one (1) fucking accident and they were gone, I don't get it

>>2040378 (OP)
Airbus would rather support and manufacture parts for thousands of aircraft, not 20.

>thing X can do a task well
>make thing Y that can do the task better, in some respects
>thing Y also costs way more and makes you less money
>"wtf why don't people want thing Y"

>>2040378 (OP)
It was throttled by legislation banning supersonic flights over land, which restricted it to transoceanic routes. It didn’t have the performance for transpacific flights to/from the US mainland, so transatlantic routes were kinda it. A major accident and 9/11 pushed a plane with a razor thin operating margin too far in the red.

Here’s what it could’ve been:

http://www.concordesst.com/concordeb.html

>>2040378 (OP)
It was a combination of 9/11, and the internet/computers. It wasn't just that one of them crashed.

Why did Aerion fail?

>>2040378 (OP)
the accident finally uncovered how unsafe the design was though

how many planes have you heard about that were brought down by an exploding tire?

maybe overture will ever fly and we will see something like this again (it 100% won't)

>>2040424
Do you have any idea the energy contained in one of those tires on takeoff? The rotation speed of Concorde is like 200+ kts; if one of them shreds because of debris on the runway it’s not going to be pretty. The proximity of the gear to the engines/fuel tanks made it a bigger hazard comparatively, but it was resolved before Concorde returned to flight. Here’s a link to some other accidents caused by high speed tire failures. https://aviationweek.com/business-aviation/safety-ops-regulation/handling-high-speed-tire-failure-part-2

>>2040378 (OP)
shid was just a poor copy of the superior russian tupulev tu-144

>>2040378 (OP)
it was caused by a piece of a DC-10 on the runway
always the FUCKING DC-10

>>2040420
Boeing backed them and then pulled out because they had their own issues.

>t. Lives by where their would-be factory was going to be built.

>>2040424
>the accident finally uncovered how unsafe the design was though
I agree, Death Crasher-10s should have been globally banned

this reminds me of the dali painting luguborious pl𝘢n𝘢ri𝘢n

>>2040381
It didn't make money it lost money. The Concorde was a prestige project run on state subsidies.
It was never profitable.

>>2040378 (OP)
Too expensive
Too loud

>>2041057
their googly eyes are cute

>>2041057
>dali painting luguborious pl𝘢n𝘢ri𝘢n
wow I knew this was a schizo painting before looking it up. Gives me goosebumps thinking about it.
>>2041495
Not to be insulting but is that really how normies react to this?

>>2042293
not him but my first reaction was "I could do that"

there's probably some context here I'm missing that makes this remarkable but without it it's like a nice lighting exercise with some googly eyed dudes

>>2040381
>Makes less money
Didn't it run (fly) at a loss, just as a "prestige" operation?
>>2041064
This lol

>>2041064
I will point out that the technological development was not profitable for the state but Concorde was profitable for the airlines it flew for.

>>2042293
desu you sound like an impressionable fag

>>2042980
BA and Air France pretty much got them for free and charged 2000 or so a seat.
In the latter years you could get a flight which took you far enough over water to lay down a boom and return home. They were fun.

OP is a sheltered retard that has never experienced a real sonic boom in his entire life, and no, the F-16s flying around at your local air show may be loud but they do not produce sonic booms. Imagine being forced to hear an explosion every single day just because a plane that's 40,000 ft above sea level happens to be flying within a 10 mile radius of your house. It wasn't just accidents that caused supersonic flights to be banned anon, these planes had the potential to make entire cities less liveable than they already are

>>2043004
One could argue that commercial aviation was a product of wartime engineering, and that the transition to the jet age was pioneered by military research investment. Pre-WWII commercial air travel existed, but it never would have made the technological advancement without the government flooding money into defense R&D. Same principle with Concorde except for some reason money invested into defense is an easier pill to swallow for the general public than commercial aerospace advancement.

>>2043030
The Interwar Period was the peak of Commercial aviation

>>2040378 (OP)
Towards the end it was barely making any money, and the airframes were wearing out so required more and more maintenance per flight hour, so the crash was the perfect pretext to shut the concorde down.

>>2043034
I’d argue for the 50s with bigger quad engined aircraft that was faster and more comfortable than what was available in the interwar years, but the glory days were just about over by the time the jet age came around.

>>2040379
how about thousands of supersonic aircraft?

atc here, apparently these guys were a huge pain in the ass to vector in tracon airspace

>>2046200
They had their own special tracks in the atlantic, because they flew at 50-60k feet above the jetstream and all other traffic

>>2040378 (OP)
Supersonic commercial aviation is a meme, was always a meme and will continue to be a meme forever.

>>2040378 (OP)
It was costing the airlines absurd amounts of money and turning over barely any profit or often made a loss.
>>2040381
The vast majority of people are literally unable to comprehend the concept of opportunity costs.

beep beep , the winner takes it all !
DC-10 1954-2025