Isn't progress wonderful!

Orionaut · 7 Feb 2016 at 14:54

I was at a Saturday market with the GF yesterday.

On one of the stalls there was and old Airfix model of the Concord.

I commented to her, "Just think about this. In the 1960's we could fly the Atlantic in three hours, now it takes seven! Isn't progress wonderful!"

(The subsonic Atlantic record was also held by a 1960's aircraft too until really very recently (VC-10) )

Caged · 7 Feb 2016 at 14:57

It's also significantly cheaper to fly now, safer, more comfortable, and technology is chipping away at the reasons to require people to make trans-Atlantic trips.

So if you measure progress purely in terms of "how quickly can I fly from London to New York irrespective of cost" then it would look like we haven't made progress.

Diddums · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:03

Concorde was a truly astonishing accomplishment, but it was a textbook example of doing something for prestige and recognition rather than profits. We fould easily build another one nowadays which uses less fuel, flies faster, is more comfy and quiet, yet we're bound by budgets and accounts. That said, there are of course people bucking the trend, Elon Musk is a good example.

George Hincapie · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:03

Caged said:
It's also significantly cheaper to fly now

I don't think that's a good thing actually.

sigma · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:07

The world has clearly not progressed since 1960.

Glaucus · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:09

We've progressed massively, but concord made no sense. To expensive, not enough passengers. Sonic booms meaning it couldn't throttle up till over the sea.

Supersonic passenger planes will be back at some point, but when it makes sense, there's a huge amount if research and as said if we wanted to we could already build something far superior. Nasa dies huge amounts if research into aerodynamics, minimising sonic booms etc.

Arm though cost of ticket is the driving force passenger plane design, which in itself lack a lot of technology to make them fuel efficient.

Skeeter · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:15

Halo technologies like Concord drive the industry forward though. Same with the Space Shuttle. They inspire people, especially young people, and without them part of the magic is lost.

They don't need to be cost effective, they need to be inspiring.

Glaucus · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:18

There's lots of stuff to be inspired by, more is always better. But for a company it has to be economically viable. Or it has to be government/philanthropist backed project.

doofer · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:22

Skeeter said:
They inspire people, especially young people, and without them part of the magic is lost.

The UK has - in just a Generation - gone from a 'You can do anything' mentality to a 'You can't do anything incase it upsets someone' one.

Tefal · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:30

Skylon A2 will be the next concorde i think.

If the concept and skylon works the ability to fly up coast through low earth orbit at insane speeds then fly back down would mean australia in a very short time.

But its a long ways off

Tunney · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:31

doofer said:
The UK has - in just a Generation - gone from a 'You can do anything' mentality to a 'You can't do anything incase it upsets someone' one.

Nonsense. We've gone from one generation where the best and the brightest want to work for investment banks to the next generation where the best and the brightest want to work in tech.

[TW]Fox · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:31

Orionaut said:
I was at a Saturday market with the GF yesterday.

On one of the stalls there was and old Airfix model of the Concord.

I commented to her, "Just think about this. In the 1960's we could fly the Atlantic in three hours, now it takes seven! Isn't progress wonderful!"

In the 1960's the vast majority of us could never fly the Atlantic in any sort of time. Even those who could visit say Spain were in the privileged few. The rest of us were limited to British seaside towns.

Today, we can pretty much all afford it, some multiple times a year.

Isn't progress wonderful?

estebanrey · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:32

doofer said:
The UK has - in just a Generation - gone from a 'You can do anything' mentality to a 'You can't do anything incase it upsets someone' one.

Are you somehow conflating a perceived lack of ambition from British engineers with the rise of political correctness?

Not really sure how the current lack of supersonic planes is linked not being able to call gay people "poofs" in public anymore :confused:

Tefal · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:33

Glaucus said:
We've progressed massively, but concord made no sense. To expensive, not enough passengers. Sonic booms meaning it couldn't throttle up till over the sea.

Supersonic passenger planes will be back at some point, but when it makes sense, there's a huge amount if research and as said if we wanted to we could already build something far superior. Nasa dies huge amounts if research into aerodynamics, minimising sonic booms etc.

Arm though cost of ticket is the driving force passenger plane design, which in itself lack a lot of technology to make them fuel efficient.

Theres lots of progress being made such as the new NEO versions of 320 and soon the 330.

For the 350 there was a recent rapid development project on trying to reduce the ampunt of unusueable fuel (bits that get stuck in parts of the tank the pumps don't reach) they managed to recover judt under 500kg of extra fuel and it will start being fitted to new 350s soon.

These small rapid projects are becoming quite a thing like new little addon fairings to gain a 0.somerthing % efficency

Diddums · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:34

Skeeter said:
Halo technologies like Concord drive the industry forward though. Same with the Space Shuttle. They inspire people, especially young people, and without them part of the magic is lost.

They don't need to be cost effective, they need to be inspiring.

Agreed, but there are projects out there which still do that, Bloodhound springs to mind.

doofer · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:46

estebanrey said:
Are you somehow conflating a perceived lack of ambition from British engineers with the rise of political correctness?

Not really sure how the current lack of supersonic planes is linked not being able to call gay people "poofs" in public anymore

Ummm..

I was thinking more along the lines of people complaining about how anything inventive or progressive would affect them, their house-prices or what favourite moss of theirs it might slightly inconvenience. Not sure where you grabbed 'poofs' from? Something Freudian maybe...

Deleted member 66701 · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:47

Orionaut said:
I was at a Saturday market with the GF yesterday.

On one of the stalls there was and old Airfix model of the Concord.

I commented to her, "Just think about this. In the 1960's we could fly the Atlantic in three hours, now it takes seven! Isn't progress wonderful!"

(The subsonic Atlantic record was also held by a 1960's aircraft too until really very recently (VC-10) )

Have you flown on Concord?

I have and I'd rather take a modern Airbus anyday, even if it does take twice as long.

7 hours in supreme comfort or 3 hrs in a cramped, noisy, tiny windowed, poor climate controlled bone shaker? Not really a choice - nor does it seem it was much of a choice for others, hence why Concord isn't flying anymore but Jumbos still are.

Caged · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:48

doofer said:
Ummm..

I was thinking more along the lines of people complaining about how anything inventive or progressive would affect them, their house-prices or what favourite moss of theirs it might slightly inconvenience. Not sure where you grabbed 'poofs' from? Something Freudian maybe...

I think all these complaining people existed, but the internet has given them a voice.

Alibaba99 · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:50

Orionaut said:
I was at a Saturday market with the GF yesterday.

On one of the stalls there was and old Airfix model of the Concord.

I commented to her, "Just think about this. In the 1960's we could fly the Atlantic in three hours, now it takes seven! Isn't progress wonderful!"

(The subsonic Atlantic record was also held by a 1960's aircraft too until really very recently (VC-10) )

I can have a webex with America (or anywhere else for that matter) that takes no time out of my day at all and so the need to travel is massively reduced.

There is a reason why modern planes don't fly as quick as the VC-10, it's all about efficiency and operational cost (same as why 4 engined planes are disappearing).

Skeeter · 7 Feb 2016 at 15:52

Diddums said:
Agreed, but there are projects out there which still do that, Bloodhound springs to mind.

True, but you can't aspire to buy a ticket to ride in Bloodhound. Concorde was awesome because people were able to imagine themselves flying on it. Obviously few did, but it was always a possibility.

Isn't progress wonderful!

Deleted member 66701

Deleted member 66701