It's a real shame that ONE incedent grounded this aircraft. If this were the case, we wouldn't be flying at all. I would have saved up and paid $10,000 to ride this aircraft. It's a shame....way ahead of it's time.
@brightlights456X An interesting question. The SR-71 can fly faster and higher but only carries 1 or in some cases 2 people and they both have to wear full pressure suits. Concorde could carry 120 people at 60.000 feet at Mach 2 - and was capable of barrel rolls and the like, as we hear in this video. To me, Concorde is the more beautiful as well. I'd have to go for Concorde - though the SR-71 is one hell of a plane as well.
@brightlights456X For some reason I thought you maybe knew why Concorde isn't flown at air shows anymore. But after re-reading it seems you were actually asking :P
Probably cost of maintaining. I really wanted to know if a multi-millionaire ore billiobaire would be aloud to buy on if he could afford the maintenance.
IT IS DESIGNED THAT WAY. The plane will be ''loose'' during take off, and upon reach cruise speeds at over MAch3, the body will expand due to the intense heat from friction. The expansion will then fit the ''gaps''.
@brightlights456X well they are designed for different rolls, but the Concorde was/is much harder to do, the big boss at NASA when he hear of the Concorde project say to make a passenger aircraft to cross the Atlantic at mach 2 will make putting man on the moon seem like a walk in the park.well history will tell you the the US made it to the moon but had 2 or 3 failed attempt's at a supersonic airliner, i think this is what makes Concorde so special
a barrel roll is a completely safe maneuver in any modern jet passenger aircraft. It maintains continuous, positive gforce. Your drink wouldn't even spill
@TheWheels777 Unless Boeing or Airbus have found a way to combat gravity, I'd like to think that when the plane was upside down, any drink in an unlidded container would spill out.
@md69cs If as the captain says here they were applying positive g all the way round - pulling back on the stick as well as rolling the aircraft - that might not happen. Not sure on that one.
You can always tell what countries built a supersonic airliner and what ones did not by the slagging off concord gets from a certain country. Tupolov stole it, could not make it work, bowing tried and could not make it work so gave up and built 747. Shame realy as some competition would have saved Concorde. Ho hum!
@dc2man123 Concorde has tyres made specially for it - they were not "accidents waiting to happen". ANY TYRE will burst if its cut when rubbish is left on the runway. As for "big jet" - it weighs 120tons.
@dc2man123 "All the destruction it caused"? Have some perspective. It had one crash. As bad as it was for the people impacted by the accident, it hardly compares in a contest of "most damage caused by different airplanes."
@dc2man123 It was a single crash. The 747 has crashed hundreds of times, Titanic sank on its first voyage, 2 space shuttles blew up... what about those? Besides, the pilot in this video was talking long before concorde crashed. (Btw, when has Ireland ever built any technilogical marvels, or anything interesting.... i hear silence)
a burst tyre did not put Concorde out of use, the humble Boeing 737 has killed 20x as many people in crashes over the many years of its life and yet still flies. only the cost of maintaining Concorde was its downfall. the only reason there are no new concordes with lower operation costs and Modern technology is because no one has worked out how to stop the sonic boom, That is the sole reason it now takes 8 hours to get from London to New York when it used to take 3!
@andysim232 Cost was important, but the crash was the nail in the coffin. Also, thanks to the way statistics works, the 737 still has a better safety record when you look at total crashes vs. successful flights, given that there were so many more 737s built than Concords.
We need another SST airliner, but more of a practical one. Mach 1.8 would do. would allow you to go from one side of the earth to the other in a business day. ie 10 hours. or sydney to london. time to start lobbying Boeing and Airbus I think....
@rebsrule311 I meant as in what type of camera how do they have it on the other aircraft. Specifics I wasn't expecting people not to understand what i meant.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@2:11 "when you take off from NY in the dark and see the sun rise in the west" -- huh? When you're flying NY-LDN, you're flying to the EAST, i.e. along with the earth's rotation. So all you MIGHT ever see would be the sun rising in the east very rapidly.
@hyperthreaded You are correct he says 'take off from NY' then emphasises the 'rise in the west' and 'doing something different' - The reason being he climbs to 60,000 and can see way beyond the western horizon, he therefore gets a sunrise in the west courtesy of his climb. - Not entirely unique, I recall an RAF Pilot saying the same thing in training, how you climb, watch the sun set, climb, watch it rise.. descend and land in the dark.
@georgaalty sorry for the late reply but your assertion he see the sun rising from the west due to climb rate is wrong. In fact, the Concorde flew faster than than the solar terminator, which is what separates the night world from the day. That is why the sun appears to rise in the west, as it's catching up to daytime.
