3 ms·

The money DID go to public transportation. The cost of the Concorde program is peanuts compared to how much value was gained from it. Concorde brought many inno

by mopsi 3y ago

The money DID go to public transportation. The cost of the Concorde program is peanuts compared to how much value was gained from it. Concorde brought many innovations such as its electric control system, which was developed further for the Airbus A300, and then reached its pinnacle in the Airbus A320. This tech tree is one of the cornerstones of unprecedented safety that modern airliners have brought to air travel, flying hundreds of millions of people every year without causing the loss of a single life, regardless of whether one is a self-important elitist or a regular schmuck on a 20 EUR flight to Ibiza. You can't just go out and buy such innovation. It's the natural by-product of relentless pursuit of borderline impossible goals.

notahacker 3y ago
Most of Concorde's engineering innovations were tech tree dead ends though. The Concorde project was certainly good at fostering Anglo French cooperation in aerospace but it's difficult to imagine the counterfactual scenario where the cooperation is doomed to failure because the debut product is a commercially viable subsonic aircraft rather than a technically impressive aircraft that doesn't sell. Similarly, whilst some of the R&D investment in control systems did find it's way into the A300, the A320's digital fly by wire is a completely different system, and it's difficult to imagine the scenario where a nascent Airbus project doesn't consider fly by wire because they hadn't figured out delta wings or droop noses yet
panick21_ 3y ago
Electric control systems were bound to happen, planes can be safe without them as well. The Concorde cost a huge amount and getting a electric control system out of it isn't actually a good deal. > It's the natural by-product of relentless pursuit of borderline impossible goals. No it isn't. Its a direct product of the choice to develop it, and funding it. Increasing electric support had been going into aircraft for a while and any new development of a major air plane would consider it. At best it might have slightly push forward adoption of that technology.

by mopsi 3y ago

notahacker 3y ago

Most of Concorde's engineering innovations were tech tree dead ends though. The Concorde project was certainly good at fostering Anglo French cooperation in aerospace but it's difficult to imagine the counterfactual scenario where the cooperation is doomed to failure because the debut product is a commercially viable subsonic aircraft rather than a technically impressive aircraft that doesn't sell. Similarly, whilst some of the R&D investment in control systems did find it's way into the A300, the A320's digital fly by wire is a completely different system, and it's difficult to imagine the scenario where a nascent Airbus project doesn't consider fly by wire because they hadn't figured out delta wings or droop noses yet

panick21_ 3y ago

Electric control systems were bound to happen, planes can be safe without them as well. The Concorde cost a huge amount and getting a electric control system out of it isn't actually a good deal. > It's the natural by-product of relentless pursuit of borderline impossible goals. No it isn't. Its a direct product of the choice to develop it, and funding it. Increasing electric support had been going into aircraft for a while and any new development of a major air plane would consider it. At best it might have slightly push forward adoption of that technology.