>Fastest commercial aircraft ever>Could fly from France to US in 3 hours>Could have solved international travel>Suddenly, one day, we just stopped producing them foreverWhat happened to the Concorde?What was the real reason they were discontinued?>Inb4 jews
>>539278364>>Inb4 jewsEveryone just got dumber and talentless.
>>539278364It didn't work
>>539278364Because everyone who can afford that flight and needs that speed doesn't want to rub shoulders with the plebs.
It was fucking expensive, not particularly comfy relative to the price and not enough people with money could be fucked with it once the novelty wore off. From what I remember anyway.A French one crashed too, maybe that had something to do with it.
>>539278364Shit was expensive.
>>539278584>A French one crashedAlthough it was America's fault, I might add.
>>539278364Like $10k for a basic ticket and most people would rather buy first class to relax and get free food and alcohol even if it's 3x the wait.
>>539278364cost of R&D old and new vs risks
>>539278364Boeing didn’t want the competition
>>539278639Americans always fuck up. Way more americans died trying to get to space than soviets ever did, youre all living in a made up fantasy propaganda world running on delusion and false sense of superiority, youre already massive minorities in your own countries in the 0-18 age bracket, youre already dead and still think youre the gods chosen people.
Airbus stopped making parts too, apparently.
>>539278639cope lmao even frog courts proved it was euro incompetence
>>539278364They were very loud and people living near airports complained
>>539278364Sonic booms are noisy.Also used a lot of fuel.
>>539278727>Way more americans died trying to get to space than soviets ever didWe will never know because Soviets lied through their teeth about everything
Corporate figured out that sending staff for 5k in 6 hours was a better option
>>539278735The court ruling was absolute bullshit.
>>539278639Although checking the runway for debris, which was mandatory, probably was a duty of the French.
>>539278364Super loud. Produced only a few for the super rich. A niche plane never intended to be the backbone of commercial aviation.
>>539278364Bad safety record and sonic boom noise pollution. What makes a good subsonic aircraft and what makes a good supersonic aircraft are completely different
>>539278364>Could have solved international travelNo they are not allowed to fly supersonic above land so it only works in a London/Paris to New York setup or similar
>>539278769No? They were just kinda secretive, just as the USA was.>did this or that happen?>who knows hehe shrug
>>539278851>Bad safety recordwutiirc it had a better record than virtually any other plane (when) at this level of production.
>>539278727>youre all living in a made up fantasy propaganda world running on delusion and false sense of superiority,Says the guy who believes space is real. Kek.
>>539278819Back then it wasn't mandatory before every flight, although given that it should have been.
>>539278364What were the costs of operation? I think there was a purpose, but it would have been specific high cost, luxury, and speed. Maybe like a dozen total airports shuffling flights between them, Melbourne, NYC, LA, Tokyo, Paris or London, Moscow, etc with the goal of leaping across oceans or continents and connecting to local flights to get to relatively minor locations or other countries. It certainly wasn't feasible for general air travel.
>>539278364Concorde's real utility was in US domestic flights like NY-LA but ofc the ammorigan political class outlawed it simply because it was not ammorigan.
>>539278912It's quite curious how much of a hazard landing gear damage is in general. I read about some crashes recently, and overall you'd think that the landing gear should be of relatively little concern, but no, either it throws shit under the fuselage, into engine intakes, or a wheel starts burning which is then retracted into the landing gear well. It's a major point of failure even if it doesn't impede takeoff or landing (which usually will still work somewhat even if half your wheels are busted, although it might not be pretty).
>>539278836tfw you repeat the party line up to the punctuation. Sad.
>>539279053if you ever experienced an hard landing with Ryanair you get what landing gears must be able to bear.
>>539278994>What were the costs of operation?Like 20 times of a normal plane.One of the critical problems really was noise, since they were no longer allowed to go supersonic over solid ground, and they were equally ineffecient flying at subsonic speeds, which wasted a lot of time and fuel.
>>539278761Sound cant legally enter your ears without your consent
>>539279110>they were no longer allowed to go supersonic over solid groundthat was a political decision for thwarting it. I lived near a NATO base as a child and I remember sonic booms all the time by military planes back in the 1980s
>>539278521it worked, but it had a flaw exploited by american dc10 leaving pieces of metal on the runway
>>539279103With Ryanair in particular? It's one of the few airlines I've actually flown.What I noticed then wasn't so much the landing but those narrow-body airliners, 737 I think it was..>it's basically a bus>entire thing shook under one lardass walking through the plane>you could see it bend>walls like a coke canKinda scary desu, but this probably makes them easier on the landing.Now a wide-body? That could be quite the thump if it comes down too hard.
>>539278513because of jews.
>>539279227ryanair is the airline zoomers use to mock their landings even though they tend to be completely fine
>>539279188They used to be much more common until regulations got steadily tightened.>BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRCCCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHI understand the concern though; if you get that all the time it will be annoying. Worse than living next to a busy high speed rail route.
>>539279227ryanair performs hard landings because they're cheaper and their maintenance contracts incentive them. For you as a passenger it's quite scary when it happens if you don't know the cause. You have the impression the plane just crashed to the ground.
>>539279315Not that I'd still fly with them these days. They probably have a significant number of brown and femoid pilots these days. I'm not willing to die for a bunch of politicians virtue signalling.
>>539279388>You have the impression the plane just crashed to the ground.It's probably not THAT hard?A hard landing will still be below 3m/s sink rate or so. Past 5m/s it becomes a crash landing.And I'm honestly not sure how many passangers are unaware when the plane will touch down. I always have a window seat, but it seems hard to miss still, so worst case you just get ready for the evacuation.>when your landings are so scary all the passengers go into impact brace position beforehand by defaultKinda based.
>>539279497This goofy retard probably thinks a hard landing is any one he feels in the back of coach
>>539279399from my experience they're usually white and quite young, it's the cabin crew that tend to be gay/brown
>>539279781I mean ultimately it's a matter of definition. Anything in excess of 1m/s could be considered hard, and is often labeled as such, but it's an exceedingly low bar for a hard landing.At 2m/s it will definitely become unpleasant for all involved, and 3m/s is likely to be damaging in some form, but still a landing. Above this there will be injuries or fatalities, landing gear collapse or the destruction of the aircraft.
>>539278364a mysterious thing called supply and demand
>>539278364All routes except LDN-NYC were unprofitable and maintained mainly for marketing halo status.There were only a few planes.Parts were all bespoke.Maintenance was a pain point.The airframes were getting old.Then one crashed. Not 1/4000 aircraft, but 1/20, 5% of the total global fleet. Questions were raised.
>>539278727Thank goodness the yanks have a Czechoslovakian on 4chan to tell them how to be a real country
>>539278364It's too fucking loud that's it.Also needs 3 pilots and very complicated to fly.
>>539278679But there was free food and alcohol on board the concorde. In fact, they would serve you whatever you wanted as long as you ordered it before the flight. Michael Jackson was famous for ordering Big Macs for example.
We lost something when we stopped doing Concorde. I don't know how to define it, something like that relentless optimism of the 60s 70s, that died when Concorde was scrapped. But not just optimism, an attitude of doing cool shit because it was cool, and limits were made to be pushed, and everything should always be stronger and faster and bigger and higher and louder. And what was money for if yhou didn't spend it on supersonic jets.
>>539280253Obviously a modern concorde would have comparable automation levels to current-gen planes like A350 and 737 Max, ie basically flies itself and the pilots are minders in case of emergency. Third crew is a relic of when flight engineers were required. All of this went away when the modern era of computer automation arrived. It shouldn't be underestimated just how much computers have simplified the job of the flight crew and improved safety by removing opportunities for fuck ups
>>539278851some interesting new tech in the works apparently to make the sonic booms deflect towards poorer people's houses only
>>539278584It was not Concorde's fault...some previous plane had drop its parts (probably boeing) to runway and those destroyed Concorde's engines on lift.
