Petition for keeping one Concorde flying

"David Wright" wrote in message
...
And, isn't it a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has
bolted?
All the Concorde's have gone, or are going, to their new static homes -
there isn't a Concorde left to fly is there??

Well, they've (mostly) flown there and been put in a hangar. They haven't
been taken apart or anything like that as far as I know. Ignoring the
legalities, I would guess you could, for example, bring AF out of the
hangar at Filton, fuel it up and fly it tomorrow. Or today even... :-)
Maybe they've drained the oil, don't know...

One of them (AB?) is still at Heathrow, standing out on the tarmac.
This one hasn't had the kevlar liners put in the fuel tanks.

By the way, we (at Brooklands museum) hope to get BBDG in March
or maybe April.

http://www.concordesst.com/

Paul

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...
One of them (AB?) is still at Heathrow, standing out on the tarmac.
This one hasn't had the kevlar liners put in the fuel tanks.

AA is at Heathrow too apparently. Guess it's inside.

And, isn't it a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has
bolted?
All the Concorde's have gone, or are going, to their new static homes -
there isn't a Concorde left to fly is there??

Well, they've (mostly) flown there and been put in a hangar. They haven't
been taken apart or anything like that as far as I know. Ignoring the
legalities, I would guess you could, for example, bring AF out of the
hangar at Filton, fuel it up and fly it tomorrow. Or today even... :-)
Maybe they've drained the oil, don't know...

I seem to remember hearing that engineers were standing by at Manchester to
make it unflyable the day it arrived?

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...
Don't know if you know about this, but the petition to keep Concorde
flying is going to change. The emphasis is now going to be on keeping
one airworthy to be used at airshows, etc.


It would be just too expensive and from past experience it would crash.
I think when we are down to the last serviceable machine of historic type it
should be grounded!
If some one then wants to see it flying - make them build a replica
airframe! (As the engines are not usually the problem.)

Slatts

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...
SNIP
Well, they've (mostly) flown there and been put in a hangar. They haven't
been taken apart or anything like that as far as I know. Ignoring the
legalities, I would guess you could, for example, bring AF out of the
hangar at Filton, fuel it up and fly it tomorrow. Or today even... :-)

At a very minimum it would need a 100hr check - Cost?
Then are the C of A, compass swing, C of R, weigh schedule, Radio licence
etc. still valid ?

Slatts

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...

legalities, I would guess you could, for example, bring AF out of the
hangar at Filton, fuel it up and fly it tomorrow. Or today even... :-)

I've been past Filton several times since it arrived and each time I've seen
it standing outside. I assume it was taken out of the hangar as soon as the
crowds had gone home and has been there ever since. I don't suppose that
standing outside will do it much harm in the short term, but I did get the
impression, at the time it arrived, that it was going to be looked after
rather better than that.

Stephen

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...
No, maybe not. But someone somewhere may see how much
support there is, so it may help. It's not a "hey, we demand you
keep it flying" sort of petition, it's more a "we'd support any
person or organisation that has a plan", or a "come on guys, look
how people love this machine" sort of thing.


Good for you, I'll sign it. OK, it may not get anywhere, but for Ghu's sake,
it's no effort to sign a petition; and at least it keeps the issue alive.
Not a dig at any one person, but I do get irritated when people simply
dismiss efforts in an Eyeore-ish manner.

Ali

"Jeff Franks" wrote in message
.. .

It takes $$$$$$$ to keep airplanes flying not petitions.


...and complacency to keep one grounded.



SFX: Loud applause to that man.

Ali

"Sla#s" wrote in message
...

I think when we are down to the last serviceable machine of historic type
it
should be grounded!

You'd not restore the Vulcan, then?

Ali

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 13:02:37 +0000, Paul Sengupta wrote:

"David Wright" wrote in message
...
Don't know if you know about this, but the petition to keep Concorde
flying is going to change. The emphasis is now going to be on keeping
one airworthy to be used at airshows, etc.

Oh dear, why bother - it's obvious that it's not going to happen. No
petition of any size is going to influence Airbus! There is no cost
benefit
from flying a Concorde for airshows is there?

Maybe not. But then there isn't to keep Spirfires or Lancasters or
Hurricanes or Hunters flying, or returning Vulcans, Lightnings or
Buccaneers to the air.



What about fast taxi runs? The Cold War jets at Bruntingthorpe are
regularly wheeled out to be bombed down the runway to the delight of the
thousands who turn up for every open day there. No COA or anything
required. So why not the same with Concorde?

Of course the biggest obstacle to keeping classic jets flying in this
country is the CAA. That's why if you want to see Buccs and Lightnings
flying you have to travel to South Africa. A national disgrace if ever
there was one.

K