The Crash That Killed Concorde | A Short Documentary | Fascinating Horror

[@FascinatingHorror]

Concorde wasn't the only supersonic project to end in disaster. Here's a link to the video I made about the Soviet supersonic jet project. It was sometimes jokingly referred to as the "Concordski" because of how similar it looked: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mpKwh4hmlq6crMU

[@MilesL.auto-train4013]

I work with a former BA flight attendant, she had this to say about the Concorde: "They were lovely planes, but the real reason we stopped using them is because the fuel was too expensive to 'justify', and then the Air France disaster gave them the excuse they needed to stop using them, despite it's amazing safety record."

[@gilded_lady]

I'm not at all shocked. Honestly, if the accident hadn't hasn't the timeline I'm sure they'd been gone by 2008.

[@charlietownend4721]

*Plus the fear from 9/11 which reduced passenger numbers even more.*

[@scottlarson1548]

When the place I worked for bought a British company we had the option of flying on the Concorde once. We didn't because why would we want to sit in the equivalent of a business class seat when instead we could sit in a luxurious first class private cubicle with a fully reclining seat?

[@basstrammel1322]

​@@scottlarson1548 Well, if you appreciate less time in the air, obviously.

[@scottlarson1548]

@@basstrammel1322 First class on a 767 was one of the best experiences of my life. I would have liked *more* time in the air.

[@joanhoffman3702]

Talk about a freak accident. Damn. That was brutal.

[@robertafettuccine]

A Plainly Difficult and a Fascinating Horror vid on the same day, this is more than I could have asked for :)

[@vsocarras27]

The craziest and most ironic part of Air France Concorde F-BTSC was before officially being bought and later flown in 1980 by Air France, the year before, the fourth and last Airport movie called Concorde Airport ‘79 was about Concorde miraculously making a emergency landing after nearly crashing. The exact Concorde used in that movie was Concorde F-BTSC, the accident plane involved in the crash of Air France 4590 I’m a way I guess it seems like fate

[@ethribin4188]

The one thing keeping Concord in the air was the public. The moment that saw a decline, Concord vanished.

[@CarlWolf114]

You should do one about The Day the Music Died, the plane crash that killed Buddy Holly, The Big Bopper, and Ritchie Valens on February 3, 1959.

[@davedogge2280]

I've been on Concorde the aisle is extremely narrow and although the 'deerskin' seats were comfy you felt extremely cramped in there due to a very thin fuselage.

[@workingmothercatlover6699]

I wondered what happened to the Concord. Thank you.

[@ralphvelez4133]

The Concordes Engine 3 and 4 started burning after takeoff because a DC-10 left some debris on the runaway. Sadly, the pilots tried there best to save the plane but they were unable to successfully conduct a Emergency landing resulting in a crash.

[@bobblebardsley]

I remember the incident but I had never heard the explanation of what caused it before. Poor workmanship by another airline on a completely different aircraft, combined with dumb bad luck. I understand now why people still feel aggrieved that Concorde was retired.

[@bestnameeverf]

*shakes head* I’ve been binging Air Disasters on the Smithsonian channel. An episode of this along with another documentary called Crash of the Concorde explains in more detail. They even had interviewed the survivor which where Fh got the quote from. I’m obsessed! P. S could you do a short doc on the crash of Lamia flight 2933? It was a Brazilian soccer team flying to a tournament, whos plane crashed because it ran out of fuel when the idiot pilots wanted to save money by only putting the bare minimum amount of gas.

[@stevewhisperer6609]

Pretty much all of the safety upgrades added to the Concords already existed before this crash... they just weren't implemented due to costs, lack of justification, etc. Nothing like an airline crash with hundreds of casualties to get safety upgrades added. 🙄😔

[@availableusername9101]

2:49 puts meaning into the gas station crackhead's famous words: "i'll see you yesterday"

[@KenzotopianAirlines]

The Tu-144 beat them, however it was cancelled rather quickly due to many crashes and the 1970’s Paris air show where it crash again.

[@bruh_hahaha]

Amazing how engineers was able to traced the cause of the accident to something so minuscule as a stray scrap of metal.

[@Vermagerber]

They had problems with tire blowouts for some time. Because of the swept wing design their v1 and rotate speeds were much higher than regular commercial airliners.

[@Sideshownicful]

When Concorde came back into service in November 2001, the number of passengers was lower not because of this crash, but because of the September 11 attacks. Airline travel was down across the board on all types of airplanes, not just Concorde. There is much more to the commercial failure of the Concorde than this one crash.

[@prettyshinyspaghetti8332]

Would Concorde have still survived if this crash didn't happen but 9/11 and the air travel sentiments did?

[@Shirospyre]

@@prettyshinyspaghetti8332 Unlikely. It was just too expensive to maintain and buy fuel for.

[@Sideshownicful]

@@prettyshinyspaghetti8332 Pretty much what Shirospyre said. A short video giving a rapid explanation of the situation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/l5Dapqyhr8t5sKc

[@juniorballs6025]

Agreed, a point well made.

[@JCBro-yg8vd]

Yeah, that was just really bad timing on the Concorde's part. If 9/11 hadn't occurred, it might have been able to stay in service for at least a few more years. But 9/11 and its aftermath touched off a recession on top of bringing air travel down for a while. The Concorde never had a chance in that environment.

[@kenjcm]

You can find recordings of the cockpit communications between the pilots and they were trying their hardest to recover the situation, but of course we all know they weren't able to. I think I remember reading that the crew did everything correctly and there wasn't any human error that contributed to the crash. So bravo to those pilots who remained calm during a time of crisis and did all they could to save the passengers.

[@ghosttowntomato]

um, this crash was 110% caused by human error, considering the plane was designed and built entirely by HUMANS. Don't let big business trick you into believing the disasters they cause are out of their control-- they cut costs at every corner. What did you expect to happen?????

[@ErinBujalski]

@@ghosttowntomato and that was the pilots fault how exactly?? Those pilots tried everything in their power to try and save the passengers. Did they tell Concorde to do all that?? No. Take your ire out on the correct people. Not the pilots that did what they could to try and save lives and a stricken plane.

[@AuRelixRa]

ghosttowntomato when it’s said that “human error” contributes to a crash, to my understanding it usually means a mistake on the part of the pilots or air traffic control. Of course some kind of human error will always be involved at some point in the chain of events, but in this case there was nothing the pilots could have done differently that would have stopped what happened.

[@katieg7015]

@@ghosttowntomato how incredibly obtuse 🤦‍♀️

[@deezelfairy]

There wad a LOT of human error involved. The pilot didn't do everything correctly. He tried to take the plane off several tons overweight and fuel tanks were filled beyond normal safe protocol. A whole catalogue of negligent errors. Also a critical spacer was left out the l/h landing gear that kept both wheels aligned. It was left out in error during recent maintenance. These were all very significant factors in this accident. Placing the blame squarely at the strip of titanium from the Continental DC-10 is an incredibly lazy analysis of this tragedy.

