|British Airways Concorde in 1986|
|Manufacturer||BAC (now BAE Systems)
Sud Aviation (later Aérospatiale, now EADS)
|First flight||2 March 1969|
|Introduction||21 January 1976|
|Retired||26 November 2003|
|Status||Retired from service|
|Primary users||British Airways
See Operators below for others
|Number built||20 (including 6 non-airline aircraft)|
|Program cost||£ 1.3 billion|
Aérospatiale-BAC Concorde // is a retired turbojet-powered supersonic passenger airliner or supersonic transport (SST). It is one of only two SSTs to have entered commercial service; the other was the Tupolev Tu-144. Concorde was jointly developed and produced by Aérospatiale and the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) under an Anglo-French treaty. First flown in 1969, Concorde entered service in 1976 and continued commercial flights for 27 years.
Among other destinations, Concorde flew regular transatlantic flights from London Heathrow and Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport to New York JFK and Washington Dulles; it profitably flew these routes in less than half the time of other airliners. With only 20 aircraft built, the development of Concorde was a substantial economic loss; Air France and British Airways also received considerable government subsidies to purchase them. Concorde was retired in 2003 due to a general downturn in the aviation industry after the type's only crash in 2000, the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001 and a decision by Airbus, the successor firm of Aérospatiale and BAC, to discontinue maintenance support.
A total of 20 aircraft were built in France and the United Kingdom; six of these were prototypes and development aircraft. Seven each were delivered to Air France and British Airways. Concorde's name reflects the development agreement between the United Kingdom and France. In the UK, any or all of the type—unusually for an aircraft—are known simply as "Concorde", without an article. The aircraft is regarded by many people as an aviation icon and an engineering marvel.
- 1 Development
- 2 Design
- 3 Operational history
- 4 Operators
- 5 Comparable aircraft
- 6 Impact
- 7 Specifications
- 8 Notable appearances in media
- 9 See also
- 10 References
- 11 External links
The origins of the Concorde project date to the early 1950s, when Arnold Hall, director of the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) asked Morien Morgan to form a committee to study the SST concept. The group met for the first time in February 1954 and delivered their first report in April 1955.
At the time it was known that the drag at supersonic speeds was strongly related to the span of the wing.[N 1] This led to the use of very short-span, very thin rectangular wings like those seen on the control surfaces of many missiles, or in aircraft like the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter or the Avro 730 that the team studied.[N 2] This same short span produced very little lift at low speed, which resulted in extremely long takeoff runs and frighteningly high landing speeds. In an SST design, this would have required enormous engine power to lift off from existing runways, and to provide the fuel needed, "some horribly large aeroplanes" resulted. Based on this, the group considered the concept of an SST unfeasible, and instead suggested continued low-levels studies into supersonic aerodynamics.
Soon after, Dietrich Küchemann at the RAE published a series of reports on a new wing planform, known in the UK as the "slender delta" concept. Küchemann's team, including Eric Maskell and Johanna Weber, worked with the fact that delta wings can produce strong vortexes on their upper surfaces at high angles of attack. The vortex will lower the air pressure and cause lift to be greatly increased. This effect had been noticed earlier, notably by Chuck Yeager in the Convair XF-92, but its qualities had not been fully appreciated. Küchemann suggested that this was no mere curiosity, and the effect could be deliberately used to improve low speed performance.
Küchemann's papers changed the entire nature of supersonic design almost overnight. Although the delta had already been used on aircraft prior to this point, these designs used planforms that were not much different than a swept wing of the same span.[N 3] Küchemann noted that the lift from the vortex was increased by the length of the wing it had to operate over, which suggested that the effect would be maximized by extending the wing along the fuselage as far as possible. Such a layout would still have good supersonic performance inherent to the short span, while also offering reasonable takeoff and landing speeds using vortex generation. The only downside to such a design is that the aircraft would have to takeoff and land very "nose high" in order to generate the required vortex lift, which led to questions about the low speed handling qualities of such a design. It would also need to have long landing gear to produce the required angles while still on the runway.
Küchemann presented the idea at a meeting where Morgan was also present. Eric Brown recalls Morgan's reaction to the presentation, saying that he immediately seized on it as the solution to the SST problem. Brown considers this moment as being the true birth of the Concorde project.
On 1 October 1956 the Ministry of Supply asked Morgan to form a new study group, the Supersonic Transport Advisory Committee or STAC, with the explicit goal of developing a practical SST design and finding industry partners to build it. At the very first meeting, on 5 November 1956, the decision was made to fund the development of a testbed aircraft to examine the low speed performance of the slender delta, a contract that eventually produced the Handley Page HP.115. This aircraft would ultimately demonstrate safe control at speeds as low as 69 mph, about ⅓rd that of the Starfighter.
Küchemann and others at the RAE continued their work on the slender delta throughout, considering three basic shapes; the classic straight-edge delta, the "gothic delta" that was rounded outwards to appear like a gothic arch, and another that was rounded inwards into an ogee. Each of these planforms had their own advantages and disadvantages in terms of aerodynamics. As they worked with these shapes, a practical concern grew to become so important that it forced selection of one of these designs. Weight changes during the design phase can cause the aircraft center of gravity (CoG) to move. Generally one wants to have the wing's center of pressure (CoP) close to the CoG for structural reasons, and if the CoG moves it is normally easy to simply move the wing slightly fore or aft to account for this.[N 4] With a delta running the length of the fuselage, this was obviously no longer possible. Studying the various layouts in terms of CoG changes, both during design and changes due to fuel use during flight, the ogee platform immediately came to the fore.
Based on this "ogival wing", STAC claimed that an SST would have economic performance similar to existing subsonic types. Although they would burn more fuel in cruise, they would be able to fly more sorties in a given period of time, so less aircraft would be needed to service a particular route. This would remain economically advantageous as long as fuel represented a small percentage of operational costs, as it did at the time. STAC suggested that two designs naturally fell out of their work, a transatlantic model flying at about Mach 2, and a shorter-range version flying at perhaps Mach 1.2. Morgan suggested that a 150 passenger transatlantic SST would cost about £75 to £90 million to develop to production, and be in service in 1970. The smaller 100 passenger short-range version would cost perhaps £50 to £80 million, and be ready for service in 1968. To meet this schedule, development would need to begin in 1960, with production contracts let in 1962. Morgan strongly suggested that the US was already involved in a similar project, and that if the UK failed to respond it would be locked out of a market that he believed would be dominated by SST aircraft.
In 1959 a study contract was let to Hawker Siddeley and Bristol for preliminary designs based on the slender delta concept, which developed as the HSA.1000 and Bristol 223. Armstrong Whitworth also responded with an internal design, the "M-Wing", for the lower-speed shorter-range category. Even at this early time, both the STAC group and the government were looking for partners to develop the designs. In September 1959 Hawker approached Lockheed, and after the creation of British Aircraft Corporation in 1960, the former Bristol team immediately started talks with Boeing, General Dynamics, Douglas Aircraft and Sud Aviation.
Partnership with Sud
By this time similar political and economic concerns in France had led to their own SST plans. In the late 1950s the government requested designs from both the government-owned Sud and Nord, as well as Dassault.[N 5] All three returned designs based on Küchemann's slender delta; Nord suggested a ramjet powered design flying at Mach 3, the other two were jet powered Mach 2 designs that were similar to each other. Of the three, the Sud Aviation Super Caravelle won the design contest with a medium-range design deliberately sized to avoid competition with transatlantic US designs they assumed were already on the drawing board.
As soon as the design was complete, in April 1960, Pierre Satre, the company's technical director, was sent to Bristol to discuss a partnership. Bristol was surprised to find that the Sud team had designed a very similar aircraft after considering the SST problem and coming to the very same conclusions as the Bristol and STAC teams in terms of economics. It was later revealed that the original STAC report, marked "For UK Eyes Only", had secretly been passed to the French in order to win political favour. Sud made minor changes, and presented it as their own work.
The two teams found much to agree on. The French had no modern large jet engines, and had already concluded they would be buying a British design anyway (as they had on the earlier subsonic Caravelle). As neither company had experience in the use of high-heat metals for airframes, a maximum speed of around Mach 2 was selected so aluminum could be used — above this speed the friction with the air warms the metal so much that aluminum begins to soften. This lower speed would also speed development and allow their design to fly before the Americans. Finally, everyone involved agreed that Küchemann's ogive design was the right one.
The only disagreements were over the size and range. The UK team was still focussed on a 150 passenger design serving transatlantic routes, while the French were deliberately avoiding these. However, this proved not the be the barrier it might seem; common components could be used in both designs, with the shorter range version using a clipped fuselage and four engines, the longer one with a stretched fuselage and six engines, leaving only the wing to be extensively re-designed. The teams continued to meet through 1961, and by this time it was clear that the two aircraft would be considerably more similar in spite of different range and seating arrangements. A single design emerged that differed primarily in fuel load. More powerful engines, being developed for the TSR-2, allowed either design to be powered by only four engines.
Cabinet response, treaty
While the development teams met, French Minister of Public Works and Transport Robert Burton was meeting with the UK Minister of Aviation Peter Thorneycroft, and Thorneycroft soon revealed to the cabinet that the French were much more serious about a partnership than any of the US companies. The various US companies had proved uninterested in such a venture, likely due to the belief that the government would be funding development and would frown on any partnership with a European company, and the risk of "giving away" US technological leadership to a European partner.
When the STAC plans were presented to the UK cabinet, a very negative reaction resulted. The economic considerations were considered highly questionable, especially as these were based on development costs, now estimated to be £150 million, which were constantly being overrun in the industry. The Treasury Ministry in particular presented a very negative view, suggesting that there was no way the project would have any positive financial returns for the government, especially in light that "the industry's past record of over-optimistic estimating (including the recent history of the TSR.2) suggests that it would be prudent to consider the £150 million [cost] to turn out much too low."
This concern led to an independent review of the project by the Committee on Civil Scientific Research and Development, which met on topic between July and September 1962. The Committee ultimately rejected the economic arguments, including considerations of supporting the industry made by Thorneycroft. Their report in October stated that it was unlikely there would be any direct positive economic outcome, but that the project should still be considered for the simple reason that everyone else was going supersonic, and they were concerned they would locked out of future markets. Conversely, it appeared the project would not be likely to significantly impact other, more important, research efforts.
