How mediocrity ruined a multi-million dollar concorde company

I found this worth copy-pasting.

www.sde.co.ke/m/thenairobian/article/2000180918/bishop-allan-kiuna-how-mediocrity-ruined-a-multi-million-dollar-concorde-company

On July 25, 2000, a fatal accident brought down one of aviation history’s marvels, the Concorde. All 100 passengers, nine crew members on board and four people on the ground were killed.

Concorde was an extraordinary supersonic aircraft that could travel at over 2,100 km/h - more than twice the speed of sound. At one point, it did the fastest transatlantic flight from New York to London in two hours, 52 minutes, 59 seconds. That was epic, given that regular airlines did the same journey for over eight hours. Even with such blinding speed, the Concorde was not only considered the fastest, but also the safest way to travel by air.

However, in the year 2000, disaster struck. Five minutes before the Concorde, another aircraft departing for Newark, New Jersey, had lost a titanium alloy strip about one foot long on the same runway. During the Concorde’s takeoff run, this piece of debris, still lying on the runway, was run over, cutting a tyre and rupturing it.

A large chunk of tyre debris (4.5 kilos) struck the underside, sending out a pressure shockwave that ruptured the number five fuel tank, just above the undercarriage. Leaking fuel gushing out from the bottom of the wing was most likely ignited through contact with hot parts of the engine.

Although the control tower saw the large plume of flame, and notified the pilot, with only two kilometres of runway remaining and travelling at a speed of 328 km/h, his only option was to take off. The Concorde would have needed at least three kilometres of runway to abort safely. The crew attempted to level the aircraft, but with falling airspeed, they lost control and the aircraft stalled, crashing into a hotel near the airport.

The crash of one Concorde contributed to the end of the entire company. A few days after the crash, all Concordes were grounded, pending an investigation into the cause of the crash. In March 2008, after massive losses and an irretrievable goodwill, manslaughter charges were finally brought against a very unlikely culprit, but rightfully so: the mechanic who replaced the wear strip that had been dropped on the runway before Concorde’s takeoff.

This wear strip had been replaced only slightly over a month and the investigation revealed that the rough edged strip had been neither manufactured nor installed in accordance with the procedures as defined by the manufacturer.

One mistake by a mediocre mechanic from another company brought down the multi-million dollar Concorde marvel. The lack of excellence in the mind of one man gave birth to a monumental catastrophe. This one lesson on the ravages of mediocrity constantly nudges my heart.

6 Likes

That one mistake wasnt the cause of the downfall. Concorde flights were expensive. The operating costs of the aircraft exceeded any cash coming in. It was also a time when fewer people travelled by air. Not to mwntion the few routes that concorde actually flew didnt make generate enough income. Concorde was mainly flown by business people when the money was now going to airlines who tended to tourists.
This article makes it sound like one crash ended everything.

9 Likes

They flew for 3 more years and in 2003 economic realities grounded the planes

7 Likes

Standard do some lazy journalism. The title and conclusions are very misleading and wrong.

5 Likes

Shoddy journalism.

Don’t expect much from
The Nairobian.

JUST ASKING,

why cant passengers on airplanes wear parachutes and trained on using them such that before a crush they can be ejected automatically jetfighter style? atleast wengine wapone?

1 Like

Expensive to who? Concorde wasn’t targeting the average. Up to this day, there are numerous petitions to bring back those flights. Just google, bring back the concorde.

naona umeona mission impossible 5! Not bad!

1 Like

That doesn’t mean it will be profitable if relaunched

Just not practical:
a) altitude of about 30k feet/oxygen issues
b) Bulkiness/costliness of the parachutes
c)Really, in case of a crash, no passenger would get chance to eject out.
d) parachutes’ use require advanced training and it’s not practical to train passengers every time they board a plane.
e)To open a cabin that’s pressurised(if indeed it can be open) would be even more catastrophic.
f)so many other reasons.
It’s decent/safer to have well trained pilots and well maintained planes in the first place

4 Likes

Osungu na Mpira leo imekupata Uncle.:smiley:

I think @uwesmake has a point here. At least the crew should be trained to eject so that at least there can be a survivor(s) to tell us what happened. Also most accidents happen during take off or landing so the issue of lack of oxygen does not arise here.
Maybe the issue is opening the pressurized cabin but they can start with the cockpit.

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Right…Like it happens in the movies… guess hii industry is run by chupilee

1 Like

People in Europe were complaining about the sonic booms produced by these majestic planes.

sasa hapa parachute itasaidia aje o_O

2 Likes

Ratio of safe v/s fatal flights means planes are still safe.
People die in bathroom accidents but no overhaul in the ritual. :smiley: