3 ms·
> modern subsonic airliners are now capable of far better speeds and efficiencies No modern subsonic airliner is capable of the speeds that the Concorde flew a
by craftyguy 9y ago
> modern subsonic airliners are now capable of far better speeds and efficiencies
No modern subsonic airliner is capable of the speeds that the Concorde flew at.
> I would far rather spend 17 hours in a comfy, wide body aircraft than even 10 in a narrow missile
You must not have flown recently, or have been weathly (or fortunate) enough to not be in the 'economy' class. I'm not even super tall, just over 6ft, but I cannot fit in a standard seat on these 'modern' airliners. I too have been in a Concorde at a museum, and would prefer 10 hours in a sardine can to 17 hours in a sardine can.
- acchow 9y agoIf you have cost in mind, you shouldn't be comparing 10 hours in a Concorde with a normal economy class flight. The supersonic sardine can will cost more than a lie-flat bed with private curtain in a subsonic plane.
- craftyguy 9y agoGood point. A traveler can only dream, right?
- notahacker 9y agotbf, Concorde also took 17 hours to go to Australia, and that was when it was actively bidding to set a speed record, due to the need to divert and refuel unlike today's 787, as well as restrictions on supersonic flight overland. Coolness value of Concorde aside, I'd definitely prefer the business class in the 787.