After considerable argument, the decision to proceed ultimately fell to an unlikely political expediency. At the time, the UK was pressing for admission to the European Common Market, which was being controlled by Charles de Gaulle who felt the UK's Special Relationship with the US made them unacceptable in a pan-European group. Cabinet felt that signing a deal with Sud would pave the way for Common Market entry, and this became the main deciding reason for moving ahead with the deal. It was this belief that had led the original STAC documents being leaked to the French.
The development project was negotiated as an international treaty between the two countries rather than a commercial agreement between companies and included a clause, originally asked for by the UK, imposing heavy penalties for cancellation. A draft treaty was signed on 29 November 1962.
Unfortunately for the UK, De Gaulle spoke of the European origin of the design, and continued to block the UK's entry into the Common Market.
Reflecting the treaty between the British and French governments which led to Concorde's construction, the name Concorde is from the French word concorde (IPA: [kɔ̃kɔʁd]), which has an English equivalent, concord. Both words mean agreement, harmony or union. The name was officially changed to Concord by Harold Macmillan in response to a perceived slight by Charles de Gaulle. In 1967, at the French roll-out in Toulouse the British Government Minister for Technology, Tony Benn, announced that he would change the spelling back to Concorde. This created a nationalist uproar that died down when Benn stated that the suffixed 'e' represented "Excellence, England, Europe and Entente (Cordiale)." In his memoirs, he recounts a tale of a letter from an irate Scotsman claiming: "[Y]ou talk about 'E' for England, but part of it is made in Scotland." Given Scotland’s contribution of providing the nose cone for the aircraft, Benn replied, "[I]t was also 'E' for 'Écosse' (the French name for Scotland) — and I might have added 'e' for extravagance and 'e' for escalation as well!"
Concorde also acquired an unusual nomenclature for an aircraft. In common usage in the United Kingdom, the type is known as Concorde without an article, rather than the Concorde or a Concorde.
At first the new consortium intended to produce one long-range and one short-range version. However, prospective customers showed no interest in the short-range version and it was dropped.
The consortium secured orders (i.e., non-binding options) for over 100 of the long-range version from the major airlines of the day: Pan Am, BOAC, and Air France were the launch customers, with six Concordes each. Other airlines in the order book included Panair do Brasil, Continental Airlines, Japan Airlines, Lufthansa, American Airlines, United Airlines, Air India, Air Canada, Braniff, Singapore Airlines, Iran Air, Olympic Airways, Qantas, CAAC, Middle East Airlines, and TWA.
The design work was supported by a preceding research programme studying the flight characteristics of low ratio delta wings. The supersonic BAC 221 was modified for flight tests of the high speed flight envelope, the Handley Page HP.115 also provided valuable information on low speed performance.
Construction of two prototypes began in February 1965: 001, built by Aerospatiale at Toulouse, and 002, by BAC at Filton, Bristol. Concorde 001 made its first test flight from Toulouse on 2 March 1969, piloted by André Turcat, and first went supersonic on 1 October. The first UK-built Concorde flew from Filton to RAF Fairford on 9 April 1969, piloted by Brian Trubshaw. Both prototypes were presented to the public for the first time on 7–8 June 1969 at the Paris Airshow. As the flight programme progressed, 001 embarked on a sales and demonstration tour on 4 September 1971, which was also the first transatlantic crossing of Concorde. Concorde 002 followed suit on 2 June 1972 with a tour of the Middle and Far East. Concorde 002 made the first visit to the United States in 1973, landing at the new Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport to mark that airport’s opening.
While Concorde had initially held a great deal of customer interest, the project was hit by a large number of order cancellations. The Paris Le Bourget air show crash of the competing Soviet Tupolev Tu-144 had shocked potential buyers, and public concern over the environmental issues presented by a supersonic aircraft – the sonic boom, takeoff-noise and pollution – had produced a shift in public opinion of SSTs. By 1976 four nations remained as prospective buyers: Britain, France, China, and Iran. Only Air France and British Airways (the successor to BOAC) took up their orders, with the two governments taking a cut of any profits made.
The United States cancelled the Boeing 2707, its rival supersonic transport programme, in 1971. Observers have suggested that opposition to Concorde on grounds of noise pollution had been encouraged by the United States Government, as it lacked its own competitor. The US, India, and Malaysia all ruled out Concorde supersonic flights over the noise concern, although some of these restrictions were later relaxed. Professor Douglas Ross characterised restrictions placed upon Concorde operations by President Jimmy Carter's administration as having been an act of protectionism of American aircraft manufacturers.
Concorde had other considerable difficulties that led to its dismal sales performance. Costs had spiralled during development to more than six times the original projections, arriving at a unit cost of £23 million in 1977. World events had also dampened Concorde sales prospects, the 1973 oil crisis had many airlines think twice about aircraft with high rates of fuel consumption; and new wide-body aircraft, such as the Boeing 747, had recently made subsonic aircraft significantly more efficient and presented a low-risk option for airlines. While carrying a full load, Concorde achieved 15.8 passenger miles per gallon of fuel, while the Boeing 707 reached 33.3 pm/g, the Boeing 747 46.4 pm/g, and the McDonnell Douglas DC-10 53.6 pm/g. An emerging trend in the industry in favour of cheaper airline tickets had also caused airlines such as Qantas to question Concorde's market suitability.
Concorde is an ogival (also "ogee") delta-winged aircraft with four Olympus engines based on those employed in the RAF's Avro Vulcan strategic bomber. Concorde was the first airliner to have a (in this case, analogue) fly-by-wire flight-control system; the avionics of Concorde were unique because it was the first commercial aircraft to employ hybrid circuits. The principal designer for the project was Pierre Satre, with Sir Archibald Russell as his deputy.
Concorde pioneered the following technologies:
For high speed and optimisation of flight:
- Double delta (ogee/ogival) shaped wings
- Variable engine air intake system controlled by digital computers
- Supercruise capability
- Thrust-by-wire engines, predecessor of today’s FADEC-controlled engines
- Droop-nose section for better landing visibility
For weight-saving and enhanced performance:
- Mach 2.04 (~2,179 km/h or 1,354 mph) cruising speed for optimum fuel consumption (supersonic drag minimum although turbojet engines are more efficient at higher speed)
- Mainly aluminium construction for low weight and conventional manufacture (higher speeds would have ruled out aluminium)
- Full-regime autopilot and autothrottle allowing "hands off" control of the aircraft from climb out to landing
- Fully electrically controlled analogue fly-by-wire flight controls systems
- High-pressure hydraulic system of 28 MPa (4,000 lbf/in²) for lighter hydraulic components
- Complex Air Data Computer (ADC) for the automated monitoring and transmission of aerodynamic measurements (total pressure, static pressure, angle of attack, side-slip).
- Fully electrically controlled analogue brake-by-wire system
- Pitch trim by shifting fuel around the fuselage for centre-of-gravity control
- Parts made using "sculpture milling", reducing the part count while saving weight and adding strength.
- No auxiliary power unit, as Concorde would only visit large airports where ground air start carts are available.
Concorde needed to fly long distances to be economically viable; this required high efficiency. Turbofan engines were rejected due to their larger cross-section producing excessive drag. Turbojets were found to be the best choice of engines. The engine used was the twin spool Rolls-Royce/Snecma Olympus 593, a development of the Bristol engine first used for the Avro Vulcan bomber, and developed into an afterburning supersonic variant for the BAC TSR-2 strike bomber.
The aircraft used reheat (afterburners) at takeoff and to pass through the upper transonic regime and to supersonic speeds, between Mach 0.95 and Mach 1.7. The afterburners were switched off at all other times. Due to jet engines being highly inefficient at low speeds, Concorde burned two tonnes of fuel (almost 2% of the maximum fuel load) taxiing to the runway. Fuel used is Jet A-1. Due to the high power produced even with the engines at idle, only the two outer engines were run after landing for easier taxiing.
The intake design for Concorde’s engines was especially critical. Conventional jet engines can take in air at only around Mach 0.5; therefore the air has to be slowed from the Mach 2.0 airspeed that enters the engine intake. In particular, Concorde needed to control the shock waves that this reduction in speed generates to avoid damage to the engines. This was done by a pair of intake ramps and an auxiliary spill door, whose position moved in-flight to slow transiting air.
Engine failure causes problems on conventional subsonic aircraft; not only does the aircraft lose thrust on that side but the engine creates drag, causing the aircraft to yaw and bank in the direction of the failed engine. If this had happened to Concorde at supersonic speeds, it theoretically could have caused a catastrophic failure of the airframe. Although computer simulations predicted considerable problems, in practice Concorde could shut down both engines on the same side of the aircraft at Mach 2 without the predicted difficulties. During an engine failure the required air intake is virtually zero so, on Concorde, engine failure was countered by the opening of the auxiliary spill door and the full extension of the ramps, which deflected the air downwards past the engine, gaining lift and minimising drag. Concorde pilots were routinely trained to handle double engine failure.
Air friction on the outer surfaces caused the cabin to heat up during flight. Every surface, such as windows and panels, was warm to the touch by end of the flight. Besides engines, the hottest part of the structure of any supersonic aircraft, due to aerodynamic heating, is the nose. The engineers used Hiduminium R.R. 58, an aluminium alloy, throughout the aircraft due to its familiarity, cost and ease of construction. The highest temperature that aluminium could sustain over the life of the aircraft was 127 °C (261 °F), which limited the top speed to Mach 2.02. Concorde went through two cycles of heating and cooling during a flight, first cooling down as it gained altitude, then heating up after going supersonic. The reverse happened when descending and slowing down. This had to be factored into the metallurgical and fatigue modelling. A test rig was built that repeatedly heated up a full-size section of the wing, and then cooled it, and periodically samples of metal were taken for testing. The Concorde airframe was designed for a life of 45,000 flying hours.
Owing to air friction as the plane travelled at supersonic speed, the fuselage would heat up and expand by as much as 300 mm (almost 1 ft). The most obvious manifestation of this being a gap that opened up on the flight deck between the flight engineer's console and the bulkhead. On some aircraft that conducted a retiring supersonic flight, the flight engineers placed their caps in this expanded gap, wedging the cap when it shrank again. To keep the cabin cool, Concorde used the fuel as a heat sink for the heat from the air conditioning. The same method also cooled the hydraulics. During supersonic flight the surfaces forward from the cockpit became heated, and a visor was used to deflect much of this heat from directly reaching the cockpit.
