Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!nrl-cmf!ukma!xanth!ames!amdcad!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!glasgow!bru-cc!me85mda
From: me85mda@cc.brunel.ac.uk (M D Ayton)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Number of Concorde ever built
Message-ID: <625@Terra.cc.brunel.ac.uk>
Date: 31 Jan 89 10:42:11 GMT
References: [deleted]
Reply-To: me85mda@cc.brunel.ac.uk (M D Ayton)
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
Lines: 29

>>The delay was from court battles over the noise issue.

Right, I've just about had enough of this.

Concorde was banned from American airports ONLY while it was still being
built and on the SPURIOUS gruonds of noise.

I'd better explain the last, because Concorde is, without doubt, a noisy
aircraft. One of Concorde's "added extras" is its truly incredible low-speed
manoueverability; this meant that during noise tests at JFK (I think) British
Airways, in conjunction with BAe, was able to pull a rather neat trick. The
location of the noise monitors at the airport was found and the pilot (who
must have been something special) was instructed to fly an approach path
which kept him as far as possible from the monitors at all times. When the
officials subsequently checked the recordings, Concorde had been DROWNED OUT
by the background roar from American BOEING 747s. As I recall, nobody then
suggested that the American craft may have been too noisy :-) .

So, lets face the real, and unpalatable, reason for Concorde's demise: At the
time *NO* American manufacturer was capable of building a supersonic carrier,
and on the principle of "if you can't join them, beat them" lobbied, lied,
bribed and cheated their way to making it uneconomic for anyone else to build
such a carrier either. That action is the root cause of there being no new
supersonic carrier being made and sold today. You have only yourselves to
blame.

Isolationism and protectionism are a sad, sad story.

Martin.