[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

Guys, into my aviation but not really business side of things.

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 1

File: Concorde.jpg (251KB, 1024x687px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Concorde.jpg
251KB, 1024x687px
Guys, into my aviation but not really business side of things. Could the worlds best aircraft have worked if the following 2 conditions was met?
>Larger capacity (Circa 200)
>Operated on a low cost airline model

If not, how could it have become profitable.
>>
>>2548890
Is that a coin tho?
>>
>>2548890
Make an ICO
>>
>>2548890
Will it be listed on Bittrex soon?
>>
I would guess so. But then it really wouldn't have been that plane. The biggest downfall from what i heard was that the fuel to passanger ratio was too low. That it would've costed too much to maintain and so the tickets were exorbitant. maybe to the super rich it would be profitable. But it really isnt worth it. the super rich can already get private jets to take them places quicker. And they can already get first class tickets on regular flights. There are a lot of smart people in the industry who must've done all the logistics. But, at the end of the day, it just wasn't worth the money to impliment these.
>>
>>2548890
If I recall correctly, the Concorde failed because it was expensive and unnecessary. Expensive because of the complicated design, mainteinance, and fuel/performance ratio, and unnecessary because people didn't really need to travel that fast. A supersonic passenger plane generate problems that a sub-sonic plane doesn't.

Don't listen to me at all, I'm not an expert.
>>
>>2548890
IIRC it's because it used turbojet engines which are inefficient as fuck, was banned from overland flight, was expensive to maintain,and its two crashes scared everybody.

The time for SSBJ's (super sonic business jets) might be upon us though.

See:
https://boomsupersonic.com/
http://www.aerionsupersonic.com/
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 1


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.