airforum
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:48 pm

CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:15 pm

I could well have missed a topic on this before, but I came across this picture in the database which draw my attention.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Philippe Noret - AirTeamimages



This one is taken at Paris CDG, two months before a sistership crashed in Gonesse. What makes it special to me is the fact that there's a Continental DC-10 in the background. It was a strip of metal lost by this aircraft (maybe not exactly this particular one, but who knows) that later turned out to be the cause of the crash. And eventually set in the end of the the wonderful age of Concordes.

Maybe it's just me being melancholic, but I always find these kind of pics very interesting. In retrospect they capture much more than what's just seen by the eye.

 boggled 
What goes up, must come down. Let's hope the sky never went up.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:22 pm

Quoting Airforum (Thread starter):
It was a strip of metal lost by this aircraft (maybe not exactly this particular one, but who knows) that later turned out to be the cause of the crash

I think 'a contributing factor' would be more accurate than 'the cause of the crash' - lots of a/c can take an FOD-caused tyreburst without crashing - from my understanding it wasn't so much the tyreburst that caused the crash , as the secondary damage that the tyreburst did to the wing/fuel tanks. A different a/c type would probably have run over the debris , burst a couple of tyres , carried on with an otherwise uneventful take off and come back for a safe landing which might have warranted no more than a couple of lines on page 27 of the newspaper ( and then only if it was a slow news day )
 
EI747SYDNEY
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:28 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:57 pm

Quoting Airforum (Thread starter):

Just like all those photos of aircraft flying past the World Trade Centre pre 9/11

Rob  wave 
''Live life on the edge, Live each and every day like it's your last, Hell you only live once''
 
User avatar
EGTESkyGod
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:27 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:07 pm

Quoting EI747SYDNEY (Reply 2):
Just like all those photos of aircraft flying past the World Trade Centre pre 9/11  wave 

Careful, you might get in trouble with that one.   

[Edited 2005-12-09 12:08:27]
I came, I saw, I Concorde! RIP Michael Jackson
 
airforum
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:48 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:23 pm

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 1):
A different a/c type would probably have run over the debris , burst a couple of tyres , carried on with an otherwise uneventful take off and come back for a safe landing which might have warranted no more than a couple of lines on page 27 of the newspaper ( and then only if it was a slow news day )

Perhaps, but in this case it all started with that strip. I think it is safe to say that the Concorde wouldnt have crashed when the metal part wasnt lost by the CO plane.


Quoting EI747SYDNEY (Reply 2):
Just like all those photos of aircraft flying past the World Trade Centre pre 9/11

Naah, that would be a little too sombre. Big grin
In the picture above you find the drama of time (two months before the crash) and the presence of the main characters (CO DC-10 and AF Concorde).
What goes up, must come down. Let's hope the sky never went up.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:30 pm

Quoting Airforum (Reply 4):
aps, but in this case it all started with that strip

or started with a poorly designed fuel tank that was unusually vulnerable to damage from a tyreburst , something which after all can be expected to happen from time to time .

Quoting Airforum (Reply 4):
I think it is safe to say that the Concorde wouldnt have crashed when the metal part wasnt lost by the CO plane.

I think that it is also safe to say that an A330 or B747 or L-1011 or MD-11 or virtually any other large a/c wouldn't have crashed under the same set of circumstances .


edited to correct typo

[Edited 2005-12-09 12:34:01]
 
vunz
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2001 3:51 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:04 pm

I think this one's even more interesting, read the caption.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael F. McLaughlin

 
kiwiandrew

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:06 pm

Quoting Vunz (Reply 6):
I think this one's even more interesting, read the caption.

that is an amazing co-incidence
 
ARGinLON
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 6:26 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:08 pm

I think the piece of metal in question is believed to be from a CO 764
 
kiwiandrew

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:12 pm

Quoting ARGinLON (Reply 8):
I think the piece of metal in question is believed to be from a CO 764

everything I've read said it came off a DC-10-30 engine cowling
 
jeffry747
Posts: 906
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:26 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:18 pm

This one is interesting as well. Look closely at the pic and read the caption.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joe Pries - ATR Team


Sadly both the bird and the piece of scenery near the tail were lost tragically.
C'mon Big B, FLY!
 
airforum
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 10:48 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:43 pm

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 5):
think that it is also safe to say that an A330 or B747 or L-1011 or MD-11 or virtually any other large a/c wouldn't have crashed under the same set of circumstances .

Kiwi, I got your point. But I am not talking about 747s, A330s or Tristars. In this case it's about a Concorde. And it went down because of a strip of metal.

I am not saying that this strip would have caused any Boeing or Airbus aircraft to crash as well.
What goes up, must come down. Let's hope the sky never went up.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:52 pm

Quoting Airforum (Reply 11):
In this case it's about a Concorde. And it went down because of a strip of metal.

yes , I agree that a strip of metal was one in a chain of factors ( a chain which stretches back to the design process way back in the '60s - a design flaw which was serious enough to have the type certificate withdrawn ) - my point is that the original poster said it was 'the cause' as if it was the only cause - on that basis you could equally say that the bomb scare which caused flights to be diverted was 'the cause' of the KL/PA Tenerife disaster because if that hadn't happened then neither would the collision.

[Edited 2005-12-09 15:53:26]
 
access-air
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 5:30 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:37 am

Actually,

Not for one minute do I believe that a strip of metal brought this plane down on its own....I believe the other finding that is being "hushed" and that is that the spacers were not put back in the offending wheel bogies and thereforre it caused the offending where to wobble itself into shrapnel and THAT is what helped to bring this plane down....
Have any of you had a tyre on your car unaligned? it kinda pulls to one side or the other. The resulting sweeping motion of the tyre across the pavement esp at high speeds not only pulls the car in the direction of that tyre but it also wears away the tyre and tread. Think of how fast it would take for that to happn at near the takeoff speed of the Concorde.
If on your car this situation was to be left unchecked you'd eventually have bald spots or the steel belts showing thru on your car tyre. I had a Ford Escourt that unknown to me came with a broken Ball joint in the front right wheel section and it made that front tyre wobble continually even tho the tyres were pefectly alighned. The result was a prematurely worn out tyre...
And yes it pulled my car over to the right all the time.....
Just maybe these "Spacers" in the Concorde's wheel bogie had just been forgotten. Maybe these tyres were for a change in short order. Whos to say how long this plane could have been flying around without the spacers. You would have to check the Pilots logs to see if the reported any pulling to the left like what happened to this plane on it takeoff run. Was this problem something started a couple flights before or was this flight the last in a chain of events, one that started as an undetectable problem that balloned into a major problem all at once?
If we go with the DC10 idea, I think you would also have to take alook at the location of the Main Bogie on the Concorde vs the position of the engine as it is hangs on the DC10's wing. You have to look at when and at what speed the Concorde's tyre started pulling the plane to the left and what made it do that and did the wobbling tyres actually pull the Concorde into the path of the DC10 metal which may have been the proverbial "needle" that popped the fatigued "balloon" ???
Had the Concorde NOT been pulled to the left and accelerated normally and ent straight down the runway would it even had hit the Offending DC10 metal???
Titanium or not I still dont believe that one peice of engine cowling cover could bring down such a plane all by itself with out some other contributing factors.
Does this make any sense?????
The only facts that I have on this were two apposing Television programs on why the Cocnorde crashed and the Spacer explanation or the lack of the spacers was more logical. Something prior to the Piece of metal had to bring a tyre of that strength to its knees in a few seconds and I dont think it was a strip of metal. The metal might have popped the already fatigued tyre but that would be all...

Access-Air
Remember, Wherever you go, there you are!!!!
 
c680
Posts: 428
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:03 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:58 am

Quoting Airforum (Thread starter):
It was a strip of metal lost by this aircraft (maybe not exactly this particular one, but who knows) that later turned out to be the cause of the crash

French investigators started pointing the blame at CO very soon after the accident. There were even calls for the CO captian to be arrested for murder. From a French public relations and national image point of view, it was a good tactical maneuver. Questioning the FOD from the DC-10 early in the process inserted the thought in many minds that the "strip of metal" caused the Concorde crash.

What if the headlines had read: "Concorde Crashes - Faulty design unable to withstand minimal runway debris"
My happy place is FL470 - what's yours?
 
User avatar
EGTESkyGod
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:27 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:18 am

Quoting C680 (Reply 14):
Concorde Crashes - Faulty design unable to withstand minimal runway debris

Bit extreme, isn't it? I'm sure this is not the only crash due to FOD there's ever been. Media coverage was so immense just because it was Concorde.

I'll agree the modifications made ultimately meant she was a safer aircraft, but I don't believe she was unsafe to begin with. You can't forsee when you're designing an aircraft such an unfortunate CHAIN OF EVENTS that may bring her down, same as the WTC builders couldn't forsee TWO fully laden jet aircraft being flown at very high speed into the towers.

I think a lot of people were very quick to condemn a superlative aircraft after one very unfortunate incident. I think they were wrong to withdraw the CofA after the accident as the aircraft were perfectly flyable providing they were maintained properly (AF left out a spacer that should have been there). 24 years of service had already proved that. What should have happened is the changes should have been recommended at the next check of any kind on each aircraft. I firmly believe if that had happened, she might well still be flying.
I came, I saw, I Concorde! RIP Michael Jackson
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:25 am

Quoting Airforum (Reply 11):
And it went down because of a strip of metal.

No, it went down because it's fuel tanks couldn't withstand a tire burst on takeoff, due to a faulty design. That, and the fact that shoddy maintenance on the landing gear caused the plane to veer severely off track on the takeoff roll, and hit the piece on the edge of the runway.

Harry
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

).

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:28 am

Access-Air, BS.

I saw all this at close hand, you are talking of what you clearly do not know.
(The curse of our age perhaps?)

The joint investigation by French AND UK authorities was open, detailed, intensive.

Guess what? The shape of the strip exactly matched damage on the tyre, molecular tests confirmed this. Explain that away then, think up something silly to account for it.
This is all in the public domain, why not check it out, instead of thinking up bizarre conspiracies?
(I think the onus should be on conspiracy nuts to do all the explaining, not the other away around).

Can you really give one sane, informed, reason why a cover would happen, just hate the French perhaps?
Well the UK authorities were fully involved too, as was industry on both sides of the channel, as BA was, including colleagues of mine, the FAA were also in the loop.

We knew it was the strip by Sept 2000, we also knew that it's inappropriate fabrication of titanium, not aluminum, was a very important factor, (a much harder material).
Leading to a type of type destruction (not burst), with much larger, heavier lumps of carcass, (the lethal one was 5 ft long), that had not been seen in over 40 years of military and civil jet aviation, this was researched and checked.
That rub strip had to be aluminum, as it was a part far more likely to come off than usual, due to it's role and position (part of the thrust reverser).

Also, I know of 2 727's lost to tyre bursts, a DC-8-60, a very near loss of a PA DC-10 in 1980, at LHR.

Plenty of threads on this here, some fairly recent, go search.
I've had enough of this most ill-informed, partisan, discussed subject on here, I saw enough of it in 2000-2001, every working day.
 
Devil505x
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 3:55 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:33 am

Quoting Airforum (Reply 4):
Perhaps, but in this case it all started with that strip. I think it is safe to say that the Concorde wouldnt have crashed when the metal part wasnt lost by the CO plane

Everybody's (in general terms) an expert. It amazes me that nobody saw this coming.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:34 am

THis has come up so often, I created a 'Common questions and answers' document to the topic of Concordes crash.


http://81.86.134.163/~richard/Concorde.txt

Message me if you want anything adding or changed.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:36 am

Thanks Richard, perhaps this thread should be called 'Deja Vu'
 
dogfighter2111
Posts: 1867
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:02 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:37 am

Actually, it wasn't the strip fo metal that 'caused' the crash. Let me explain:

The tyre burst BEFORE the aircraft hit the strip of metal, the aircraft started to veer off the runway and then the aircraft hit the strip of metal which caused part of the tyre to rip off an hit the fuel tank.

Whilst i am explaing, the main reason that the Captain lifted off the RWY too early was because there was a B744 carrying the French Prime Minister on the taxiway directly ahead of the flaming concorde. There are many pics taken from the B744 that shows it flying over her.

So, i think it really should be AF that are blamed for the tyre bursting. The tyre could've been replaced.

Anyway, when i saw this pic i immediatly thought that it was the AF Concorde that crashed and the DC-10 that left the strip of metal.

Thanks
Mike
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5184
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:38 am

Back to Concorde F-BTSC, This aircraft was the one used for the (bad) movie "Airport 80 (or 79 ?) - Concorde", as shown on this picture :


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alain Iger



At the end of that movie, Concorde crashes and burns after an amergency landing on a Ski slope in south Germany (or Austria ?)  sarcastic 
 
Amy
Posts: 1109
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 9:48 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:41 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 17):
I've had enough of this most ill-informed, partisan, discussed subject on here, I saw enough of it in 2000-2001, every working day.

 checkmark 

Yet another example of a.netters thinking they know better than the air crash investigators and other officials working on the incident.

Fact of the matter is, like most aviation distasters, there was a sequence of events that led to the crash, and if any of them had been 'as they should have been' it wouldn't have happened.

Concorde is resting quietly. Please let the subject do the same.

Having said that, it is a poinient shot. Thanks for pointing it out Airforum.
A340-300 - slow, but awesome!
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 1:47 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 17):
a very near loss of a PA DC-10 in 1980, at LHR.

GDB - would you mind telling us more about this incident? I'd love to hear about it.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:09 am

Chris, multi tyre bursts, fire, the A/C came very close to running off the end of the runway, this was an incident on take off.

Dogfighter, sorry, but you are also talking nonsense too, it's all disproved, rubbish.
I saw all this close up, you didn't, end of story.
Blunt I know, not even meant personally, but it's the bottom line.

Read the accident report, (warning to those into conspiracies, it does not read like a tabloid).
 
User avatar
EGTESkyGod
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:27 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:12 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 25):
I saw all this close up, you didn't, end of story.
Blunt I know, not even meant personally, but it's the bottom line.

You were in Paris and saw Concorde in trouble? What went through your mind?
I came, I saw, I Concorde! RIP Michael Jackson
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:20 am

Quoting Airforum (Thread starter):
And eventually set in the end of the the wonderful age of Concordes.

Are you kidding? As a white elephant, the type was doomed from the start.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:23 am

No, I was at LHR and saw the aftermath, the hunt for information, the effort to run the fleet under massive, largely ill-informed, media pressure, (the grounding 3 weeks later was almost a relief to tell the truth, not that we thought so at the time)
Then the whole return to flight programme (which was modified itself, as more information came in from the investigation), we talked with industry (EADS/BAE/RR, then Michelin), worked with EADS people directly on the mod programme.
Colleagues went to CDG to sort and catalogue the wreckage.
They fed back much to us on their return.

The mod programme was totally predicated on an accurate picture of the accident, without this, it would never have got off the ground.
This alone blows away any conspiracies on the subject.

Thats enough now from me, this has all been said so many times on here.
 
GQfluffy
Posts: 3072
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 1:25 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:40 am

Quoting Airforum (Thread starter):
that later turned out to be the cause of the crash

Negative

Quoting Airforum (Reply 11):
And it went down because of a strip of metal.

Again, Negative.

Copied from Richard's Link:

"- failure in fueltank occured much further forward than the dent made by the tyre chunk - failure caused by a shockwave due to fullness of tank and type of fuel and not penetration"

Any questions?
This isn't where I parked my car...
 
Morvious
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:36 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:51 am

This is what I can remember of reports and television.

Aircraft did run over the metal strip
Tire exploded and damaged the wing and fuel tanks
Leaking fuel caught fire
Aircraft almost veered of the runway
Pilot took off with the minimum speed
Crew did shut down one engine on the left side (number 1 or 2) because they got warning signals it was on fire. (But no by checklists, and way to early)
Wing on the left side was damaged by the fire (report above doesn't mention)
Aircraft felt down into a building!

Although any crash is because of a string of events, experts didn't blame the metal strip.

The metal strip only started the event, but experts blamed the crash on the engine shut down and the melted wing.

The AF was doomed after the fuel cought fire, this fire was so intens and so hot, the wing melted and lost function to generate lift. <-The reason the concorde crashed (Experts did say it, don't blame me).

After research they could tell non of the engine realy took fore before the crash.
The crew did however got a fire warning in one of its engines, and they did shut it down, to low and not by checklist procedures.
There was a big chance the aircraft whould have cleared the building if the crew didn't shut the engine down.
have a good day, Stefan van Hierden
 
slider
Posts: 6812
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:00 am

Quoting Airforum (Reply 4):
I think it is safe to say that the Concorde wouldnt have crashed when the metal part wasnt lost by the CO plane.

I know it is safe to say that had the CDG airport authority conducted their runway inspection prior to departure as per Concorde SOP that it wouldn't have crashed.


******************

We've argued this one around and around a million times. The most astute answer is in fact to intellectually identify the sequence of events that lead up to it and realize that safety demands a 360 degree focus of attention at all times. That includes aircraft design, mitigation of design defects, operational exceptions, and contingency plans.
 
dogfighter2111
Posts: 1867
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:02 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:03 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 25):

Well, you never actually saw the incident happen where as there are people who did and have told me.

My uncle used to be a firefighter in CDG at the time of the incident, not on duty at the time but he did inform me that his colleauges did infact see the flames start way before it hit the strip of metal.

Thanks
Mike
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23199
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:21 am

Quoting Dogfighter2111 (Reply 32):
My uncle used to be a firefighter in CDG at the time of the incident, not on duty at the time but he did inform me that his colleauges did infact see the flames start way before it hit the strip of metal.

There are few things more unreliable then an "eyewitness" according to many investigators.  Smile Especially days or weeks after the event they witnessed.

I don't know GDB, but I am guessing they work(ed) for BA and was a member of their Concorde group, so even if they were not part of the accident investigation team, they were receiving information from it to assist in the investigation on other Concorde frames and to develop and implement changes necessary to prevent the events that brought down F-BTSC from bringing down another Concorde.

That's carries more weight with me then those "quoting" sources they can't even remember.  Wink
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:26 am

Quoting Slider (Reply 31):
I know it is safe to say that had the CDG airport authority conducted their runway inspection prior to departure as per Concorde SOP that it wouldn't have crashed.

It wasnt SOP for a runway sweep before a Concorde take off for either AF or BA.


Quoting Dogfighter2111 (Reply 32):
My uncle used to be a firefighter in CDG at the time of the incident, not on duty at the time but he did inform me that his colleauges did infact see the flames start way before it hit the strip of metal.

The tyre fragments and the titanium strip matched up in both shape and forensic details. How did that happen if the tyre had supposedly burst earlier in the takeoff run than the investigation says?

The odds were stacked up against this particular aircraft from the moment it was rolled out that morning. Thats it, bad luck and a chain of events.
 
vc10
Posts: 1342
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2001 4:13 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:32 am

Morvious, Just a little correction to your posting,

Now the engine might have been shut down earlier than was ideal, but as the aircraft was only airborne for a limited time no checklist would have been used as the "Engine Fire Drill" initial actions were done by memory and only later confirmed by checklist action. These memory items would have shut the engine down. However there should have been some verbal evidence that they were being monitored and perhaps this is what you are referring to

Slider, Cannot speak for Air France but having the take off runway inspected prior to departure was never a BA SOP as long as that runway was being used by other aircraft for Take off. If Concorde was to use the non active take off runway such as often happed in JFK then the runway it was to use would be inspected just prior to it's departure. Well this was the case prior the crash anyway

There are a lot of myths around as to how special Concorde was treated by ATC and airports but that was just not the case except sometimes when aircraft wanted to watch it take off and so would invite it to jump the take off line, but this was only in the early days or at an airfield that had not seen the old girl before

have fun little vc10
 
joness0154
Posts: 650
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:56 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 3:33 am

And how did your uncle know exactly when it hit the piece of metal, if he was not standing right by it?

Saying the Concorde crashed because it hit the piece of metal is a good example of a fallacy.

It was part of a series of events that led up to the crash.
I don't have an attitude problem. You have a perception problem
 
tjcab
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:14 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:19 am

Quoting Joness0154 (Reply 36):
It was part of a series of events that led up to the crash.

Yes, what what started the series?

The part was not supposed to be titanium.

The part should never have fallen off.

There should have been a FOB scan prior to take off

The CO DC-10 should take some blame as well. Like it or not, it was part of the equation!
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:30 am

Quoting TJCAB (Reply 37):
There should have been a FOB scan prior to take off

No, there shouldnt have. How many times does this have to be repeated?! Neither AF or BA required FOD scans before all Concorde departures until after the crash.
 
access-air
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 5:30 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:48 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 17):
Access-Air, BS.

You are right Im not an expert...but I felt I was just as qualified to say something as much as anyone else, based on the information I had at my disposal...
And No, I do not hate the French...why would you think that???
I just hate that the fact that it seems like not all the facts are being uncovered and made available to the pubic regarding this.
So dont preach to me about being misinformed. If it is a coverup no one will ever know. By this time facts have been so diluted know one could ever be certain as to what really happend. The best guys to tell you what happend were in the front office of the plane and unfortunately they cant..

Besides, I am surprised that you as a Brit would be so ouchy as I draw my conclusions from some BRITISH investigators...information that the French chose not to even consider....

Why must I defend everything I say on here when everone else can spew out the crap they can and it goes over everyones head???
Sheesh.....

Access-Air
Remember, Wherever you go, there you are!!!!
 
jepstein
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:06 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:53 am

Quoting Vunz (Reply 6):
think this one's even more interesting, read the caption.

Weird man, very weird.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:58 am

Quoting Access-Air (Reply 39):
but I felt I was just as qualified to say something as much as anyone else, based on the information I had at my disposal...

GDB was a Concorde engineer with BA and was heavily involved in the aftermath of the crash at BA, including investigations into how susceptable the aircraft were to these events.

I think he is more qualified to comment on these matters than anyone on this board.

Also see my link I posted earlier for more information, especially matchign the tyre and titanium strip up forensically. Explain how that happens if the strip doesnt cause the blow out, or the blow out happens before the point on the runway the strip was at.

I also dont think the pilots would have any idea what was actually going on, all they knew was they had a blown tyre (instruments), and a fire. They didnt know what caused what, they had no way of knowing.
 
IAH744
Posts: 127
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:09 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:09 am

Quoting Jeffry747 (Reply 10):
This one is interesting as well. Look closely at the pic and read the caption.


View Large View Medium

Photo © Joe Pries - ATR Team


Sadly both the bird and the piece of scenery near the tail were lost tragically.

i dont seem to remember that [i mean the plane, not whats near the tail]
Deliver Everyones Luggage To Atlanta
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:13 am

With respect Access-Air, you are NOT informed on this at all, otherwise you would not have written that nonsense post.

OK, not a nationalistic thing with you, but so many on here, with the same flag by your name, have been highly biased against the French on this, some Brits too granted.

Why do you think all the facts have not been uncovered, yes they have, from the technical investigation, French law also has a judicial investigation to follow, which it is.
It was one of the most extensive reports in aviation history.
The alternative views stated on here were looked into, all found wanting.

This report actually was not totally kind to AF, a full scale audit of their maint procedures came out of it.
The accident report is on line, in an English version.

As stated, the investigation fed into the return to flight mods, which I was involved with, cover ups are almost always the fevered, ill-informed imaginings of those with an axe to grind.

There was NO cover up, there was a return to service (blunted by Sept 11th, without that event, we'd still be flying), the investigation had to be 'signed off' to allow the mods to be completed and the C of A to be returned.
Which it was, for the first modded aircraft, (G-BOAF), on Sept 5th 2001.
I was on a proving, pax simulation flight, on Sept 11th 2001, ironic eh? Concorde Operational Evaluation Flifgt (by GDB Sep 15 2001 in Trip Reports)

I lived this every day for over a year, information tricked out to us, we got first looks on the updated reports as they were done, we saw how the conclusions of the investigation fed into, often altered, the return to flight programme.

