October 21, 2003 at 9:32 am
“I am writing to complain concerning the complete shambles that is the retirement of Concorde. Your PR dept have missed a fantastic opportunity to gain goodwill with the British public. 3 landings in front of a 1000 seat grandstand at Heathrow is unimaginative to say the least. Celebrating Concorde by attending a few airshows would have been one very obvious example of safely saying goodbye in front of hundreds of thousands of people (most of whom payed for Concorde’s design and build through their taxes). I am flying to the Czeck Republic on business today and had the choice of flying BA or Czeck Airlines. No prizes for guessing who I chose…..”
By: Red Beast - 12th November 2003 at 00:06
And the BBC completely missed the BA debacle in their reporting – big celebration my foot. Coul’ve been bigger if everyone handn’t been told to buzz off by the rapacious British Airports Autority and BA combo.
With thier attitude being unable to maske money is a laugh. How about trying to provide s service then?
Useless.
Yo
By: Arabella-Cox - 11th November 2003 at 23:55
Same expression of incredulity here too.
As I’ve pointed out previously, British Airways did NOT have a Concorde in attendance at any public air display at all this year.
And god help them if they’re classing the final landings as a ‘public air display’, after they were at such pains to make the public stay away.
Fuming. 😡
By: Der - 11th November 2003 at 23:03
Air Shows????????:confused:
By: patb - 11th November 2003 at 22:59
weird reply or what???
Dear Mr Beardmore
Thank you for taking the time to e-mail BA.
I am sorry you are disappointed with the public air shows held for
Concorde’s retirement.
We value your feedback and your comments have been brought to the attention
of our
Customer Service team for review.
We look forward to being of assistance to you in future.
Yours sincerely
Tania Terreiro
Executive Club Blue
By: patb - 26th October 2003 at 08:36
with wonderful irony, after e-mailing off the compliant, I received news that I had succeeded in the ballot and won 2 tickets to the viewing enclosure. Attendance proved my orriginal point that BA were happy to do the minimum required to have an event. The temp grandstand was accompanied by around 20 portaloos, a coffee/sandwich stand and little else. Again, a complete lack of imagination or will to make this e decent event.
By: mike currill - 25th October 2003 at 19:13
There is one problem to running revenue earning flights with her that I was not aware of until yesterday and that is that Airbus have withdrawn the type certificate. So you can imagine the pproblems that will create
By: D R - 24th October 2003 at 22:51
British Airways “CEO and Board” PATHETIC
Well, watched it on the news from 7:30am this morning, i am now gutted what a sad day.
Concious that i should identify who i am slagging off when talking about British Airways. I am not attacking the people at the sharp end, crew, engineers and other team members. I AM attacking the board and all those in the ivory tower who make the desicions.
Firstly. i understand that all things come to an end and the fact that you feel commercially concorde cannot be run profitably i understand and except that (Just!)
Secondly, Without the backing of Airbus you feel that safety may be called into question. This too i understand.
However… Since retirement was anounced earlier this year the way British Airways have handled this has been disgusting!
No Airshow appearences in the summer, giving families the oppertunity to see the aeroplane one last time. A mutual Benefit of enhancing B A ‘s image and supporting the airshow industry!
A pathetic excuss of a farewell tour! Edinburgh, Cardiff and the Bay of Biscay on a Friday Afternoon? Nice one shame the Kids couldn’t go and watch??????
I’m Sorry BA you are not fit to be called our National Flag carrier and i think the fact you call yourselves ‘British’ Airways is sick.
You just don’t have the flare, skill and business brain…maybe thats why Virgin are taking your long haul business from you and Easy Jet have got the budget market wrapped up!
The future aint bright…
By: Der - 24th October 2003 at 22:02
Saw the beastie at Edinburgh today, and it was truly impressive.
Difficult to believe we’ll never see it in its element again.
By the time I’d packed up my gear and started walking back to the car, it was at 29,000 feet, and about 3 quarters of an hour after I’d got home, about 8 miles away, it was on finals at Heathrow!
We’ll never see its like again.:(
By: Tigercatno1fan - 24th October 2003 at 19:34
I have just got back from Heathrow and found out at the eleventh hour i was waiting at the end of the wrong runway DOH:eek: , If there is no love lost between BA and Richard(going up in my estimations) Branson why not let him take some concordes and to to run them at a profit, if he cant BA have the last laugh if he can we do, or am I over simplyfing things. What about the pilots and ground crew no matter what they do now it will feel like a step back, like getting Micheal Schumacher to become a bus driver;)
By: scott c - 24th October 2003 at 19:24
Well it’s all over
Sat home this afternoon watched the last flights on sky news and thought to myself never to be seen again. BUT the press are still talking about BA keeping one flying, but what about airbus is this just the BA press machine working overtime or are they really trying to save one. As for concordes going overseas im totally against it as the british tax payers paid for the aircraft they should be kept in the UK for those people who paid for it and could’nt afored to fly in it to visit it in all it’s glory on the ground.
Scott C
By: warbirdUK - 24th October 2003 at 17:24
I have just watched the BBC2 Concorde program, very strange hearing the R/T saying that they were just passing over the Devon coast at Woolacombe then rushing out into my back garden to see it overhead me in Bristol then a couple of minutes later TV pictures of the same aircraft turning over London! try that in a 747! It then really brings it home how unique Concorde really was………..