@mikel1982 That may be Mike, but having taken off from NY - he would have been flying East and therefore away from the sun. Hence his altitude was responsible for the Sunrise in this instance.
We'll not see anything as beautiful gracing our skies again. When I lived in west London, , every day I'd go out to watch her coming in, the epitome of grace, power and speed.
Fab vid bringing back memories of flying in this wonderfully super aircraft. Great promo for 4 handbuilt Concorde models at scale 1:144 from GTrans International. Check out the website at gtrans.com.au or email for a brochure at info@gtrans.com.au Percentage donation for each sale to the Premier's Flood Appeal
What documentary series is this from?? I remember watching it years ago and they had a different one each week such as Chuck Yeager throwing an F16 around the place. Loved it. Anyone know???
Concorde for me is "Sexy Engineering" different, fast, aerodynamically gorgeous, and in the major leagues! Men that commercial airplane is SEEEEXXXYYYY!!!
This has got to be some of the most beautiful aerospace footage I have ever seen. I had always wanted to fly on Concorde and assumed it would always be there so that when and if I got old and rich enough to afford it, I could do it. But alas. Still, what a beautiful thing it was. "What do you reckon the time will be for the decel?' Having a distinct phase of flight allocated to deceleration alone! Walpole was a good spokesman for it, quintessentially optimistic, cheerful and British.
If you love aviation (and concorde specifically) and if you havent yet seen it, I fully recommend the ITVV documentary made about this machine. It's a very long watch (some people like me prefer mad long documentaries) but you will get to experience near as damn it a whole flight from London to NY in the cockpit and will get most of the instruments and systems explained to you in detail (so much detail you wont understand). It's fascinating. If you havent yet seen it, google ITVV.
@SSgtParmer haha, you make ignorant comments like this and then call us arrogant? Pah! I guess this is what happens when your mother and sister are the same person. It flew for the 27 years, how is that a failure?
Yes of course little boy you are so right how stupid of me, the big white concorde shaped aircraft i saw at RAE Farnborough in the late 1990's must have been a figment of my exceptionally vivid imagination, but then i guess the same must be said of the Avro Vulcan, which i mistakenly believed could operate at 65,000ft in times of war, thank you so much for pointing out the error of my ways!!!
I'll tell you why Concorde was special. It was the only aircraft, including military aircraft, that could continue to accelerate above Mach 1 WITHOUT reheat. They turned the afterburners off at some point above Mach 1, and Concorde would continue up to Mach 2 WITHOUT AFTERBURNERS. No other aircraft could / can do this. Superb design and efficiency.
I wonder if one of the reasons it was retired was because it could fly so fast ? Post 9/11 it might of been a danger being near NY with no fighter close by.
@bluenail90 It was retired because it was grossly expensive. When it did run it even before the airline industry took a hit it needed tax payer subsidies.
@wikichris Really? Within four years of operating the British Airways fleet was making 20 million a year, zero subsidies at all. During the mid 90s it approached profits of 50 million a year. It didn't cover the development costs, but the unit costs paid for themselves. If people are stupid enough to buy tickets that high and the seats are full, why charge less? BA actually used to charge less, until market research told them they could triple the price with no downturn in numbers, so they did.
@wikichris Not for the development company it didn't, but then again the same can be said of most planes developed for government usage. Most aircraft in existence today wouldn't be around without government development funding, simple as. The DC-10 would have been an absolute failure without the US gov stepping in to buy the excess that couldn't be shifted as tankers, the L-1011 would have been impossible without British and American bankrolling.
@wikichris It did make a profit for the operator. If you're going by development costs, then most planes aren't profitable, but were necessary stepping stones to other models. The thrust-by-wire system of the Concorde was a world first that was used by American manufacturers in every Boeing plane today; if we didn't pay for the development, it may never have happened at all. Same with the B-1 bomber leading to the CM-56 Engine, now equipped to a fair chunk of the world's passenger aircraft.
@s2k997 Those planes had military applications refueling etc. I totally understand the appreciation of Concorde as a big toy but rationality has to prevail. There are military aircraft to be more than amazed by. Concorde was for the rich at an expense to the tax payer.
@wikichris As opposed to putting a few elite USAF members and several billionaires into orbit for a few weeks? The technologies behind Concorde made its way into every commericial plane; from flight computers, to the control interfacing, to the brakes. It practically paid for itself in that it was the starting point for Airbus, the biggest plane manufacturer in the world, 1 billion seems like a bargin for such an end result.