[@leopold7562]

I remember Concorde as a child. The sight of it coming in to land at Manchester airport (on the rare occasions it was allowed) fascinated me. It became one of my bucket list items. I’d still not flown on it at the time of the accident, but that never put me off wanting to fly on it, just once. When it was announced they were being retired, I made the very expensive decision to go for it. It worked out cheaper to do a deal flying via Paris than from Heathrow (since Manchester was now completely off-limits to the plane), so in May 2003, I boarded the last USA-bound passenger flight of F-BVFA. It was a fantastic, if somewhat cramped, experience (I’m 6 foot 2) and one I’ll never forget. And neither will my credit card!

[@calebkemplay6040]

Its only money, sounds like it was well spent for a memory that will last the rest of your life.

[@deprofundis3293]

How cool!!

[@windsofmarchjourneyperrytr2823]

How much?

[@leopold7562]

@@windsofmarchjourneyperrytr2823 I recommend you sit down for this one. Ready? £6500

[@BeatriceFlowers]

@@leopold7562 I hope that was a return flight

[@Markus_Andrew]

Such a freakish accident. A small metal strip just happened to fall off another aircraft and end up on the runway in just the right place for one of the Concorde's tyres to run over it, a piece of the damaged tyre just happened to fly up at the right trajectory to hit one of Concorde's fuel tanks with enough force to cause a rupture, and the leaking fuel just happened to be ignited by a random arc from the landing gear (though some have speculated that the fuel may have been ignited by hot engine exhaust). Any one of those events could have been off by a relatively small margin and this disaster might not have taken place. It's a sobering example of how a series of unpredictable events can, by sheer chance, develop into an escalating chain of disastrous causality.

[@luccubsol]

​@@30smsuperstrat as far as i know, no one claimed it ¿why you say a terrorist attack?

[@leftpastsaturn67]

@@luccubsol Probably because conspiracies are more exciting than reality.

[@Subject_Keter]

@@leftpastsaturn67 "We must untighten a bolt and hope it hits our target! This will convey we are serious about our demands and we are to be taken seriously!"

[@leftpastsaturn67]

@@30smsuperstrat Sarcasm? That excuse was even flimsier than the investigation :D

[@desmond-hawkins]

Regarding this speculation about hot engine exhaust: the alternative explanation was more about hot engine walls than exhaust, since that's too far back. There's a whole section in the accident report detailing experiments the investigators conducted to try to find the initial ignition source. They damaged the insulators of the supply lines to the brake ventilators, and saw them arcing for a short enough time that it didn't trip a breaker. They estimated the energy of these sparks at 27 joules, and reference tests showing vaporized kerosene igniting with 3 joules. They also do mention ignition due to contact with hot engine walls, but for this to happen they'd have to explain how the flame would have then "propagated forward" to attach itself behind the landing gear well - since that's where the fire was documented to be early on. They describe different areas of the plane where airflow is around 20m/s in one area and 100m/s in another, and conducted tests showing where it was possible for the fire to move up and whether this matched the evidence recovered and photos taken right at takeoff. Fire can travel along a stream of jet fuel at a few meters/sec with no wind, so going forward against 100m/s wind can seem like a stretch. The report itself is 187 pages long, they really spent a lot of time trying to figure out exactly what happened.

[@Disturban]

I'm terryfied of flying, but always click on the plane videos instantly

[@samanthamcnemar1851]

Love your channel!! 💗

[@IzaakCha7]

I would be terrified of flying if I did the same, Disturban! Love your work, btw.

[@susanjenkins6893]

Me too!

[@spookyufo98]

lovely seeing you here

[@kenirainseeker539]

If it's any comfort, the last time anyone died in a plane-related incident in the US was a dude who was on a runway when he wasn't supposed to and got ran over, in 2020. (and he's the only one that died) Before that, it was the Kobe Bryant incident with helicopters. The fact that literally no one has died in a plane accident in 2 years should give you an idea of how rare stuff like this is. The other most recent ones only have like 1-6 deaths at most. 2009 is the last time more than 10 people died. I'm terrified of flying too so I'm telling this to myself as much as you lol.

[@rayross997]

People in Nova Scotia were hearing loud booms at about the same times each day. It was a mystery that scientists claimed was caused by gas escaping from the ocean bottom. The reality was that it turned out to be Concorde flights leaving airports in New York. They were supposed to stay below supersonic speeds till they got away from the coast but cranked up to high speed off the coast of Nova Scotia as they headed across the Atlantic. You could set your watch by when the booms happened.

[@kenmore01]

That's very rude. It is a testament to British airways' punctuality, though.

[@IzaakCha7]

I remember hearing those booms over Nova Scotia when I was young. I miss hearing them

[@endgovernmentextremism]

Now you just hear the boom of the cannon at noon.

[@resevoirdog]

Shoutout to NS! Winnipegger over here I love Halifax I lived there for 2 years

[@andbriwaslike]

@@IzaakCha7 move to huntsville and live next to the redstone arsenal where the US missile defense is. 😂 window shaking booms every day as they test detonate various types of military explosives. so cool how you can hear the booms travel through the sky when you’re outside

[@usgator]

One minor correction: Concorde holds the *civilian* record of crossing the Atlantic. We probably have no idea what the real record is because it’s classified.

[@aquaabouttogetfunky]

When you say it like that, that makes sense

[@nthgth]

Good point. It's is published the "official" ranges and cruising speeds of many military craft, though. There's gotta be some experimental ones though with no published figures

[@usgator]

@@nthgth if nothing else, I’m sure the SR-71 has crossed the Atlantic faster than the Concorde

[@mrgeoffreyspatchcock4825]

I swam the Atlantic in 25 minutes in 1992.

[@usgator]

@@mrgeoffreyspatchcock4825 then that’s probably the record. Well done!

[@JustJezBeingJez]

I can't believe how unlucky they were in this whole accident. From the piece of debris to landing on the only building surrounded by open fields. All round was just very sad and unfortunate.

[@hencohendriksen6908]

Disasters usually are a chain of events. Same here. All the way from inadequate maintenance procedures at Continental, to a piece of metal laying on the a runway exactly at the place a plane tyre would run over it and after V1.

[@frankmarano1118]

This was some final destination type shit. If I saw this in a movie I probably wouldve thought it was extremely improbable for everything to all perfectly align in the worst way possible. But this proves it does happen sometimes. I cant imagine how that mechanic lives with himself honestly. I mean it was a mistake but still.. that's really heavy

[@JustJezBeingJez]

@@frankmarano1118 yeah for sure. Might have received a suspended sentence but living with that knowledge as a direct cause of your actions is a life sentence.

[@thisbetalife1263]

@@frankmarano1118 I was wondering the same thing. And sure it was an accident.. But I know it would destroy me.

[@stephenshoihet2590]

They weren't unlucky, the Concorde had experienced dozens of blown tires and more than a half dozen ruptured fuel tanks and fires before this; this was a ticking time bomb just waiting to finally kill people.

[@draysmusicalshtposts6340]

The chain of events that led to this is some final destination levels of extremely unlucky. When you started talking about the metal strip I was saying to myself "no way". What were the odds of this?

[@Daemonarch2k6]

Imagine being the mechanic that was held responsible for this tragedy. His life was over at that fatal moment too

[@edgardplayspc9729]

These odds are a safe flight with a dc-10 odds

[@SerenityNow666]

Dis some movie shit yo

[@dangerousandy]

I was working for British Airways at Heathrow Airport back in 2000 when this happened. I remember that day clearly. I wasn’t lucky enough to ever fly on Concorde, but I was given a tour of it when they were in the hangar at Hatton Cross being re-fitted. It was an absolutely stunning machine. Whenever it used to take off in the morning (flight BA001) everyone who was airside used to stop what they were doing and watch it. She is sadly missed from the skies.

[@charlotteoceane]

When I was a kid I lived near Charles de Gaulle Airport in France (where the crash happened) and we sometimes went with the car on the roads near the runways to watch it land! It was so cool and elegant. It was missed around there too, as we were all used to see (and hear) it in the sky.

[@rajjy1976]

I was driving through the perimeter road once and the level crossing barriers were down, as they were wheeling Concorde from one side to the other. I was at the front of the queue, I felt really lucky that day. You couldn’t help but just stare in awe at it.

[@resevoirdog]

Thanks for sharing by the way that seemed like an intense day to experience for you

[@resevoirdog]

@@charlotteoceane by missed do you mean people missed it once it was gone? Or missed as in the plane was missing from its landing time

[@hmdwgf]

The Concorde was an amazing airplane but even by the early 2000s it was old technology and was aging. Nowadays Lockheed and NASA are working on something called low boom technology, which is reducing the sound of a sonic boom from 110 db (a rock concert) to 70 db (a car door closing). Hopefully there will be a successor to Concorde one day.

[@AviationHorrors]

It's also interesting to note that Flight 4590 should have been airborne before reaching the DC-10 wear strip on the runway: however, there was a spacer missing from the left main landing gear. This, in combination with an uneven fuel load, this caused the aircraft to veer to the left and consequently use a slightly longer takeoff run. "For want of a nail..."

[@mattthrun-nowicki8641]

Yup! Also, the missing spacer and uneven left gear was most likely the real source of ignition for the fire, not the arc’ing as the BEA says

[@bsmith1164]

And once the plane took off, its fate was sealed. If it hadn't crashed, it would have exploded in the air.

[@skylined5534]

When all is said and done though, had another 'plane not shed a piece of itself on the runway the Concorde would have been on its merry way.

[@mattthrun-nowicki8641]

@@skylined5534 Yeah. But you could also say that, had the captain not overloaded the plane with fuel and luggage, and/or decide to take off with a tailwind, 4590 would’ve rotated off the ground before it ever got to the metal strip (see former Concorde pilot Chauve and Flight Engineer Suaud’s analysis)

[@nachtegaelw5389]

@@mattthrun-nowicki8641 is it the pilot’s decision how much weight to carry? It’s not up to the airline? I honestly don’t know & am curious

[@tornadohunter6500]

Was literally just looking for something to watch, one of my favourite channels comes through, Another great informative video, keep up the good work.

[@holynightwingfan4510]

Same here. I didn't have anything to watch till this just showed up. A blessing to my goth heart. It's morning in my country.

[@loganross656]

Me too man trying to sleep

[@tankgirl_3846]

Same

[@cameronturner1865]

Check back this time every week! Fascinating Horror is like clockwork with the releases

[@flyingmintbunny1286]

Same here!!

[@ZGryphon]

Minor side note: Concorde was well-known among the people who could afford it for most of its career, but its profile with the general public received a significant boost in 1985, when Phil Collins used it to play both ends of Live Aid--from Wembley early on, and Philadelphia near the end.

[@cathychilders5109]

I remember that crash all too well, I was in aviation school when that happened. It’s amazing what a little FOD (foreign object debris) can do to an aircraft.

[@AlisonBryen]

In July 1987 I was out shopping in town with my parents and new baby sister. I remember my dad looking up to the bright blue sky and saying "look there's Concorde". I remember looking up to see the iconic shape of the plane flying overhead. I'll never forget that moment.

[@MegaMesozoic]

I'll never forget that terrible accident, nor the day when the last five Concords all flew into Heathrow, one after the other, like a graceful flock of swans coming into land. And I cried when I thought I'd never see such a sight again!

[@Cheskaz]

Thank you for sharing. Your description of the returning Concords is beautiful

[@maxthelab8457]

@@Cheskaz I cried too Jane, having flown by Concorde a number of times there was a special place in my heart for the aircraft - they really were so special.

[@dahliacheung6020]

I'm sad I was never able to fly on a Concord. I love airplanes and the concords were just BEAUTIFUL.

[@rb5078]

Isn't in incredible how investigators are able to piece together the precise chain of events? I'm always astonished by that.

[@kl8062]

I was just at the Museum of Flight in Seattle last weekend and got to see and walk through their Concorde. I've always been into aviation, and Concorde is such an iconic aircraft for obvious reasons. It was a real treat to get to see it in person. I just wish I would've got to see it fly.

[@sonic23233]

The Smithsonian also has one

[@lorigoshert6667]

Not sure if you will see this since there are already 600 comments, but can you do the Hillsborough Stadium disaster? Great job on these videos! I like that you don't sensationalize the stories, so the victims are able to keep their dignity.

[@purcascade]

He's said that he will do Hillsborough. No timeline though. He had to wait until after the trials. YNWA.

[@waynepopeski7796]

I to remember this and seeing that iconic and heartbreaking photo of the jet taking off with the trailer flames I know you were very busy and such but if you want a very interesting plane incident, do Air Canada flight 143… better known as the Gimli Glider. What could’ve been a tragedy ended up being nothing more than an amazing emergency landing. However, the story behind it is truly fascinating as well as the way the pilot who saved everybody’s lives was treated

[@chocolatechip12]

Gimli Glider is a terrific story!

[@steveairport]

This channel's subject is historical tragedies and disasters, so it wouldn't really fit in with the other content

[@ViridianForests]

@@steveairport I'm pretty sure there's at least one video I saw here that didn't end with people dying though? I might be confusing it with another channel, so don't quote me on that hahah

[@janicesullivan8942]

They have a nice little museum in Gimli, devoted to that miraculous landing.

[@dudetheman3]

@@ViridianForests You are right about this. He usually does a story around Christmas time that details a disaster that was casualty-free. The most recent one was "The Story of Flight 5390"

[@collateralpigeon2151]

Finally someone did their research. Heat in supersonic flight is primarily from pressure not friction. Little things like that are why I love this channel.

[@maxthelab8457]

When you were at 60K feet the windows were really hot! and that was on the inside.

[@jeremytravis360]

I remember going to Heathrow Airport to take some pictures on the last Concordes coming into land. So sad that they no longer fly. I had always wanted to fly on Concorde and now I realise that I never will is so sad for me as well. These are great videos and as a result I have my subscriptions turned onto all. And edited subtitles as well Thanks for another bit of Fascinating Horror.

[@annieshakespeare7613]

My grandparents love the concorde and were able to fly in one (my grandfather being a retired RAF Pilot, which comes with perks) They say they've never forgotten what a brilliant plane it was

[@bombski5657]

Honestly one of the most underrated channels on KZbin. Keep up the good work.

[@gerardacronin334]

This channel is growing very fast so I don’t think it is as underrated as you may believe.

[@sephalon1]

I'm not sure 766K subscribers counts as "underrated". It's getting the recognition it deserves and continues to grow.

[@bombski5657]

I don't know about you two but underrated is meant as a compliment. As in I think this channel deserves more attention than some of the channels out there that don't put in as much effort and have more subscribers. Just proves you can't write anything on the Internet without someone disagreeing 😂

[@gerardacronin334]

@@bombski5657 This channel is not underrated by at least three quarters of a million people. The others may not have heard of it.

[@nicholasschroeder3678]

Sometimes I wonder if the title isn't so good. I remember the first time I tuned in and was so surprised at how cool-headed and compassionate it was. With FH as the title I expected something sensationalistic and cheesy.

[@equarg]

I remember that tragic day. The footage, images, and series of events was mind boggling. A few months later I found a small 2000 to 1 scale pewter model of the Concord at a garage sale for a few bucks. I bought it in memory of an entire family (2 retired teaches saved every penny to take their entire family on a Concord flight) that were killed that day. Still have it. Feels like a dark omen what the 2000’s was gonna be like looking back.

[@JeanPaulBeaubier]

Apparently a few airlines are planning to bring back the supersonic passenger flights in the next few years, which is interesting to me, even if I may never be able to afford a plane ticket (who know,s maybe they'll be cheaper some day, or I'll get richer lol). Although the end of Concorde in relation to this tragedy is understandable, I'm glad the potential of supersonic flights are being reconsidered.

[@kumaahito3927]

That's dope. I do want to fly once fast enough to take over the sunset/sunrise as stupid as it might seem unless it is literally impossible to pay so much.

[@Octoberstorm333]

Human curiosity has always made me believe they would try and revive the Concorde. But in 2022-2030 I can’t fathom the price of the tickets in the day

[@kumaahito3927]

@@Octoberstorm333 I think it should be around 20-30k, so not really in a price range I can afford atm unfortunately haha

[@Octoberstorm333]

@@kumaahito3927 oh my, I was thinking 8-10k or 15 the most. It may be bad considering military would definitely make use of it and it only be used for the elite and political figures. I hope they’ll stick to private jets if this is the case. Lol

[@kumaahito3927]

@@Octoberstorm333 I just looked up the price of a ticket in 2000 (iirc 12k), then applied usd inflation and added some extra for leverage. No idea how much it'd really cost

[@manfromanywhere]

1:05 -"Concorde was the world's first supersonic aircraft" should have been: "...airliner", as supersonic military aircraft were already very common at the time.

[@Treblaine]

As only 20 concordes were built this meant a single loss caused it to go from the safest jet passenger aircraft to being the deadliest by every possible metric.

[@Cenentury0941]

Although, by total deaths caused, the Tenerife airport disaster single handedly puts the 747 ahead of the Concorde. So not every metric.

[@Treblaine]

@@Cenentury0941 But there's been so many 747s that have also flown much more, even Tenerife is proportionally small.

[@kennethcoenen7643]

If you look at crashes vs number built, the dc 10 did worse. Corcorde: 20 built - 1 hull loss = 1/20 DC 10: 386 built - 32 hull losses = 1/12

[@Treblaine]

@@kennethcoenen7643 Wow, and it was a strip of metal off a DC-10 that caused the Concorde's tyre to blow out. When the two deadliest aircraft meet. However, I think Concorde was deadlier because of how many of those DC-10 hull losses were without any fatalities or only 1-3 fatalities.

[@DanknDerpyGamer]

@@kennethcoenen7643 OFC just a strict created/hull loss ration, regardless of which aircraft type it's used on, IMO seems like a metric that leaves a lot to be desired.

[@Rhiannonganon]

Just wondering if you'd be willing to tell the Lockerbie disaster? I'm sure there are many people who've heard of it but aren't sure what exactly it is, I've delved into it a little myself and it was horrific and extremely sad 😢

[@exodous02]

Seems really unfair, it wasn't the fault of the aircraft and it's safety improvements should have been enough.

[@kenjcm]

While true, it was already struggling to begin with. They likely would have went under anyway simply from not being able to profit from their operation. Crashes of any kind always would cause some people to decide not to fly. Unfortunately those few people would affect a plane like the Concorde a lot more than others since they really depended on every last dollar from every last passenger to try to break even with operating costs... Combine that with the millions they had to spend to upgrade the fleet to be safer and it was just the final nail in the coffin.

[@sephalon1]

It was absolutely the fault of the aircraft. The design of the fuel tank allowed for a catastrophic failure if it got hit by a piece of rubber from a popped tire.

[@skylined5534]

@sephalon1 It was absolutely not the fault of the aircraft. Without a DC-10 shedding bits of its self and essentially a freak accident this wouldn't have occurred. No crashes or major issues in 31 years prior to the 2000 incident isn't sheer luck.

[@amityislandchum]

This crash is not what ended Concorde. Concorde ended because of 9/11 and the US invasion of Iraq. Post-9/11, all air traffic was down massively. The only reason the aviation industry even survived is because of massive government bailouts. The War in Iraq then caused skyrocketing fuel costs. It's what led to flights charging for luggage. Concorde was already too expensive to be profitable, so they ended it for good.

[@DEVILTAZ35]

It wasn't truly about that though. There is a really good doco all about why the Concorde was discontinued and it had little to do with the accident beyond public perception pushed into thinking that was the reason why. They played on that fear as a convenient excuse to ditch it.

[@emdotrod]

The Concorde was pretty much an outdated plane by the time of the crash happened. It was loud and expensive to maintain. The crash and also the 911 just accelerated its end of service.

[@whofandb]

I always wondered where the passengers were going. I never knew they were all on a holiday trip to meet a cruise ship. The testimony of the hotel guest added to the harsh reality of the scene. I had never seen the added information on the passengers and hotel guest before. Thank you so much. It really adds an additional element to the disaster report that no other has done.

[@cyberleaderandy1]

This was the Death of a legend sadly. The engines live on as power for ships and industrial uses though.

[@louniece1650]

I didn't know that. Nice.

[@brianfearn4246]

@@louniece1650 just for interest Concorde was powerd by the RR olimpus which was developed from the RAF Vulcan bomber.

[@GermanShepherd1983]

I've always been glad that the US cancelled it's SST project, the 2707, back in 1970. It was a wise move and saved a lot of money and fuel.

[@faizalf119]

I felt that the "safety issues" as an excuse of its decommissioning is just complete bs. They just looking for an excuse to ground the plane due to cost problem.

[@meghanmisaliar]

Duh. That's very obvious. It's been said many times that the reason was money.

[@RCTommy]

1:04, not really though. The American Bell X-1 was the first (intentional and registered) supersonic aircraft to fly. The Concorde would have been the first supersonic passenger airliner to take flight, but then again the USSR developed Tupolev Tu-144 flew some three months before the Concorde did (though the "Concordski" were not as successful as the Concorde in the end).

[@greebo7857]

The "Concordsski" was an unmitigated disaster. All it showed was that the USSR made crap photocopies. They built the Tu-144 to show their own people that the West was behind them technologically. The poor folk in the bread queues didn't have time or energy to care, and nobody else believed a word of the crap, but didn't have the courage to sat so. Never mind though, because regardless of the Soviets, regardless of the lefty hatred ( yes, even back then ), Concorde burnt itself into our souls, so that even after 20 years of her passing she is still the most awesome, and recognisable, aircraft ever built. My grandkids know her, and the oldest of them is ten.

[@cen7ury]

Was just about to mention this...looks like you got here before me though.

[@Cthulhoop]

@@greebo7857 lefty hatred. Have you seen the "right" lately? Lol

[@greybeard29]

Im assuming he meant airliner, but even that would be wrong with the TU-144

[@Cenentury0941]

@@greebo7857 sure bud, but the point was that the "concordsky" was put into service before the Concorde making it the first supersonic passenger jet to be put into service.

[@shmurtis6379]

I showed my 62 yr old father this channel and I found it absolutely fascinating he remembers so many of the events showcased on this channel from his time. New favorite YT channel. Close to 1 mil keep it up good sir you are brilliant! Youre storytelling ability is absolutely amazing

[@StephenLuke]

RIP To the passengers and crew of Air France Flight 4590 and the four people on the ground

[@cjmillsnun]

Concorde was not the world's first supersonic aircraft or even the world's first supersonic airliner. The TU-144 beat it into flight and into service, and the Bell X-1 was the first supersonic aircraft. Some facts you missed about the accident. The plane was overweight. Excess baggage and not burning the full amount of taxi fuel as they had a shorter than anticipated taxi had seen to that. The centre of gravity, vital for Concorde was wrong, and could not be altered because the trim tanks were full as a result of not burning all of the taxi fuel. The runway was due an inspection before the Concorde took off, for some reason this was not done. The rupture in the fuel tanks was caused not firectly by the tyre hitting the tank, but from the shockwave of the fuel in the brim full tanks, this probably made the hole bigger than it could've been. A spacer was not fitted to the landing gear after overhaul. Whether it had a bearing or not on the accident is unknown, the report says not, but former Concorde pilots believe it has a bearing, but it calls into question Air France's maintenance. The flight engineer incorrectly shut down one of the engines at too low an altitude. Even idle thrust may have helped, although the best that might've done is made the plane miss the hotel. The largest users of Concorde were business flights. CEOs and high executives. 9/11 sadly killed roughly half of them just before she was about to return to service. Probably the main reason the numbers never recovered.

[@GermanShepherd1983]

The TU-144 design was stolen from the British by the Soviets too

[@Unownshipper]

Perhaps the correct moniker should be "the world's first commercially viable supersonic aircraft?" While those others might hold the titles you described, I think the Concorde was the first supersonic liner to offer a regular service route for multiple years.

[@PrinceBarin77]

Was about to post the correction but figured someone must have done so already. As you say the impact of 9/11 on passenger numbers, coupled with the rapidly increasing costs of maintaining and fuelling such a complex, ageing and small fleet made it completely uncommercial. And of course neither airline was prepared to let a competitor revive the project. For anyone interested, there is some excellent analysis of the incident here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/eV7Rcn-Pe5xmnrc

[@Unownshipper]

@@DavidB-rx3km Actually this person normally does quite a lot of research including gathering background information, quotes, stats, and visual aids like period photos, vintage footage, graphs, etc. More than would normally be available on Wikipedia. You have no cause to impugn his credibility or work ethic just because he missed a detail on this particular video.

[@Markaintus]

This is one of those few moments where the one's who took the biggest hit from the incident weren't directly at fault! I'm sure I would have never flow on a Concord airline and it probably would have become a rarity to see today, given the cost of plane tickets and all, but its sad that they are all grounded.

[@andyb1653]

The DC-10: An airliner so f*cked up, it killed Concorde simply because a Concorde once used the same runway as one. (Edit: For all the DC-10 fans out there, I'm just kidding. I know the DC-10 was a decent bird, just an unlucky one)

[@jaybee4118]

I grew up in the south west of Britain and I used to hear the sonic boom often, I’d look up to see the Concorde flying above. I thought for a long time there were lots of concorde planes because I saw them so frequently, I thought there were loads of them flying everywhere. Turns out I just lived in a flight path it used often. I’ll remember Concorde for all the reasons you mentioned, but also because it was so often there, above my head :)

[@QT5656]

Many congratulations on your 100th episode!🥳

[@MLennholm]

It's really sad how the DC-10, one of the most incident prone airliners ever created, flew for 45 years while the Concorde was killed off after a single accident... caused by a DC-10.

[@chopperballs85]

Seems like 'they' were looking for any excuse to stop Concorde from flying.

[@DanknDerpyGamer]

> *one of the most incident prone airliners ever created,* I actually have to ask where the statistics for that are - especially when looking at accidents across all subtypes., and compared to other aircraft types across all subtypes.

[@oldwelshbloke6860]

As a wee kid in the 70s I remember watching Concord quite often flying over my school in S.Wales on it's way to/from Filton. Stunning. Sad how things turned out

[@greebo7857]

I drove for over four hours to see Concorde arrive in Australia. She appeared through the clouds on a ray of sunlight that came through sinultaneously. A moment of perfect beauty I will never forget. A gorgeous creature, somehow alive.

[@stevebrown3559]

We lived in Surrey, and I used to go outside and watch it when I heard it coming. Absolutely incredible to see; so graceful...

[@kringe700]

Something that many people usually bring up when discussing about this particular Concorde crash is that the DC-10 is known by the public as a notoriously unsafe plane with tons of fatal accidents under the belt, yet were still allowed to fly for over 40-50 years until it was retired a few years ago. While, for some reason, it only took a single crash for the Concorde to be grounded. It should be noted that the DC-10 did receive several design enhancements to make it safer over the years, and that this particular accident happened because of a sloppy repair on the DC-10's mechanics. The Concorde, being a novelty plane with a limited scope of wealthy passenger flew with it that requires a lot of maintenance, suffered from a single crash because its novelty is now seen as a danger and that these passengers (and airlines) were now preferred a more standardised and proven design. It will take a while for any other supersonic like Concorde to take a flight again, but not until it was proven to be a reliable design.

[@peteconrad2077]

The debris was a contributing issue but there was lost else contributing to this accident.

[@thereal757_ap]

The DC-10 was a far more profitable aircraft to have in ones arsenal. The Concorde, while being well ahead of it's time, and really only suffering this one fatal incident. Concorde really only serviced a couple flight routes as noise restrictions around the world limited the aircraft from flying supersonic over land. The issues with the DC-10 has resulted in far more fatalities. But Concorde was really ok its way out, with the crash being one of the final nails in the coffin.

[@SammiCPC79]

It was the economics that did for it, not so much the crash, though the crash did harm the economics considerably.

[@peteconrad2077]

@@thereal757_ap Concorde was highly profitable in BA service. In fact, the LHRJFK route was their most profitable.

[@peteconrad2077]

@@SammiCPC79 the economics were in fact quite good. BA made a healthy profit with theirs. What killed it was airbus withdrawing the type approval.

[@5amH45lam]

You know there's been a bit of an oversight when projected cost was 70 million and actual cost ends up being one thousand three hundred million pounds.

[@Allangulon]

Deliberately under quoted!

[@Markus_Andrew]

Indeed. I had to replay that part to make sure I'd heard it correctly.

[@artymorty_1248]

Ugh I would have given anything just to see a Concorde fly-still miss her😭R.I.P to all victims of the crash

[@jumpingjjonah8088]

The videos on this channel are so well written, narrated and delivered. Netflix needs to give this guy a call. I love how soberly and descriptively these videos are presented. Without sensationalism, but with real compassion. And wow this guy does his homework. 👏👏👏

[@adub1300]

Not that well written considering they can’t even get simple facts correct. 1:08, Concorde was far from the worlds first supersonic aircraft.

[@jumpingjjonah8088]

@@adub1300 ok so he might have got a fact wrong. Was Concorde the first supersonic commercial aircraft?

[@nicholasschroeder3678]

@@adub1300 Ok, commercial aircraft. He made a slip there. Still, an amazing body of work from Mr. Horror. Go back and watch one the facts of which you're familiar with and re-evaluate. I think he's highly reliable. Best on KZbin.

[@skylined5534]

@Adub 1300 He missed out one word. 'Commercial'. Big deal. Still very well written and leagues ahead of what you or I could do.

[@GLASSB182]

I remember becoming fascinated in the Concord in 4th grade. A teacher at school said she almost flew in one but didn't for it "being expensive!" Then one crashed and they stopped flying the plane. I was bummed even more when I learned Concord stopped just two years before in 2003.

[@ethribin4188]

The main problem with concord though was that she was not economic. Yes, she was much mych faster. But also consumed much much more fuel per passanger. Tickets for her today would have cost multiple times what normal airplane tickets cost. And considering cross atlantic these days is a few hundred at least, concord tickets would be at least a thousand if not two. Few people would pay that just to have their flight time cut in half.

[@j1nz007]

Check business class tickets and you get the same amount of cost for the tickets

[@isuckatgaming7225]

i believe you never set foot on an airplane.. Because your math are way off..

[@greebo7857]

Who the fuck cares? Do you have no beauty in your life that you feel the need to tear down something you can never comprehend? I'll bet you are an accountant.

[@catscanhavelittleasalami]

@@greebo7857 Chill dude, the concord ain't gonna shag you

[@XPLAlN]

Concorde found its niche and became profitable. Rich celebrities adored it. First class transatlantic travel that literally beat the clock came at a price but they had no problem filling it. They also made money from charter flights like the accident one.

[@johnmichaelrichards]

@1:05 Your claim is incorrect: Concorde was not the world's first supersonic aircraft. Many aircraft flew supersonic prior to Concorde: - the Bell X-1 of 1946 first flew supersonic in 1947; - Douglas D-558-2 Skyrocket first went supersonic in 1948 and reached Mach 2 in 1953; - Douglas X-3 Stiletto went supersonic in dives in 1952, though not in level flight; - Bell X-2 (1952); - F-100 Super Sabre (1953); - MiG-19 (1953); - Convair F-102 Delta Dagger (1953); - Nord Gerfaut (1954); - Lockheed F-104 Starfighter (1954); - English Electric Lightning (1954); Nor was Concorde the first passenger airliner to go supersonic, as technically, the Tupolev Tu-144 ('Concodski') just pipped it to the post.

[@greebo7857]

Bloody magnificent aircraft, insanely beautiful, and still has the best safety record of any commercial aircraft ever. People call the 747 the "Queen of the Skies". I call bullshit. That title will always belong to Concorde, the most beautiful, amazing and transcendent aircraft ever built. Concorde rivals the SR-71 as the most astonishing aircraft ever built. I never flew Concorde, and that is something I will miss until I die. What a Goddess.

[@NannupTiger]

"Most astonishing 'passenger' aircraft" maybe...

[@EveryFairyDies]

Ahhh, another Blackbird fan!!! That is one absolutely gorgeous aircraft.

[@threehead99]

This craft in no way rivals Blackbird, let alone a Lancer or even Valkyrie. Impressive? Absolutely. Same league? No.

[@Inspadave]

I hear you on the 747. It was produced in much greater numbers than Concorde, and was far more successful financially speaking. But hey, Concorde was "beautiful".

[@greebo7857]

@@threehead99 Oh please. Blackbird was a military marvel, of course. Valkyrie and even Vulcan were amazing indeed. Did you ever see one? Could you go for a ride in one? All you needed to fly Concorde was a deep pocket. Champagne and smoked salmom at more than Mach2. That was Concorde. She captured imaginations far more than than the military aircraft you speak of. Most ordinary folk don't even know of the SR-71. I do, you do. The Vulcan is mostly known for its appearance in Thunderball. Concorde is recognised the world over. I know the Blackbird was faster. I know the XB-70 Valkyrie was extraordinary for a short while. but none of these amazing aircraft match Concorde, because YOU could get on one and fly from London or Paris to New York, turn around and fly back to London or Paris in less time than it took for a 747 to make the journey in one direction. Whilst sitting in First Class. I adore the Blackbird. I love the Vulcan ( has anything else sounded like that, ever? ) but Concorde trumps them all because she flew longer, she carried passengers in a style nothing else could match, and she wasn't EVER a secret. She was a statement.

[@johannesbols57]

All fine and well for the French gov't to get their centimes in a twist about it being the fault of Continental Airlines maintenance and McDonnell Douglas. But what about the French ramp worker who slammed the door shut incorrectly on Turkish Airlines 981, a DC-10 that crashed after the door blew open because it was closed incorrectly. The ramp worker's sorry excuse for shutting it incorrectly being that the instructions weren't in French. WHAT ABOUT THAT???????????????

[@citizenerased1992]

Tragically the disaster shows that rich people do not like to take risks, Concorde remains one of the safest commercial aircraft ever built in any era with ths representing the only hull loss of any of the aircraft in its fleet. It is sad that public confidence in it was killed by a completely different aircraft and that this incident could have happened to any aircraft relistically. BA tried to salvage concorde with extensive refurbishment but the 11th September 2001 damaged aviation even further, this combined with Airbus; the succeser to co builder Aerospatiale no longer wishing to put up with the bother of maintaining these aircraft at great cost and little real return for themselves meant their being axed became inevitable from a corporate perspective. No concorde will ever fly again because it is widely thought that the electrical systems were sabotaged upon retirement with vast amounts of cables being cut so that they may never fly again.One of the gretest aircraft ever built did not deserve any of the unfair fate it ended up with.

[@DoubleNN]

Concorde was really doomed from the start, it was never economically viable to develop, which is why no private company did, despite considering it. It took governments (French and British I believe, hence the name) to sink money into the prestige project. There's a reason why there was never any new versions of it. It was too costly, too cramped inside, too disruptive in terms of the sonic boom, not even fuel efficient, all for getting to where you're going a couple of hours earlier. Sure it might look nice, but that's not the only thing to consider. As for the safety record, that's probably mainly because there wasn't that many of them. Had a thousand been flying around the skies all day you might have seen that number rise a little bit. Statistically speaking 20 planes over 30 years will not crash, no matter what kind it is. My dad has a 100% hit rate in shooting. That being said he has only ever fired a shotgun once while clay pigeon shooting.

[@marolatv618]

Supersonic travel may return in the future. If it does, they need to build a completely separate airport to operate those airplanes. They require more care than what the average airport can provide in terms of cleaning debris from the runways. Operating those planes out of the same airports as normal planes is like running high speed rail trains on a freight train track...you are asking for trouble.

[@Consrignrant]

@AJ Traveller....... Actually, that one crash gave Concorde the worst safety record of any airliner in history. And your comment about the cables is absurd.

[@Preservestlandry]

The planes were getting older and updating was too expensive. It wasn't all about a single accident.

[@DoubleNN]

@@Consrignrant Given that there were only ever 20 built, that's a 5% rate, rather abysmal. Flying for slightly over 30 years, which apparently is about as long as most airliners operate.

[@MsDawnnee]

My Dad got a free flight on concorde through a business he dealt with. He had an amazing day! So sad how it ended. God rest the souls of all who died.

[@AbeTheBabe6233]

funny enough, if anyone has heard of the movie: Concorde: Airport '79, the concorde they used for the movie ( F- BTSC ), was the one that crashed on that fateful day. i could list all the things i know about concorde, but this comment would be like a novel if i did

[@Cheskaz]

" i could list all the things i know about concorde," ...go on

[@deboralee1623]

that is insane.

[@AbeTheBabe6233]

@@Cheskaz alot more airlines ordered concordes. there was united, singapore, and much more. the 747 that F- BTSC nearly collided with had the french president on board. they travelled at 1,345 mph and i know this from being in one of them, the windows are microscopic. these are the only ones that i remember vividly. the rest i know i would remember after watching a documentary about them but yeah. there are a few others i could mention but those are facts in this video

[@martinc.720]

We get it, you know stuff.

[@AbeTheBabe6233]

@@martinc.720 someone asked me some things I know. No need to be aresy

[@Frenchblue8]

"Concordia flew so high that you could see the curvature of the Earth" TAKE THAT, FLERFERS 🌎✈️🌎✈️🌏 ✈️🌎

[@MomMom4Cubs]

The DC-10 was such a shitty plane it brought down a vastly superior aircraft with a previously sparkling safety record. This happened the day after I turned 18. I had been saving my allowance, then paychecks, for the previous 6 years for a ticket. At the rate I was going, I would've made it 2 weeks before 9/11. I still don't know how to feel about any of that.

[@DanknDerpyGamer]

> *The DC-10 was such a shitty plane it brought down a vastly superior aircraft with a previously sparkling safety record.* Except for the part where the improper maintenance caused it to fall off, and the other design faults of the concord amplified the consequences of striking the metal.

[@iandobson6538]

@@DanknDerpyGamer Correct: an incorrect repair rather than an inherent defect with the DC10 though the main reason the tyre debris impact caused such devastation was that the captain had fueled up way over the max permitted load. When the rubber struck the wing the non-compressible nature of the fuel meant that the energy of the strike caused a shockwave that could not dissipate as there was no airspace above the fuel and this led to the rupture. Mentour Pilot does a very in-depth and technical analysis of this tragedy with the perspective and knowledge of a serving airline captain.

[@StunningHistory]

What a tragedy. It was a series of unfortunate events that culminated in the perfect storm. Amazing how a small, stray piece of metal can cause so much damage.

[@LADYJAYY19788]

1.fuel prices 2. Cost to run the airlines 3. This doomed flight 4590 4. 9/11/11 Was the death of concorde. Bring back the Concorde.

[@pickles3128]

My dad grew up in the 50s and 60s. He said he'd randomly hear sonic booms overhead playing in the country and they'd make him nearly crap himself. Think it was McDonnell Douglas testing their fighters overhead.

[@AwkwardKidAdventures]

I wondered what happened to those planes. I'm not sure how I missed this story when it happened. So many things falling together in just the right, horrific way... Thank you, as always, for telling these stories with such respect!

[@pierrebegley2746]

It's really sad. The Concorde was always an expensive venture that was going to die anyway. Though this crash swiftly hastened its death.

[@trinidadmetroid]

One of them is in Barbados and used for tours.

[@taliats]

There is a Concorde at Manchester Airport in the UK if I recall.

[@masey78]

Another in Aerospace Bristol, well worth a visit.

[@dawnstorm9768]

I don't know how I missed it either, considering I remember hearing about it during the 70s.

[@cabax1234]

I know this will sound pedantic, but Concorde's final flight was 24 October 2003. I know that for certain because it was my birthday.

[@danegel]

9/11, the day Concorde had its first test flight since this incident, had a profound effect on the aircraft as it decimated a lot of its passengers. I met one of the flight attendants of Concorde's last ever flight and he took me back to his place to show me his box of memorabilia and paraphernalia from it.

[@cherylb2008]

Seconds to disaster- a series of events leading to destruction. The mechanic not properly maintaining the aircraft that dropped a piece of metal that punctured the tire. That plane was like a rocket- you couldn’t stop it’s flight and it was important for pilots to intervene

[@andreagriffiths3512]

I remember being taken to see Concorde take off. The sonic boom was out of this world to my 5 year old self. It was awesome!

[@britt.any_time]

not to make light of this situation by any means ~ when I visualize the investigators facing the vast wreckage area and I try to imagine the moment(s) leading up to and of the discovery of the thin object on the runway ... i picture Sherlock Holmes and Watson walking around ~ observing. Making connections and piecing together the horrifying sequence of events. But seriously - I always think about how devoted and open-minded these investigators must be. The patience and confidence one must maintain to successfully complete the analysis and paint the picture after the fact...damn. They are prbly some of the most interesting ppl to meet as well.

[@joshuabook7316]

Love this channel, keep up the amazing work! Greetings from Germany

[@Gatherway]

1:07 "First supersonic aircraft" Definitely false. Plenty of planes had gone supersonic before Concorde. Probably what you meant to say was first supersonic _airliner_ , of which Concorde was definitely the first.

