It was a nasty move by BA because Concorde was gifted to BA by HMG on behalf of the tax payers. They should have handed it back and let Virgin have it.
- 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!
10 years ago today...
Collapse
X
-
"A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices," George Orwell -
Comment
-
There's one sat on the side of the runway uncovered rotting here in Bristol.
No 216, made its last supersonic flight in 2003.Comment
-
They could never return to flight now having sat out of use for so long. You'd have to go over the entire structure with the x-ray machine to check for any cracks and the like. Too expensive, you'd be cheaper building a new one from scratch with updated technology.
In the end I'm sure we'd rather spend £60 billion on HS2 than £3.496 billion for concorde at todays prices."Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience". Mark TwainComment
-
Originally posted by scooterscot View PostThey could never return to flight now having sat out of use for so long. You'd have to go over the entire structure with the x-ray machine to check for any cracks and the like. Too expensive, you'd be cheaper building a new one from scratch with updated technology.
In the end I'm sure we'd rather spend £60 billion on HS2 than £3.496 billion for concorde at todays prices.Comment
-
Originally posted by Churchill View PostCan we have TSR-2 back in the air, please?
Are we talking about the Avro Arrow? I notice that McDonnell Douglas tried to get in on the replacement to the TSR-2, like they managed with the replacement to the Arrow. Not that I'm suggesting a conspiracy.Comment
-
Originally posted by Ticktock View PostA military aircraft being developed and built by a company in the country intending to use it during late '50s - early '60s, then the project being cancelled?
Are we talking about the Avro Arrow? I notice that McDonnell Douglas tried to get in on the replacement to the TSR-2, like they managed with the replacement to the Arrow. Not that I'm suggesting a conspiracy.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAC_TSR-2Comment
-
I realise that, which is why I mentioned the TSR-2 in my post.
I just compared it to another project, in a different country, for a different advanced aircraft, where the project was also cancelled around the same time.Comment
-
Originally posted by Churchill View Post"A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices," George OrwellComment
-
Originally posted by scooterscot View PostThey could never return to flight now having sat out of use for so long. You'd have to go over the entire structure with the x-ray machine to check for any cracks and the like. Too expensive, you'd be cheaper building a new one from scratch with updated technology.
In the end I'm sure we'd rather spend £60 billion on HS2 than £3.496 billion for concorde at todays prices.
If Concorde had seen small incremental developments for as long as the 747, just imagine what we'd have; small variants for short supersonic or nearly supersonic flights, big variants that bring the cost per passenger down, more and more fuel efficient variants, freight variants that bring fresh fruit or even fish from Australia or South America in hours or bring food to famine victims before the famine even gets started, military transport variants that get soldiers to war torn regions in less than a day, ; the possibilities were almost endless.
I also think it's a shame Richard Branson wasn't allowed the chance to make a business success of it.And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Reports of umbrella companies’ death are greatly exaggerated Nov 28 10:11
- A new hiring fraud hinges on a limited company, a passport and ‘Ade’ Nov 27 09:21
- Is an unpaid umbrella company required to pay contractors? Nov 26 09:28
- The truth of umbrella company regulation is being misconstrued Nov 25 09:23
- Labour’s plan to regulate umbrella companies: a closer look Nov 21 09:24
- When HMRC misses an FTT deadline but still wins another CJRS case Nov 20 09:20
- How 15% employer NICs will sting the umbrella company market Nov 19 09:16
- Contracting Awards 2024 hails 19 firms as best of the best Nov 18 09:13
- How to answer at interview, ‘What’s your greatest weakness?’ Nov 14 09:59
- Business Asset Disposal Relief changes in April 2025: Q&A Nov 13 09:37
Comment