@s2k997 If Concorde technologies were so good then why weren't they funded by those that profited from it? It's not an argument. Airbus is something to be proud of overall but not it's tax payer / subsidy background. Subsidy money comes from people. You can't take a photo of the jobs that were never conceived from people's money ending up in Airbus/Concorde but you can take a photo of an aeroplane as justification.
@wikichris Because those who profitted from it didn't have the money before they earned it, obviously. Britain made hundreds of billions privatising the industry that made Concorde and the national airline that flew it, not to forget the many billions in annual taxation that came in. Without Concorde, no Airbus, no Airbus would have meant a huge loss of jobs and tax revenue, I think that would account for a bigger loss overall.
@wikichris And you're insulting and lacking in observational skills. All major transportation projects need government money, compare like to like. The Interstates, nothing but a constant drain of public money. Railways the same in the US. Aviation, well the manufacturers get taxbreaks and subsidies all over the shoot, most of their revenue is in government contracts. None of the American transport sectors are anything but a big money sink, pull the plug and things will grind to a halt.
@s2k997 I'd be more than happy to debate where government intervention can be justified. Very few people complain about interstates since they are just as accessible to the absolute poorest. Concorde was a toy for the rich.
@wikichris Problem is, that wasn't how it was supposed to be, or how it was imagined during the construction. If America has spend that 1 Billion on a cardboard model on buying Concordes, they may have been more economical. The 70s Oil Scares, completely unpredictable, only added to the costs. And the adaption of the Olympus engine was harder than originally concieved, much more costly.
@wikichris It may have been something that many people couldn't afford, but that wasn't predictable. If countries had been less nationalistic and didn't squander money on trying to develop their own competitors, and failing, it may have been a more reasonable aircraft. Besides, we're not communists, why charge less than what can be gotten, isn't that the American way after all?
4 reheated olym-PI engines.
mikel1982 1 month ago 2
the view head-on above the clouds is fantastic.
mikel1982 1 month ago
It's a real shame that ONE incedent grounded this aircraft. If this were the case, we wouldn't be flying at all. I would have saved up and paid $10,000 to ride this aircraft. It's a shame....way ahead of it's time.
SpudMcKinzy 1 month ago
One of my biggest disappointments is knowing I may never have the chance to fly in one of these :(.
JMCSD 2 months ago
At 2:20 both pilots look like they're asleep at the controls.
symph0nyofblase 2 months ago
@dc2man123 The Air France crash did not put Concordes out of production. The last one rolled off the line over 20 years before that happened...
md69cs 3 months ago
if only we could see that barrel roll in that movie
7errafirma 3 months ago
Goddamn thats one sexy plane!
krisstopher07 4 months ago
Tell me people, which is better.
Concorde or SR-71?
brightlights456X 4 months ago
@brightlights456X An interesting question. The SR-71 can fly faster and higher but only carries 1 or in some cases 2 people and they both have to wear full pressure suits. Concorde could carry 120 people at 60.000 feet at Mach 2 - and was capable of barrel rolls and the like, as we hear in this video. To me, Concorde is the more beautiful as well. I'd have to go for Concorde - though the SR-71 is one hell of a plane as well.
wahaya2 3 months ago
@wahaya2
Plus, Concorde never leaked fuel :D
Since you put it like that I guess Concorde overall is better than an SR-71. Do you know why Concorde isn't even flown at air shows anymore?
brightlights456X 3 months ago
@brightlights456X Why not?
JMCSD 2 months ago
@JMCSD
Why not what?
brightlights456X 2 months ago
@brightlights456X For some reason I thought you maybe knew why Concorde isn't flown at air shows anymore. But after re-reading it seems you were actually asking :P
JMCSD 2 months ago
@JMCSD
Probably cost of maintaining. I really wanted to know if a multi-millionaire ore billiobaire would be aloud to buy on if he could afford the maintenance.
brightlights456X 2 months ago
@brightlights456X Do you know why the SR71 leaks fuel?
IT IS DESIGNED THAT WAY. The plane will be ''loose'' during take off, and upon reach cruise speeds at over MAch3, the body will expand due to the intense heat from friction. The expansion will then fit the ''gaps''.
ChibiSmasher 4 weeks ago
@ChibiSmasher
I know all that, but Concorde didn't. So you prefer the SR-71 I take.
