Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 49 of 49

Thread: Concorde

  1. #26
    Thailand Expat
    Bonecollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 02:39 AM
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai View Post
    3.5 hours as opposed to about 8 , is a significant about 4.5 hour savings, at $12,000 for a ticket it represents $1500 per hour Who among us does not value their time at more than $1,500 per hour? I know I wont get out of bed for any less than that.
    I'd get out of bed for a good blow job and a good coffee.

  2. #27
    Thailand Expat
    Mendip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:15 PM
    Location
    Korat
    Posts
    6,949
    ^ better if they come to you!

    Edit: I would imagine.
    Last edited by Mendip; 03-05-2022 at 08:20 PM.

  3. #28
    En route
    Cujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 10:51 AM
    Location
    Reality.
    Posts
    32,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe 90 View Post


    the planes are set to return to the runways by 2029.
    Based on what?
    Link?

  4. #29
    Im bored AF Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    8,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Cujo View Post
    Based on what?
    Link?
    Boom - Supersonic Passenger Airplanes

  5. #30
    Im bored AF Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    8,880
    Quote Originally Posted by cyrille View Post
    Were you into ladyboys back then, or was that later?
    Anyway you didnt respond to this

    When you travel from east to west, you travel to earlier time zones. Each time zone is 1 hour. Because the Concorde travels faster than the rotating earth, 1300 mph vs 900 mph, which spins from west to east, it gains on the sun, so to speak. So it can land in New York with the sun in an earlier phase in the sky there, than the sun was in the London sky when it took off in London.

    Flying Westwards at Mach 2, for example LHR-JFK, it departs from LHR at 10:30 am, getting to JFK at 09:20 am.
    you do gain 1 hr 10 mins.
    I took the US 75 days to take Fallujah and 267 days to take Mosul. Russia took Mariupol in 88 days.

  6. #31
    Hangin' Around cyrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Home
    Posts
    27,317
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    Anyway you didnt respond to this
    Your explanation of what happens when you get on a plane and the time zone changes?

    wtf where you expecting?

    "Oh wow, I've been living in a different time zone from the place I was born since 1985 and I ... I never realised that's how it works"?



    Yes, you gain time.

    Kind of.

    You do not achieve 'literal time travel', you ridiculous plank.
    'Ben Stokes is said to be fit, despite bowling gingerly in the nets on Wednesday' - The Guardian

  7. #32
    Im bored AF Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    8,880
    Quote Originally Posted by cyrille View Post
    Your explanation of what happens when you get on a plane and the time zone changes?

    wtf where you expecting?

    "Oh wow, I've been living in a different time zone from the place I was born since 1985 and I ... I never realised that's how it works"?



    Yes, you gain time.

    Kind of.

    You do not achieve 'literal time travel', you ridiculous plank.
    Thanks for that erudite technical explanation of how flying faster than the earth is spinning isn't time travel.

  8. #33
    Praise Jesus
    Edmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Cebu
    Posts
    6,929
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    Thanks for that erudite technical explanation of how flying faster than the earth is spinning isn't time travel.
    You can travel a century in a few minutes at the North pole.

    Mark a one meter circle around it, then run around it like buggery.

  9. #34
    Im bored AF Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    8,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Happy As Larry View Post
    Neither did I. I preferred First Class on a 747.

    However an old colleague of mine was enthralled by Concorde. He flew Concorde many times before the 80s.
    He used to keep the little menu cards as a memento.
    We are all different.
    You like jet lag that much eh. I flew business class a couple times and realized no matter how comfy you make it, flying is still cumbersome in a noisy aluminum tube and the sooner it's over the better. All you have to do is look at the ppl who come off a long flight and you know that its a bitch.

    There was probably still some holdouts that still liked taking a ship across the ocean instead of a jet liner too. At least that's what they convinced themselves for awhile

  10. #35
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:27 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    10,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    Thanks for that erudite technical explanation of how flying faster than the earth is spinning isn't time travel.
    Well, that's not exactly time travel is it? You need to brush up on your theory of relativity skiddy.

    However, in simple terms.

    As an observer in New York, or an observer in London, time was identical as your time during the trip on Concorde. Each second passed by equally and in the forward direction. Time did not decelerate as you travelled West and it did not accelerate as you travelled East.

    I vaguely recall that when I was your age, about 12 or 13, Einstein's theory of relativity was all the rage. Light clocks, external observers, and the appearance of light clocks slowing down. I'm sure it's all on the web somewhere.

