For those who want the concorde back

[dcunning30]

Woody was correct in his reasons.
Richard Bransons offers were a joke, nothing more. He could have offered a legitimate amount if he was serious.
Airbus stopping supply was down to air france and their ability to pull strings with the airbus management. Air France didn't want to operate the plane, bad income low numbers embarressment for the crash still being around. and told this to airbus, despite BA supplying air france with parts and personelle to keep it flying air france still pulled it from service and airbus said it wouldn't be cost effective to only supply BA. Thus the aircraft was dead.

Seems you cite Airbus not wanting to supply parts as the reason.  But you give the explaination for this as Air France not being able to operate the aircraft profitably, which gives reason for Airbus not wanting to supply parts.  Seems like the cart is before the horse.

[Craig.]

The exact timeline went along the lines of Air France telling Airbus they no longer wanted to fly Concorde. They suggested behind closed doors, that BA should no longer continue to operate Concorde because it would cost Air France customers and make AF look bad. So Airbus being the company they are, in turn stopped producing parts for the plane.

[skwang]

Just a quick question... Has any internet patition ever worked on a government agency?  Seems to easy to spoof more "signatures" than are really out there.

Skwang

[Hagar]

[quote]Just a quick question... Has any internet patition ever worked on a government agency?

[Chris_F]

Chris, Im assuming that by Apollo 14 you mean Apollo 17

Everyone knows missions Apollo 15 thru 17 were filmed in a movie studio in Hollywood.  They filmed an Apollo 18-21 as well but low ratings eventually killed the series.

[skwang]

You have a very good point there. I doubt very much that any petition (internet or not) has ever affected a government decision.

Here in the USA petitions (real ones) have power, in that things can be added to the ballot by patition if none of our elected officials will do anything about an issue.

Skwang

[eniranjanrao]

In a democracy Petitions can change a lot of things there is an here's A Example In India we have a mini Railway line to a resort which was washed out during the Monsoon,which was a loss making line,Because of the petitions it should be back on track.The Line is over 150 years old.
So lets have a hope we can use Concorde for Joy rides atleast.

[dcunning30]

You have a very good point there. I doubt very much that any petition (internet or not) has ever affected a government decision.

Here in the USA petitions (real ones) have power, in that things can be added to the ballot by patition if none of our elected officials will do anything about an issue.

Skwang

But a petition that can not be displayed as serving the public good and can be economically viable will go nowhere.  If the prtitioners can have an answer to these two points, then they have a fighting chance to get their approval.

[Chris_F]

[quote]But a petition that can not be displayed as serving the public good and can be economically viable will go nowhere.

[Hagar]

Did anyone actually read the Mission Statement of the Save Concorde Group from the link I posted? To avoid further confusion about their objective I'll quote it here in full. This would be a heritage project for a single example to display at air shows & public events. There was never any question of returning it to commercial service.

[quote]Mission Statement

SCG is campaigning to return Concorde to flight. This will enable the Great British public to enjoy witnessing the ongoing celebration of one of the greatest engineering achievements in the history of this country. It would also be a living tribute to cooperation between European nations in the post-war era, and could be timed to coincide with the celebrations for the London Olympics in 2012.

The main obstacle preventing this return to flight is British Airways. They continue to hide behind statements that they refuse to back up in terms of costs and accountability.

The commercial life of the British Concordes had come to an end in 2003 when the aircraft, which remains legally owned by British Airways, were retired to museums. BA itself signalled a desire to see one Concorde fly in a heritage capacity, but the company

[dcunning30]

[quote]Approval from whom?

[dcunning30]

Hagar,

so the petition is to request the government to intervene with the holder of the type certificate to grant approval fir Concorde to fly in a heritage capacity?  So the roadblock might either be the holder of the certificate (government entity? ) or BA making excuses?  If this type ceritificate is granted, who would pay for it's maintance and operating costs?

[Hagar]

I assume that would have to be decided if & when they get the necessary approvals. Nothing is impossible but, as I said in my first reply in this topic, I see little chance of that happening.

Concorde is dead. Forget it.

PS. The holder of the type certificate is the prime manufacturer, in this case Airbus.

[dcunning30]

PS. The holder of the type certificate is the prime manufacturer, in this case Airbus.

I don't know how rampant litigation ir over in the UK, but here in the US, the holder of the certificate's lawyers whould be saying: "Are you kidding?  You seen the videos of that Concord with flames shooting out of it?  If we released the certificate, and something happens that caused a loss of life, our *sses would be drug into court in front of a jury of grandmothers.  We'd have no chance! We might get off easy by paying $1 million per litigant!"

[Hagar]

[quote]I don't know how rampant litigation ir over in the UK, but here in the US, the holder of the certificate's lawyers whould be saying: "Are you kidding?