 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Richard Branson Hopes To Introduce ‘Concorde-Style’ Supersonic Jets To Virgin Fleet
Sir Richard Branson is planning to bring back supersonic transatlantic travel with ‘affordable’ flights on Concorde-like planes.
The new jets will offer 3.5-hour passenger flights between London and New York.
A return ticket is likely to cost around $5,000 (£3,533).
The Virgin boss is teaming up with pilot and former Amazon executive Blake Scholl who is building a prototype jet called Boom, presumably named after the sonic boom created by supersonic travel.
Less than the cost of a business class fair; its gonna get good  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Concorde was an amazing aircraft, never tired of seeing it fly over.
Business wise though it's not the time factor that counts, it's the amount of paid seats on board, hence the A380's.
I can't see how he can make it viable with airfares that low unless he's planning on a bigger aircraft than the original.
Good luck to him |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was lucky enough to fly on Concorde was just one of those flights they did for a couple of hours but did hit Mach2 was a travesty when the fleet was grounded. As the Vulcan bomber was "
13th May 2003 I flew on her an amazing piece of machinery, long gone but never forgotten. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It won't happen!.
It's got nothing to do with profits, Concorde was profitable for every year BA had it... Of course they got it for free, so that's not exactly fucking business genius at work!.
It was and remains a piece of technical history but just like Apollo and the space shuttle will remain that way! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The problem with this aircraft, and concorde, is/was the number of seats 
All new supersonic proposals are for approx 30 passengers.
Concorde was limited to 90.
The British proposal was for an aircraft with 220.The french only wanted a 50 seater, and the whole project ended up being a compromise
We need a big supersonic airliner for all, and not just the elite  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The problem with this aircraft, and concorde, is/was the number of seats
All new supersonic proposals are for approx 30 passengers.
Concorde was limited to 90.
The British proposal was for an aircraft with 220.The french only wanted a 50 seater, and the whole project ended up being a compromise
We need a big supersonic airliner for all, and not just the elite "
.
It comes down to fuel capacity!.
That's why they chose 90 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The problem with this aircraft, and concorde, is/was the number of seats
All new supersonic proposals are for approx 30 passengers.
Concorde was limited to 90.
The British proposal was for an aircraft with 220.The french only wanted a 50 seater, and the whole project ended up being a compromise
We need a big supersonic airliner for all, and not just the elite "
It was actually 100 seats, down from 117 on pre production |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The problem with this aircraft, and concorde, is/was the number of seats
All new supersonic proposals are for approx 30 passengers.
Concorde was limited to 90.
The British proposal was for an aircraft with 220.The french only wanted a 50 seater, and the whole project ended up being a compromise
We need a big supersonic airliner for all, and not just the elite
It was actually 100 seats, down from 117 on pre production "
I was lucky enough to have sat in the pilot's seat when I was three years old 
My dad was part of the flight test programme out of Fairford 
The whole plane was a compromise and a shadow of what it promised to be  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
What a plane, will be missed forever but I can't see this working... It's been tried and same plan keeps getting recycled. I'm gutted never got the chance to fly on her. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ive never flown on concorde but I always thought it looked a bit claustrophobic inside.
"
it was like being inside a hose pipe that had been fitted out with a second hand inter-city 125 interior from the 70's |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Ive never flown on concorde but I always thought it looked a bit claustrophobic inside.
it was like being inside a hose pipe that had been fitted out with a second hand inter-city 125 interior from the 70's "
What a complete load of twaddle!!!
Have you ever been on one?? I doubt it if that's what your opinion is.... try luxury class, plenty of room to move around as there was only 100 seats, comfort that can't be described in words... and to sit at Mach 2 way above all the other piddly cattle class aircraft whilst drinking fine champagne and enjoying the _iews..... just my opinion on the best aircraft in the world....EVER!
I have a passion for this plane |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
It seems Fab has more pessimist's than optimist's but I always support an optimists _iew and I truly believe Branson will roll this out, he has the cash flow, he has the investors and its not new technology, its old technology being re-developed into a more economic & safer system.
At lets face it, technology has increased hugely since 1969
Virgin has signed a deal to buy 10 of the speedy jets, according to The Guardian.
