If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC-US)   Once a vision of supersonic travel, the Concorde was a symbol of our achievement in flight, now a decade after its final flight, in the 21st century we have_________   (bbc.com) divider line 112
    More: Interesting, Concorde, widebodies, Paris Air Show, flights, symbols, curvature  
•       •       •

7353 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 May 2013 at 10:09 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



112 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-30 08:07:55 AM  
Funyons? Gangnam Style? Catbeards?
 
2013-05-30 08:19:51 AM  
Viagra for eighty year old great grandfathers.
 
2013-05-30 08:26:45 AM  
Nearly cured gray hair. Almost here.
 
2013-05-30 08:35:21 AM  
I went aboard the NS Savannah in Baltimore a couple of weekends ago, and it very much reminded me of
the Concorde, inasmuchas it was a beautifully designed and built dead-end:

atomicinsights.com
 
2013-05-30 08:45:45 AM  
TSA
 
2013-05-30 10:07:53 AM  
Remember that the same country that gave us the Concorde also gave us the Pou-du-Ciel.  I would be remiss if I didn't point out that there are more PdC's flying today than Concordes.
 
2013-05-30 10:11:33 AM  
the Segway!
 
2013-05-30 10:12:17 AM  
When I was a kid:

People were walking on the moon.
We had commercially available supersonic flight.
Public education was held up as good for banishing superstition and ignorance instead of promoting creationism.
NATO countries didn't kidnap and torture.

Progress isn't uniform....
 
2013-05-30 10:12:28 AM  
Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.
 
2013-05-30 10:12:48 AM  
Instead we have a crowd sourced plane built by the lowest bidder.
 
2013-05-30 10:12:51 AM  
When the Japanese did government-managed industrial development in the 50s and 60s, they made sure the products they generated could be purchased by a broad swath of customers.  Witness Honda and Toyota.

When the French and British governments did it in the 60s and the 70s, they created something that only the very wealthiest could afford.
 
2013-05-30 10:13:29 AM  
Pretty sure it had less to do with people dying and more to do with people not wanting to pay the expensive fairs the concord required.
 
2013-05-30 10:14:06 AM  

OtherLittleGuy: the Segway!


www.theinquirer.net
 
2013-05-30 10:16:13 AM  

Rev. Skarekroe: Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.


The past is BETTER!
thedapperdude.com
 
2013-05-30 10:16:19 AM  
indiawires.com
 
2013-05-30 10:16:32 AM  
We're sorry but this site is not accessible from the UK as it is part of our international service and is not funded by the licence fee. It is run commercially by BBC Worldwide, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the BBC, the profits made from it go back to BBC programme-makers to help fund great new BBC programmes. You can find out more about BBC Worldwide and its digital activities at http://www.bbcworldwide.com/about-us.aspx">www.bbcworldwide.com.

or am I doing something wrong?
 
2013-05-30 10:17:06 AM  

gaslight: When I was a kid:

People were walking on the moon.
We had commercially available supersonic flight.
Public education was held up as good for banishing superstition and ignorance instead of promoting creationism.
NATO countries didn't kidnap and torture.

Progress isn't uniform....


I like to say "Sometimes progress isn't".
 
2013-05-30 10:19:05 AM  

gaslight: When I was a kid:

People were walking on the moon.
We had commercially available supersonic flight.
Public education was held up as good for banishing superstition and ignorance instead of promoting creationism.
NATO countries didn't kidnap and torture.

Progress isn't uniform....


So you are saying when you were a kid, funds for space exploration and research were being diverted to relatively low value public relations projects instead of actually valuable stuff like exploring and solving the mysteries of the universe, rich people were being massively subsidized by middle class tax payers to jet off around the world slightly faster, and NATO countries weren't being caught kidnapping and torturing people as much (and/or the media was more complicit in covering it up in the past).

/you can have item 3, but it obviously mostly applies to the US
 
2013-05-30 10:20:20 AM  

gaslight: When I was a kid:

People were walking on the moon.
We had commercially available supersonic flight.
Public education was held up as good for banishing superstition and ignorance instead of promoting creationism.
NATO countries didn't kidnap and torture.

Progress isn't uniform....


Who's being naive, Kay?
 
2013-05-30 10:23:00 AM  
As a owner of a 1996 Chrysler Concorde, im gettin a kick.

/or was that an engine knock oh god im so scared.
 
2013-05-30 10:23:08 AM  
'long-term recession...'

Glad we don't have anything like that in the US
 
2013-05-30 10:24:31 AM  
A 4lb hairball

/huzzah
 
2013-05-30 10:24:35 AM  

gaslight: When I was a kid:

People were walking on the moon.
We had commercially available supersonic flight.
Public education was held up as good for banishing superstition and ignorance instead of promoting creationism.
NATO countries didn't kidnap and torture.

Progress isn't uniform....


The internet, amazing mobile computers that fit in your pocket, stuffed crust pizza...
 
2013-05-30 10:26:11 AM  
Smartphones
 
2013-05-30 10:27:27 AM  

Rev. Skarekroe: Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.


There have been huge changes since the 60's, not as many since the 80's though.The problem is that you can't get faster: there are huge issues with breaking the sound barrier and you can't get much bigger: there isn't the demand and it becomes a logistical nightmare. What has happened is improved safety systems, autopilot, radar and more efficient engines; most of which are invisible to your average passenger but still important.
 
2013-05-30 10:29:46 AM  
And over FIFTY years after first "landing on the moon", given our technical achievements in the past FIFTY  years, we can somehow no longer "land on the moon".

Can't even put a robot there. I wonder why?
 
2013-05-30 10:30:18 AM  
Semi-autonomous robots exploring Mars
A full time international space-station
Commercially available space flight.
Airplanes that fly themselves
Coming soon: cars that drive themselves.
 
2013-05-30 10:30:38 AM  
3-D PRINTERS!

...someone had to summon You-Know-Who to a "human achievement" thread.
 
2013-05-30 10:31:24 AM  

bmihura: And over FIFTY years after first "landing on the moon", given our technical achievements in the past FIFTY  years, we can somehow no longer "land on the moon".

Can't even put a robot there. I wonder why?


That's no moon, that's a space station.
 
2013-05-30 10:31:31 AM  
Karmaceutical..... Yeah, the stewardesses were cute, but can you imagine the thunderbushes they had up there back then before trimming was in vogue?
 
2013-05-30 10:32:30 AM  

kidakita: Karmaceutical..... Yeah, the stewardesses were cute, but can you imagine the thunderbushes they had up there back then before trimming was in vogue?


imagine?
yeah.... I'll be in my bunk... imagining thunderbushes.
 
2013-05-30 10:32:39 AM  
Back in 2002 I flew the Concorde New York to London. I had a window seat, row 6, just ahead of the wing with a beautiful view. As we lifted off at JFK, the sun was on the other side, so I had a magnificent view of the aircraft shadow as we climbed out. The aircraft bounced up/down slightly as the long, skinny landing gear bounced as it retracted. We hit mach 1 twenty minutes after takeoff, climbed to 58,000 feet, Mach two shortly afterward. Cruising is really no different than regular aircraft except for one thing: the windows get warm, not cold, due to the air friction at mach twoo.

Left JFK at 8:30 am, flew 3 and half hours, got to London at 5:30 pm, but my body clock said it was lunch time, hooked up with friends and did the Eye,  partied and pub hopped the rest of the night. At two in the morning I was still fresh as a daisy....
 
2013-05-30 10:33:39 AM  
Two midgets shiatting into a bucket.
 
2013-05-30 10:35:02 AM  

Rev. Skarekroe: Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.


Summon the Longevity Troll!
 
2013-05-30 10:35:46 AM  
Chartered flights for the 1% who can afford it.

Face it, the Concorde was about as expensive as private charter. Especially if you were taking more than three people. So why deal with public transportation when you can charter a jet.
 
2013-05-30 10:36:04 AM  

bmihura: And over FIFTY years after first "landing on the moon", given our technical achievements in the past FIFTY  years, we can somehow no longer "land on the moon".

Can't even put a robot there. I wonder why?


A year and a half ago NASA landed a nuclear powered rover the size of a small car and armed with a laser cannon on mars by lowering it by a crane from a rocket platform.

/I watched it live and stayed up late to see the first images come in. It was awesome.
 
2013-05-30 10:36:12 AM  
If the Concorde didn't want to be a dead-end in aeronautical engineering, maybe it should have been more profitable.
 
2013-05-30 10:36:42 AM  

FrancoFile: When the Japanese did government-managed industrial development in the 50s and 60s, they made sure the products they generated could be purchased by a broad swath of customers.  Witness Honda and Toyota.

When the French and British governments did it in the 60s and the 70s, they created something that only the very wealthiest could afford.


The Japanese were essentially refining the manufacturing process for an already available technology, cars.

The development of a supersonic airliner was the creation of a new type of aircraft that had never been built before (and hasn't been bettered since). To criticise them that it wasn't available to all is a bit unfair. Akin to claiming that landing on the moon wasn't great because the average guy couldn't afford to do it.
 
2013-05-30 10:37:47 AM  

Voiceofreason01: What has happened is improved safety systems, autopilot, radar and more efficient engines; most of which are invisible to your average passenger but still important.


I flew on a 747-8 last week and it was seriously spiffy if you know where to look. The wing is a work of art.

