Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Return Of Concorde... AirFrance?  
User currently offlineVgnAtl747 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 1513 posts, RR: 2
Posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1267 times:

I know that BA has done test fligts, and modified their concorde fleet, but I havn't heard what Air France has done. Any test flights? Modifications? If not, will the Air France concorde fleet enter service at the same time as the BA fleet? I would think Air France would have to go through the same process that BA did. Any comments?


Work Hard. Fly Right. Continental Airlines
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineB737-700 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1222 times:


I think AF has recently done tests as well. They want to start their flights one months later than BA. Around October.

Regards,
B737-700


User currently offlineMegatop From Denmark, joined May 1999, 347 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1215 times:

According to the respected danish newspaper JP, both AF and BA start service again late summer or early autum.

Megatop

PS AF has also made at least one testflight.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 78
Reply 3, posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1195 times:

The previous AF test flights were with aircraft without the tank-liner mod, that's why G-BOAF's flights last week were so significant.
Only OAF has had all the work done, OAE is nearing completion and OAG is starting it's mod.
AF are doing (with a lot of help from EADS), three tank-liner mods now, with a fourth aircraft to start soon.
BA plan to start services in september, subject to modded aircraft availability. Hard to see AF starting services until october. AF won't like that, but BA and EADS were the driving forces in getting Concorde back.
AF started their tank-liner mods several months after BA, but they will no doubt benefit from the experience of OAF's work.


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1185 times:

I read in some book a while back that the Brits wanted to withdraw from the Concorde program before it flew but the french had a serious commitment and basically told them that they do not have that option.

I think when she crash last year, and the news broadcasts reported that "...their 31-yr old girl has finally died..," they got broken hearted.

Either that or it has something to do with the fact that when Hitler came the France, they gave up so their art wasn't sacraficed; the world considered them wussies. Something giant, politically, had to happen to show that they wouldn't give up -- until they have a real excuse.

Anyway, when I see Concorde, and I mean no offense, I see it purely as a French airplane; BA seemed to have little respect for the passengers who died by keeping it in service after AF withdrew them.

They cost a half billion dollars each, you just can't be sloppy, we can't replace them! Soon they'll be as priceless as Egyptian mummies for crying out loud!

I think they care more, or not ... depends I guess.

-lehpron



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1167 times:

Extremely Ambitious and Sensitive - I see... Big grin

User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 78
Reply 6, posted (13 years 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1168 times:

Wrong, it's BA who have utilised Concorde more fully, (around 40% more flights). BA who have upgraded the cabin three times, compared to virtually nothing from AF.
BA had two JFK services per day, AF had one.
BA pioneered the charter market with Concorde.
BA have always had a large pool (approx 280) of dedicated Concorde ground engineers, many of whom built the aircraft when they worked for BAC.
As for the aircraft itself;
British Aircraft Corporation built the nose, forward fuselage, intermediate fuselage, rear fuselage, fin, rudder and engine nacelles.
Aerospatatiale built the wings, centre fuselage and other French companies did the undercarriage.
The engines were R/R Olympus, with a French nozzle/reheat system by Snecma.
Systems and avionics were split 50/50 between UK and France.
Production was at Filton, England and Toulouse, France.
After the crash, BA suspended the BA003/BA004 as a mark of respect and to allow checking of the fleet before service resumed next day.
So Concorde was the first truly joint project between two European nations, not just a French project.
Neither nation had the cash or technology to build it alone.


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (13 years 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 1150 times:

Dude, calm down, though I'm not sorry if I hit a nerve.

Check out "Vehicles" by Nigel Hawkes (buy it used on Amazon), it was published in 1991, hard cover black book. Publisher: MacMillan Publishing Company.

It said there that initially the two countries' concepts of an SST were different: British-short range, French-if it can't cross Atlantic, then no market. They couldn't do it alone, so they got together and went for the French ideal.

It also said there that the Brits indeed wanted to back out of the program, I never said that they weren't commited or not part of the Anglo-French alliance; history and you have showed us that. I was merely talking about the atitudes before anything was launched.

Stop going A-bomb on me, just because I choose to neglect stuff, doesn't mean I'm unaware.

Lehpron

BTW, what is GDB?



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineGyro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1147 times:

AF has also carried out plenty of tests, however not airborne. They have done high speed runway tests in a French Air Force base and of course strenghtened the wings, changed tyre type etc, etc. BA definately uses the Concorde more than AF on scheduled flights. AF only does the classic route but also carries out plenty of charter flights with them...

Regards: Sven


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 78
Reply 9, posted (13 years 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1147 times:

I was aware of how some the British establishment was anti-Concorde, in fact they were, and are anti spending money on anything a bit risky.
A large proportion of the UK press are anti too, does not stop some of them have freebies on it though.
I actually admire the French commitment to technology and engineering, besides Concorde, there's TGV trains, Ariane rockets, Dassault aircraft to name a few. All areas that the UK was ahead of and let slip away in the past 40 years.
And Concorde's return is largely the work of Airbus France, (EADS). The EADS guys we had advising us were great.
If Concorde's wings were a BAE Systems product, we would be sunk now as they would not be really interested, (and you should have heard their modification suggestions).
The Concorde variant built, was the British 'long-range' concept, (trust me!)
I wasn't offended by your post, but you hear so much misinformation, especially in the past year.



User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (13 years 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 1130 times:

The transatlantic version (that was built) is BRITISH one...

User currently offlineTeva From France, joined Jan 2001, 1871 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (13 years 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

Lehpron, was this book published in the States? In this case, be very careful with the content. Concorde had to face a hard battle to land in JFK. (Maybe because Boeing has not been able to produce their own supersonic... They even recently used the old Concordsky, to try to learn the technology)
Due to this battle, and despite the fact that Concorde has been adopted by american travelers, I know there are still a lot of people to criticize what they have not been able to do. I do not like polemics. I prefer the facts. Here they are.(GDB, I will not repeat your, but tx for knowing so much about the Concorde)

1) Concorde has never been profitable for AF and BA. Then, last year, the net income for AF was 90 Millions FRF. And if it is a financial disaster, why did BA operate 2 daily flights? (for prestige, 1 daily flight is enough). And why did Virgin try to lease Concorde from AF (as AF has only &1 flight, they do not need as many aircraft as BA, and Vigin wanted to lease 2 of them to compete with BA)

2) Concorde has been a financial disaster for BAE and French Aerospatiale.
If you only look at the aircraft sales, you are right. If you look the long term , that's not true. the equation is as simple as this:
Without Concorde, no Airbus !!!!!
- people from different countries learned how to work together;

- a lot of the technologies developped for the Concorde have been applied for the Airbus. The most famous example is the joystick you find in the A320, A330 and A340 families. (but it is not the only one)

I stop here as this note starts to be too long; I just hope that some of the readers will now read different books to collect more facts

Nana...
Teva



Ecoute les orgues, Elles jouent pour toi...C'est le requiem pour un con
User currently offlineGo Canada! From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 2955 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (13 years 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 1124 times:

The BBC says air france will start their flights a month after BA.This is according to BA and AF, with BA flying in September and AF in October


I can see AF selling their concordes, with BA snapping them up.



It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
User currently offlineTeva From France, joined Jan 2001, 1871 posts, RR: 16
Reply 13, posted (13 years 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 1119 times:

Go Canada,
Do you want a new revolution in France?
We did the mistake in the 70s, with "LE FRANCE", today the NORWAY.
Even if BA or Virgin want them (to make profit with them), we will never let AF do such a crime.
As I said, there will be a revolution....

Nana....



Ecoute les orgues, Elles jouent pour toi...C'est le requiem pour un con
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 78
Reply 14, posted (13 years 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1108 times:

Concorde profits for BA in the last full year were £16 million.
BA would not want AF Concorde's, not to fly anyway, they have been used much less and are at very different modification states to the BA fleet. I don't mean the new safety mods, just general routine structural stuff.
And it is in BA's interests in the long-term for AF to operate Concorde again, sharing spares keeps the costs down, and then there's the planned re-life 2 programme, cheaper if two operators are doing it instead of one. If re-life 2 does not happen, Concorde will be retired around 2008-2009. Re-life 2 could extend that out to 2014-15.


User currently offlineToady From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 724 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (13 years 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1097 times:

A year ago I was puzzled by the reaction to BA's decision to continue Concorde flights - and I still am!
Why shouldn't they have continued? If (for example) an AF B747 were to crash, would all B747s worldwide be grounded?
Why the mention of "respect" for those who died? Are Concorde passengers & crew worthy of more respect than the rest of us?

This isn't meant to be inflammatory; it's a serious question.


User currently offlineAirsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (13 years 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1097 times:

Now this is very mean and cynical of me but anyway:
Do you think there would have been any effort to make her fly again (much less on behalf of AF) if AF 1 or 2 had crashed, and not AF 4590? For one, the hype would have been MUCH greater than it´s now, and the market would have been even deader than it´s now; no celebrity or industrial high roller would have set foot on that plane if not some unimportant German nobodies had been killed.

Daniel Smile


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 78
Reply 17, posted (13 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1083 times:

The fact is was a heavily-loaded, much-delayed charter flight may have had some bearing on the circumtances, and BA's regular passengers know this.
Just imagine if we never flew on an aircraft type after a crash to respect those lost, fancy taking a boat abroad? Or only trains overland?
And it was an AF Concorde that crashed, not a BA one. BA complied with the instructions of the authorities, when they said it's OK to fly, they did, when they said stop, BA did.
What more are they supposed to do?


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Any Footage Of Concorde Doing A Barrel Roll? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 19:57:38 by Gh123
Package Prompts Return Of Air India Flight posted Tue Sep 19 2006 13:50:02 by YYZSaabGuy
26th July - Official Opening Of Concorde 202 posted Wed Jul 26 2006 22:04:36 by GDB
Return Of Delta 757s At ABQ? posted Tue May 23 2006 23:18:41 by 1337Delta764
Video Of Concorde Breaking The Sound Barrier posted Fri Feb 10 2006 11:42:18 by NoUFO
Removal Of Concorde At CDG? posted Sat Oct 29 2005 22:08:21 by Lufthansi
Judge Ok's NW Return Of Planes posted Wed Oct 19 2005 19:57:35 by DAYflyer
Airbus Planning "Son Of Concorde" posted Mon Sep 26 2005 15:04:38 by Oly720man
LGW - Any Return Of BA's 747's? posted Thu Mar 24 2005 23:22:00 by VS747SPUR
Could ATL See The Return Of KLM 747's? posted Tue Feb 8 2005 04:36:19 by AV8AJET