So if we can Keep a Vulcan Flying.....

[FWDRacer]

... why not a single Concorde?

Yep - I watched (misty eyed) the C4 documentary last night and remember fondly seeing the huge plume of shiite deposited over Yardley () as Concorde took off from BHX on its final farewell tour.

I consider myself lucky to have seen it fly - the noise as it went overhead while parked up (again) on the M25 at Stanwell is something I will never forget. Unfortunatly my daughters generation will have to rely on Photo's and historical film. It is a crying shame and as an Engineering marvel, why can't we continue Concorde's legacy. The plane was and is, an icon.

Is it cost?

Is it Airframe Hours?

Is it parts?

Somebody much more learned with the regulations laid out by the CAA will probably be along to explain...

[Eric Mc]

Multiple threads on this on PH going back quite a while.

Concorde is a whole order of magnitude more complex than an essentially 1940s era Vulcan.

The main blocking point is the absolute and total unwiilingness to support the engineering aspect of keeping a Concorde airworthy by the companies that you would need to provide that support - Rolls Royce, Airbus etc.

[john_p]

From the "4 Olympus Engines and Some Metal" thread..

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[FWDRacer]

That's me told then...

JohnP ->

[john_p]

I'm just glad I got to see a couple of the final depatures from LHR.