The entrepreneurs hope that the new airline will be more successful than Concorde as it will be more affordable.
The first prototype of the new Boom jet is expected to be completed by the end of 2017.
The passenger plane will travel at speeds of up to 1,451mph, while Concorde’s top speed was around 1,354mph.
Boom has also reportedly signed a deal with an unnamed London-based airline to help it to develop its own planes, every passenger will get a direct _iew of the curvature of the earth as the plane cruises at 60,000ft, as well as direct access to the drinks trolley
Scholl is leading an 11-person team, including former Nasa, Lockheed Martin and Boeing engineers, constructing the plane in a hanger in Denver, Colorado. He said cheaper commercial supersonic travel is possible mainly due to advances in carbon fibre technology, which should enable his team to construct a plane that’s 30% more fuel efficient than Concorde.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Ive never flown on concorde but I always thought it looked a bit claustrophobic inside.
it was like being inside a hose pipe that had been fitted out with a second hand inter-city 125 interior from the 70's
What a complete load of twaddle!!!
Have you ever been on one?? I doubt it if that's what your opinion is.... try luxury class, plenty of room to move around as there was only 100 seats, comfort that can't be described in words... and to sit at Mach 2 way above all the other piddly cattle class aircraft whilst drinking fine champagne and enjoying the _iews..... just my opinion on the best aircraft in the world....EVER!
I have a passion for this plane "
I have been on it more than once, there wasn't hardly any room at all....it was like sitting on a bus but with luxury seats and service. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *olgateMan
over a year ago
on the road to nowhere in particular |
"I loved it when flying to new york and back, a surreal experience compared to now.
Premature 'news' though - there's no plane built yet, it's just an idea. "
Free publicity for Branson |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ive never flown on concorde but I always thought it looked a bit claustrophobic inside.
it was like being inside a hose pipe that had been fitted out with a second hand inter-city 125 interior from the 70's
What a complete load of twaddle!!!
Have you ever been on one?? I doubt it if that's what your opinion is.... try luxury class, plenty of room to move around as there was only 100 seats, comfort that can't be described in words... and to sit at Mach 2 way above all the other piddly cattle class aircraft whilst drinking fine champagne and enjoying the _iews..... just my opinion on the best aircraft in the world....EVER!
I have a passion for this plane "
I agree. My preferred seat was 8A, I didn't eat caviar but loved the luxury on board and the champagne of course. Gutted when it was taken out of service - first class doesn't compare now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I loved it when flying to new york and back, a surreal experience compared to now.
Premature 'news' though - there's no plane built yet, it's just an idea.
Free publicity for Branson"
He puts out this fluff all the time and the media publish it when news is fairly slow. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ive never flown on concorde but I always thought it looked a bit claustrophobic inside.
it was like being inside a hose pipe that had been fitted out with a second hand inter-city 125 interior from the 70's
What a complete load of twaddle!!!
Have you ever been on one?? "
yes, several times .... which is why i know it was like being in a hose pipe ... fair enough they upgraded those orange upholstered seats eventually and it was quick but it was like being in a hose pipe |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Ive never flown on concorde but I always thought it looked a bit claustrophobic inside.
it was like being inside a hose pipe that had been fitted out with a second hand inter-city 125 interior from the 70's
What a complete load of twaddle!!!
Have you ever been on one??
yes, several times .... which is why i know it was like being in a hose pipe ... fair enough they upgraded those orange upholstered seats eventually and it was quick but it was like being in a hose pipe "
.
I have to agree with you, I've been on it three times (Manchester airport _iewing not flying).
It's incredibly small and the cockpit is tiny and a mass of buttons and levers (  ).
I love it for what it is! But I wouldn't have any desire to fly on it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I don't how old and wealthy people on here are but.
It was decommissioned what 13 years ago and blew up in 2000? And was grounded for longish periods in between that!.
The cost in 2000 was £5000 one way to new York, I bought a semi detached house in 1999 for 40k.
I certainly could never have afforded it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
What's not commonly known is that the chief test pilot (Brian Trubshaw) performed a barrel roll over the Atlantic on one of the test flights 
He said it was one of the best handling aircraft he had the pleasure of flying |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Concorde was an amazing aircraft, never tired of seeing it fly over.