Concorde had livery restrictions; the majority of the surface had to be covered with a highly reflective white paint to avoid overheating the aluminium structure due to heating effects from supersonic flight at Mach 2. The white finish reduced the skin temperature by between six to 11 degrees Celsius. In 1996, Air France briefly painted F-BTSD in a predominantly blue livery, with the exception of the wings, in a promotional deal with Pepsi. In this paint scheme, Air France were advised to remain at Mach 2 for no more than 20 minutes at a time, but there was no restriction at speeds under Mach 1.7. F-BTSD was used because it was not scheduled for any long flights that required extended Mach 2 operations.
Due to the high speeds at which Concorde travelled, large forces were applied to the aircraft's structure during banks and turns. This caused twisting and the distortion of the aircraft’s structure. In addition there were concerns over maintaining precise control at supersonic speeds; both of these issues were resolved by active ratio changes between the inboard and outboard elevons, varying at differing speeds including supersonic. Only the innermost elevons, which are attached to the stiffest area of the wings, were active at high speed. Additionally, the narrow fuselage meant that the aircraft flexed. This was visible from the rear passengers’ viewpoints.
When any aircraft passes the critical mach of that particular airframe, the centre of pressure shifts rearwards. This causes a pitch down force on the aircraft if the centre of mass remains where it was. The engineers designed the wings in a specific manner to reduce this shift, but there was still a shift of about 2 metres. This could have been countered by the use of trim controls, but at such high speeds this would have caused a dramatic increase in the drag on the aircraft. Instead, the distribution of fuel along the aircraft was shifted during acceleration and deceleration to move the centre of mass, effectively acting as an auxiliary trim control.
In order to fly non-stop across the Atlantic Ocean, Concorde was developed to have the greatest supersonic range of any aircraft. This was achieved by a combination of engines which were highly efficient at supersonic speeds,[N 6] a slender fuselage with high fineness ratio, and a complex wing shape for a high lift to drag ratio. This also required carrying only a modest payload and a high fuel capacity, and the aircraft was trimmed with precision to avoid unnecessary drag.
Nevertheless, soon after Concorde began flying, a Concorde "B" model was designed with slightly larger fuel capacity and slightly larger wings with leading edge slats to improve aerodynamic performance at all speeds, with the objective of expanding the range to reach markets in new regions. It featured more powerful engines with sound deadening and without the fuel-hungry and noisy reheat. It was speculated that it was reasonably possible to create an engine with up to 25% gain in efficiency over the Rolls-Royce/Snecma Olympus 593. This would have given 500 mi (805 km) additional range and a greater payload, making new commercial routes possible. This was cancelled due in part to poor sales of Concorde, but also to the rising cost of aviation fuel in the 1970s.
Cabin pressurisation and radiation concerns
The high altitude at which Concorde cruised meant passengers received almost twice the flux of extraterrestrial ionising radiation as those travelling on a conventional long-haul flight. Upon Concorde's introduction, it was speculated that this exposure during supersonic travels would increase the likelihood of skin cancer. Due to the proportionally reduced flight time, the overall equivalent dose would normally be less than a conventional flight over the same distance. Unusual solar activity might lead to an increase in incident radiation. To prevent incidents of excessive radiation exposure, the flight deck had a radiometer and an instrument to measure the rate of decrease of radiation. If the radiation level became too high, Concorde would descend below 47,000 feet (14,000 m).
Airliner cabins were usually maintained at a pressure equivalent to 6,000–8,000 feet (1,800–2,400 m) elevation. Concorde’s pressurisation was set to an altitude at the lower end of this range, 6,000 feet (1,800 m). Concorde’s maximum cruising altitude was 60,000 feet (18,000 m); subsonic airliners typically cruise below 40,000 feet (12,000 m).
A sudden reduction in cabin pressure is hazardous to all passengers and crew. Above 50,000 feet (15,000 m), in the event of a sudden cabin depressurisation, the lack of air pressure would give a "time of useful consciousness" in even a conditioned athlete of no more than 10–15 seconds. At Concorde’s altitude, the air density is very low; a breach of cabin integrity would result in a loss of pressure severe enough so that the plastic emergency oxygen masks installed on other passenger jets would not be effective, and passengers would quickly suffer from hypoxia despite quickly donning them. Concorde was equipped with smaller windows to reduce the rate of loss in the event of a breach, a reserve air supply system to augment cabin air pressure, and a rapid descent procedure to bring the aircraft to a safe altitude. The FAA enforces minimum emergency descent rates for aircraft and made note of Concorde’s higher operating altitude, concluding that the best response to a loss of pressure would be a rapid descent. Continuous positive airway pressure would have delivered pressurised oxygen directly to the pilots through masks.
While commercial jets took eight hours to fly from New York to Paris, the average supersonic flight time on the transatlantic routes was just under 3.5 hours. Concorde had a maximum cruise altitude of 18,300 metres (60,039 ft) and an average cruise speed of Mach 2.02, about 1155 knots (2140 km/h or 1334 mph), more than twice the speed of conventional aircraft.
With no other civil traffic operating at its cruising altitude of about 56,000 ft (17,000 m), dedicated oceanic airways or "tracks" were used by Concorde to cross the Atlantic. Due to the nature of high altitude winds, these SST tracks were fixed in terms of their co-ordinates, unlike the North Atlantic Tracks at lower altitudes whose co-ordinates alter daily according to forecast weather patterns. Concorde would also be cleared in a 15,000-foot (4,600 m) block, allowing for a slow climb from 45,000 to 60,000 ft (18,000 m) during the oceanic crossing as the fuel load gradually decreased. In regular service, Concorde employed an efficient cruise-climb flight profile following take-off.
The delta-shaped wings forced Concorde to attain a higher angle of attack at low speeds than conventional aircraft, but it allowed the formation of large low pressure vortices over the entire upper wing surface, maintaining lift. The normal landing speed was 170 miles per hour (274 km/h). Because of this high angle, during a landing approach Concorde was on the "back side" of the drag force curve, where raising the nose would increase the sink rate; the aircraft was thus largely flown on the throttle and was fitted with an autothrottle to reduce the pilot's workload.
"The only thing that tells you that you're moving is that occasionally when you're flying over the subsonic aeroplanes you can see all these 747s 20,000 feet below you almost appearing to go backwards, I mean you are going 800 miles an hour or thereabouts faster than they are. The aeroplane was an absolute delight to fly, it handled beautifully. And remember we are talking about an aeroplane that was being designed in the late 1950s - mid 1960s. I think it's absolutely amazing and here we are, now in the 21st century, and it remains unique" - John Hutchinson, Concorde Captain
Brakes and undercarriage
Because of the way Concorde's delta-wing generated lift, the undercarriage had to be unusually strong. At rotation, Concorde would rise to a high angle of attack, about 18 degrees. Prior to rotation the wing generated almost no lift, unlike typical aircraft wings. Combined with the high airspeed at rotation (199 knots indicated airspeed), this increased the stresses on the rear undercarriage in a way that was initially unexpected during the development and required a major redesign. Due to the high angle needed at rotation, a small set of wheels were added aft to prevent tailstrikes. The rear main undercarriage units swing towards each other to be stowed but due to their great height also need to retract telescopically before swinging in order to clear each other when stowed. The four main wheel tyres on each bogie unit are inflated to 232 lb/sq in. The twin-wheel nose undercarriage retracts forwards and its tyres are inflated to a pressure of 191 lb/sq in, and the wheel assembly carries a spray deflector to prevent standing water being thrown up into the engine intakes. The tyres are rated to 250 mph. The starboard nose wheel carries a single disc brake to halt wheel rotation whilst the undercarriage is being retracted. The port nose wheel carries speed generators for the anti-skid braking system which prevents brake activation until nose and main wheels are rotating at the same rate.
Additionally, due to the high average takeoff speed of 250 miles per hour (400 km/h), Concorde needed upgraded brakes. Like most airliners, Concorde has anti-skid braking – a system which prevents the tyres from losing traction when the brakes are applied for greater control during roll-out. The brakes, developed by Dunlop, were the first carbon-based brakes used on an airliner. The use of carbon over equivalent steel brakes provided a weight-saving of 12,000 lb (5,443 kg). Each wheel has multiple discs which are cooled by electric fans. Wheel sensors include brake overload, brake temperature, and tyre deflation. After a typical landing at Heathrow brake temperatures were around 300-400 C.
Concorde’s drooping nose, developed by Marshall Aerospace, enabled the aircraft to switch between being streamlined to reduce drag and achieve optimum aerodynamic efficiency, and not obstructing the pilot's view during taxi, takeoff, and landing operations. Due to the high angle of attack the long pointed nose obstructed the view and necessitated the capability to droop. The droop nose was accompanied by a moving visor that retracted into the nose prior to being lowered. When the nose was raised to horizontal, the visor would raise in front of the cockpit windscreen for aerodynamic streamlining.
A controller in the cockpit allowed the visor to be retracted and the nose to be lowered to 5° below the standard horizontal position for taxiing and takeoff. Following takeoff and after clearing the airport, the nose and visor were raised. Prior to landing, the visor was again retracted and the nose lowered to 12.5° below horizontal for maximum visibility. Upon landing the nose was raised to the five-degree position to avoid the possibility of damage.
The Federal Aviation Administration had objected to the restrictive visibility of the visor used on the first two prototype Concordes and thus requiring alteration before the FAA would permit Concorde to serve US airports; this led to the redesigned visor used on the production and the four pre-production aircraft (101, 102, 201, and 202). The nose window and visor glass needed to endure temperatures in excess of 100 °C at supersonic flight were developed by Triplex.
Scheduled flights began on 21 January 1976 on the London–Bahrain and Paris–Rio (via Dakar) routes, with BA flights using the "Speedbird Concorde" call sign to notify air traffic control of the aircraft’s unique abilities and restrictions, but the French using their normal callsigns. The Paris-Caracas route (via Azores) began on 10 April. The US Congress had just banned Concorde landings in the US, mainly due to citizen protest over sonic booms, preventing launch on the coveted North Atlantic routes. The US Secretary of Transportation, William Coleman, gave permission for Concorde service to Washington Dulles International Airport, and Air France and British Airways simultaneously began service to Dulles on 24 May 1976.
When the US ban on JFK Concorde operations was lifted in February 1977, New York banned Concorde locally. The ban came to an end on 17 October 1977 when the Supreme Court of the United States declined to overturn a lower court’s ruling rejecting efforts by the Port Authority and a grass-roots campaign led by Carol Berman to continue the ban. In spite of complaints about noise, the noise report noted that Air Force One, at the time a Boeing VC-137, was louder than Concorde at subsonic speeds and during takeoff and landing. Scheduled service from Paris and London to New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport began on 22 November 1977.
In 1977, British Airways and Singapore Airlines shared a Concorde for flights between London and Singapore International Airport at Paya Lebar via Bahrain. The aircraft, BA’s Concorde G-BOAD, was painted in Singapore Airlines livery on the port side and British Airways livery on the starboard side. The service was discontinued after three return flights because of noise complaints from the Malaysian government; it could only be reinstated on a new route bypassing Malaysian airspace in 1979. A dispute with India prevented Concorde from reaching supersonic speeds in Indian airspace, so the route was eventually declared not viable and discontinued in 1980.
During the Mexican oil boom, Air France flew Concorde twice weekly to Mexico City’s Benito Juárez International Airport via Washington, DC, or New York City, from September 1978 to November 1982. The worldwide economic crisis during that period resulted in this route’s cancellation; the last flights were almost empty. The routing between Washington or New York and Mexico City included a deceleration, from Mach 2.02 to Mach 0.95, to cross Florida subsonically and avoid creating a sonic boom over the state; Concorde then re-accelerated back to high speed while crossing the Gulf of Mexico. On 1 April 1989, on an around-the-world luxury tour charter, British Airways implemented changes to this routing that allowed G-BOAF to maintain Mach 2.02 by passing around Florida to the east and south. Periodically Concorde visited the region on similar chartered flights to Mexico City and Acapulco.
From 1978 to 1980, Braniff International Airways leased 10 Concordes, five each from Air France and British Airways. These were used on subsonic flights between Dallas-Fort Worth and Washington Dulles International Airport, flown by Braniff flight crews. Air France and British Airways crews then took over for the continuing supersonic flights to London and Paris. The aircraft were registered in both the United States and their home countries; the European registration was covered while being operated by Braniff, retaining full AF/BA liveries. The flights were not profitable and typically less than 50% booked, forcing Braniff to end its tenure as the only US Concorde operator in May 1980.
British Caledonian interest
Following the launch of British Airways' Concorde services, Britain's other major airline, British Caledonian (BCal), set up a task force headed by Gordon Davidson, BA's former Concorde director, to investigate the possibility of their own Concorde operations. This was seen as particularly viable for the airline's long-haul network as there were two unsold aircraft then available for purchase.
One important reason for BCal's interest in Concorde was that the British Government's 1976 aviation policy review had opened the possibility of BA setting up supersonic services in competition with BCal's established sphere of influence. To counteract this potential threat, BCal considered their own independent Concorde plans, as well as a partnership with BA. BCal were considered most likely to have set up a Concorde service on the Gatwick–Lagos route, a major source of revenue and profits within BCal's scheduled route network; BCal's Concorde task force did assess the viability of a daily supersonic service complementing the existing subsonic widebody service on this route.
BCal entered into a bid to acquire at least one Concorde. However, BCal eventually arranged for two aircraft to be leased from BA and Aérospatiale respectively, to be maintained by either BA or Air France. BCal's envisaged two-Concorde fleet would have required a high level of aircraft utilisation to be cost-effective; therefore, BCal had decided to operate the second aircraft on a supersonic service between Gatwick and Atlanta, with a stopover at either Gander or Halifax. Consideration was given to services to Houston and various points on its South American network at a later stage. Both supersonic services were to be launched at some point during 1980; however, steeply rising oil prices caused by the 1979 energy crisis led to BCal shelving their supersonic ambitions.
British Airways buys its Concordes outright
By around 1981 in the UK, the future for Concorde looked bleak. The British government had lost money operating Concorde every year, and moves were afoot to cancel the service entirely. A cost projection came back with greatly reduced metallurgical testing costs because the test rig for the wings had built up enough data to last for 30 years and could be shut down. Despite this, the government was not keen to continue. In 1983, BA's managing director, Sir John King, convinced the government to sell the aircraft outright to British Airways for £16.5 million plus the first year’s profits.
King recognised that, in Concorde, BA had a premier product that was underpriced. Market research had revealed that many customers thought Concorde was more expensive than it actually was; thus ticket prices were progressively raised to match these perceptions. It is reported that British Airways then ran Concorde at a profit, unlike their French counterpart.
Between 1984 and 1991, British Airways flew a thrice-weekly Concorde service between London and Miami, stopping at Washington Dulles International Airport. Until 2003, Air France and British Airways continued to operate the New York services daily. Concorde routinely flew to Grantley Adams International Airport, Barbados, during the winter holiday season.
Prior to the Air France Paris crash, several UK and French tour operators operated charter flights to European destinations on a regular basis; the charter business was viewed as lucrative by British Airways and Air France.
In 1997, British Airways held a promotional contest to mark the 10th anniversary of the airline's move into the private sector. The promotion was a lottery to fly to New York held for 190 tickets valued at £5,400 each, to be offered at £10. Contestants had to call a special hotline to compete with up to 20 million people.
Concorde Flight 4590 crash
On 25 July 2000, Air France Flight 4590, registration F-BTSC, crashed in Gonesse, France after departing from Paris Charles de Gaulle en route to John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City, killing all 100 passengers and nine crew members on board the flight, and four people on the ground. It was the only fatal accident involving Concorde.
According to the official investigation conducted by the Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la Sécurité de l'Aviation Civile (BEA), the crash was caused by a metallic strip that fell from a Continental Airlines DC-10 that had taken off minutes earlier. This fragment punctured a tyre on Concorde's left main wheel bogie during takeoff. The tyre exploded, and a piece of rubber hit the fuel tank, which caused a fuel leak and led to a fire. The crew shut down engine number 2 in response to a fire warning, and with engine number 1 surging and producing little power, the aircraft was unable to gain altitude or speed. The aircraft entered a rapid pitch-up then a violent descent, rolling left and crashing tail-low into the Hôtelissimo Les Relais Bleus Hotel in Gonesse.
Prior to the accident, Concorde had been arguably the safest operational passenger airliner in the world in terms of passenger deaths-per-kilometres travelled with zero, but had a rate of tyre damage some 30 times higher than subsonic airliners from 1995 to 2000. Safety improvements were made in the wake of the crash, including more secure electrical controls, Kevlar lining on the fuel tanks and specially developed burst-resistant tyres. On 6 December 2010, Continental Airlines and John Taylor, one of their mechanics, were found guilty of involuntary manslaughter, but on 30 November 2012 a French court overturned the conviction, saying mistakes by Continental and Taylor did not make them criminally responsible.
The first flight after the modifications departed from London Heathrow on 17 July 2001, piloted by BA Chief Concorde Pilot Mike Bannister. During the 3-hour 20-minute flight over the mid-Atlantic towards Iceland, Bannister attained Mach 2.02 and 60,000 ft (18,000 m) before returning to RAF Brize Norton. The test flight, intended to resemble the London–New York route, was declared a success and was watched on live TV, and by crowds on the ground at both locations. The first flight with passengers after the accident took place on 11 September 2001, landing shortly before the World Trade Center attacks in the United States. This was not a revenue flight, as all the passengers were BA employees.
On 10 April 2003, Air France and British Airways simultaneously announced that they would retire Concorde later that year. They cited low passenger numbers following the 25 July 2000 crash, the slump in air travel following 11 September 2001, and rising maintenance costs. Although Concorde was technologically advanced when introduced in the 1970s, 30 years later its analogue cockpit was dated. There had been little commercial pressure to upgrade Concorde due to a lack of competing aircraft, unlike other airliners of the same era such as the Boeing 747. By its retirement, it was the last aircraft in British Airways' fleet that had a flight engineer; other aircraft, such as the modernised 747-400, had eliminated the role.
On 11 April 2003, Virgin Atlantic founder Sir Richard Branson announced that the company was interested in purchasing British Airways’ Concorde fleet for their nominal original price of £1 (US$1.57 in April 2003) each. British Airways dismissed the idea, prompting Virgin to increase their offer to £1 million each. Branson claimed that when BA was privatised, a clause in the agreement required them to allow another British airline to operate Concorde if BA ceased to do so, but the Government denied the existence of such a clause. In October 2003, Branson wrote in The Economist that his final offer was "over £5 million" and that he had intended to operate the fleet "for many years to come". The chances for keeping Concorde in service were stifled by Airbus's lack of support for continued maintenance.[N 7]
It has been suggested that Concorde was not withdrawn for the reasons usually given but that it became apparent during the grounding of Concorde that the airlines could make more profit carrying first class passengers subsonically. A lack of commitment to Concorde from Director of Engineering Alan MacDonald was cited as having undermined BA’s resolve to continue operating Concorde.
Air France made its final commercial Concorde landing in the United States in New York City from Paris on 30 May 2003. Air France's final Concorde flight took place on 27 June 2003 when F-BVFC retired to Toulouse.
An auction of Concorde parts and memorabilia for Air France was held at Christie's in Paris on 15 November 2003; 1,300 people attended, and several lots exceeded their predicted values. French Concorde F-BVFC was retired to Toulouse and kept functional for a short time after the end of service, in case taxi runs were required in support of the French judicial enquiry into the 2000 crash. The aircraft is now fully retired and no longer functional.
French Concorde F-BTSD has been retired to the "Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace" at Le Bourget (near Paris) and, unlike the other museum Concordes, a few of the systems are being kept functional. For instance, the famous "droop nose" can still be lowered and raised. This led to rumours that they could be prepared for future flights for special occasions.
French Concorde F-BVFB currently rests at the Auto & Technik Museum Sinsheim at Sinsheim, Germany, after its last flight from Paris to Baden-Baden, followed by a spectacular transport to Sinsheim via barge and road. The museum also has a Tu-144 on display – this is the only place where both supersonic airliners can be seen together.
British Airways conducted a North American farewell tour in October 2003. G-BOAG visited Toronto Pearson International Airport on 1 October, after which it flew to New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport. G-BOAD visited Boston’s Logan International Airport on 8 October, and G-BOAG visited Washington Dulles International Airport on 14 October. It has been claimed that G-BOAD’s flight from London Heathrow to Boston set a transatlantic flight record of 3 hours, 5 minutes, 34 seconds. However the fastest transatlantic flight was from Heathrow to New York JFK airport on 7 February 1996, taking only 2 hours, 52 minutes, 59 seconds.
In a week of farewell flights around the United Kingdom, Concorde visited Birmingham on 20 October, Belfast on 21 October, Manchester on 22 October, Cardiff on 23 October, and Edinburgh on 24 October. Each day the aircraft made a return flight out and back into Heathrow to the cities, often overflying them at low altitude. On 22 October, both Concorde flight BA9021C, a special from Manchester, and BA002 from New York landed simultaneously on both of Heathrow's runways. On 23 October 2003, the Queen consented to the illumination of Windsor Castle, an honour reserved for state events and visiting dignitaries, as Concorde's last west-bound commercial flight departed London.
British Airways retired its Concorde fleet on 24 October 2003. G-BOAG left New York to a fanfare similar to that given for Air France’s F-BTSD, while two more made round trips, G-BOAF over the Bay of Biscay, carrying VIP guests including former Concorde pilots, and G-BOAE to Edinburgh. The three aircraft then circled over London, having received special permission to fly at low altitude, before landing in sequence at Heathrow. The captain of the New York to London flight was Mike Bannister.
The final flight of a Concorde in the US occurred on 5 November 2003 when G-BOAG flew from New York's Kennedy Airport to Seattle's Boeing Field to join the Museum of Flight's permanent collection. The plane was piloted by Mike Bannister and Les Broadie who claimed a flight time of three hours, 55 minutes and 12 seconds, a record between the two cities. The museum had been pursuing a Concorde for their collection since 1984. The final flight of a Concorde world-wide took place on 26 November 2003 with a landing at Filton, Bristol, UK.
All of BA's Concorde fleet have been grounded, drained of hydraulic fluid and their airworthiness certificates withdrawn. Jock Lowe, ex-chief Concorde pilot and manager of the fleet estimated in 2004 that it would cost £10–15 million to make G-BOAF airworthy again. BA maintain ownership and have stated that they will not fly again due to a lack of support from Airbus. On 1 December 2003, Bonhams held an auction of British Airways’ Concorde artifacts, including a nose cone, at Kensington Olympia in London. Proceeds of around £750,000 were raised, with the majority going to charity. G-BOAD is currently on display at the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum in New York. In 2007, BA announced that the advertising spot at Heathrow where a 40% scale model of Concorde was located would not be retained; the model is now on display at the Brooklands Museum.
Although only used for spares after being retired from test flying and trials work in 1981, Concorde G-BBDG was dismantled and transported by road from Filton then restored from essentially a shell at the Brooklands Museum in Surrey.
One of the youngest Concordes (F-BTSD) is on display at Le Bourget Air and Space Museum in Paris. In February 2010, it was announced that the museum and a group of volunteer Air France technicians intend to restore F-BTSD so it can taxi under its own power. In May 2010, it was reported that the British Save Concorde Group and French Olympus 593 groups had begun inspecting the engines of a Concorde at the French museum; their intent is to restore the airliner to a condition where it can fly in demonstrations.
- Air France
- British Airways
- Braniff International Airways (short term lease)
- Singapore Airlines (short term wet lease)
The only supersonic airliner in direct competition with Concorde was the Soviet Tupolev Tu-144, nicknamed "Concordski" by Western Europeans for its outward similarity to Concorde. It had been alleged that Soviet espionage efforts had resulted in the theft of Concorde blueprints, ostensibly to assist in the design of the Tu-144. As a result of a rushed development programme, the first Tu-144 prototype was substantially different from the preproduction machines, but both were cruder than Concorde. The Tu-144S had a significantly shorter range than Concorde, due to its low-bypass turbofan engines. The aircraft had poor control at low speeds because of a simpler supersonic wing design; in addition the Tu-144 required parachutes to land while Concorde used anti-lock brakes. The Tu-144 had two crashes, one at the 1973 Paris Air Show, and another during a pre-delivery test flight in May 1978.
Later production Tu-144 versions were more refined and competitive. They had retractable canards for better low-speed control, turbojet engines providing nearly the fuel efficiency and range of Concorde and a top speed of Mach 2.35. Passenger service commenced in November 1977, but after the 1978 crash the aircraft was taken out of service. The aircraft had an inherently unsafe structural design as a consequence of an automated production method chosen in order to simplify and speed up manufacturing.
The American designs, the Boeing 2707 and the Lockheed L-2000 were to have been larger, with seating for up to 300 people. Running a few years behind Concorde, the Boeing 2707 was redesigned to a cropped delta layout; the extra cost of these changes helped to kill the project. The operation of US military aircraft such as the XB-70 Valkyrie and B-58 Hustler had shown that sonic booms were quite capable of reaching the ground, and the experience from the Oklahoma City sonic boom tests led to the same environmental concerns that hindered the commercial success of Concorde. The American government cancelled the project in 1971, after having spent more than $1 billion.
Before Concorde’s flight trials, developments in the civil aviation industry were largely accepted by governments and their respective electorates. Opposition to Concorde’s noise, particularly on the east coast of the United States, forged a new political agenda on both sides of the Atlantic, with scientists and technology experts across a multitude of industries beginning to take the environmental and social impact more seriously. Although Concorde led directly to the introduction of a general noise abatement programme for aircraft flying out of John F. Kennedy Airport, many found that Concorde was quieter than expected, partly due to the pilots temporarily throttling back their engines to reduce noise during overflight of residential areas. Even before revenue flights started it had been claimed that Concorde was quieter than several aircraft then in service. In 1971 BAC's technical director was quoted "It is certain on present evidence and calculations that in the airport context, production Concordes will be no worse than aircraft now in service and will in fact be better than many of them."
Concorde produced nitrogen oxides in its exhaust, which, despite complicated interactions with other ozone-depleting chemicals, are understood to result in degradation to the ozone layer at the stratospheric altitudes it cruised. It has been pointed out that other, lower-flying, airliners produce ozone during their flights in the troposphere, but vertical transit of gases between the layers is restricted. The small fleet meant overall ozone-layer degradation caused by Concorde was negligible. David W. Fahey, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, found that to produce a drop in stratospheric ozone of 1 to 2% would require a fleet of 500 supersonic aircraft to be operated. Dr. Fahey stated that this would not be a limiting factor for further supersonic transport development.
Concorde’s technical leap forward boosted the public’s understanding of conflicts between technology and the environment as well as awareness of the complex decision analysis processes that surround such conflicts. In France, the use of acoustic fencing alongside TGV tracks might not have been achieved without the 1970s controversy over aircraft noise. In the UK, the CPRE has issued tranquillity maps since 1990.
Some sources say Concorde typically flew 17 miles per U.S. gallon (14 L/100 km; 20 mpg-imp) per passenger (100 passengers were maximum capacity).
Concorde was normally perceived as a privilege of the rich, but special circular or one-way (with return by other flight or ship) charter flights were arranged to bring a trip within the means of moderately well-off enthusiasts.
The aircraft was usually referred to by the British as simply "Concorde". In France it was known as "le Concorde" due to "le", the definite article, used in French grammar to introduce the name of a ship or aircraft, and the capital being used to distinguish a proper name from a common noun of the same spelling. In French, the common noun concorde means "agreement, harmony, or peace". [N 8] Concorde’s pilots and British Airways in official publications often refer to Concorde both in the singular and plural as "she" or "her".[N 9]
As a symbol of national pride, an example from the BA fleet made occasional flypasts at selected Royal events, major air shows and other special occasions, sometimes in formation with the Red Arrows. On the final day of commercial service, public interest was so great that grandstands were erected at Heathrow Airport. Significant numbers of people attended the final landings; the event received widespread media coverage.
In 2006, 37 years after her first test flight, Concorde was announced the winner of the Great British Design Quest organised by the BBC and the Design Museum. A total of 212,000 votes were cast with Concorde beating design icons such as the Mini, mini skirt, Jaguar E-type, Tube map and the Supermarine Spitfire.
The fastest transatlantic airliner flight was from New York JFK to London Heathrow on 7 February 1996 by British Airways' G-BOAD in 2 hours, 52 minutes, 59 seconds from takeoff to touchdown. Concorde also set other records, including the official FAI "Westbound Around the World" and "Eastbound Around the World" world air speed records. On 12–13 October 1992, in commemoration of the 500th anniversary of Columbus’ first New World landing, Concorde Spirit Tours (USA) chartered Air France Concorde F-BTSD and circumnavigated the world in 32 hours 49 minutes and 3 seconds, from Lisbon, Portugal, including six refuelling stops at Santo Domingo, Acapulco, Honolulu, Guam, Bangkok, and Bahrain.
The eastbound record was set by the same Air France Concorde (F-BTSD) under charter to Concorde Spirit Tours in the USA on 15–16 August 1995. This promotional flight circumnavigated the world from New York/JFK International Airport in 31 hours 27 minutes 49 seconds, including six refuelling stops at Toulouse, Dubai, Bangkok, Andersen AFB in Guam, Honolulu, and Acapulco. By its 30th flight anniversary on 2 March 1999 Concorde had clocked up 920,000 flight hours, with more than 600,000 supersonic, much more than all of the other supersonic aircraft in the Western world combined.
On its way to the Museum of Flight in November 2003, G-BOAG set a New York City-to-Seattle speed record of 3 hours, 55 minutes, and 12 seconds.
- Crew: 3 (2 Pilots and a flight engineer)
- Capacity: 92–120 passengers
(128 in high-density layout)[N 10]
- Length: 202 ft 4 in (61.66 m)
- Wingspan: 84 ft 0 in (25.6 m)
- Height: 40 ft 0 in (12.2 m)
- Fuselage internal length: 129 ft 0 in (39.32 m)
- Fuselage width: maximum of 9 ft 5 in (2.87 m) external 8 ft 7 in (2.62 m) internal
- Fuselage height: maximum of 10 ft 10 in (3.30 m) external 6 ft 5 in (1.96 m) internal)
- Wing area: 3,856 ft2 (358.25 m2)
- Empty weight: 173,500 lb (78,700 kg)
- Useful load: 245,000 lb (111,130 kg)
- Powerplant: 4 × Rolls-Royce/SNECMA Olympus 593 Mk 610 afterburning turbojets
- Maximum fuel load: 210,940 lb (95,680 kg)
- Maximum taxiing weight: 412,000 lb (187,000 kg)
- Maximum speed: Mach 2.04 (≈1,354 mph, 2,179 km/h) at cruise altitude
- Cruise speed: Mach 2.02 (≈1,340 mph, 2,158 km/h) at cruise altitude
- Range: 3,900 nmi (4,488.04 mi, 7,222.8 km)
- Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,300 m)
- Rate of climb: 5,000 ft/min (25.41 m/s)
- lift-to-drag: Low speed– 3.94, Approach– 4.35, 250 kn, 10,000 ft– 9.27, Mach 0.94– 11.47, Mach 2.04– 7.14
- Fuel consumption: 46.85 lb/mi (13.2 kg/km) operating for maximum range
- Thrust/weight: 0.373
- Maximum nose tip temperature: 260 °F (127 °C)
Notable appearances in media
- BAC 221
- Barbara Harmer, the first qualified female Concorde pilot.
- North American XB-70 Valkyrie
- Richard Wiggs, Anti-Concorde campaigner
- Related development
- Related lists
- In particular, R. T. Jones' work at NACA demonstrated this in depth.
- The original proposal looks very much like a greatly enlarged Starfighter, or more interestingly, almost exactly like the Lockheed "Suntan" proposal.
- Consider especially the English Electric Lightning, who's wing can be considered either a highly swept rectangle, or a delta with a notch cut out of the root.
- Or, more rarely, "bent" back into position. Examples include the DC-3 and Me 262.
- This apparently took place some time in 1957, according to Conway's unclear statement about "the following year" which apparently references the first STAC meeting in late 1956.
- "It is the world's most efficient jet engine." -Ricky Bastin, Concorde Engineer
- Quote: "Airbus, the manufacturer of Concorde, has said it is becoming uneconomic to maintain the ageing craft and that it will no longer provide spare parts for it."
- concorde s.f. concord, unity, harmony, peace.
- Quote: Raymond Baxter commentating as Concorde flies for first time: "She rolls ... She flies!"
- BA and AF Concordes originally had 100 seats, with AF removing 8 seats after the safety modifications of CY2000–2001 because of weight considerations.
- Towey 2007, p. 359.
- "Ageing luxury jet". BBC News, 25 July 2000. 25 July 2000.
- Marston, Paul (16 August 2000). "Is this the end of the Concorde dream?". London: The Daily Telegraph, 16 August 2000.
- UK CPI inflation numbers based on data available from Gregory Clark (2013), "What Were the British Earnings and Prices Then? (New Series)" MeasuringWorth.
- "UK | Concorde grounded for good". BBC News. 2003-04-10. Retrieved 2013-06-15.
- Jury, Louise (17 March 2006). "Concorde beats Tube map to become Britain's favourite design". London: The Independent, 17 March 2006.
- Owen 2001, p. 35.
- Jan Meyer, "High altitude flying with F-104", Starfighterens veneer Norge
- Conway 2005, p. 67.
- Maltby, R.L. "The development of the slender delta concept". Aircraft Engineering. 40, 1968.
- Eric Brown, "Wings On My Sleeve", Hachette UK, 2008, end of Chapter 12
- Conway 2005, p. 39.
- Jim Winchester, "Handley Page HP.115 (1961)", in "X-Planes and Prototypes", Amber Books, 2005, p. 134.
- Owen 2001, p. 40.
- Conway 2005, p. 68.
- Conway 2005, p. 69.
- Conway 2005, p. 70.
- Owen 2001, p. 49.
- Owen 2001, p. 47.
- Owen 2001, p. 41.
- Owen 2001, p. 50.
- Conway 2005, p. 71.
- Conway 2005, p. 66.
- "Early History." concordesst.com. Retrieved 8 September 2007.
- Benn, Tony (17 October 2003). "Sonic booms and that 'e' on the end: Tony Benn remembers his role in getting Concorde off the ground". London: The Guardian, 17 October 2003.
- McIntyre 1992, p. 20.
- Note this British convention is used throughout this article: "In depth: Farewell to Concorde". BBC News, 15 August 2007. 15 August 2007.
- "About Concorde – main page". British Airways. Retrieved 11 January 2010.
- "Aerospace: Pan Am's Concorde Retreat". Time, 12 February 1973. 12 February 1973.
- "Vertrag mit Luken". Der Spiegel. 13 March 1967. Retrieved 6 November 2012.
- Taylor 1965, p. 130.
- Winchester 2005, p. 134.
- "Pilot Says Concorde Flight "Perfect"". Montreal Gazette,. 1969. Retrieved 30 June 2011. Unknown parameter
- "Concorde Tops Speed of Sound for 9 Minutes on a Test Flight". The New York Times, 2 October 1969. 2 October 1969.
- "1969: Concorde flies for the first time". BBC News, 2 March 1969. 2 March 1969. Retrieved 8 July 2007.
- Rohrbach, Edward (10 April 1969). "Concorde 002 Makes 1st Flight". Chicago Tribune, 10 April 1969. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde 001 Makes Its First Atlantic Crossing". Chicago Tribune, 5 September 1971. 5 September 1971. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Anglo-French Concorde Lands in Brazil to begin Week of Demonstration Flights". Bangor Daily News. 7 September 1971.
- Stern, Michael (3 June 1972). "Concorde Prototype Begins 10-Nation Tour; Britain Shows Optimism For Supersonic Aircraft". The New York Times, 3 June 1972. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Witkin, Richard (21 September 1973). "A Supersonic Concorde Lands in Texas". The New York Times, 21 September 1973. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concordes limited to 16". Virgin Islands Daily News, 5 June 1976.
- "Payments for Concorde". British Airways. Retrieved 2 December 2009.
- Lewis, Anthony (12 February 1973). "Britain and France have wasted billions on the Concorde". The New York Times, 12 February 1973.
- "Malaysia lifting ban on the use Of its Airspace by the Concorde". The New York Times, 17 December 1978. 17 December 1978. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "News from around the world". Herald-Journal, 13 January 1978. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Ross 1978, p. 46.
- Marston, Paul (16 August 2000). "Is this the end of the Concorde dream?". London: Daily Telegraph, 16 August 2000.
- Ross 1978, pp. 47–49.
- Ross 1978, p. 49.
- Gunn 2010, p. 45.
- Favre, C. (1996). Mark B. Tischler, ed. Advances in aircraft flight control. CRC Press. p. 219. ISBN 0-7484-0479-1. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Masefield, Peter. "Obituary: Sir Archibald Russell". UK: The Independent, 1 July 1995.
- "NOVA transcript: Supersonic Dream". PBS, 18 January 2005.
- "Rolls-Royce Snecma Olympus". Janes. 25 July 2000.[dead link]
- Frawley 2003, p. 14.
- "Unified propulsion 8". MIT. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
- "Concorde – Choice of a light alloy for the construction of the first supersonic commercial aircraft". Revue De L'Aluminium (316, March 1964): 111–119.
- Wolfe, B.S. (1967). "The Concorde Automatic Flight Control System: A description of the automatic flight control system for the Anglo/French SST and its development to date". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP) 39 (5, 1967): 40. doi:10.1108/eb034268. ISSN 0002-2667.
- Schefer, L.J. "Concorde has designed-in reliability". Hydraulics and Pneumatics. 29, 1976: 51–55.
- Owen 2001, p. 101.
- "Aircraft Stopping Systems". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP) 47 (10, 1975): 18. 1975. doi:10.1108/eb035278. ISSN 0002-2667.
- Turner, H.G. (1971). "Fuel Management for Concorde: A brief account of the fuel system and the fuel pumps developed for the aircraft". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB Ltd) 43 (3, 1971): 36–39. doi:10.1108/eb034738. ISSN 0002-2667.
- "British Contribution to Concord Production in France". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB Ltd) 36 (8, 1964): 232–237. 1964. doi:10.1108/eb033911. ISSN 0002-2667.
- Owen 2001, p. 206.
- Birtles, Philip. Concorde, pp. 62–63. Vergennes, Vermont: Plymouth Press, 2000. ISBN 1-882663-44-6.
- "Rolls Royce Olympus history." wingweb.co.uk. Retrieved 15 January 2010.
- Ganley, G.; G. Laviec (1989). The Rolls Royce/SNECMA Olympus 593 engine operational experience and the lessons learned. European Symposium on the Future of High Speed Air Transport. pp. 73–80. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Lynam, Joe (19 July 2006). "Are the skies turning green?". BBC News.
- Ganley, G. A. (September 1991). Concorde Propulsion—Did we get it right? The Rolls-Royce/Snecma Olympus 593 Engine reviewed. SAE International.
- Fisher, S.A.; M.C. Neale and A.J. Brooks. "On the sub-critical stability of variable ramp intakes at Mach numbers around 2". Aeronautical Research Council (Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1972).
- "Concorde Special – The test pilot – John Cochrane". Flight International. 21 October 2003.
- Woodman, Peter (27 July 2000). "How a Concorde pilot would handle a nightmare failure". Birmingham Post.
- "1976 | 1835 | Flight Archive". Flightglobal.com. 1976-09-04. Retrieved 2013-06-15.
- Dalton, Alastair. "Supersonic: The enduring allure of Concorde". Scotsman.com, 17 July 2012.
- Eberhart, Jonathan. "When the SST Is Too Slow..". Science News (Society for Science & the Public) 91 (22, 3 June 1967): 528–529. doi:10.2307/3951418. JSTOR 3951418.
- "The Concorde takes shape : Test programme and construction proceeding according to schedule". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP) 38 (4, 1966): 38. 1966. doi:10.1108/eb034143. ISSN 0002-2667.
- N'guyen, V.P.; Perrais; J.P. Perrais (1972). "Fatigue Tests on Big Structure Assemblies of Concorde Aircraft". Advanced Approaches to Fatigue Evaluation. NASA SP-309 (NASA) 309: 631. Bibcode:1972NASSP.309..631N.
- Wallace, James (7 November 2003). "Those who flew the Concorde will miss it". Seattle Post.
- Gedge, G.T.; M.I. Prod. "Introduction to Concorde: A brief review of the Concorde and its prospects". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (Emerald Group Publishing Limited) 40 (3, 1993).
- Owen 2001, p. 14.
- "1967 | 0821 | Flight Archive". Flightglobal.com. Retrieved 2013-06-15.
- "Is this the colour of the new millennium?". UK: The Independent, 3 April 1996.
- Frade, Cristina. "Azul contra rojo". El Mundo, 5 April 1996.
- Owen 2001, p. 78.
- Kocivar, Ben. "Aboard the Concorde SST." Popular Science, October 1973, p. 117.
- "Flight Refuelling Limited and Concorde: The fuel system aboard is largely their work". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP) 48 (9, September 1976): 20–21. doi:10.1108/eb035344. ISSN 0002-2667.
- "Concorde model 'B'"
- Strack, William. Propulsion challenges and opportunities for high-speed transport aircraft. Aeropropulsion, 1987. pp. 437–452. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Smale, Alison. "Fuel costs kill Second Generation of Concordes". Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 22 September 1979.
- "How much radiation might I be exposed to?". British Airways. Retrieved 11 January 2010.