Please read the accident report.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:20 am

Consider this, if you think there was a coverup -

Air France had been wanting to retire their Concorde fleet for a number of years, it wasnt as operationally successful as BAs and it was costing them a lot of money. They couldnt because of contractual reasons - they had to keep them flying while BA did, otherwise they had to pay BA lots of money to get out of maintenance and parts contracts with suppliers.

Why would Air France want Concorde to come out with a positive bill of health from the crash report if otherwise it meant getting a decent excuse to shut down their fleet? If Concorde was deemed unsuitable to fly, BA would have been affected as well, and the contracts would have been much easier to get out of.

As it is, BA and AF decided a few years later to retire the fleets.
 
jeffry747
Posts: 906
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:26 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:23 am

http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/v...=9V-SPK&airline=Singapore+Airlines

Quoting IAH744 (Reply 42):
i dont seem to remember that [i mean the plane, not whats near the tail]

The details about the fate of SQ006 and B747-400 9V-SPK.
C'mon Big B, FLY!
 
User avatar
Aeroflot777
Posts: 2995
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 2:19 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:30 am

Quoting Jeffry747 (Reply 10):
This one is interesting as well. Look closely at the pic and read the caption.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Joe Pries - ATR Team


Sadly both the bird and the piece of scenery near the tail were lost tragically.

I don't get it. I understand that the plane was lost, but what "else" is lost in the photo? Something about the scenery? Pardon my ignorance...

Aeroflot777
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:40 am

Quoting Aeroflot777 (Reply 46):
I don't get it. I understand that the plane was lost, but what "else" is lost in the photo? Something about the scenery? Pardon my ignorance...

To the very left, just above the truck, you can make out the Twin Towers of the WTC. Tenuous link....  Smile
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5184
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 6:46 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 44):
Air France had been wanting to retire their Concorde fleet for a number of years

Wrong.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 44):
it wasnt as operationally successful as BAs and it was costing them a lot of money.

Wrong again.
The overall Concorde activity was profitable.
The regular route CDG-JFK-CDG was profitable, though AF001 JFK-CDG never made money, AF002 CDG-JFK was profitable enough to report profits for the route.
The most lucrative activity was of course the charter flights and the World Tours.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 44):
They couldnt because of contractual reasons - they had to keep them flying while BA did, otherwise they had to pay BA lots of money to get out of maintenance and parts contracts with suppliers.

Wrong.
Though competitors, AF & BA always had a good relation & cooperation concerning Concorde. Since the very begining of the Concorde flights, and when it was understood that they would be the two sole operators in the world, AF & BA agreed that when they would stop Concorde, they would take the decision together and do it together.

Quoting Dogfighter2111 (Reply 32):
My uncle used to be a firefighter in CDG at the time of the incident, not on duty at the time but he did inform me that his colleauges did infact see the flames start way before it hit the strip of metal.

the man who saw the man, who saw the man, who saw the man, who saw the man who saw the bear ...

I was at CDG on that day. I was on reserve for Concorde flights.
From the sixth floor of the AF Crew Center, I saw F-BTSC taking off, and I can tell you there was no flames when SC started its take off run.
 
coa747
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:11 pm

RE: CO DC-10 And AF Concorde In One Pic

Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:11 am

To say the titanium stip was the cause is not accurate. The strip from the CO DC-10 was a part of the accident sequence but it wasn't even the proximate event. The loss of both port engines caused the aircraft to crash, up until that point the Concorde was still capable of flight. There are many contributing factors. The missing wheel spacer which caused the wheel assembly to shimy. The design of the wing tanks. The propencity of concorde tires to burst. The fact that a piece of tire severed the wiring bundle in the wheel well that prevented the undercariage from being retracted and which also provided the spark that ignited the fuel spraying from the ruptured fuel tank. The list goes on and on. However I think we can all agree that this crash did hasten the retirement of Concorde and that design fixes should have been introduced to deal with the tire fod issue long before the accident in Paris.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ACDC8, Baidu [Spider], BoeingVista, calpsafltskeds, Ducari, iahcsr, MaxiAir, mwh787, n757kw, QuarkFly, Rmjhjr, seat64k, TailDragging, traindoc, withak and 204 guests