Concorde- Why are we stepping backwards?
@jackcuthbertson1990 (59)
February 24, 2007 4:19pm CST
Concorde is a fasanating machine. It cost billions to design. It proved all the sceptics wrong, who said it could not be done. So, Why then after one crash was concorde consigned to history? Why then, when we are advancing in everything from medical science to renewable energy did we take a step backwards with supersonic transport? The 747 has crashed over 30 times due to similar faults. But the first time that concorde makes a mistake, we withdraw it. It beats me....
1 person likes this
2 responses
@SageMother (2277)
• United States
24 Feb 07
It wasn't actually the crash that grounded the Concorde.
It was too expensive for most people to use, so many times it flew half empty, which is a huge loss to the companies that had it in their fleet. It IS sad but sometimes the greatest inventions fail because they are not practical.
1 person likes this
@Karbon (18)
•
30 Mar 07
Concorde Cost loads to make and design, let alone MAINTAIN.
Which is the key word here- Maintenance. The concorde did infact f*** up, but far too many times for the time lapse since it was released. Yes, there was a crash. But how many news reports have you heard or seen of a concorde piece flying off it? The nose was a incredibly stupid design, throwing off the G-balance throughout the plane and stressing the back more, which is why the pieces flew off their. So what? We propose to redesign the concorde's nose? Costing more of the taxpayer's money? No, we ground the thing.
It was costing too much money to the extent it was not economical.