The pilot still absolutely pranged it on landing though. Probably the worst landing I've seen in 30+ years of business flying.
 
2013-05-30 10:39:53 AM  

Rev. Skarekroe: Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.


because....that design, I don't know, works?  Don't base your expectations on Sci-Fi.
 
2013-05-30 10:40:13 AM  

SomeoneDumb: Smartphones


This.

I was just thinking about that very thing as I was dozing off to sleep last night.  The timeline of the cell phones.

I got my first one in 1998 in order to make sure I could keep in touch with my wife, because she was pregnant.  It was clunky, with a 1/2" tall black LCD screen that could only handle the simplest characters.  In the short time since, they have added cameras, big high rez screens, ultra fast internet, video capabilities, apps for everything imaginable, GPS, and pretty damn good quality voice, among much else.  Not to mention Angry Birds.

And the thing is, for a while there, it was mostly business people that had spiffy cell phones.  Now EVERYONE has them.  Even my kids and all their friends have them.

It's a shame that ultra-rich people can't fly to France for lunch and make it back by dinner time.  But, other than the novelty, it was pretty useless technology simply because it was so innaccessbile.  The fact that no one cares to make another attempt at it is enough to prove that point.
 
2013-05-30 10:41:10 AM  

bmihura: And over FIFTY years after first "landing on the moon", given our technical achievements in the past FIFTY  years, we can somehow no longer "land on the moon".

Can't even put a robot there. I wonder why?


Because our robots are rolling around drawing dicks on Mars?
 
2013-05-30 10:44:00 AM  

flucto: Voiceofreason01: What has happened is improved safety systems, autopilot, radar and more efficient engines; most of which are invisible to your average passenger but still important.

I flew on a 747-8 last week and it was seriously spiffy if you know where to look. The wing is a work of art.

The pilot still absolutely pranged it on landing though. Probably the worst landing I've seen in 30+ years of business flying.


oh yeah, if you pay attention or know where to look there are serious differences in the design of the newer planes but a lot of people see a cylindrical fuselage and engines mounted on pods under the wing and say, "yep same as the planes from the 1960's"
 
2013-05-30 10:44:29 AM  

Rev. Skarekroe: Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.


Cars look the same on the outside. Design must be frozen in amber. Derp, however, is flowing freely.
 
2013-05-30 10:45:54 AM  

karmaceutical: Rev. Skarekroe: Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.

The past is BETTER!


Of late I think of Willoughby
 
2013-05-30 10:46:46 AM  

Sticky Hands: kidakita: Karmaceutical..... Yeah, the stewardesses were cute, but can you imagine the thunderbushes they had up there back then before trimming was in vogue?

imagine?
yeah.... I'll be in my bunk... imagining thunderbushes.


So everyone is still blaming (thunder) Bush?
 
2013-05-30 10:47:24 AM  

mark12A: Back in 2002 I flew the Concorde New York to London. I had a window seat, row 6, just ahead of the wing with a beautiful view. As we lifted off at JFK, the sun was on the other side, so I had a magnificent view of the aircraft shadow as we climbed out. The aircraft bounced up/down slightly as the long, skinny landing gear bounced as it retracted. We hit mach 1 twenty minutes after takeoff, climbed to 58,000 feet, Mach two shortly afterward. Cruising is really no different than regular aircraft except for one thing: the windows get warm, not cold, due to the air friction at mach twoo.

Left JFK at 8:30 am, flew 3 and half hours, got to London at 5:30 pm, but my body clock said it was lunch time, hooked up with friends and did the Eye,  partied and pub hopped the rest of the night. At two in the morning I was still fresh as a daisy....


BA used to give a free upgrade to either First or Concorde when you bought a business class ticket to the US from certain cities on the Continent. I lived in Zurich and came to NY pretty often so got to do the Concorde a few times. The hot windows and the speed number on the wall are the two strongest memories. I winder whether I'll ever get to go 1300 MPH again.
 
2013-05-30 10:48:43 AM  
...baggage fees.
 
2013-05-30 10:49:20 AM  

Russ1642


Cars look the same on the outside. Design must be frozen in amber. Derp, however, is flowing freely.


You should get your eyes checked. I have yet to see a Prius with huge tailfins.
 
2013-05-30 10:50:52 AM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Rev. Skarekroe: Most airliners today look exactly like they did in the '60s.  Maybe there are major differences under the hood, but on the surface it's a technology that's been frozen in amber for 50 years.

because....that design, I don't know, works?  Don't base your expectations on Sci-Fi.


This. We pretty much perfected fuselage and wing technology by the 1960s. The engines and avionics are miles different, though. Note that there are almost no fatal accidents among first-world airlines any more. The last American airliner crash with fatalities was in November, 2001.
 
Displayed 50 of 112 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report