Business wise though it's not the time factor that counts, it's the amount of paid seats on board, hence the A380's.
I can't see how he can make it viable with airfares that low unless he's planning on a bigger aircraft than the original.
Good luck to him "
. When I grew up id see Concorde flying over daily... Never tired of running outside to see her.. Could hear the engines start on the runway... She was so low when she would fly over x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *tormMan
over a year ago
ipswich |
Concorde was and still is way ahead of its time,built and flying in 1974 and still by the time it was retired the R.A.F never had a plane that could catch it flat out,quite some acolade that,the only reason Branson wasn't successful in his bid for all 7 British airways concorde's goes back to when he started up Virginia Atlantic and decided to put a union jack on the side of his first plane and call himself the national carrier,ba took acception to this and and promptly landed up in court over it,courtruled in Mr B's favour thus pissing the head honchos off ba off in a major way,so the reason an icon of our age sits in display hangars or worse,out in the elements at some baron airfield is solely due to sour grapes on behalf of ba,soon sad really cos for his not so clever trains I know Mr b would have made concorde's great again,where else could you travel from London to jfk in 2 hours 58 mind and 31 seconds sipping on champagne,ba have to shoulder that decision every single day and I hope there proud of what they've done,I for one will and have never flown on ba since that fateful decision was made by some daft bureaucrat which no knowledge or interest in flight,Virgin however gets my vote,every single time...long live Mr B |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *olgateMan
over a year ago
on the road to nowhere in particular |
"Concorde was and still is way ahead of its time,built and flying in 1974 and still by the time it was retired the R.A.F never had a plane that could catch it flat out,quite some acolade that,the only reason Branson wasn't successful in his bid for all 7 British airways concorde's goes back to when he started up Virginia Atlantic and decided to put a union jack on the side of his first plane and call himself the national carrier,ba took acception to this and and promptly landed up in court over it,courtruled in Mr B's favour thus pissing the head honchos off ba off in a major way,so the reason an icon of our age sits in display hangars or worse,out in the elements at some baron airfield is solely due to sour grapes on behalf of ba,soon sad really cos for his not so clever trains I know Mr b would have made concorde's great again,where else could you travel from London to jfk in 2 hours 58 mind and 31 seconds sipping on champagne,ba have to shoulder that decision every single day and I hope there proud of what they've done,I for one will and have never flown on ba since that fateful decision was made by some daft bureaucrat which no knowledge or interest in flight,Virgin however gets my vote,every single time...long live Mr B "
It's not quite as simple as that. Firstly nobody is going to give their flagship to one of their biggest competitors.
A major reason was Air France pulling out. Many of the components were manufactured by French companies that were then no longer prepared to continue to supply the necessary components |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *tormMan
over a year ago
ipswich |
Well either way it's just really sad and should have never been grounded in the first place,was the safest plane in the sky,public over reaction coupled with the 9/11 atrocity is what really grounded it,should have just parked them up for a while not for good |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Well either way it's just really sad and should have never been grounded in the first place,was the safest plane in the sky,public over reaction coupled with the 9/11 atrocity is what really grounded it,should have just parked them up for a while not for good "
.
Interestingly enough Concorde made its inaugural flight back from its grounding after Paris on... That's right it landed at jfk airport in the morning of September the 11th 2001... Sadly world events brought it's demise just like all other things! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *tormMan
over a year ago
ipswich |
On the up side there's a huge group of people,aviation enthusiasts,X captains and crew and a very wealthy investor ( might even be Mr b himself...no one knows), got together and raised currently 120 million to buy,and restore two examples sitting in a french hangar,one supposedly to be exhibited on the Thames by the London Eye on a purpose built pontoon,the other to be restored back to full flight status and used for chartering,displays and pleasure flights,so all not quite lost yet,all hides on the legalities involved in the purchase,if your into concorde,fancy a read and haven't already,give www.clubconcorde.co.uk a look,maybe even as I have donate a bit of dosh cos as they say,every little helps |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think there is a future somewhere for a working "Concorde".