Plus, whats withe the upper cases. I sense hostility in your reply.
brightlights456X 3 weeks ago
@brightlights456X well they are designed for different rolls, but the Concorde was/is much harder to do, the big boss at NASA when he hear of the Concorde project say to make a passenger aircraft to cross the Atlantic at mach 2 will make putting man on the moon seem like a walk in the park.well history will tell you the the US made it to the moon but had 2 or 3 failed attempt's at a supersonic airliner, i think this is what makes Concorde so special
77appyi 2 months ago
@77appyi
I guess thats why Concorde wasn't aloud to fly across the States.
Plus (as another YouTuber pointed out to me) people on Concorde didn't have to wear space suits.
You're right, Concorde wins.
brightlights456X 2 months ago
a barrel roll is a completely safe maneuver in any modern jet passenger aircraft. It maintains continuous, positive gforce. Your drink wouldn't even spill
TheWheels777 4 months ago 4
@TheWheels777 Unless Boeing or Airbus have found a way to combat gravity, I'd like to think that when the plane was upside down, any drink in an unlidded container would spill out.
md69cs 3 months ago
@md69cs If as the captain says here they were applying positive g all the way round - pulling back on the stick as well as rolling the aircraft - that might not happen. Not sure on that one.
wahaya2 3 months ago
@TheWheels777 It'd rip the wings off most modern airliners.
wahaya2 3 months ago
@wahaya2 I think Concorde airframe was rated at 7.5G
77appyi 2 months ago
Barrel Roll!?! hazardous attitude anybody....Macho, invulnerable
wmupilot89 4 months ago
You can always tell what countries built a supersonic airliner and what ones did not by the slagging off concord gets from a certain country. Tupolov stole it, could not make it work, bowing tried and could not make it work so gave up and built 747. Shame realy as some competition would have saved Concorde. Ho hum!
wraith01mg 4 months ago
they did a barrell roll in it!!!?!?!?!
sniktun 4 months ago
What an amazing feat of engineering such a shame it is no longer in service.
jasonpriddle 4 months ago
@dc2man123 Concorde has tyres made specially for it - they were not "accidents waiting to happen". ANY TYRE will burst if its cut when rubbish is left on the runway. As for "big jet" - it weighs 120tons.
george385 5 months ago
@dc2man123 "All the destruction it caused"? Have some perspective. It had one crash. As bad as it was for the people impacted by the accident, it hardly compares in a contest of "most damage caused by different airplanes."
Raguleader 6 months ago
@dc2man123 It was a single crash. The 747 has crashed hundreds of times, Titanic sank on its first voyage, 2 space shuttles blew up... what about those? Besides, the pilot in this video was talking long before concorde crashed. (Btw, when has Ireland ever built any technilogical marvels, or anything interesting.... i hear silence)
2491cc 6 months ago
@2491cc The Irish built the Titanic you tosser!
brifacta 6 months ago
@brifacta Actually, Harland & Wolff employed mostly protestants/British workers back then.
2491cc 6 months ago
SIXTY THOUSAND FEET? WHAT THE FLOCK?
Airforceproud95 7 months ago
I meant as in what type of camera how do they have it on the other aircraft.
maria123e 7 months ago
a burst tyre did not put Concorde out of use, the humble Boeing 737 has killed 20x as many people in crashes over the many years of its life and yet still flies. only the cost of maintaining Concorde was its downfall. the only reason there are no new concordes with lower operation costs and Modern technology is because no one has worked out how to stop the sonic boom, That is the sole reason it now takes 8 hours to get from London to New York when it used to take 3!
andysim232 7 months ago
@andysim232 Cost was important, but the crash was the nail in the coffin. Also, thanks to the way statistics works, the 737 still has a better safety record when you look at total crashes vs. successful flights, given that there were so many more 737s built than Concords.
Raguleader 6 months ago
Regardless of what anybody else says, in my opinion she was the most beautiful aeroplane ever!! The real Queen of the skies.
Speedbird7771 7 months ago
@Speedbird7771 shes beautiful, If I had to pick 3 aircraft on looks alone it would be the Spitfire, Concorde and the B-17 =)
andysim232 7 months ago
its easy to do you only have to press Z or R twice
emasterpiece15 8 months ago
so he barrel rolled without any of the passengers noticing?
They should do that on a 747!
Ryoske6 8 months ago
Think how much further we would be in aviation if this bird never retired
bajesus666 9 months ago 2
This was one awesome supersonic airliner. Shame they retired them.
Sidewinder9877 9 months ago
Do a barrel roll!!!!!!
ass23ful 9 months ago
@ass23ful
Andross won't have his way with me.
hiimbrady 9 months ago
2:56 is when he starts to talk about the barrel roll
bluenova123 10 months ago
We need another SST airliner, but more of a practical one. Mach 1.8 would do. would allow you to go from one side of the earth to the other in a business day. ie 10 hours. or sydney to london. time to start lobbying Boeing and Airbus I think....
Lastindependentthink 10 months ago
my grandad was also flight engineer on the QE2 fly by!
MrSkiesofblue 10 months ago
My grandad did the barrell roll as the flight engineer who has also wrote the haynes manual for concorde!
MrSkiesofblue 10 months ago
so beautifui this slim airplane
IQ20000Berta 10 months ago
how are they filming it in the air
maria123e 11 months ago 9
From another aircraft
gliderpilot79 11 months ago 53
@maria123e they catch a fly, call Macgyver.....
kroooassant 7 months ago
@maria123e dumbass.
rebsrule311 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rebsrule311 I meant as in what type of camera how do they have it on the other aircraft. Specifics I wasn't expecting people not to understand what i meant.
maria123e 7 months ago
@maria123e they hired angels
numb1010 1 month ago
Concorde was the pinacle of our civilization. It was civilian, beautiful and unmatched by anything else, including military aircraft.
ziegle9876 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@2:11 "when you take off from NY in the dark and see the sun rise in the west" -- huh? When you're flying NY-LDN, you're flying to the EAST, i.e. along with the earth's rotation. So all you MIGHT ever see would be the sun rising in the east very rapidly.
hyperthreaded 11 months ago
@hyperthreaded Twit...not if you're flying to L.A....then you would 'catch the sun and 'unwind' the sunset...
code6tony 11 months ago
@code6tony I didn't know the Concorde flew NY-LA too. In that case the report makes sense of course. :P
hyperthreaded 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hyperthreaded Twit...not if you're flying to L.A....then you would 'catch the sun and 'unwind' the sunset...
code6tony 11 months ago
he says "when you take off for NY"
gliderpilot79 11 months ago 29
@hyperthreaded What is the initial direction of flight out of NY!!
dubbsy69 8 months ago
@hyperthreaded You are correct he says 'take off from NY' then emphasises the 'rise in the west' and 'doing something different' - The reason being he climbs to 60,000 and can see way beyond the western horizon, he therefore gets a sunrise in the west courtesy of his climb. - Not entirely unique, I recall an RAF Pilot saying the same thing in training, how you climb, watch the sun set, climb, watch it rise.. descend and land in the dark.
georgaalty 7 months ago
@georgaalty sorry for the late reply but your assertion he see the sun rising from the west due to climb rate is wrong. In fact, the Concorde flew faster than than the solar terminator, which is what separates the night world from the day. That is why the sun appears to rise in the west, as it's catching up to daytime.
mikel1982 1 month ago
@mikel1982 That may be Mike, but having taken off from NY - he would have been flying East and therefore away from the sun. Hence his altitude was responsible for the Sunrise in this instance.
georgaalty 1 month ago
@georgaalty Of course if he says 'for' NY then you are correct.! I didnt have time to watch it again!
georgaalty 1 month ago
@georgaalty I thought he did...
mikel1982 1 month ago
@hyperthreaded Meaning when you get so high that the Sun reappears over the horizon because your line of sight changes.
vitaedrinker1981 3 months ago
My favorite part is when he said " you can take off from New York at night and see the sun rising in the West"
mrrobedeau 1 year ago
It is such a pity that Concorde did not fly anymore :-((((
It was and is the most wonderful plane in world.
ThePilot314 1 year ago
DO A BARREL ROLL!
LMMFAO!
ReconOne123456789 1 year ago 2
We'll not see anything as beautiful gracing our skies again. When I lived in west London, , every day I'd go out to watch her coming in, the epitome of grace, power and speed.
PaulCastle001 1 year ago
Fab vid bringing back memories of flying in this wonderfully super aircraft. Great promo for 4 handbuilt Concorde models at scale 1:144 from GTrans International. Check out the website at gtrans.com.au or email for a brochure at info@gtrans.com.au Percentage donation for each sale to the Premier's Flood Appeal
TheGTrans 1 year ago
DO A BARREL ROLL!
lmfao
ilikstikz7804 1 year ago 2
What documentary series is this from?? I remember watching it years ago and they had a different one each week such as Chuck Yeager throwing an F16 around the place. Loved it. Anyone know???
Blenn 1 year ago
Beautiful. Amazing.
Squats200 1 year ago
Concorde for me is "Sexy Engineering" different, fast, aerodynamically gorgeous, and in the major leagues! Men that commercial airplane is SEEEEXXXYYYY!!!
dagoberto23 1 year ago
17 people fly subsonic.