How BA or Airbus could remove it from our skies is a mystery to most people, no one interviewed on the program could see sense in the reasoning behind it!
I hope both BA & Airbus are proud of their contribution to Aviation this afternoon!
Concorde, RIP
By: GATEGUARD - 24th October 2003 at 17:00
Warbird
Well said, its criminal that the last 5 BA Concorde,s have at least 5 Years life left in them, and are to be grounded. Airbus pulled the plug probably because BA told them to, just to stop Richard Branson showing them (BA) how to operate to a profit.
BA are TO BIG, TO CR&P, and SELF CENTRED.
Unfortunately because there’s no love lost between Virgin and BA Its without a doubt what the problem is, I would have no doubt that Virgin even at £1 million each could still find a way to make a profit, he would find routes and people would fly in them.
WE will never know how much people paid to get a Concorde, but I bet its a tidy penny. Thats Tax payers property getting sold off by the way.
As many have already said , BA are shameful.
By: Bruce - 24th October 2003 at 16:55
You know the really sad thing
It struck me that in real terms, that airliners havent really advanced at all since the Comet. OK, they are a bit easier to fly, quieter, bigger and so on, but the Comet had all the basic elements of todays aeroplanes 50 odd years ago. If it hadnt fell out of the sky then who knows where we might be with Concorde.
Concorde was the only aircraft to break the mould. Now its made its last revenue earning trip. Very sad.
A huge retrograde step.
Bruce
By: warbirdUK - 24th October 2003 at 15:27
I think this is just another Government give away of our hard earned, we pay for something, It’s given away easy, when you don’t earn the money by hard work it has no value. Classic example was the recent war, what value has that been to the man/woman in the street? who paid for it? you & me, not the government, they have no money, only what we pay them in taxes. People rushed out to buy shares in the electricity privatisation why? when we already owned it! It’s very much the same for BA all they have had to do over the years is kick the tyres & light the fires (in simple terms) there has been no capital investment to re coup they didn’t have to pay more than a £1 so it’s easy for them to place the remaining Concorde where they want, the aircraft has no value, even less now as Airbus has pulled the plug on design support. I call it SHAMEFULL.
By: DOUGHNUT - 24th October 2003 at 12:53
Nobody else bought Concordes for several reasons.
Because of the 1970’s fuel prices and the very high fuel burn.
The airlines wanted a bigger plane with more seats.
The number of routes was limited, ie it could not cross the Pacific and over land supersonic routes were banded.
NOT because it was bad idea.
Questions ?
When BA used the Concorde to Singapore, where was the refuelling stop and which parts of the route did they fly supersonic
Did BA / Air France run schedules services to South America, if so did they need a refueling stop.
DOUGHNUT
By: Eddie - 24th October 2003 at 12:37
Has anyone thought of the reason why Concorde was sold to BA so cheaply? Like, that nobody else would buy it? And it’s not as if they’ve made a fortune out of demonstrating Anglo-French industry abroad, is it?
By: DOUGHNUT - 24th October 2003 at 11:13
Well lets hope that Branson can save at least two of the BA Concorde’s from overseas retirement. I think the aircraft for Seatle Museum was agreed several years ago and at least they look after their exhibits. I raised the same question on 15th October, does anybody on the Forum have expericance of such lobbying? Concorde needs our help.
“As has already been said New York and Barbados both seem odd locations, so how can we change the situation, as it needs to be done quickly. It is common knowledge that the Governement of the day paid for the Concordes and passed them over to BA for a nominal sum of £1 each. Therefore should the Government not be able to influence the final destination of these aircraft. If a peice of ‘fine art’ were to be sold abroad, an export liecence would be required, and in the national interest it could be refused. Why can the same principles be applied to the Concorde.
Has any body on the Forum got expericance of this sort of thing. Do you try to lobby your local MP’s or go direct to a Government department ? How about the national press ?”
DOUGHNUT
By: D R - 24th October 2003 at 07:55
£30,000,000 for a painting!!!!
Oh bloody ‘ell now im really p*ssed off!
I supose the painting must have heralded the start of supersonic passenger flight…
or maybe…
it helped defend our country against the threat of nuclear apocolypse…
or even…
the threat of a nazi invasion…
Yours depressed
DR:mad:
By: Flat 12x2 - 24th October 2003 at 00:46
I saw a bit of Question time, something about the Heritage Secutary stopping a painting from leaving the county last week.’We'(the nation) had to buy it for £30,000,000 ! just for a painting,Richard Branson said if that could be done for a painting then it could & should be done for Concorde.
By: Bob - 24th October 2003 at 00:11
Richard Branson was on Question Time this evening and he’s basically accepted that he will never get his hands on any Concorde for Virgin use, but he was pretty adamant that the BA Concordes should all remain in the UK and be based a Filton (I think he said) and flown for airshows and special occasions as a UK heritage flight.
He is desperate to keep them in the UK and seems determined to drag this government and BA around a table to thrash something out.
Maybe we should all write to him and back his calls for this idea.
The disposal of these aircraft is nothing less than a national disgrace and no doubt we’ll be seeing them rot away like the Shacks that went abroad and Vulcans.
Makes you want to puke…….