View Full Version : Concorde lives again. And dies again?
By definition, people on this forum are likely to have a high degree of aesthetic appreciation and an interest in engineering, and in many cases a love of older technologies, so I suspect this will strike a chord.
For the last eight years, Concorde G-BOAC, the flagship of the BA fleet, has been on display in a purpose built hanger at Manchester airport. Generally, she's in good condition and has been well looked after, but she has been a completely static exhibit, with all systems totally disabled since her arrival. Recently, due to an accident, one of the cockpit visor windows was broken, and has been patched up with tape and sheet for safety reasons since replacing it involves lowering the visor, which in turn means powering up the hydraulics, which had been thought impossible after so long.
Back in March, a small group of ex-Concorde engineers volunteered to see what could be done as they were distressed by such an eyesore spoiling the best preserved of the fleet, and started trying to activate the minimum systems required to lower the visor. Working over the summer, they not only achieved that but also managed to get virtually all of the electrical and hydraulic systems back up and running, and found that they had survived eight years of non-use far better than anyone had thought possible.
Just as they were about to complete the task of getting all systems into working and maintainable condition, the Airport Museum cottoned on to what was happening and called an immediate halt on spurious health and safety grounds.
Why does this matter? Well..... It is a very far-fetched idea that any Concorde could ever fly again. The costs would be colossal, and the infrastructure required would be huge. You would be talking about hundreds of millions of pounds and vast bureaucratic hurdles (for a start, the type no longer has a certificate of airworthiness), but there are people out there with that sort of money. (One could possibly imagine a Concorde in Virgin livery, for example). But there are only two viable airframes. One French Concorde at Le Bourget has had it's systems kept active, but is otherwise in less good condition. The rest are museum exhibits around the world in conditions that vary from poor to dreadful, and are too far gone to ever be revived. G-BOAC has been kept in excellent conditions and has not suffered from the corrosion and deterioration problems tha the rest have. As long as her vital systems are maintained, she will be the only viable candidate. It would be a tragedy if bureaucracy prevented that and she was allowed to deteriorate past the point of no return.
What can we do? Not much at the moment, other than spreading awareness. There seems to be a campaign growing; if you care, lend it your support when it comes out into the open. At the moment it's really only at the stage of a thread on the major aviation forum PPrNe, and sadly as is the way with forums, a bit of a row has broken out between the English and French factions, but you'll find it all here:
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/462735-concorde-g-boac-manchester.html (poster M2DUDE is an ex-BA maintenance engineer who has spearheaded the operation).
These is also a fascinating and lengthy thread here (nearly 1500 posts) which shows what an extraordinary and inspiring machine Concorde was, and could be again. http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/423988-concorde-question.html
For the most beautiful aircraft ever created, I would do anything to see her fly again. I used to watch Concorde fly overhead twice a day when I was in Sonning and I never could resist stepping outside to watch and listen.
However, even my biggest hopes would be a stretch. Just thinking about the hurdles to overcome to fly one again makes my head hurt. Still, if they could do it with the Vulcan, there is a tangible chance. Here's hoping.
I guess the best question to ask is how will our descendents think of us in 50 years if we allow this to rot. Or if we keep it alive?
No Concorde, no Space Shuttle, no further Moon landings or even a project to get to Mars. They will soon forget that we ever acheived such things. We are sinking into a morass of H&S shit, navel gazing and lowest common denominator politics. Not to mention what's happening in education.
To see the Moon landings and Concorde fly was to believe that we could do anything.
H&S is being used as a smokescreen by the airport authorities. In fact, there are no major H&S implications to having the aircraft maintained with or without workable systems. It's not H&S that's standing in the way, it's the bureaucrats.
Concorde landed on the Moon!?? Wow.
Seriously though, tragic for both Concorde and the Space Shuttle. Boyhood dreams!
prestonchipfryer
10-09-2011, 12:01
No Concorde, no Space Shuttle, no further Moon landings or even a project to get to Mars. They will soon forget that we ever acheived such things. We are sinking into a morass of H&S shit, navel gazing and lowest common denominator politics. Not to mention what's happening in education.
To see the Moon landings and Concorde fly was to believe that we could do anything.
+1
ursus262
10-09-2011, 14:20
I was an engineer on concorde. Flew on it a few times too. Beautiful aircraft but a bugger to work on
I have visited the Manchester Airpot viewing park, and it is a sad sight to see her there, she should be flying and with pride !
thank god H&S wasnt around when man discovered fire !
No Concorde, no Space Shuttle, no further Moon landings or even a project to get to Mars. They will soon forget that we ever acheived such things. We are sinking into a morass of H&S shit, navel gazing and lowest common denominator politics. Not to mention what's happening in education.
To see the Moon landings and Concorde fly was to believe that we could do anything.
I absolutely agree.