VerbatimFIRE 1 year ago
Now thats what I call traveling in style :)
Uberdude25 1 year ago
Someone needs to build a replacement for concorde.
stepheng1483 1 year ago 2
@stepheng1483 The environmentalist whackos won't allow it.
doug9driver 1 year ago
its a shame her fucking tyres kept bursting isent it
TurbulentG 1 year ago
Hit Z or R twice to do a barrel roll.
blakegriplingph 1 year ago 2
@blakegriplingph StarFox 64 ... Classic
gordon17freeman 1 year ago
StarFox 64 ... Classic
gordon17freeman 1 year ago
Passengers on board at the time?
numloxx 1 year ago
Not a day goes by where I don't regret not flying on the beautiful aircraft. You can keep you 787s and A380s this was the true goddess of flight.
cheesemaster1000 1 year ago 3
It's still a travesty that this magnificent airplane was retired.
mjkobb 1 year ago 3
593OLYMPUS: YES YES YES !
TheNettiblue 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
as Brian said - "the epitomy of excellence in aviation". Concorde is a stunning achievement for mankind and gorgeous with it.
593OLYMPUS 1 year ago
as Brian said - "the epitomy of excellence in aviation". Concorde is a stunning achievement for mankind and gorgeous with it.
593OLYMPUS 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
in the UK there is a campaign group to try to get one ready to fly for the london olympics.. save-concorde.co.uk/
mgbsheep 1 year ago 2
How did they film this if it is so fast?
TheDokaDoka 1 year ago
@TheDokaDoka Fighterjet camera
barthoedemaker 1 year ago
@TheDokaDoka you're either kidding, or you're stupid.
zer0dahero 1 year ago
3:07 BARREL ROLL!
Box0rz 1 year ago
Do a barrel roll!
deathboy998 1 year ago
It was a sad day when they took this bird out of the sky.
MrCheeseface1000 1 year ago
---Concorde's Successor---
The Future of Flight is here....
See channel for information....
VirginSupersonic 1 year ago
DO A BARREL ROLL!!!!!!!
stupidkid658 1 year ago
1:03 fantastic view
IQ20000Berta 1 year ago
Peppy at radio:"Do a barrel roll!"
Captain:"WTF?"
*does barrel roll*
Captain: O_o
BranislavDJ 1 year ago
This is the airplane that pride built, it lost money in construction and with every flight, but as a work of art is is without peers.
81broncoman 1 year ago
@81broncoman actually, just recently it has been found that the concorde actually broke even throughout it's life. long live concorde...
Flightkid9 1 year ago
Comment removed
XoBiNiKaXo 1 year ago
@XoBiNiKaXo 1350mph at 55,000
stevetadams1963 1 year ago
I miss the noise this thing made flying over my house! it made everybody stop. what a great aircraft, Would have loved to fly this great machine!
You will be missed!
gf3106 1 year ago
I think Concorde made no complex with US and URSS and had permit to build Airbus.
12balour 1 year ago
Did he press Z or R twice?
Naturality 1 year ago 7
WE NEED THIS PLANE BACK!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a marvel of our time IT'S AWESOME
Fisshon 1 year ago
I wish they'd never retired that aircraft, or at least replaced it with another supersonic.
pqwilrj 1 year ago
@pqwilrj supersonics, will never happen in commercial aircraft transport
1.) the tonnes of CO2 wasted could most probably fly 3 or 4 planes (yes maybe at a longer time)
2.) hardly any airlines have any money (defo not airfrance/ BA)
it's a good idea, but it wont happen i dont think.
99arr0w99 1 year ago
@99arr0w99 Someday it will happen. Just not any time soon.
pqwilrj 1 year ago
BA Air Control: "Can you please move 30 miles north?"
U.S. Spy Plane: "Why?"
BA Air Control: "Because a Concorde is approaching you at Mach 2.0 with 100 passengers at 60,000 ft".
The most elegant, powerful, beautiful plane to grace the skies.
Proud to be British (Well done to the French as well lol)
ZlunkeyMonkey 1 year ago
DO A BARREL ROLL
jimbobsailor 1 year ago 2
She is so beautifully,elegantly beautifully beautiful and elegant to behold it is magnificent and stunningly elegant and wonderful!
SynerZ0 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
SynerZ0 1 year ago
what an amazing shot of Concorde, QE2 and the Red arrows at 4:20 :)
supercruiser24 1 year ago
pics or didnt happen
dkerplunk89 1 year ago
I agree with dkerplunk89. lies.
