Let's get Concorde flying again!

In article <1135777697.062771.98150@g49g2000cwa.. com>,
Concorde <concorde@kulwant.net> wrote:

> Please spare a minute to show your support for Concorde...

It's a noisy, fuel-wasting dinosaur. I'll pass.

> If it's a dinosaur, then why is it more advanced than anything
> in commercial service today?
>
In what way pray is it more "advanced" than,say, an airbus?

David

In article <douek7$k1k@u1.netgate.net>, Geoff Miller
<geoffm@u1.netgate.net> wrote:

> beavis <nobody@nowhere.com> writes:
>
> > It's a noisy, fuel-wasting dinosaur. I'll pass.
>
>
> Ah, a tree-hugger!

Uhhh...no.

>
> If it's a dinosaur, then why is it more advanced than anything
> in commercial service today?

It isn't.

> ...one gets the impression
> that you just dislike Concorde because you're a sniveling leftist....

Yeah, that's it. Actually, I'm an airline pilot, actually, who
understands the economics of the airlines quite well. And the
economics of the Concorde make it unsustainable in today's market
without government subsidy.

beavis wrote:
> In article <douek7$k1k@u1.netgate.net>, Geoff Miller
> <geoffm@u1.netgate.net> wrote:
>
>> beavis <nobody@nowhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> It's a noisy, fuel-wasting dinosaur. I'll pass.
>>
>> Ah, a tree-hugger!
>
> Uhhh...no.
>
>> If it's a dinosaur, then why is it more advanced than anything
>> in commercial service today?
>
> It isn't.
>
>> ...one gets the impression
>> that you just dislike Concorde because you're a sniveling leftist....
>
> Yeah, that's it. Actually, I'm an airline pilot, actually, who
> understands the economics of the airlines quite well. And the
> economics of the Concorde make it unsustainable in today's market
> without government subsidy.

You're arguing that being a bus driver makes you competent to observe
that a Bugatti Veyron is a dinosaur?

Paul <Paul wrote:

> The hoy poloi

That's about the fastest way of demonstrating that you are one of the
unwashed herd.

On 28 Dec 2005 09:35:42 -0800, geoffm@u1.netgate.net (Geoff Miller)
wrote:

>Which, while well and good, has nothing to do with the matter of
>whether the Concorde is advanced.

It was advanced it no longer is. It is out dated. Now stop talking
like a thick job. Go and watch TV, listen to the radio but leave this
topic to the big lads. There's a good boy!

Carstairs-MacKracken

In article <281220051218182432%nobody@nowhere.com>, beavis
<nobody@nowhere.com> writes
>In article <douek7$k1k@u1.netgate.net>, Geoff Miller
><geoffm@u1.netgate.net> wrote:
>
>> beavis <nobody@nowhere.com> writes:
>>
>> > It's a noisy, fuel-wasting dinosaur. I'll pass.
>>
>>
>> Ah, a tree-hugger!
>
>Uhhh...no.
>
>>
>> If it's a dinosaur, then why is it more advanced than anything
>> in commercial service today?
>
>It isn't.
>
>> ...one gets the impression
>> that you just dislike Concorde because you're a sniveling leftist....
>
>Yeah, that's it. Actually, I'm an airline pilot, actually, who
>understands the economics of the airlines quite well. And the
>economics of the Concorde make it unsustainable in today's market
>without government subsidy.

Or people paying very inflated fares.

The fact that BA charged a whacking premium on Concorde fares made it
fashionable to fly on.

There was a bit of cachet to nipping across the Atlantic at your
employers expense on Concorde; it showed everyone how much your bosses
thought of you.

I heard that most of the aircraft's payload on the JFK route worked in
the World Trade centre, and the demand for seats dried up almost
completely after 11th Sept 2001.




--
Mike Lindsay

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 19:57:08 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:


>The same logic can be applied to the Space Shuttle.
And that is a total waist of American taxpayers money and also a waste
of space .

In article <doujag$ibp$3@genet.malloc.co.uk>, Steve Firth
<%steve%@malloc.co.uk> writes
>Paul <Paul wrote:
>
>> The hoy poloi
>
>That's about the fastest way of demonstrating that you are one of the
>unwashed herd.

Children, children, no need to squabble. After all who speaks ancient
Greek these days?
--
Mike Lindsay

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 20:36:33 +0000, Philip W Lee
<phil(at)lee(hyphen)family(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote:

>No aircraft can fly safely under the conditions imposed on it by
>incompetent operating staff

Were they incompetent?