Re: Concorde's Engines

Date:         25 Jun 99 01:32:58 
From:         malc@cwix.com (Malcolm Weir)
Organization: Little to None
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

On 18 Jun 99 01:39:27 , andyweir <andyweir@compuserve.com> caused to appear
as if it was written:

>>Where did you get this from? AFAIK, Concorde doesn't really have a
>>problem making it LHR-JFK or JFK-LHR. In the winter, Concorde flies
>>direct from LHR - BGI, which is about a 4 hour flight. If it can do
>>that, then the 3 to 3½ hours to/from JFK should be no problem.

>I do recall vaguely a kerfuflle about 18 months ago over a Concorde
>declaring a Pan over London because it was short on fuel, as well as
>rumours that ATC always gives Concorde a straight-in approach to LHR
>because fuel is tight. Am I also right in recalling that Concorde is
>exempted from rules regarding its ability to make an alternate airport
>to Heathrow? Anyone out there with the facts?

I would note that a Concorde loitering over southern England in one of the
stacks would be A Bad Thing from an environmental standpoint.  The things
are noisy, and I would suspect that it is in everyone's best interests to
get it from the Bristol Channel to parked on the ground in the shortest
practical time...

Malc.