Maybe there's more to David Icke's ideas than the obvious laughable ones where the direction of society is going :scratch:
A beautiful aircraft and I'm proud to have seen it fly overhead with that rumbly roar that only "it" seemed to have...
Reid Malenfant
10-09-2011, 19:12
In ways we are definately going backwards as Martin points out, no two ways about it :rolleyes:
I remember a few holidays down in Cornwall @ St Ives when i was a kid & the thump as Concorde went supersonic over the Atlantic.
Beautiful aircraft, form & function in one :)
We should be building Concord II. There are more super-rich people now than there were in the 1980s when it was last profitable. These people always want to go somewhere in a hurry, in luxury and with style. The market exists, the technology is proven, it is just politics that defies it.
You must be joking
Hyper cost cutting, cheap shit is de rigueur these days
Not joking. It could easily be done. Like I said - it's politics, where reason goes out the window
You are preaching to the choir with me mate ;)
Funding is the issue Concorde was paid for by two governments. It would take the combined efforts of both Boeing and Airbus to even contemplate designing it.
Funding is the issue Concorde was paid for by two governments. It would take the combined efforts of both Boeing and Airbus to even contemplate designing it.
It is already designed - that is done and paid for - we must still have the blueprints (although the way things are these days someone probably left them in a taxi :rolleyes:) the only costs would be the materials and labour.
Concorde as-is is no longer viable, Martin. Too small, too inefficient (although pretty good supersonically), old engines that are not clean etc.
However, if Boeing and Airbus took the principles (delta wing, variable intake engines, designed-in heat expansion etc.) and dropped what was no longer needed (droop nose - replace with cameras) then they could have something outstanding.
Maybe one day :) Thinking about it we've lost the Harrier and the big hovercrafts as well. What is next for the history of British engineering to be scrapped? The suspension bridge?
In fact, there have been two serious proposals for a Concorde successor. The first lived in the eighties but died in the recession of the early nineties, the second is a continuation of the same idea and is currently in the early stages of development. Both are British. Although the emphasis here is on putting payloads into orbit, a passenger version would bring Sydney to with four hours of London. Fantasy? Probably, but who knows...
http://gizmodo.com/5164573/hotol-the-reusable-spaceship-coming-back-from-the-80s
There is talk of supersonic travel in the future, with tests beginning next year if you are to believe this http://www.humansinvent.com/#!/2021/supersonic-travel-is-concorde-set-for-a-comeback%C2%A0/
Concorde is amazing and we are certainly stepping backwards. I missed the chance of a tour around it in Manchester due to a hospital visit with one of our suppliers at work. While the hospital was very important I am gutted to have missed out.
Techno Commander
13-09-2011, 11:44
I seem to recall that when BA decvided to "scrap the fleet", Richard Branson offered "however much cash was necessary" to purchase them. BA said no, as they couldnt stomach the idea of their competitor having them if they couldnt.
The French were pressurising BA to scrap them as they couldn't bear the idea of BA continuing with them when Air France were not. I doubt that BA had the freedom to sell them on.
Beobloke
29-09-2011, 13:40
I seem to recall that when BA decvided to "scrap the fleet", Richard Branson offered "however much cash was necessary" to purchase them. BA said no, as they couldnt stomach the idea of their competitor having them if they couldnt.
Indeed. I recall a BA spokesman on the radio after the end of Concorde was announced blatantly stating that they wanted ex-BA Concorde passengers flying BA first class in the future and not on Concorde with Virgin.
The whole Concorde fiasco is one of the several reasons why I do everything possible to avoid flying BA if I can. Furthemore, I think BA have a damn cheek featuring Concorde in their latest TV adverts.
Agreed. I also as a business traveller always felt shafted by their airmiles scheme which frequently awarded zero points for certain ticket types. Since I had gone to the trouble of specifying them to my corporate travel office, they should have rewarded my loyalty but didn't. It was nigh on impossible to retain silver membership to retain access to the lounge and that counts for a lot when you're travelling on business four times a week to European destinations and the USA.
I took my business to United and Continental who treated me much better. I still won't book BA.
I still won't book BA.
British Airways always did have an over inflated opinion of themselves. Over the years, I have flown with probably at least twenty carriers - the best were those of the Middle East: Gulf Air; Emirates; Etihad.
There used to be a joking interpretation of the names of some nation's carriers: for example, the now defunct, Sabena: "Such a Bloody Experience, Never Again". Well for me BA stands for "Bloody Awful", and that is based on flying with them a dozen or so times.
I've flown with BA hundreds of times. There are worse: Alitalia, for instance, and Aeroflot were so bad they were funny. For transatlantic, the worst were the defunct Pan Am and TWA. Shocking.
