"It can certainly be argued that these incidents were the beginning of the end for both types"
- I'd say, it was much more so for Concorde than for Tu144. Concorde was never back to what it was before that day - certainly, not only because of the crash, but that was one of the major reasons (BTW, if it was not a fatal crash but an emergency landing at LBG
... even still in flames, the airframe eventually lost but the passengers/crew evacuated... I think, it would be much different then and, who knows, may be that one thing would be enough still to see the bird in the sky today). As for Tu144, it entered service
after the crash (4 years later), and I see no difference if there was no crash at all - the design was still too far from being reliable and complete, so no chance to fly even to Eastern Europe, in the same time it was OK
to start flying with passengers on the only route inside the USSR
. Even another crash by itself was not the reason why the whole program was canceled but the fact that the aircraft was a technical failure and waste of resources even for the 100% state-owned Soviet economy. At least, the program was closed in, I believe, 1984 - 11 years after the first and 6 years after the second crash - so, they still tried to do something... Plus, none of the two Tu144 crashes was with passengers - the aircraft was "lucky" to be absolutely safe in airline service. A very important point in compare to Concorde crash...