The French-built prototype Concorde 001 flew on March 2, 1969 and the British-made Concorde 002 flew on April 9, 1969.
Both prototypes entered service in 1971. Commercial service began in 1976 but only 9 aircraft were ordered.
| ENGINE||4 x Rolls-Royce/SNECMA Olympus 593 Mk 610, 169.1kN|
| Take-off weight||185066 kg||408003 lb|
| Empty weight||78698 kg||173500 lb|
| Wingspan||25.55 m||84 ft 10 in|
| Length||62.10 m||204 ft 9 in|
| Height||11.40 m||37 ft 5 in|
| Wing area||358.22 m2||3855.84 sq ft|
| Cruise speed||2179 km/h||1354 mph|
| Ceiling||18290 m||60000 ft|
| Range||6582 km||4090 miles|
|A three-view drawing (1190 x 668)|
|Air France, 17.02.2014|
I bet that the Tu-144 could beat the crap out of the Concorde. I mean, the Tu-144 is about one tenth faster than the Concorde so you see what I mean?
The Concorde averaged 15.8 pm/g fuel consumption compared to the 707 at 33.3pm/g, the 747 46.4pm/g and the DC10 53.6pm/g.
With 3 times the consumption the economics are not in it's favor.
See how far we have come. No one has been to the moon in over 30 years and here we are in the 21st century unable to cross the Atlantic in anything capable of exceeding Mach 1. That's progress for you.
|Scott Boyd, 28.09.2011|
While having a stellar career the Concorde simply became too expensive to operate. While support issues may have played a part economic reality, fuel cost especially, and suitable destination pairs made the difference.
Concorde could easily have been kept in operation for charter operations, even though operating expenses would be high a premium would have been acceptable for those who would use it.
Parts can still be found or can be replicated for DC-3's and parting out one or two of the four would have keep 1 or two running.
They all flew to their last destinations.
|Mick Skinner, 27.09.2011|
At the time of the only CONCORDE crash I had retired from BA but had been an engineering manager (licensed on Concorde )in the Concorde hangar for 6 years up to 1968. This aircraft was second to none in terms of performance and charisma. To put it in perspective for a few hundred pounds your granny in her sunday best could be drinking champagne and eating a steak dinner at Mach 2 when a jet jockey who is in a pressure suit and not even a drink of water in a fast jet would not be able to catch it as he would run out of fuel before getting near. There is still a lot of conjecture about the Air France Paris crash but the reason Concorde is no longer flying is only because the manufacturers stopped supporting it and without spares it was no longer a viable option.
|Colin Cox, 24.09.2011|
More needs writing up on this iconic aircraft. 'Gooda' copies and pastes the post by 'Ian' but there was only 1 Concorde crash, not "crashes", as mentioned.
Air France flight AF4590 crashed into the Parisian suburb of Gonesse on
July 25th, 2000 as a direct result of encountering debris on the runway
during it's take-off roll from RW26R at CDG. Other contributory factors were involved, as is usually the case with aircraft accidents. A very good account of the event can be read in Concorde Captain John Hutchinson's book, 'The Wind Beneath My Wings'. ISBN: 978-0-9562176-2-2
Excellent achievement but not financially viable for larger scale use. The crashes sealed its fate.
|leo rudnicki, 24.04.2009|
There was a bad movie and all I remember was that an F4 couldn't catch Concorde. A single Concorde pilot probably had more Mach 1+ time than all the fighter pilots in history. I only remember one crash, caused by FOD. Wish I had flown in one but champagne tickles my nose.
Do you have any comments about this aircraft ?