Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Ok, nastier, keep 'em coming, you're making a really intellectual point there FFS.
Doh! Whereas you're avoiding it.
You see I am logical. I assume you are a cretin because you called my post where I described yours as "codswallop", nasty. Whereas in reality codswallop is an accurate description.
But lets get back on track - how exactly did the US scupper Concorde?
Except it wasn't "making something nobody wanted" several Mercan airlines signed orders, which they only cancelled after the project got delayed by the Mercan authorities banning Concorde for just long enough to kill it. You need to read some of the history of it.
Except it wasn't "making something nobody wanted" several Mercan airlines signed orders, which they only cancelled after the project got delayed by the Mercan authorities banning Concorde for just long enough to kill it. You need to read some of the history of it.
I have. And was that the real reason that Concorde failed?
Doh! Whereas you're avoiding it.
You see I am logical. I assume you are a cretin because you called my post where I described yours as "codswallop", nasty. Whereas in reality codswallop is an accurate description.
But lets get back on track - how exactly did the US scupper Concorde?
Having entirely avoided the points I was making and blathering on about the Comet, then calling me a Cretin and describing that as logic, you now seem to wish to actually debate the point about Concorde? Are you serious?
Having entirely avoided the points I was making and blathering on about the Comet, then calling me a Cretin and describing that as logic, you now seem to wish to actually debate the point about Concorde? Are you serious?
You have no points to make apart from the conspiracy theory that the Mercans killed Concorde, rather than most importantly the massive rise in oil prices in the 70s which made its ticket prices unfeasible, as well as the noise caused by its sonic boom which meant that flying over the Atlantic was the only feasible and viable commercial route.
But never let the facts get in the way of a good prejudice, eh?
The Comet was mentioned because if it wasn't for its failures Britain would have had the first viable jet-liner and probably would have been the European competitor rather than Airbus.
Comment