Concorde RIP

snip

snip

Surely, the cold war pushed us to find new solutions to percived
potential threats. Now we have no cold war, we are uncertain as to
what the potential threats are...?
--
O -----
1 Black, 1 Red. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Egocentric statement | ooo |
-----

 

*ouch*
--
O -----
1 Black, 1 Red. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Egocentric statement | ooo |
-----

 

Hear, hear...
--
O -----
1 Black, 1 Red. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Egocentric statement | ooo |
-----

 

Business class no, Eco yes. Air France packs people in their planes
like sardines in a tin. Even in Business.

 

Yes, very nice ones. Always buy some when I'm over.

 

Using the patented Mavis Bacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, Cab

Can you even *get* tinned sardines in France?

D'oh! Why am I asking you? I need an expert in all things French.

Now, where would I find one of those do you think?

 

Owen wrote

Asteroids.

Space is full of the bastards and they are all out to get us.

 

I flew JAL all the way to Australia... in economy. JAL cabins pack a
whole extra row of seats in IIRC.

The noodles and the sushi rocked, the booze was free, the plane was
comfy enough... The ticket cost me £550 return. Space on a plane isn't
my major concern as it's still less than a day of discomfort or
inconvenience, even on one of the longest flights in the world.

 

Sure. Why do you think I act so weird?

I'm fucking with their heads.

--
Platypus - Faster Than Champ
VN800 Drifter, R80RT
DIAABTCOD#2 GPOTHUF#19
BOTAFOS#6 BOTAFOT#89 FTB#11
BOB#1 SBS#35 ANORAK#18 TWA#15

 

Safranes? The early-80s 'special' edition' of the 14? Jesus. De
Gaulle used to have a Chapron-built DS or three to go down the shops in.
3PR75 IIRC. What a come-down.

If France was to retain an operational Concorde for state occasions, it
would have to be handed over to the military. Paint it a nice glossy
red with French Air Force markings and arrive in the pattern at Dulles
at Mach 2...

--
Platypus - Faster Than Champ
VN800 Drifter, R80RT
DIAABTCOD#2 GPOTHUF#19
BOTAFOS#6 BOTAFOT#89 FTB#11
BOB#1 SBS#35 ANORAK#18 TWA#15

 

Hear, hear what? Neither of you have present any logical or empirical
evidence that this /is/ the case.

 

They put an extra class in, a sort of lower business and often leave out
first. A sort of marketing ploy which puts you in an 'economy' tight
'business class' seat for business class money.

They are also famous for having the monopoly on a destination.

 

It's working

 

of course - what he meant was "If you have to ask, you wouldn't
understand".

I think.

 

Amortization plus depreciation account for more than anything else bar
fuel.

Direct operating cost plus investment:

Fuel 30.8%
Pilots' salaries 19.1%
Amortization 15.8%
Other flying ops 10.5%
Depreciation 7.8%
Other maint'nce 5.5%
Airframe labour 3.3%
Airframe mater'ls 3.0%
Engine materials 2.8%
Engine labour 0.9%
Insurance 0.4%

For US airlines from 1992-98 (the price of fuel may have shifted a
bit).

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You're joking?

 

I think he's serious, actually.

 

Ho yuss. Mildenhall circa 1986, IIRC.

It was kept /waaay/ back from the "paddock" where all the other display
aircraft were and I was, at the time, under the impression that it was so
no-one could get a proper look at it.

I later found out it was 'cause the thing pissed JP-7 everywhere when on
the ground.


You'll like this, then:
http://www.sr-71.org/index.html

--
| Wik -UKRMHRC#10- 2000 ZX12R-A1 -DC#1 -'FOT#0 'FOF #39 - BOD#12 BOB#12
|# You don't believe me | "Experience is the worst teacher.
|That the scenery | It always gives the test first
|Could be a cold-blooded killer. | and the instruction afterward."
***** human response from wik at blueyonder dot co dot uk *****

 

Boeing and others are still offering a major service with rebuild and
new glass cockpit on them as they are in there own way unique. (10,900
nat mile range)

That's comparing a tube full of passengers spaced out for long range
operations with a tube full of containers.

My comparison was what the two aircraft do:

One shifts twice as many people in it's own unique service for twice
(approximately) the amount of fuel. Hence:

My intention and if I didn't put it clearly, my fault, was to make the
point that:
"Payload" ie paying passengers paying for a service unique to each
aircraft type is very similar in fuel consumed.
With the earlier reference fuel consumed and to a launch vehicle, the
launch vehicle weight is taken into account as it is disposable with
aircraft you don't normally chuck them away each flight.

So I was looking at passenger to fuel for each service provided.

Which comes out similar.

Hope you see my point now.

Mixed fleet with mixed service was always the aim of introducing an SST
into service and until the US started trying to stop all landings[1] and
the British government try to stop its evolution, it could have
succeeded.


[1] An American woman the leader/figure head of the 'Ban Concorde
landing at JFK campaign' when it was starting services was interviewed
during the week. She admitted that the thing that made all her followers
so emotive wasn't the noise, it was that it wasn't an American aircraft.
"It was like sputnik and Yuri Gagarin all over again putting us in
second place. This time we weren't going to allow it to happen."