[@bmused55]

This crash was down to incompetence. If you read the report, the details are damning against Air France. 1. Maintenance left a wheel spacer on the bench which caused the left main gear to drag a little and the tyres to heat up making them more prone to damage. 2. Airport failed to run their scheduled FOD check on the runway 3. The flight crew loaded too much fuel and more baggage than they calculated for. They were marginally overweight. Which would normally be ok... but: 4. The flight crew elected to take off with a tail wind. So they would have needed more speed to take off safely. A speed they never attained. 5. Flight engineer shut down engines still producing power at the most critical moment. The metal strip is just a part of the chain. But, the authorities obviously can't be blaming fellow countrymen, so all the focus is put on the metal strip. Lastly, the thing that killed Concorde was Air France. No one would fly their concorde after this accident. Most being able to see through the investigation bias. They flew to London and took BA's concorde, which was making money. Air France withdrew their fleet and refused to sell them to BA. Airbus then pulled the parts manufacturing and without a source of parts, you can't fly. So BA were forced to retire theirs too. Incompetence and arrogance killed Concorde, not the crash.

[@ghosttowntomato]

^THANK YOU, SOMEONE WITH AN ACTUAL BRAIN

[@452xi]

Thanks for providing us with the full picture as to what happened.

[@heyheytaytay]

Cant help but feel something similar will happen when commercial space flights start taking off. But unlike concorde it probably won't completely derail that form of travel.

[@glorygloryholeallelujah]

Seriously-just imagine that you were having a bad day/didn’t feel good/were tired/got complacent/not focusing/had a lapse in judgment/were “cutting corners”/not following directions/etc. at your job… Only to later learn that the mistake and/or sloppy work you did one day at work caused the death of 113 people!! I genuinely don’t think I could live with that on my conscience. 😳🥺😔

[@22locor]

Sad how the engineer that fitted the metal piece got blamed and punished for such a horrific tragedy that was obviously caused by a huge design flaw in the Concorde. If running over a tiny piece of metal can blow up your jet, the jet's the problem. Big companies will try and use anyone as a scapegoat to avoid getting sued. Absolutely zero remorse in killing hundreds and blaming others for their mistakes. I'm glad they didn't get away with it.

[@hencohendriksen6908]

The Concorde is one of the most brilliant things ever made by human. Unfortunately the benefits didn't weigh out the costs. People consider an 8 hour flight between Europe and America as fast enough.

[@gerardacronin334]

It may take 8 hours to fly from London to New York but there are closer airports on both sides of the Atlantic. For example, a direct flight from St. John’s, NL, Canada to Dublin, a Ireland takes 4 hours and 36 minutes.

[@hencohendriksen6908]

@@gerardacronin334 you're right. Back in 2008, I was on a JFK to Düsseldorf flight that took just 5 hours and 45 mins. Huge tail wind.

[@MrBakedDaily]

There should be a law so you have to have air borne parachute training to ride in the air.Then every passenger should have a parachute supplied to them upon an emergency.Why we haven't did 1 of the 2 I don't know.Its kind of like having a airbag on a car .

[@rilmar2137]

Some corrections/comments from a friendly neighbourhood avgeek. Concorde wasn't actually the first supersonic aircraft (military aircraft capable of supersonic speeds took off as early as late 1940s and there quite a few of those in 1950s), even its status as the first supersonic airliner can be questioned, given that Tupolev Tu-144 (aka the Soviet Concorde) had its first test flight a few months earlier than Concorde and was introduced a month earlier, too. Though, it was plagued with even more issues than Concorde and retired a few years earlier, too. Ah yes, the iconic droop snoot of the Concorde. There were quite a few factors that brought the Concorde era to its end. The plane remained mostly unchainged through the 30 years of service so it was pretty outdated. It's main target audience were wealthy business people who saved time on transcontinental travel. By 2003, thanks to the technological advancement, you could fly business, maybe even first class on a subsonic plane giving you more comfort for similar price, take out your laptop, connect to the in-flight wifi and work there. Of course, there was also 9/11 along the way that discouraged the general public from air travel as such. Some more info about the Concorde that was relevant to the disaster: due to its relatively small wings (just look how similar it is to modern fighter jets), it needed very high speeds to take off. That put aa lot of stress on the tires. It was far from the first time a tire would burst and strike a fuel tank. This time, however the tank was actually filed above the safe maximum and it wasn't the actual tire that caused the tank to rapture, but the shock wave caused by the strike.

[@skylined5534]

Pretty sure he meant the first commercial supersonic 'plane.

[@FantasticMrFrog]

@@skylined5534 Obviously. But even then, as Rilmar mentioned, the Tupolev 144 took flight before the Concorde. There's an argument to be made, though, that the french and british built a commercial airliner, while the soviets built a geopolitical dick measuring machine, with "carrying paying passengers" at the very bottom of their priority list, if not as an afterthought scribbled footnote.

[@ikr9358]

@@FantasticMrFrog Indeed, the Tupolev deserves a huge asterisk next to its claim of being the first supersonic commercial plane. I guess we can always call the Concorde 'the most successful supersonic commercial plane'.

[@tommyrjensen]

@@skylined5534 Even if you do not count the TU-144, already in 1961 a commercial DC-8 achieved supersonic speed in a controlled flight.

[@carolebadge8203]

It grinds my gears so bad that these massive airplanes with valuable lives on board have a point of no return. This is not rocket science - build the runways about 3 kilometres long. Then if a takeoff has to be abandoned it can be done so safely. Or build it however long it needs to be so that crippled planes do not have to proceed to takeoff. No airport in the world should be allowed to continue operating without much, much longer airstrips.

[@MattSipka]

2:39 if Concord were still around, we wouldn’t have nearly as many flat-earthers today.

[@bbhybris]

Just to note. The 1.3billion cost was in the 70s. Today, adjusted for inflation, that's over 10 billion!

[@TVhyrus]

Im hoping supersonic commercial flight resumes soon. Several companies are working on it. It's a shame we've had supersonic aircraft for nearly 80 years and still don't have supersonic commercial flights

[@arfived4]

Concorde was a white elephant. The plane from that era that revolutionised air travel was the 747, add it's telling that the only customers for Concorde were the flag carriers of the two nations who'd bankrolled its development The relative cost and noise of supersonic travel pretty much limit it to luxury routes over water.

[@Olhado256]

I hope it never happens. Air travel is a major source of carbon emissions and we really don't need even more people flying halfway across the world and messing up the planet.

[@DoubleNN]

It will never happen. It's economically unviable, the costs of those things are so high thay the ticket price cannot justify the few hours haste you get. It would only be used for novelty maybe once or twice. There's a reason private companies didn't develop it themselves. That's not even to mention the fuel costs.

[@da.j.9096]

First time I ever heard of Concord was The Parent Trap when Hallie and Nick show up in London ahead of Annie and say "Did you know the Concord gets you here in half the time?" And I remember always being confused by that. Alas 20 years later I figure it out.

[@easy_eight2810]

It's quite ironic how DC-10s didn't just killed their own reputation through, but also Concordes'

[@elizabethtrudgill3567]

The DC-10 was cursed. One aircraft shouldn't have that many problems.

[@Jjames763]

The 21st century’s Hindenburg Disaster. A luxury method of air travel that ends in flames.