  11. #36
    Thailand Expat
    Troy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:27 PM
    Location
    In the EU
    Posts
    10,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Backspin View Post
    You like jet lag that much eh. I flew business class a couple times and realized no matter how comfy you make it, flying is still cumbersome in a noisy aluminum tube and the sooner it's over the better. All you have to do is look at the ppl who come off a long flight and you know that its a bitch.
    I used to work for a company where we travelled quite often to different parts of the world. The general rule was that if you went Business then you went in to work on arrival. However, if you travelled economy then you didn't have to go to work until the following day. Most preferred to travel economy, but there were exceptions when arrival meant a very short work day. I always preferred 747 to any other aircraft for long distance.

  12. #37
    Praise Jesus
    Edmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Cebu
    Posts
    6,929
    Actually, one would attain time-travel due to time-dilation via the altitude and greater distance from the Earth's mass. It's basic physics 101.

    But not 1 hour plus, unless the flight is, ohh, around 10,000 years long.


    It's actually quite easy to calculate using the equation t = t0/(1-v2/c2)1/2

    Which, btw, looks like:




    but I doubt you TD simple-dimples would manage it without removing yer socks.
    Last edited by Edmond; 04-05-2022 at 07:33 AM.

  13. #38
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    5,995
    ^ how long did it take Edwina to explain that to you Lulu and are you sure its right.

  14. #39
    Thailand Expat
    aging one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    21,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Troy View Post
    I always preferred 747 to any other aircraft for long distance.
    It was the king of the sky. None of the new generation of jets can touch it just in terms of how much bigger it felt inside.

  15. #40
    Praise Jesus
    Edmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Cebu
    Posts
    6,929
    Quote Originally Posted by aging one View Post
    can touch it just in terms of how much bigger it felt inside
    tommy just twitched.

  16. #41
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    5,995
    Quote Originally Posted by aging one View Post
    It was the king of the sky. None of the new generation of jets can touch it just in terms of how much bigger it felt inside.
    Hmmm i just did a trip in an A380 and i estimate 80% of the top deck was buisiness with quite a big bar/longue.

  17. #42
    Thailand Expat
    Mendip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:15 PM
    Location
    Korat
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmond View Post
    ...but I doubt you TD simple-dimples would manage it without removing yer socks.
    Be careful what you wish for!

  18. #43
    Thailand Expat
    Lostandfound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    30-06-2022 @ 11:31 PM
    Posts
    4,083
    I only flew it once from London to New York. Not especially comfortable, but it was a similar journey time to Athens.

    i don't remember too much except excellent free booze in the Concorde Room and the full caviar treatment in board. The main difference was take off angle - like being on a rocket and the drop in acceleraton when the afterburners were turned off.

    Although it was a single class "R", there was a definite cachet in being in the forward cabin. I heard that BA tended to put the discounted ticket travellers in the rear cabin.

    Despite the caviar and excellent booze their main market seemed to be dull as ditchwater banker types who drank nothing more than Diet Coke whilst poring over their Exel spreadsheets.

  19. #44
    Thailand Expat
    aging one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    21,186
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    Hmmm i just did a trip in an A380 and i estimate 80% of the top deck was buisiness with quite a big bar/longue.
    But it also in general is being phased out due to fuel costs and load factor. Not in production anymore.

  20. #45
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    28,115
    Quote Originally Posted by aging one View Post
    But it also in general is being phased out due to fuel costs and load factor. Not in production anymore.
    For the same reason that the iconic 747 is going out of production this year.

  21. #46
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    5,995
    ^ true, and a shame, i lovd both 747 and 380. Used to watch thd 380 from the office window in farnborough on the airshow and its a hell of a sight watching at bank at such slow speebs so low.

  22. #47
    In Uranus
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    28,115
    Quote Originally Posted by malmomike77 View Post
    true, and a shame, i lovd both 747 and 380.
    I never flew on a 380, but I flew on a 747 several times. Will definitely be a bit bittersweet seeing them taken out of production.

  23. #48
    Im bored AF Backspin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    8,880
    Ironically Airbus wanted to kill the Concorde program to focus on the A380. They made a bet that the hub and spoke model of flying would win out. Meaning big jets would service main airports then small jets would take everyone to other destinations. The other model is point to point flying with medium sized aircraft doing direct flights. Concorde was a point to point aircraft.

    It turns out that the point to point model won out. And for that reason , the A380 was just as much of a commercial failure as the Concorde was. And since point to point won out , it makes a new Concorde a viable business proposition. Which is why a new one is being built.

    The 747 is being phased out for the same reason. It's too big for point to point.

    Airbus A380: Success Despite Business Failure? - One Mile at a Time

  24. #49
    Isle of discombobulation Joe 90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Mai Arse
    Posts
    6,220
    Quote Originally Posted by aging one View Post
    But it also in general is being phased out due to fuel costs and load factor. Not in production anymore.
    It takes 2 hours to refuel.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •