Whilst I agree that it’s unacceptable for a modern airliner to crash due to a 10 inch strip of metal. AF are ultimately responsible for the crash.

The AF crew over-estimated the amount of fuel they’d consume on the journey to the runway. Meaning the aircraft was over-weight by more than a ton by the time they reached the runway.
During the taxi, the AF crew decided to cross-feed more fuel into the no. 5 tank. However, they once again miscalculated and transferred too much fuel. Meaning the aircraft was heavily unbalanced to the port side.
Finally, AF engineers had failed to install a legally required bogie ‘spacer’ for Concorde’s wheels. The spacer is a specially designed metal guard that keeps the wheels straight during take-off (Concorde had a tendency to veer to one side at high speeds). The lack of spacer would have worsened the already difficult to control aircraft, and may have been a reason why the flight never reached V1.

All three three errors are gross negligences on Air France’s part, the flight may not have crashed if either one of the errors had been eradicated.

Ha! First China, now America. Looks like our pals across the pond have stuck two big fingers up at ETS too. Obama’s signed a bill stating US carriers do not have to pay the tax.
Now the Brussels bureaucrats have egg on their face… :p
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/27/us-usa-airlines-emissions-idUSBRE8AQ1AR20121127

I hadn’t fully appreciated just how stupid ETS was until I read the article. The plan is to tax each ton of CO2 emitted on flights to and from the EU. This includes the paying of tax for miles flown outside of EU airspace.

Take American Airlines’ route from LAX-LHR. ETS would mean AA would have to pay tax on all the emissions released not just over EU airspace, but over American, Canadian and international airspace too! What a stupid tax. I fully support the US congress on this issue, why should American carriers be paying the EU for miles flown over US airspace? It’s way outside the EU tax-man’s jurisdiction.

If I drive into a low emissions zone, I expect to pay tax on the emissions my car emits in the zone… Not on all the emissions realised on the journey to the zone as well!

I guess someone who’s just spent a year in mainland Europe is just as bias as a daily mail reader?

I wouldn’t mind staying in the EU if I thought we were getting value for money – the fact is, we aren’t. And the notion that fellow EU states (France, Germany) would reduce trade with us if we leave just because we’d be “outsiders”, I personally find laughable.

Obviously if we leave the EU, bilateral agreements with France and Germany (and other large EU economies) would have to be put in place to ensure we don’t lose trade. These countries would have to agree to these bilateral’s – simply because they have too much to lose…
Eg.

Britain’s exports to Germany = £27.5 Billion.
Britain’s imports from Germany = £41.1 Billion.

Britain’s exports to France = £18.9 Billion.
Britain’s imports from France = £19.1 Billion

The story’s the same for Italy and Spain, we buy so much from the Europeans they’d have to agree to our bilateral proposals post EU departure.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/feb/24/uk-trade-exports-imports#

Makes a nice news story, the idea of a traveller taking a photo just at the moment their aircraft is struck by lightning. But this seems like too much of a co-incidence, my bet is the picture is a still from a video. :p