It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Twice as fast as Concorde: The supersonic jet that will fly from London to New York in TWO HOURS

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rob37n
reply to post by hp1229
 


Just as the US made sure Concorde wasn't a success the TSR2 programme, and yes I am aware it was a military plane, was killed off on the orders of the US Military because it would have outperformed anything US nanufacturers had on the drawing board at the time, and we were forced to take inferior planes from American manufacturers, such as the F-111 and the F-4.


Sorry, but thats just plain bunk, for want of use of harsher terms.

The TSR2 was killed because it was a hugely expensive program that the then Labour government could not justify continuing with, when at the same time they were seeking loans and guarantees on loans from the international monetary fund and international partners.

It would be like you borrowing money from your friends because you claim you cannot buy food or pay your rent, while at the same time boasting about your upcoming 6 month long round the world holiday.

Also, the US had no hand in Concordes demise - we even had US courts on our side, when the New York Port Authority (who owned the airports at the time) tried to ban Concorde on noise grounds, but were ultimately overruled because Concorde was no louder than the Boeing 707 at the time (aircraft noise levels have drastically reduced since those days, which is why Concordes noise levels were such a big thing in the years leading up to its retirement).

What killed Concorde was the middle east oil crisis - that sky rocketed fuel costs across the world, and when it was resolved they never came back down to the levels that they were before. The US had no hand in that at all - it was sheer economics that killed Concorde, it couldn't operate in that environment. It needed to be bigger, it needed to carry more passengers, it needed to do so with a lower per seat cost - but Concorde was already as big as it could be without a serious raise in production costs, so that was out of the question.



The TSR2 could have gone into service across Europe and further afield and being a real success if the rug hadn't been pulled from under it.


That is true, but it wasn't the US that pulled the rug - it was our own government.




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Rob37n
 

Yes, but why going to the US when all the business is in Asia?



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by tarifa37
 
tarifa37,
With 2700 posts I would think by now you know the rules and etiquette on ATS. I wasn't having a go at you but merely pointing out that a thread on the subject already existed. At first I thought that you may have posted this in another forum and it was moved by the mods as many of the people who commented were new to me, but there appears to be no evidence of this. We have all been guilty (myself included) of posting double threads, but given that mine was less than half way down page one and only a few days old I would have thought you would at least check first. I complimented you on providing an additional link and I meant it. Dont take offense but in the last few days I have had to contact the mods on several occasions on this very subject. Please continue to contribute.


LEE.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by RichardPrice
 


What on earth are you doing on this website Richard? Honestly? You really believe that the about TSR2 and Concorde? I doubt you could convince the people who worked on the project about those theories, they were the answers given to the public, and as we all know Governments never ever lie to the people.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by jeanne75018
 


Good point, maybe they will build longer runways in Asia and Russia to ferry about the Chinese leaders and the Russian Mafia, oops! Sorry I mean Russian Oligarchs and Government of course.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rob37n
reply to post by RichardPrice
 


What on earth are you doing on this website Richard? Honestly? You really believe that the about TSR2 and Concorde? I doubt you could convince the people who worked on the project about those theories, they were the answers given to the public, and as we all know Governments never ever lie to the people.



I'm on this website to debunk rubbish like this about the TSR2 and Concorde - but you are right, this forum has started to devolve to the age level of the average 13 year old over the past year, which is why I rarely post any more, theres hardly any decent adult discussion here any more.

I believe what I posted about the TSR2 and Concorde because I have done my research - something which sadly seems to be lacking in most peoples posting habits these days.

The TSR2 story has been around for decades, but its also been debunked for decades - its pretty easy to find the real facts of the story, but no, people seem to like to continue to believe that the US killed it for some reason. Take a look at the financial situation the UK was in when it was cancelled, take a look at how much we were borrowing. Go on, do some research.

Equally, the Concorde story has been well aired - I'm not entirely sure how people think the US "killed" it, the facts are pretty clear about how its downfall came about. It was simply uneconomical at a time when economics became the front runner in the purchasing decision - again, all the facts are out there in plain sight.

Sorry, but I'm not one for governmental conspiracies, especially when the truth is so easy to get to.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Hmm, Can I catch one from Dallas to Houston? I mean come on.... It would just be cool to say you took a plane and the flight was only 14 seconds.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Seriously though, that is fast!

Doesn't the SR-71 blackbird pull speeds of Mach 3?



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by RichardPrice
 


Done my research, hence my view. That view is widely supported by those involved in the program.

That's my last word on the subject/



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rob37n
reply to post by RichardPrice
 


Done my research, hence my view. That view is widely supported by those involved in the program.

That's my last word on the subject/


Oh, I'm sure the workers hold a grudge, but whether that grudge is justified or not is what we are really talking about - and I'm afraid the reality of the situation for both programs don't support your viewpoint.

The US do make a nice scape goat tho, that has to be said. Its a pity that in this case they are entirely free from blame.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by Rob37n
reply to post by RichardPrice
 


Done my research, hence my view. That view is widely supported by those involved in the program.

That's my last word on the subject/


Oh, I'm sure the workers hold a grudge, but whether that grudge is justified or not is what we are really talking about - and I'm afraid the reality of the situation for both programs don't support your viewpoint.

The US do make a nice scape goat tho, that has to be said. Its a pity that in this case they are entirely free from blame.


Dont worry, you are right. The Canadians also want to blame the US for their own government canceling the CF-105. Canada could not afford the CF-105, and the UK could not afford the TSR.2, without export orders to help pay for it.

The US also canceled a similar program, the F-108, and then also the XB-70. Does the US get to blame the UK or Canada for those?

And there was the US SST program that was canceled also.




top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join