- Guerin, D.W. (1973). "Electronic safety test replaces radioactive test source". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP) 45 (4, 1973): 10. doi:10.1108/eb035011. ISSN 0002-2667.
- "Skin cancer danger linked to stratospheric jet planes". St. Petersburg Times. 1 April 1975.
- "Cosmic radiation". British Airways. Retrieved 11 January 2010.
- Arctowski, Henryk (1940). "On Solar Faculae and Solar Constant Variations" (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 1940) 26 (6): 406–411. Bibcode:1940PNAS...26..406A. doi:10.1073/pnas.26.6.406. PMC 1078196. PMID 16588370.
- Hepburn, A.N. (1967). "Human Factors in the Concorde". Occupational Medicine 17 (2, 1967): 47–51. doi:10.1093/occmed/17.2.47.
- Flight Training Handbook. U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Flight Standards Service, 1980. 1980. p. 250. Retrieved 28 July 2007.
- Wolff, Mark. "Cabin Decompression and Hypoxia". PIA Air Safety Publication,6 January 2006.
- Nunn 1993, p. 341.
- Happenny, Steve. "Interim Policy on High Altitude Cabin Decompression – Relevant Past Practice". Federal Aviation Administration, 24 March 2006.
- Schrader 1989, p. 64.
- Orlebar 2002, p. 84.
- Prestwick Oceanic Area Control Centre: Manual of Air Traffic Services (Part 2). NATS
- Orlebar 2002, p. 92.
- Orlebar 2002, p. 44.
- Schrader 1989, p. 84.
- Orlebar 2002, p. 110.
- The World's Greatest Airliner, 2003, 
- Rose, David. "The real story of Flight 4590: Special Investigation". iasa.com.au, 13 May 2001.
- Brooklands Museum
- Stimson, I.L.; Fisher; R. Fisher. "Design and Engineering of Carbon Brakes". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (The Royal Society) 294 (1411, January 1980): 583–590. Bibcode:1980RSPTA.294..583S. doi:10.1098/rsta.1980.0068. JSTOR 36383.
- Owen 2001, p. 118.
- "Droop nose". Flight International. 12 August 1971. pp. 257–258.
- Owen 2001, p. 84.
- "Triplex in Concorde: The story behind the film." Flightglobal.com, 1968. Retrieved 7 June 2011.
- Strang, Dr. W.J; R. McKinley. "Concorde in Service". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP) 50 (12, 1978). doi:10.1108/eb035500. ISSN 0002-2667.
- "BA Tribute to Concorde. The takeoff scene at the end of the video contains a clip of the ATC communication with the "Speedbird Concorde"". British Airways. Retrieved 11 January 2010.
- Donin, Robert B. Safety Regulation of the Concorde Supersonic Transport: Realistic Confinement of the National Environmental Policy Act. HeinOnline, 1976. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- O'Grady, Jim (27 April 2003). "Neighborhood Report: The Rockaways; Ears Ringing? It's Cheering Over the Demise Of the Concorde". The New York Times, 27 April 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "The Nation: Smooth Landing for the Birds". Time, 5 December 1977. 5 December 1977. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde facts and figures". British Airways. Retrieved 11 January 2010.
- Warneke, Ross. "Concorde by June: Offer to Qantas". Australia: The Age, 25 October 1977.
- "Singapore Concorde flights". The New York Times, 14 October 1977. 14 October 1977. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "London and Singapore halt Concorde service". The New York Times, 17 December 1977. 17 December 1977. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde route cut". Montreal Gazette, 16 September 1980. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "French Concorde to Mexico City". Daytona Beach Morning Journal, 11 August 1978. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Supersonic Jet flights suspended". Daytona Beach Morning Journal, 27 September 1982. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Air France offering 'New Year's Eve in Paris.'". PR Newswire, 2 October 1987. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Getze, John (10 February 1977). "Braniff seeks deal to fly Concorde in U.S". Los Angeles Times, 10 February 1977.
- "Concorde flights to Texas Ok'd". Los Angeles Times, 22 June 1978. 22 June 1978. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde now reaping profits on N.Y. route". The Spokesman-Review, 23 November 1979. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Braniff to halt US Concorde flights". Milwaukee Journal, 16 April 1980. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde flights between Texas and Europe end; Big Dreams at the start, $1,447 for flight to Paris". The New York Times, 1 June 1980. 1 June 1980. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- B.CAL appoints Concorde consultant. Flight International, 24 March 1979, p. 881.
- Caledonian reports best results. Flight International, 12 May 1979, p. 1547.
- New job for B.CAL Concorde man. Flight International, 21 July 1979, p. 158.
- B.CAL to lease unsold Concorde?. Flight International, 24 February 1979, p. 517.
- Tories support B.CAL's Concorde plan. Flight International, 14 April 1979, p. 1132.
- World News. Flight International, 28 April 1979, p. 1286.
- High Risk: The Politics of the Air, Thomson, A., Sidgwick and Jackson, London, 1990, pp. 316–317.
- B.CAL drops Concorde plans but asks for Hong Kong licence. Flight International, 30 June 1979, p. 2331.
- BCAL's African Profit .... World News, Flight International, 23 December 1971, p. 994.
- The Caledonian punchbag, Flight International, 21 March 1987, p. 33.
- Cheaper fares on Swedish routes?, Air Transport, Flight International, 31 March 1979, p. 965
- Two Concordes, A310s and 20 new routes in B.CAL package, Air Transport, Flight International, 19 May 1979, p. 1637
- Backroom boys — Francis Spufford
- Greenberg, Peter (1 April 1984). "The plane fact is, Concorde has broken the profit barrier for the first time". Chicago Tribune, 1 April 1984. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "The Concorde belies those who foresaw its extinction". Philadelphia Inquirer, 26 January 1986. 26 January 1986. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Arnold, James (10 October 2003). "Why economists don't fly Concorde". BBC News, 10 October 2003.
- "Concorde to fly Miami-London route". Miami Herald, 24 January 1984. 24 January 1984. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Cuts ground Concorde from Miami to London". Miami Herald. 13 January 1991. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Jensen, Gregory. "After eight years, the Concorde flies to supersonic profit". Reading Eagle, 27 March 1984.
- Greenberg, Peter S. (23 June 1985). "Flying via charter off to New Bustle". Los Angeles Times, 23 June 1985.
- Clark, Jay (18 January 1986). "Supersonic Concorde 10 years in service and still confounding critics". Toronto Star, 18 January 1986.
- "Concorde money is in charters". Flight International, 25 January 1986. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "I beat 20m to land last pounds 10 seats on Concorde; Joe grabs bargain of a lifetime." Scottish Daily Record & Sunday (Glasgow, Scotland), 13 February 1997. Retrieved: 13 November 2012.
- Endres 2001, pp. 110–113.
- "Human Factor Issues Emerge from Concorde Crash Investigation". Air Safety Week, 11 February 2002. Retrieved 9 June 2013.
- "Accident on 25 July 2000 at La Patte d’Oie in Gonesse (95) to the Concorde registered F-BTSC operated by Air France". French Bureau Enquêtes-Accidents (BEA), January 2002. pp. 145–147. Retrieved 9 June 2013.
- "Concorde's safety modifications". BBC News, 17 July 2001. 17 July 2001.
- Cody, E. "French court holds Continental Airlines responsible for 2000 Concorde crash". Washington Post, 6 December 2010.
- "French court overturns Concorde crash conviction". New Zealand Herald. Associated Press. 30 November 2012. Retrieved 30 November 2012.
- "Concorde Completes Successful Test Flight". Fox News, 17 July 2001. 17 July 2001. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde, 100 BA staff fly over Atlantic". United Press International, 11 September 2001.
- Williams, Timothy. "Concorde returns". Ocala Star-Banner, 7 November 2001.
- "Concorde 'back where she belongs'". BBC News, 6 November 2001. 6 November 2001.
- "Concorde grounded for good". BBC News, 10 April 2003. 10 April 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Macdonald, Ian S. (1980). "New Aircraft: Where are we heading in the 1980s and 1990s". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP,) 52 (7, 1980): 23–17. doi:10.1108/eb035646. ISSN 0002-2667.
- Michaels, Danial (2 October 2003). "Final Boarding Call: As Concorde Departs, so do 3-Man Crews: In New Cockpits, Engineers are seen as Extra Baggage". Wall Street Journal, 2 October 2003.
- "Concorde not for sale, says BA". CNN, 11 April 2003. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
- "Fabled Concorde to fly off into sunset / British, French airlines to retire supersonic jet". San Francisco Chronicle, 11 April 2003. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
- "Virgin Increases Concorde Bid". Space Daily (from AFP article).
- "Branson increases offer for Concorde". The Daily Telegraph, 22 June 2003. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
- Montague, Simon (6 May 2003). "Branson's Concorde bid rejected". BBC News, 6 May 2003.
- "Branson accuses 'sad' Government of washing its hands of Concorde". Western Mail, 24 October 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde not to fly at air shows". CNN, 30 October 2003. 30 October 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Simpkins, Edward (15 June 2003). "Buffett vehicle to follow in Concorde's slipstream". London: The Daily Telegraph, 15 June 2003.
- "Concorde: An Untimely and Unnecessary Demise". Travel Insider, 2003. Retrieved 13 January 2010.
- Pevsner, Donald L. "The Betrayal of Concorde". Concorde Spirit Tours. Retrieved 13 January 2010.
- Lemel, Laurent. "Concorde makes Final Flight from Paris to New York". Associated Press, 30 May 2003.
- "French Concorde bids adieu". BBC News, 31 May 2003. 31 May 2003.
- "Jetting off". Daily Mirror, 28 June 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "3,500 due at UK Concorde auction". BBC News, 30 November 2003. 30 November 2003.
- "Miscellaneous brief articles – Business & Industry". Flight International. 15 July 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Pourquoi n'a-t-on pas sauvé le Concorde?". TourMag.com, 24 March 2010. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Webster, Ben. "This is not a flight of fancy: Volunteers say Concorde can realise an Olympic dream if BA will help". The Times, 31 May 2006.
- "Museum Sinsheim". Museum Sinsheim. Retrieved 26 June 2010.
- Atchison, Marc (2 October 2003). "Concorde's supersonic swan song; Star writer aboard for jet's farewell trip to Toronto Transatlantic sound-breaker a vision of grace". Toronto Star, 2 October 2003.
- Ramstack, Tom. "Final flight: British Airways Concorde lands locally for last time". Washington Post, 15 October 2003.