Malleh08 1 year ago
hes lieing
dkerplunk89 1 year ago
I coudlnt adore this aircraft any more! Love it!
Flyglobespan93 1 year ago
This has got to be some of the most beautiful aerospace footage I have ever seen. I had always wanted to fly on Concorde and assumed it would always be there so that when and if I got old and rich enough to afford it, I could do it. But alas. Still, what a beautiful thing it was. "What do you reckon the time will be for the decel?' Having a distinct phase of flight allocated to deceleration alone! Walpole was a good spokesman for it, quintessentially optimistic, cheerful and British.
acbulgin2 1 year ago 2
@SSgtParmer Stupid fucking American making the rest of us look ignorant.
sk8er4ever0101 1 year ago
most fantastic plane ever.
dxweasel 1 year ago
thats awesome thats 1 hell of a plane just to bad i was not around to see it
cjh134414 1 year ago
que du bonheur merci
stoplataupe 1 year ago
i am assuming the 16 people who hit the dislike button missed the like button.
ie210 1 year ago
AirFrance 123 : Is FL 480 available?
Controller : Are you able FL 480???
Air France 123: Affirm
Controller : Roger- cleared Level 480
Air France123: Descending FL 480.
TheAllevian 1 year ago 85
@TheAllevian
LMAO. what a great bird this was.
dxweasel 1 year ago
@TheAllevian
I get it! ahaha
gloomyoutlook 1 year ago
@TheAllevian Took me a short while to realise what you were trying to say. After a moments thought, I get it. Very funny!!
stzzla 1 year ago
If you love aviation (and concorde specifically) and if you havent yet seen it, I fully recommend the ITVV documentary made about this machine. It's a very long watch (some people like me prefer mad long documentaries) but you will get to experience near as damn it a whole flight from London to NY in the cockpit and will get most of the instruments and systems explained to you in detail (so much detail you wont understand). It's fascinating. If you havent yet seen it, google ITVV.
stzzla 1 year ago
@TheAllevian
Spoken to a former Concorde pilot who told me the same story. Another way that Concorde just defied all popular belief.
harry211 1 year ago
Love the 70s/80s electronica at the end.
v1v2go 1 year ago
MAGNIFICENT
memmnock 1 year ago
The most inspirational airplane ever built
101ypk 1 year ago
"horizontal horizont " :))
tudorgui1992 1 year ago
Dam this plane is AMAZING!!!! Will they ever make another like it?
supersaintsfan31 1 year ago 2
V1, V2, positive rate, gears up... love those words.
CssniperAus 1 year ago
Comment removed
Snakypaintbrush 1 year ago
How anyone could have something bad to say about this beautiful marvel of technology is, and will always be, a mystery to me.
mrplease66 1 year ago 54
@mrplease66 Also because it's CIVIL! It's not meant to kill people but to make them happy.
I love this machine!
Jaiv74 1 year ago
Crazy ass pilot well that plane is no longer in use.
southsideguy13 1 year ago
Those dials on the cockpit panel are just watches to know what time it is in different countries.
youcantbeatfacts 1 year ago
@SSgtParmer haha, you make ignorant comments like this and then call us arrogant? Pah! I guess this is what happens when your mother and sister are the same person. It flew for the 27 years, how is that a failure?
Aliasify 1 year ago
@nasaAstroNots
Well get back under your bridge then little troll
mpainter22 1 year ago
@nasaAstroNots
Yes of course little boy you are so right how stupid of me, the big white concorde shaped aircraft i saw at RAE Farnborough in the late 1990's must have been a figment of my exceptionally vivid imagination, but then i guess the same must be said of the Avro Vulcan, which i mistakenly believed could operate at 65,000ft in times of war, thank you so much for pointing out the error of my ways!!!
mpainter22 1 year ago
@SSgtParmer yeah and america was colonized by the british so suck a cock u ignorant fuck
rockstarJDP 1 year ago
@SSgtParmer you US prick what did 'the Brits' do to you and Ungland is so small and still managed to take over many countries
everton123 1 year ago
What a shame they never developed a Mk2
alSation81 1 year ago
there is a VERY real possibility that concorde will fly again, one of the air france aircraft is currently under going tests to see if it can be done
mpainter22 1 year ago
A passenger aircraft that can barrel roll...whoopdee fucking doo.
wikichris 1 year ago
I'm not impressed. Hitting Z or R twice is easy.
goldenate 1 year ago
I'll tell you why Concorde was special. It was the only aircraft, including military aircraft, that could continue to accelerate above Mach 1 WITHOUT reheat. They turned the afterburners off at some point above Mach 1, and Concorde would continue up to Mach 2 WITHOUT AFTERBURNERS. No other aircraft could / can do this. Superb design and efficiency.