I just don't think you'll ever see them in full service ever again due to how management would say... Unforseen circumstances |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"3.5 hours to New York.... great
Can take that long to get from south to north London!
that's sounds like a nightmare"
especially via underground - tube |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *AA123Couple
over a year ago
Lichfield |
Research is still ongoing what with the likes of Gulfstream dabbling in this area but the problem of muting the environmental impact of sonic booms overland hasn't been resolved yet and that is a big negative for growth and profits. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Concorde was and still is way ahead of its time,built and flying in 1974 and still by the time it was retired the R.A.F never had a plane that could catch it flat out,... "
Not so. Concorde's top speed was Mach 2.04 at 60,000 feet. The English Electric Lightning F.1 onwards (1959) could do Mach 2.27 at 40,000 feet (the air is denser at that altitude and thus harder to achieve). Yes I know Mach numbers relate to the speed of sound, which varies with altitude and air pressure. But could the Lightning outperform Concorde, absolutely, in all areas, such as rate of climb, operational ceiling, etc.
But then the Lightning was a thoroughbred jet fighter, not a passenger aircraft.
Concorde was an amazing feat of engineering, way ahead of its time. Its remarkable performance was made possible by the superb Rolls Royce Olympus engines, developed from the ones that powered the Vulcan. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *tormMan
over a year ago
ipswich |
Hmmmmm yes I get what your saying that the lightening was quick however one would just like to point out that were a concorde flat out over land at 60,000 feet and a lightening scrambled to intercept it I'm afraid whilst the blissfully unaware peeps sipping champagne and munching on canapés are enjoying the _iew of the curvature of the earth,are old friend the peasant in the lightening would in no uncertain terms be flying by the seat of his pants with his Co pilot by his side,flat out,shook to sit, precipitous beads of sweat forming on his brow and in all likely hood if u do the maths run out of fuel and nose dive into the ocean before he even caught a glimpse of the majestic good lady conc,hence my original post that they never had a plane that could catch it...stick that in your pipe and inhale deeply lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Hmmmmm yes I get what your saying that the lightening was quick however one would just like to point out that were a concorde flat out over land at 60,000 feet and a lightening scrambled to intercept it I'm afraid whilst the blissfully unaware peeps sipping champagne and munching on canapés are enjoying the _iew of the curvature of the earth,are old friend the peasant in the lightening would in no uncertain terms be flying by the seat of his pants with his Co pilot by his side,flat out,shook to sit, precipitous beads of sweat forming on his brow and in all likely hood if u do the maths run out of fuel and nose dive into the ocean before he even caught a glimpse of the majestic good lady conc,hence my original post that they never had a plane that could catch it...stick that in your pipe and inhale deeply lol "
Yes you are correct that the Lightening was horrendously fuel inefficient, but in the unlikely event it was scrambled to intercept a Concorde, it would be scrambled ahead of the Concorde, not behind it and with an initial rate of climb of 55,000 feet per minute (greater than the F15), would be on station in less than 3 mins from scramble - not bad for an aircraft designed in the 1940s and in service in the 1950s.
Did they ever have a drag race, yes you bet, and the Lightening won. So yes, it could catch and overtake Concorde.
If you knew anything about aviation, you'd also know that the Lightening was a single seater and thus, no co-pilot. Also, no RAF pilot would knowingly proceed past their point of no return fuel wise, and mid air re-fuelling is an option. So your conjecture is totally misconceived and your assertion erroneous. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Ive never flown on concorde but I always thought it looked a bit claustrophobic inside.
it was like being inside a hose pipe that had been fitted out with a second hand inter-city 125 interior from the 70's "
" What a complete load of twaddle!!!
Have you ever been on one? No. Try luxury class, plenty of room to move around as there was only 100 seats, comfort that can't be described in words... and to sit at Mach 2 way above all the other piddly cattle class aircraft whilst drinking fine champagne and enjoying the _iews..... just my opinion on the best aircraft in the world....EVER!
"
Well said and totally agree. Concorde really was something unique. I travelled a few times on her and was in awe at the take off and landing, like being in a dentist chair as you're tipped back.
Absolutely nothing will compare to her.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