>>539278364There was a crash where a tire exploded on a runway and they stopped making them shortly after that. I never rode in one but apparently they had a limited capacity and had high maintenance costs
>>539278639Yes the bloody Americans forced the French to build a literal flaming deathball. Honestly do you snog your boyfriend with that mouth?
>>539278513i really really really like this image anon
They never managed to make it profitable. It was just a propaganda tool during the cold war and when that ended there was no longer a justifiable reason to keep operating them at a loss.
>>539278364The ban on supersonic overland flight severely restricted its utility. At subsonic flight it was grossly inefficient
>>539278364No airlines are profitable. They are credit card companies that happen to own planes.
>>539280728The flight engineer was killed by FADEC.With FADEC you cannot even manipulate the engines in detail; it's computer controlled, period. Only got a starter and thrust lever, maybe reverse thrust and fire extinguisher.Has its ups and downs. If FADEC fails you're pretty much screwed because it doesn't allow any manual overrides; but then again, with jet engines and in most cases, all that can be done is simply shutting down the engine, and that still works.
>>539281505cool, I wasn't aware of that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FADEC
>>539280417The spirit of progress, yes. Same with the space travel debacle.>big hype after moon landing>then 4 decades of nothing
>>539278364>Could have solved international travelmicrosoft teams calls solved international travel.
>>539280417>>539281624Actually the Space Shuttle may be a better example.>poof>there goes people's confidenceIn that respect SpaceX is doing some important work, whatever comes of it in the end.
>>539278364it was a small production run and they got old and obsolete
>>539280794cool renderer bro, but will it even fly in the next 10years?
>>539278364the reality of plane travel is enough consumers want a ticket as cheap as possible no matter how much longer the flight is or how bad the layover. there wasn't a sustainable market for a bajillion dollar flight that gets you to your destination a few hours earlier
>luxury turbofast plane>makes the bullshit you go through in the airport seem even longer and more egregiousthe 'temporary post-9/11 TSA heightened security' scheme would have failed if they let planes like this operate.
>>539278364This shit was like the price of a first class ticket today. For what? To save maybe 4 or max 5 hours flight time? Other than novelty, it just didn't make much practical sense.
>>539278364Restrictions on where you are allowed to cause noise pollution of that level
>>539278513>>539278364Rich people in urban centers complained about the sonic boom and basically got it banned from all major air ports
>>539278364Too expensive.As long as air travel was always expensive, the Concorde was simply a way to travel faster for even more money.But with today's ticket prices, the difference between a standard ticket and a Concorde ticket became too big - and the Concorde wasn't too comfortable as well - essentially a narrowbody plane. You can travel 1st class for less and for urgent matters people use Teams or something similar.
>>539279188Going hypersonic over land means a lot of broken windows. US civilians complained about it during 9/11 when the scrambled jets were bee lining around to stop the terrorists
Memefags, not even once, sukdeep…>wake up in NYC and have breakfast >have lunch meeting in London or Paris>be back in NYC in time for supper That was the concord and it was fucking awesome. They even gave you a little certificate you could frame after flying it. I know, I have one
>>539278364Too loud, too much fuel consumption, expensive to maintain
>>539278364It was a vanity project that lost money on every ticket sale even though tickets were on average 5000 back in the 80snormal jets can go ny to paris in 7 hours, the difference in time isn't that significant, you are still losing a day for travelthe only place supersonic makes sense is between the US and China since the distance is much larger and the amount of commerce/business is much much higher which provides the needed demographic but you can't fly over the US supersonic, so it'd just be Cali to Chinathere is a plane in development for this, but we will probably go to war with China before it's produced
Imagine a turbo 9/11 where the allahuakbars got ahold of a couple of these
>>539283341AFAIK the Concorde only went supersonic over oceans, which is easy to do when going from London/Paris to New York.
Another issue is that private jets became more common in the Concorde's target demographic.
>>539278727The space shittle doesn't countburgers with nazi leadership in the 50s and 60s space race were incredible
>>539283428