- "Concorde establishes London-to-U.S. record". America's Intelligence Wire, 9 October 2003. 9 October 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "SST makes record flight". St Louis Post, 9 February 1996. 9 February 1996. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Exhibits: Concorde". Intrepidmuseum.org. Retrieved 6 March 2011.
- "Last Concorde lands". BBC News,. 27 November 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde enjoys Cardiff farewell". BBC News. 23 October 2003. 23 October 2003.
- "Concorde – The Farewell – A collection of the final flights of the last days of Concorde". Simply Media, 19 April 2004. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Magoolaghan, Brian. "The Concorde Makes A Comeback". Wave of Long Island, 31 October 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Lawless, Jill. "Final Concorde flight lands at Heathrow". Associated Press, 26 October 2003.
- "End of an era for Concorde". BBC News,. 24 October 2003.
- Thousands welcome Concorde to Seattle
- Robert Bogash
- "BBC News: Last Concorde lands". BBC News,. 27 November 2003.
- "Will Concorde ever come out of retirement – e.g. for a Coronation flypast or airshows?". British Airways. Retrieved 14 January 2010.
- "Concorde nose cone sells for half-million at auction". USA Today, 12 December 2003. 2 December 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Concorde Memorabilia Auction". Getty Images, 1 December 2003. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Heathrow Concorde model removed". BBC News. 30 March 2007.
- "The Brooklands Concorde Project". Brooklands Museum. Retrieved 15 January 2010.
- "Air France Concorde to taxi again under own power". Flightglobal, 5 February 2010. Retrieved 5 February 2010.
- "Work starts in £15m plan to get Concorde Flying". BBC News. 29 May 2010. Retrieved 29 May 2010.
- "Soviet Union: Christening the Concordski". Time, 14 November 1977. 14 November 1977. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Gordon, Yefim. Tupolev Tu-144. London: Midland, 2006. ISBN 1-85780-216-0.
- "'Concordski' designer dies". BBC News, 13 May 2001. 13 May 2001.
- Hess, John L (26 May 1971). "Soviet SST, in Its First Flight to the West, Arrives in Paris for Air Show". The New York Times, 26 May 1971. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Deruaz, George. "Soviet SST stalls, dives into towns". St. Petersburg Times, 4 June 1973. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Pride of Soviet air fleet explodes during exhibition". Sarasota Journal, 4 June 1973. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Fisher, Dan (27 October 1978). "Russia confirms crash of Supersonic Airliner in test: Latest failure of Trouble-plagued TU-144 seen as blow to Soviet hopes of expanding industry". Los Angeles Times, 27 October 1978.
- "ASN Aircraft accident Tupolev 144D CCCP-77111 Yegoryevsk". Flight Safety Foundation. Retrieved 1 July 2011.
- "The Tu-144: the future that never was". RIA Novosti, 3 January 2008. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Fridlyander, Iosif. "Sad Epic of the Tu-144." Messenger of Russian Academy of Sciences, №1, 2002 (in Russian: И.Н. Фридляндер, "Печальная эпопея Ту-144", Вестник РАН, №1, 2002.
- "The United States SST Contenders". Flight International, 13 February 1964. pp. 234–235. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Winchester 2005, p. 84.
- Lyons, Richard D (5 January 1969). "The Russians Lead With the SST...". The New York Times, 5 January 1969. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "B-58's Sonic Boom Rattles Kentuckians". Chicago Daily Tribune, 19 December 1961. 19 December 1961. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "The Nation: Showdown on the SST". Time, 29 May 1971. 29 March 1971. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Tu-160 Blackjack Strategic Bomber, Russia". airforce-technology.com. Retrieved 16 May 2010.
- "Here Comes the Concorde, Maybe". Time, 16 February 1976. 16 February 1976. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Allen, Robert M. Legal and Environmental ramifications of the Concorde. J. Air L. & Com., 1976. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Hock, R.; R. Hawkins. Recent studies into Concorde noise reduction. AGARD Noise Mech, 1974. p. 14. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Muss, Joshua A. Aircraft Noise: Federal pre-emption of Local Control, Concorde and other recent cases. J. Air L. & Com, 1977. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- Endres 2001, p 90.
- "Reducing noise with type 28 nozzle". Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology (MCB UP) 45 (4, 1973): 14. 1973. doi:10.1108/eb035013.
- Aviation Daily 18 Feb 1971 p263
- Fahey, D. W.; et al. (1995). "Emission Measurements of the Concorde Supersonic Aircraft in the Lower Stratosphere". Science 270 (5233): 70. Bibcode:1995Sci...270...70F. doi:10.1126/science.270.5233.70.
- "Increase in supersonic jets could be threat to ozone U-2 plane trails Concorde, studies exhaust particles." Baltimore Sun, October 8, 1995.
- Anderson, Jon. Decision Analysis in Environmental Decisionmaking: Improving the Concorde Balance. HeinOnline, 1978. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Train à grande vitesse causes distress". Environmental Science and Engineering, November 2001.[dead link]
- "National and regional tranquillity maps". Campaign to Protect Rural England. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
- "British Airways Concorde is expected to begin flying passengers again in next 6 weeks". Dallas Morning News, 23 August 2001. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Farewell to Concorde". BBC News, 15 August 2007. 15 August 2007. Retrieved 15 January 2010.
- Oxford Language Dictionaries Online – French Resources: Glossary of Grammatical Terms
- Centre National de Ressources Textuelles et Lexicales – Définition de LE, LA: article défini, II.3
- Reverso Dictionnaire: La majuscule dans les noms propres ("Capital letters within proper names")
- Ferrar 1980, p. 114.
- "Celebrate Concorde: videos". British Airways. Retrieved 15 January 2010.
- "Documentary of British Airways Concorde introduction". youtube.com.
- "Red Arrows fly into Scotland". Daily Record, 12 June 2000. Retrieved 30 June 2011.
- "Million turn out to crown Queen's Jubilee". London: Daily Telegraph, 4 June 2002. 4 June 2002. Retrieved 1 April 2010.
- Laville, Sandra (24 October 2003). "Chaos fear at Concorde farewell". London: Daily Telegraph, 24 October 2003.
- "Air France Concorde sets round-the-world speed record". Business Wire, 16 August 1995. Retrieved 30 June 2011.[dead link]
- "French Concorde to attempt round-the-world record". Anchorage Daily News, 12 October 1992.
- "Concorde jets occupants on record ride". Deseret News, 17 August 1995.
- "Rolls-Royce SNECMA Olympus". Janes, 25 July 2000.
- "Museum of Flight". Museum of Flight. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
- Kelly 2005, p. 52.
- "Comparison with Tu-144." Richard Seaman aircraft museum. Retrieved 15 January 2010.
- Conway, Eric (2005). High-Speed Dreams: NASA and the Technopolitics of Supersonic Transportation, 1945–1999. JHU Press. ISBN 080188067X.
- Beniada, Frederic (2006). Concorde. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Zenith Press. ISBN 0-7603-2703-3.
- Calvert, Brian. Flying Concorde: The Full Story. London: Crowood Press, 2002. ISBN 1-84037-352-0.
- Deregel, Xavier; Jean-Philippe Lemaire. Concorde Passion. New York: LBM, 2009. ISBN 2-915347-73-5.
- Endres, Günter. Concorde. St Paul, Minnesota: MBI Publishing Company, 2001. ISBN 0-7603-1195-1.
- Ferrar, Henry (ed.). The Concise Oxford French-English Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. ISBN 0-19-864157-5.
- Frawley, Gerald (2003). The International Directory of Civil Aircraft, 2003/2004. Aerospace Publications. ISBN 1-875671-58-7.
- Gunn, John (2010). Crowded Skies. Turnkey Productions. ISBN 978-0-646-54973-6.
- Kelly, Neil. The Concorde Story: 34 Years of Supersonic Air Travel. Surrey, UK: Merchant Book Company Ltd, 2005. ISBN 1-904779-05-0.
- Knight, Geoffrey. Concorde: The Inside Story. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1976. ISBN 0-297-77114-0.
- Lewis, Rob; Lewis, Edwin (2004). Supersonic secrets : the unauthorised biography of Concorde. London: Exposé. ISBN 0-9546617-0-2.
- McIntyre, Ian. Dogfight: The Transatlantic Battle over Airbus. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers, 1992. ISBN 0-275-94278-3.
- Nunn, John Francis. Nunn's Applied Respiratory Physiology. Burlington, Maryland: Butterworth-Heineman, 1993. ISBN 0-7506-1336-X.
- Owen, Kenneth (2001). Concorde: Story of a Supersonic Pioneer. London: Science Museum, 2001. ISBN 978-1-900747-42-4.
- Orlebar, Christopher. The Concorde Story. Oxford, UK: Osprey Publishing, 2004. ISBN 1-85532-667-1.
- Ross, Douglas (March 1978). The Concorde Compromise: The Politics of Decision-making. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. pp. 46–53.
- Schrader, Richard K. Concorde: The Full Story of the Anglo-French SST. Kent, UK: Pictorial Histories Pub. Co., 1989. ISBN 0-929521-16-1.
- Taylor, John W. R. (1965). Jane's All The World's Aircraft 1965–66. Marston.
- Towey, Barrie (ed.). Jet Airliners of the World 1949–2007. Tunbridge Wells, Kent, UK: Air-Britain (Historians) Ltd, 2007. ISBN 0-85130-348-X.
- Winchester, Jim. The World's Worst Aircraft: From Pioneering Failures to Multimillion Dollar Disasters. London: Amber Books Ltd, 2005. ISBN 1-904687-34-2.
- Winchester, Jim (2005). X-Planes and Prototypes: From Nazi Secret Weapons to the Warplanes of the Future. Amber Books Ltd. ISBN 1-84013-815-7.
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to Concorde.|
- Concorde Legacy Website
- Concorde Flight Website
- British Airways Concorde page
- Braniff Airways Concorde page
- Design Museum (UK) Concorde page
- Concorde Experience at the National Museum of Flight, Scotland
- Concorde F-BVFB at the Auto & Technik Museum Sinsheim
- Supersonic: Tribute to Concorde – a slideshow by Life magazine
- Pathé film of 002's maiden flight from Filton to RAF Fairford on 9 April 1967
- First Supersonic Transatlantic Commercial Flight Lands at Dulles (1976)
- "The New Metal Angel" a 1976 Flight article on the pending commencement of Concorde commercial supersonic operations
- "Concorde Conception" a 1963 Flight article on Concorde