My diatribe against BA is because they like to promote themselves as "The World's Favourite Airline"; possibly justified statistically, but not proven in practice. Business class is fine, but not standard class. Other carriers offer far better service in standard class: usually the Middle Eastern fleets.
There are of course national carriers that offer acceptable but perfectly nondescript service: Air France; Alitalia; Iberia; Iceland Air; Sabena, Pakistan Air; Air India; Virgin and a host of others. Some are, in my experience, better: KLM; Lufthansa; Druk Air (Bhutan) and Thai Air.
Then there are those who are so 'basic' that it becomes 'part of the experience': Aeroflot; Air Madagascar; CAAC; Air Mali and some South American airlines, as well as whoever it is operating in Cambodia.
"Fly the flag"? Not if I can help it!
I once flew an Aeroflot internal flight and someone brought a goat onboard, tethered in the aisle.
Reid Malenfant
30-09-2011, 19:30
I once flew an Aeroflot internal flight and someone brought a goat onboard, tethered in the aisle.
:lolsign:
I once flew an Aeroflot internal flight and someone brought a goat onboard, tethered in the aisle.
I experienced something similar. It was in Laos, flying in a Soviet ex-military cargo helicopter. Mothers nursing babies, chickens, a goat and me!
No seat belts, no in-flight entertaiment, no cabin crew. You had to laugh.
Fantastic! At least I got a reading from a red book, probably the writings of Marx or Lenin. It certainly wasn't a safety announcement :)
American Airlines have always been excellent when I have travelled on them.
We flew with Virgin Atlantic 2 years ago to Florida and they we crap !
crew just not interested, we had paid for the premium upgrade and it just wasnt worth it
Virgin are not what they used to be. On two early flights (I think they had just two 747s at the time) I had a fashion show and a live band on board.
Virgin are not what they used to be. On two early flights (I think they had just two 747s at the time) I had a fashion show and a live band on board.
I flew with BA last summer - long haul on a triple 7 - no complaints at all they were very good. I hate flying though, if I was rich I would travel by ship. Much more civilised.
The 777s are nice planes. Just a couple of engines short of full peace of mind, though.
I know what you mean about ships, I love them. And not those enormous floating hotels, either. Proper ships. I actually went scheduled ship to Australia and back when I was 16.
The 777s are nice planes. Just a couple of engines short of full peace of mind, though.
.
Even if it had 8 engines I would still have spent the entire 10 hours just waiting to crash.:lol: Only reading provides some distraction. But, a necessary evil to go somewhere good, affordably. Booked my seat online so even though I was in coach I had the seat in front of the bulkhead - Ah! Four feet of leg room! That helped a lot:)
Yes, those seats are good. As are the emergency door ones, which always have a little more room. You never know when you might need it, too :eyebrows:
Vinyleyes
02-10-2011, 13:43
I've flown with BA hundreds of times. There are worse: Alitalia, for instance, and Aeroflot were so bad they were funny. For transatlantic, the worst were the defunct Pan Am and TWA. Shocking.
Aeroflot Moscow to Amsterdam is now better than KLM .. better seats and one is actually fed decent hot food. International wise they are a whole heap better than they were ... thankfully ... :lolsign:
Vinyleyes
02-10-2011, 13:55
I absolutely agree.
Maybe there's more to David Icke's ideas than the obvious laughable ones where the direction of society is going :scratch:
If you ignore the more outlandish of Icke's theories and listen to what he says about the way the world is being ran the he makes an awful lot of sense ... Have a listen to this video on The Banking scam ... and then tell me he does not make sense .. ( ignore the intro in foreign language)
http://www.davidicke.com./headlines/53872-david-icke-the-coming-economic-crash-banking-fraudsters-and-fake-obama
Sure, Icke for president eh :mental:
Come on people, lets try not to nut ourselves off too early on in the game.
It’s often not the ideal that scuppers a cause; it’s the idiots who turn up to support it ;)
Beobloke
03-10-2011, 15:06
"Fly the flag"? Not if I can help it!
Ah yes, another BA fiasco - let's remove the Union Flag from our planes. That one backfired spectacularly, didn't it?
I still smile when I see a Virgin aeroplane with "Britain's flag carrier" on the side - Richard Branson jumped on that one lightning-fast!
That was the worst bit of marketing bollo I've seen for a long time. No wonder Maggie Thatcher covered up the tail-fin of the model in that famous summation of what she thought of it. BA should have kicked that agency into next week.
Mark Grant
17-03-2012, 18:19
The nearest thing to a flying Concorde,
EZ5YMVijZ4s
MSOlVGcRlSY?hd=1
Very skilled model makers, I especially like the landing in the second video.
Would be great to see a real one flying again...
Reid Malenfant
17-03-2012, 18:45
They must have some pretty serious public liability insurance :eyebrows: Those things could do some serious damage :eek:
Very nice to though :)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.