Rick Brown Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Chaps: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/18/supersonic-breakthrough-concorde-could-fly-again-within-four-years Also in the i. Brought a tear to my eye thinking about it. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Never going to happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brown Posted September 19, 2015 Author Share Posted September 19, 2015 Money isn't the only issue! Rick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brown Posted September 19, 2015 Author Share Posted September 19, 2015 At this rate there'll be a TSR2 along any minute........ Rick. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver66 Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Fantasy! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brown Posted September 19, 2015 Author Share Posted September 19, 2015 The mind boggles. The complexity of that aircraft makes the Vulcan look like the Wrights Flyer. Still, we can dream. Rick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard E Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Unless they can secure manufacturer support from Airbus for the airframe and Rolls Royce for the engines it isn't going to happen; I suppose a static example parked on a barge on the Thames is a possibility though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Vor!!! Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Ive got my seat booked just as soon as i get back from my trip to the Mars colonies 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brown Posted September 19, 2015 Author Share Posted September 19, 2015 I've just double checked. Nope, it's not April 1st. Rick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 You do have to wonder if the team "planning" this actually includes any design engineers, maintenance engineers, or airworthiness engineers. Or billionairers with bottomless pockets. I knew some of the people involved in attempting to get a Lightning airborne in the UK, and the team with the Vulcan deserve immense praise for actually succeeding. But a Concorde? Those extolling its virtues and stressing what an advanced and difficult piece of engineering it was are not exactly helping this cause. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Have to say that I love the passion and enthusiasm that similar groups show and I take my hat off to them. At the same time there are realistic projects and unrealistic ones. Bringing a Concorde to the air IMHO unfortunately falls into the latter cathegory. Here we have a very complicated aircrafts that would likely require a lot of maintenance and would cost huge sums to keep flying. Plus an aircraft for which most items were unique and that even when in service with two of the major airlines in the world was considered a very expensive toy. Yes there's been a Vulcan flying for a quite a long time, however the Vulcan is a very simple aircraft in comparison. The Concorde has been one of the most iconic aircrafts ever, I've had the luck of seeing several in the air (but never the money to fly on one unfortunately) and I can understand why people would like to have one flying again. However I feel that the best and safest way to preserve these aircrafts today is in museums, sad as it may sound 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Foster60 Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 I was speaking about this last evening with another gent of similar vintage. How many of us remember It was sunday afternoon TV when the British Concord made its first flight? 46 years ago! It would be great to see it fly again, but I think a dream. Rather like listning to Ramond Buke describing the guys coming back from the moon and landing in the Pacific, to be recovered by the helo, we all watched! Happy days Nigel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmatthewbacon Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Interesting that the article talks about the Concorde "on display at Le Bourget in Paris." It's possible that I'm misremembering, but I think the one in the Museum at Le Bourget is the French prototype, and it's been in the museum for decades. There's another one on stilts at Charles de Gaulle airport, but that's been sitting out in all weathers for the best part of ten years. Surely there must be better candidates?! Bestest, M. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brown Posted September 19, 2015 Author Share Posted September 19, 2015 ........Surely there must be better candidates?! Bestest, M. Yep, A VC10! Now that's far more "Do-able"! Rick. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicarage Vee Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Are they talking about F-BTSD the one at Le Bourget that they've had the electrics and hydraulics running on? It's a lovely thought, but as Richard rightly points out, without the design authority on board it can't happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Vor!!! Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 NIMROD the mighty hunter Now thats worth thinking about 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 The Brooklands airframe has about 900 hours flying hours in total.the ,P, word grounded Concorde to enable Air France to be sold as they lost money on it, and would not allow a monopoly user of the design. The short answer is ,Non,. Airbus will never play ball. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theplasticsurgeon Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 (edited) I heard of rumour of something like this in 2011 or early 2012. A colleague whose son works at Rolls Royce aero engines had mentioned something about a Concorde flypast to open the London Olympics.I looked around on internet, and found a forum with some similarities to those for the Vulcan.All the ideas, structure, and some waffle - BUT absolutely no evidence of anything actually happening, plans or milestones!Could have been a con or scam, but I couldn't see any pleas for money either.I let my colleague know what I'd found, saying it was all empty ideas backed with NO action.Obviously came to nothing - well nobody here heard about it at the time. The Olympics have come and gone - opened with a Red Arrows flypast . Edited September 19, 2015 by theplasticsurgeon 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markjames68 Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Plus the CAA wont let supersonic complex airframes fly in civilian hands in the uk, Mark and Ray Hanna could never get their Phantom airborne and the CAA wouldnt even let the Lightning fly out of the country, it had to be trailered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmatthewbacon Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Plus the CAA wont let supersonic complex airframes fly in civilian hands in the uk, Mark and Ray Hanna could never get their Phantom airborne and the CAA wouldnt even let the Lightning fly out of the country, it had to be trailered Once upon a time, I interviewed Mark (lovely guy, BTW...), and he told me that the reason that the Phantom wasn't allowed to fly was that the authorities didn't want a still pretty potent frontline warbird being flown privately, even by people with impeccable credentials... bestest, M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Onkey Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 Once upon a time, I interviewed Mark (lovely guy, BTW...), and he told me that the reason that the Phantom wasn't allowed to fly was that the authorities didn't want a still pretty potent frontline warbird being flown privately, even by people with impeccable credentials... bestest, M. You can sort of see their point there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Brown Posted September 19, 2015 Author Share Posted September 19, 2015 Bit more about it: http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/the-revival-of-concorde/ar-AAerMOL?li=AA9SkIr&ocid=mailsignoutmd Rick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamS Posted September 19, 2015 Share Posted September 19, 2015 I must admit that fantastic as it would be, I can't see it happening. Having said that the Tu144 was revived. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted September 20, 2015 Share Posted September 20, 2015 Once upon a time, I interviewed Mark (lovely guy, BTW...), and he told me that the reason that the Phantom wasn't allowed to fly was that the authorities didn't want a still pretty potent frontline warbird being flown privately, even by people with impeccable credentials... bestest, M. Biggest problem here is the Spey Phantoms are subject to the arms reduction treaties. Unless the govt still own the airframes, none are displayed with their engines in situ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelh Posted September 20, 2015 Share Posted September 20, 2015 There is tendency these days to dismiss ideas like this as impossible or doomed to failure. In reality we have a reached a point in human development where technologically speaking we can so almost anything we can imagine or design. The work impossible seems almost obsolete. After all we humans have a permanent space station orbiting overhead. We've been to the moon and back and there was a time when we had routine supersonic passenger flights across the Atlantic ocean. We can have that again and we can have a permanent manned base on the the Moon and even Mars. We could build undersea tunnels for supersonic trains under the ocean. We could have sub orbital passenger aircraft that can reach anywhere on the Earth in a couple of hours. All of the above is possible. We have the technology and although there are obstacles to overcome they remain possible. Some could even happen soon with the proper backing and finance. So of course it's entirely possible that a Concorde can be restored to flight. With the right people in place and the right attitude, the cooperation of the manufacturers and the authorities and an 'unlimited pot of money'. We will see a Concorde in the air again. Except that we won't. Most of us here and those involved in the project are children of the twentieth century, that heady era when technology seemed to advance almost daily. From the Wright Flyer to the moon in less than seventy years. We still think that kind of progress is possible. But we're wrong. None of the exciting projects I mentioned above will happen and no Concorde will every fly again. No amount of enthusiasm will compensate for the lack of an unlimited pot of money. Which is what is needed and isn't available. Yes the article mentions that they found a backer. Well he better double his investment or treble it. But I doubt even Bill Gates could get a Concorde into the air. I mentioned above how we humans have reached a point in technical ability to make almost anything we can imagine. That's true but we've also reached a point where practical considerations outweigh technology. We can go to the moon again but there is no practical reason to do so, no benefit in investing billions in getting there. No return on investment and no end to the flow of money out in order to keep a moonbase in operation. So it is with Concorde. Putting it back in the air is only the start, keeping it there remains the problem. That will require endless amounts of money even when it's sitting on the ground. Even if the manufacturers and the aviation authorities weigh in enthusiastically. Even if there is a ten year waiting list of enthusiastic passengers willing to pay thousands for an hour or two in a Concorde. Plus there's another factor, post Shoreham, 'vintage' jets will be scrutinised very heavily. So it won't happen. It's doomed to failure like so many projects. There's no harm in dreaming of course. But that's all it is, a dream. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now