Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Concorde May Fly Again
AV Web ^ | 5/30/10 | Russ Niles

Posted on 06/03/2010 8:38:09 PM PDT by mgstarr

An Air France Concorde was to have undergone borescope tests Saturday to determine if its four engines can be safely started in advance of a possible return to flight. The aircraft is at a French museum at Le Bourget Airport, where it was mothballed seven years ago when Air France and British Airways ended supersonic service after decades of financial losses and the spectacular crash of a Concorde in Paris in 2000 that killed 113 people. There was no word at our deadline on the outcome of the tests but it's hoped the aircraft can soon be fueled and readied for taxi tests before returning to the air for heritage flights. It's hoped the aircraft can be airworthy in time for a flight over the opening ceremonies of the 2012 Summer Olympics in London.

(Excerpt) Read more at avweb.com ...


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: concorde
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last
Update and longer article on Wired:

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/06/concorde-may-fly-again/

1 posted on 06/03/2010 8:38:09 PM PDT by mgstarr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mgstarr
Let's get THIS one back in the air!

2 posted on 06/03/2010 8:44:01 PM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr
Maybe we can arrange a Space Shuttle flyover for the 2022 Detroit Olympics!


3 posted on 06/03/2010 8:46:32 PM PDT by OCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr

It was an aircraft killed by cheap tickets. When prices were still silly in the 1960s and 1970s...it would have fallen into the might-make-profit category. By the 1980s...with so much in cheap tickets starting...it was only the ultra rich that would have ever used it.

Now, it requires a ton of maintenance to operate each and every flight...so after the Paris flight episode...it was silly to keep running the few left.


4 posted on 06/03/2010 8:46:33 PM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr
View Image
5 posted on 06/03/2010 8:47:55 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT

Valkyrie was gorgeous.


6 posted on 06/03/2010 8:48:19 PM PDT by mgstarr ("Some of us drink because we're not poets." Arthur (1981))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr
The article that you linked to had another link to an article I found fascinating. It may be found here. Essentially, it says that the original 707 traveled almost 150 mph faster than what the modern passenger jet flies. We're getting slower, not faster. That's irritating.

One of the few regrets I have in life is that I never had the opportunity to fly the Concord, and by "opportunity", I mean I couldn't afford it.

7 posted on 06/03/2010 8:48:29 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT
Valkyrie seemed like a cluster from what I've studied of it.

It was useful in an X-aircraft sense, by providing some good information, but the engineering was ahead of the materials technology and computer technology of the time.

/johnny

8 posted on 06/03/2010 8:49:42 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr

Bringing it back for a fly over of the Olympics? Why? Or is the dream that if it flies over the Olympics, that somehow some mysterious demand will suddenly crop up to get on a flying death trap of a plane that should have been retired from service in the 1980’s?

Just design a better plane and get it over with.


9 posted on 06/03/2010 8:50:19 PM PDT by kingu (Favorite Sticker: Lost hope, and Obama took my change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr

10 posted on 06/03/2010 8:52:11 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I saw that as well. WIRED has some dandy tech articles. Sadly can’t be posted here :-(


11 posted on 06/03/2010 8:52:43 PM PDT by mgstarr ("Some of us drink because we're not poets." Arthur (1981))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OCC

I have the Lintoy/ERTL model of that on my desk right now!


12 posted on 06/03/2010 8:52:45 PM PDT by cmsgop ( I don't think Rick Sanchez can handle any more "Breaking News" (Credit Market Ticker))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kingu

Meow.


13 posted on 06/03/2010 8:55:14 PM PDT by mgstarr ("Some of us drink because we're not poets." Arthur (1981))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT
Coolest looking plane never making it to production!


14 posted on 06/03/2010 8:57:04 PM PDT by OCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr

I’ll let others fly on the Concorde, thanks.


15 posted on 06/03/2010 8:57:54 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Gonna go visit it next weekend...;-)


16 posted on 06/03/2010 8:59:35 PM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mgstarr

It would take that much time to make one previously-serviced aircraft airworthy again?


17 posted on 06/03/2010 9:00:18 PM PDT by wastedyears (The Founders revolted for less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OCC
She is pretty. And performed as well as the technolodgy of the day would let her. Love to see one in modern composites, alloys, computers.

/johnny

18 posted on 06/03/2010 9:00:42 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Well, I might suggest your numbers are somewhat erroneous. Yes, newer aircraft generally cruise slower than earlier designs. Primarily because:

—newer aircraft tend to be designed to operate at slower cruise speeds to optimize fuel savings (fuel is costly these days and a bigger share of operating expense)

—more aircraft in the sky inevitably results in aircraft in trail enroute destinations—thus all are traveling at more or less the speed of the slowest in the line (antiquadated air traffic control requirements)

—a 727 or 707 would routinely cruise at mach .82 to .85
nowadays most aircraft are operated about .77 or so

that does not equate to a 150 mph difference—more like a 60-70 mph difference (at altitude)

Regards


19 posted on 06/03/2010 9:01:43 PM PDT by petertare (--.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cmsgop
I have the Lintoy/ERTL model of that on my desk right now!

Want to sell it?

20 posted on 06/03/2010 9:02:26 PM PDT by OCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson