Forum Moderators: open
[airbus.com ]
Now if only they had done something like "Tex" Johston's aileron roll with the the Boeing Model 367-80 (707 prototype) during the 1955 SeaFair flyby ...
And I know that this one flies well etc etc ..BUT..I have an unexplainable bad feeling about this model ever since I saw it and I will not fly in one ..
This little voice has kept me alive in the past and off certain vehicles or routes ..I wish no one any ill in their experiences with this one and hope one never falls ..But I will listen to my little inner voice ..
now someone post something lighter ...
Seriously thinking of getting my pilots license. Out of all my friends and family that I have asked, only one said they would go up in a plane with me at the controls and she was drunk.
Does you little inner voice have advice for me? ;)
DO IT!
Saying that I still prefer skydiving ..but there are those here who have asked why jump out of a plane that isn't showing signs of problems ...
Quite a few pilots on these fora ..even some in the mods ..don't know how many skydivers ..?
I have a pic somewhere ..I'll try to find it ...
in case any one is wondering ..yes I make sure someone else is flying the plane ..before I play "birdy" out the door ;)
The last time the world took such as interest in the maiden flight of a passenger plane was way back in 1969, when Concorde took to the skies.
She was tiny compared to the A380, but she was built for speed. Sleek, white, beautiful, a triumph to the ingenuity of man...
I had the supreme privilege of flying on her twice (London-New York in 2002, then Barbados-London in 2003) and it is an experience I will never, ever forget. To fly at 11 miles high, see the curve of the Earth against the indigo skies of the lower stratosphere, and arrive in New York before leaving London is unbelievable.
But
I had the supreme privilege of flying on her twice
The citizens of the UK and to a lesser degree those of France had the priviledge of paying for it ( Concorde )..will do for this one too ..cost of Concorde was never recouped..even allowing for the supposed "prestige element" it was the biggest flying white elephant in history ..til this new one ..
Cost to date 21 billion dollars funded by Europes taxpayers ..add on similar costing till it's ready to deliver a commercial version ..divide by the cost of the plane when it will be sold ( if the Chinese don't back out cos they cant sell unlimited tee shirts and socks to Europe since the quota system stopped )...and this one will be the biggest white elephant ever ..and impossible to recover the costs ..do the maths ..:(
BTW directly and indirectly the current project only supports 20,000 jobs in Europe..The "prestige" of Toulouse et al ..is to be paid for by everyone here for years to come ..even if they stopped now ....
Seriously thinking of getting my pilots license.
308 tons
22 tons of on-board test instruments
464 tons on takeoff (test flight, about 75% capacity)
That is just too big, IMO.
> I will listen to my little inner voice ..
By all means do that. I have consciously ignored mine once. More than 15 years later I still have not quite recovered from the consequences.
Now if only they had done something like “Tex” Johston’s aileron roll with the the Boeing Model 367-80 (707 prototype) during the 1955 SeaFair flyby ...
When I was in the US Air Force, I remember watching video footage of that. You know the Air Force put in the first order for those and turned them into the KC135 (tanker), C135(cargo) RC135(reconnaissance) and EC135(AWAC). At the time they were purchased, they hadn’t gotten the 707 brand yet, they were still the D-80 prototype.
This aricraft is a monster for sure though! Humans are always building bigger, taller, faster, greater .... Is there a limit? Or will the Earth one day be a giant Airplane/Building/Supercomputer?
Who says the cost of Concorde was never recouped? Whilst it is true that the Air France Concorde was always run at a loss, the British Airways fleet of seven Concordes, at their peak in the mid-70s to early-80s, were responsible for 40% of British Airways revenue.
Concorde is the only supersonic jet to have made a profit, even if it was only for a short time.
And at £3,500 per person for a one-way ticket to New York (£5,800 return) it was the PASSENGERS who paid for - yes - the privilege, not the taxpayers.
It's not because of creative accounting ( not including the dev cost or the purchase price ..cos at the time of purchase British airways was nationalised ..therefore the British taxpayer paid dev and the purchase price ..) ...
It's like I pay 2 billion to develope a new supersonic taxi ..
I then give you the money to buy some ..
I add that you don't need to pay me back anything ..
You then run your taxi business ..and tell me how profitable it is!
( this not counting the environmental costs of the least fuel efficient passenger aircraft ever to fly ..which all aviation engineers agree ..it was ..)..plus the runways that had to be extended etc ( with public money ) ..etc etc ..always with public money ..
It's not because the ticket price was steep that meant you actually paid any thing like the real price ..you work the net ..you understand ROI ..
The "profits" from ticket sales went to BA shareholders ( after privatisation ) ..never back to those who had really paid for it ..
Not getting at you personnally ..but math is math ..and stupid enconomics for the sake of prestige projects is ..well just that ..
The UK government always ( after Wilson ) admitted privately that it got "suckered in " by the french and then it was too destructive to their European membership ambitions to call halt ...
Nor is that politics ..just the way it was/is ..
BTW 40% of BA revenue?..c'mon ...BA moves around 400 million passengers per year ( just through the London hub )..Concorde moved how many ...? Always at a loss ( BA's own accounting said so every year ) ..just to "fly the flagship"..
But - cost aside - there is no denying that Concorde was (and still is) a major technological achievement, years and years ahead of her time. Just remember she did her maiden flight 36 years ago!
To produce a machine that can wing 100 passengers across the Atlantic in just 3 hours is amazing.
Today it takes 7 hours to cross the Atlantic. This is the first time, in the history of mankind, that technology has taken a step backwards.
I, for one, am very proud that the word "BRITISH" was emblazoned along Concorde's sleek form.
I still cringe whenever I see the one parked up near here at Manchester Airport, such a waste - what a great Air Force One for the UK that'd be!
(and s*d the cost)
:-)
DoU
DoU ..I suspect that unlike myself you were not part of the generation that paid for it ..so the cost wouldn't worry you ..would it?..;)
The financial benefit of Concorde cannot be ascertained by looking at the economics of just the aircraft and it's operation. You need to look at it from a different angle.
I agree with you about not flying on this new airbus though - something about it just looks plain wrong somehow.
TJ
Will the Earth one day be a giant Airplane/Building/Supercomputer?According to Douglas Adams, it already is. :-)
What angle?
As Leo mentioned, the plane to hold in awe was the SR-71 Blackbird. NY to London in 1 hr, 54 minutes, 56.4 seconds back in 1974. it cruises 75,000 ft at Mach 3 (faster than a 30.06 rifle bullet), with a reported top speed of Mach 3.2. At Mach 3, the pilots actually had to throttle back to keep it from going faster.
It cost $30 million a year to opertate 7 years ago.
As for the Airbus, my little voice sings the same refrain as Leo's. And if my voice is wrong and this bird turns out to really be a tech marvel, there still isnt a privately owned airline in the world that has figured out how this albatross could possibly turn a profit.
What angle?
The angle that takes into account the side-benefits to the economies and status of the countries and airlines involved.
TJ