studyolic 1 year ago
I wonder if one of the reasons it was retired was because it could fly so fast ? Post 9/11 it might of been a danger being near NY with no fighter close by.
bluenail90 1 year ago
@bluenail90 It was retired because it was grossly expensive. When it did run it even before the airline industry took a hit it needed tax payer subsidies.
wikichris 1 year ago
@wikichris Really? Within four years of operating the British Airways fleet was making 20 million a year, zero subsidies at all. During the mid 90s it approached profits of 50 million a year. It didn't cover the development costs, but the unit costs paid for themselves. If people are stupid enough to buy tickets that high and the seats are full, why charge less? BA actually used to charge less, until market research told them they could triple the price with no downturn in numbers, so they did.
s2k997 1 year ago
@s2k997 "It didn't cover the development costs, but..." But nothing. It didn't make a profit overall which is the most important.
wikichris 1 year ago
@wikichris Not for the development company it didn't, but then again the same can be said of most planes developed for government usage. Most aircraft in existence today wouldn't be around without government development funding, simple as. The DC-10 would have been an absolute failure without the US gov stepping in to buy the excess that couldn't be shifted as tankers, the L-1011 would have been impossible without British and American bankrolling.
s2k997 1 year ago
@wikichris It did make a profit for the operator. If you're going by development costs, then most planes aren't profitable, but were necessary stepping stones to other models. The thrust-by-wire system of the Concorde was a world first that was used by American manufacturers in every Boeing plane today; if we didn't pay for the development, it may never have happened at all. Same with the B-1 bomber leading to the CM-56 Engine, now equipped to a fair chunk of the world's passenger aircraft.
s2k997 1 year ago
@s2k997 Those planes had military applications refueling etc. I totally understand the appreciation of Concorde as a big toy but rationality has to prevail. There are military aircraft to be more than amazed by. Concorde was for the rich at an expense to the tax payer.
wikichris 1 year ago
@wikichris As opposed to putting a few elite USAF members and several billionaires into orbit for a few weeks? The technologies behind Concorde made its way into every commericial plane; from flight computers, to the control interfacing, to the brakes. It practically paid for itself in that it was the starting point for Airbus, the biggest plane manufacturer in the world, 1 billion seems like a bargin for such an end result.
s2k997 1 year ago
@s2k997 If Concorde technologies were so good then why weren't they funded by those that profited from it? It's not an argument. Airbus is something to be proud of overall but not it's tax payer / subsidy background. Subsidy money comes from people. You can't take a photo of the jobs that were never conceived from people's money ending up in Airbus/Concorde but you can take a photo of an aeroplane as justification.
wikichris 1 year ago
@wikichris Because those who profitted from it didn't have the money before they earned it, obviously. Britain made hundreds of billions privatising the industry that made Concorde and the national airline that flew it, not to forget the many billions in annual taxation that came in. Without Concorde, no Airbus, no Airbus would have meant a huge loss of jobs and tax revenue, I think that would account for a bigger loss overall.
s2k997 1 year ago
@s2k997 You're a fool. You don't need government money to make money. Countless human endeavours have succeded using private investment.
wikichris 1 year ago
@wikichris And you're insulting and lacking in observational skills. All major transportation projects need government money, compare like to like. The Interstates, nothing but a constant drain of public money. Railways the same in the US. Aviation, well the manufacturers get taxbreaks and subsidies all over the shoot, most of their revenue is in government contracts. None of the American transport sectors are anything but a big money sink, pull the plug and things will grind to a halt.
s2k997 1 year ago
@s2k997 I'd be more than happy to debate where government intervention can be justified. Very few people complain about interstates since they are just as accessible to the absolute poorest. Concorde was a toy for the rich.
wikichris 1 year ago
@wikichris Problem is, that wasn't how it was supposed to be, or how it was imagined during the construction. If America has spend that 1 Billion on a cardboard model on buying Concordes, they may have been more economical. The 70s Oil Scares, completely unpredictable, only added to the costs. And the adaption of the Olympus engine was harder than originally concieved, much more costly.
s2k997 1 year ago
@wikichris It may have been something that many people couldn't afford, but that wasn't predictable. If countries had been less nationalistic and didn't squander money on trying to develop their own competitors, and failing, it may have been a more reasonable aircraft. Besides, we're not communists, why charge less than what can be gotten, isn't that the American way after all?
s2k997 1 year ago