The model that blew up over Paris in 2000!

The Aerospatiale ATSF / British Aerospace AST (Alliance) It was a SST proposal made by the builders of the Concorde during the in late 1980s and early 1990s as a replacement for said aircraft, with expected development to begin in the late 1990s and early 2000s. It was to seat between 200-230 passengers, cruise at Mach 1.7 which was necessary due to the desire to build the plane out of less exotic, cheaper and ultimately less heat resistant aluminium alloys to the Concorde in an effort to reduce costs. Theres very little on this SST out there besides some concept art. If you wish to look it up on google then the following will likely yield the most results "Alliance AST Plane" or "Aerospatiale ATSF". The design seems to have been gone through 3-4 iterations with the largest getting into the region of 300ft to 311ft in length. SOURCE'S: -There is a wikipedia article on the plane under the heading "Avion de Transport Supersonique Futur" (Don't worry the rest is in English!) -The webpage on "secretprojects.co.uk" (forum site) with a page entitled "The Aerospatiale ATSF (Alliance)/ British Aerospace AST" features some info and material -On Facebook there is a group entitled "IPMS.(UK.) 'Project Cancelled SIG.' (UK. & commonwealth) alt. modelling" if you type "Alliance" into a group search that features 29 pictures of various things. Newspaper clippings, concept art, models etc

They did not foresee the coming rise in fuel price and environmental concerns. It's sad that we don't even reach half the speed of the Concorde in airliners of today.

@@skunkjobb You mean sonic boom and noise pollution, that was main reason why it got removed. Its biggest advantage - speed - turned out to be its biggest weakness.

it is crazy that when it was taken out of use the top speed of travel on earth went down and hasn't come back in 24 years

And Boeing isn't even designing something new and ground breaking with the 737 😂😂😂

Boeing is the largest aerospace manufacturer in the world, what happened to BAC???

Boeing builds the safest aircraft in the world hands down

They've taken a note, but it'll be used as roach by Friday.

​@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke It's now BAE Systems.

It was dumped outside of Airbus for a long time!

G-BOAC is on display in a building at Manchester Airport - I took my son to see it (you get a full tour and can sit in the cockpit). It was unbelievable considering the decade it was designed and manufactured.

YES disgraceful, BUT---the local Council was, at that time, on the verge of being broke. The government should have stepped in.@@JohnSmith-ei2pz

We did get a chance from time to time if there was a test flight and they needed some ballast. A couple of my workmates went up but sadly I was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

@@zanellewellyn1667 My Dad was part of the team at Marshalls that worked on and designed the droop nose. He's never been up in one but we did visit the Concorde at Duxford when I was a kid.

I thought exactly the same when I heard that lady speak

agreed - every hand that touched the bird in the building process should have qualified for a free flight .

Indeed.

I would attribute it more to a prideful competition instead, nowadays it would never get off the drawing board once the calculations for costs were made and the tests with sonic booms and people's perception around it were taken into account. In fact that is a big part of what killed the US versions of supersonic transport. The Europeans kept at it cause in the end of the day, someone still had to win against the Soviets.

So much love and care it blew into flames

@@H.hipster The one and only tragic accident in it's entire operaitonal history...and caused by debris on the runway from another aeroplane

The usual colloquialism ... the IQs have dropped

I'm a local too. Grew up right under the flight path. Each year during the family open day my dad used to take me into the factory so I got to see them at various stages of construction. Even got to go inside a couple before they were finished. I even remember going to Aust services to watch the first one flying down the Severn. The hillside was covered in BAC and Rolls families. Happy memories indeed.

Same here. My childhood home in Twickenham. My Grandad used to visit and watch in amazement as the sliding doors shook.

I lived on the edge of Filton airfield in 1990, weird to think that it's closed and all the Vulcans and Concordes that used to use it are scrapped or in museums now. Back then it seemed like Concorde would go on forever.

I grew up in south-west London in the 1980s, under the path of Concorde's takeoff climb-out. The friend I used to walk to school with once remarked that, "it sometimes seems like it's splitting the sky," which is the best description I ever heard of that incredible sound.

Would love to know what some of your other favourite industrial products are. (Seriously)

Rapaz, ver um brasileiro aqui e que lembre do Concorde, que coisa.

I agree.

One of the most beautiful aircraft ever built. Period.

Efficient aircraft tend to look good, like the Spifire and the Concorde

Agree Spitfire and Concorde, they are both No.1 on my list.

Concorde and the 747 just pure classic designs, it's sad that even the 747 will see it's end of service sooner than later. Now all you are left with are 2 engine tubes that all look alike, I guess fuel price wins. Maybe if fuel prices rise enough we will get back to regular scheduled Ocean Liners now that would be something else.

There actually was a proposal for a successor in the late 80s and early 90s. If you type either "Alliance AST Plane" or "Aerospatiale ATSF" you should see some concept art/models

@@NightHeronProduction thank you. I’ll do some research. Appreciate the information 👍

@@NightHeronProduction thank you. I’ll do some research. Appreciate the information 👍

Shame Bristol didn't keep Filton at its airport.

I think that the unique color had something to do with it. The culture as well

We also lost Sea Cats and Hovercraft. Both were also uneconomical because of the excessive need for maintenance and fuel demands.

@@jamesfx2 They became uneconomical because of the tunnel.

Problem of going faster than Mach 2 is materials. Higher the temperature due to air friction, less material that can handle the heat. Also consider is it really important to get there faster? It all comes down to tradeoffs in engineering and business. Even with subsonic aircraft these days the two of these professions are always in a tug of war. But for those of Freddy Price generation witnessed when air travel was a daredevil adventure and danger to evolving to comfortably cruising across the Atlantic having a nice meal and a glass of champagne.

Remember when education used to mean something.

Is it really such a step backward?

@@Hans-gb4mv We were on the brink of jet travel for all and now they even fly jumbo jets slower than 20 years ago. I'd call that a backwards step.

​@@MrDirkles 👍👍

@@MrDirkles You mean we don't have jet travel for all today? EasyJet and Ryanair? You got it completely opposite, instead of the elite going between London and New York at supersonic speeds, we go slow so that we can have Wizz Air.

​@@MrDirklesYes, but probably more affordable than ever (bar some price fluctuations). Compare (regular) London to NYC flight prices between 2003 and 2023, and there is a large difference. Is that really a step backwards? For those who want to fly supersonic in this day and age and can afford it; buy an old MiG, and you still can!

Yes, because they had a future worth fighting for

Yes, but no one can take it away from us... 😊

a shithole countrie? 🙃

I lived under the Heathrow flight path when I was a kid, watch the last 3 flights come in together.

He was much happier being at work! Haha.

@@_chipchip totally agree🤣😂🤣👍

They were the days when wives didn't have fake tans,hair extensions, trout lips and big arses hanging out in wine bars before school pickup and feeding the kids in Macky "D"s 😂

Your comment setts the world on a higher level. So for all others you can see to what brain using leads when you watch the film . And in some comments you can see what " no brain" can do ......

@@martinbohm399 like yours.

Observe the color

@@gdiwolverinemale4th Colour.

You mean no n.. or w...

Their kids seemed to have suffered too. And as you say all for what? A stark reminder to always put family first.

She’s right next to you Alan. Ask her.

This is such a terrible take based on nostalgia and comes from people who don't have an idea about our engineering capabilities in other fields. You think we haven't made development just because we don't have a supersonic airliner? Flying has been made cheaper and accessible to everyone, while being safer than driving on the road. We have a range of jets today that can fly to even small towns and be economical and comfortable. The concorde experience would be considered shockingly bad by modern standards today because you can get a lie flat bed and a good night of sleep for the price as a cramped seat on the Concorde. Supersonic travel will never make sense for the masses because it's just way too expensive

Most supersonic flight hours of any aircraft made

Biggest failure in commercial aviation history

​@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerkeIt was never an engineering failure. At the time this was the Pinnacle of aeronautical engineering on the planet. As far as becoming a widely used aircraft, there were issues and opposition that changed its viable future. But it was NEVER a failure.

@@bobolulu7615 They why were no Concordes sold? The Concorde was a unmitgated 65 million pound financial failure that completely gutted BAC and the UK aircraft industry

@@phillipbanes5484 Excellent comment, excellent point. America clearly knew alot more about supersonic aircraft which is exactly why they opted not to build SSTs

Also as with anything, creating replacement parts for maintenance starts to become uneconomic as time passes

Nope.

No it wouldn't have. People would much rather pay $20k for a luxurious seat on the 747 or 777 rather than fly on the Concorde on the seats you'd find on Spirit or Ryanair. Most airlines today can't even sell out their first class cabin throughout the year, and rely on people using miles or free upgrades to use them. Now imagine what the economics are for the concorde which is essentially a 100 seat first class-exclusive cabin in terms of price

@@harshallashar1069 you are a bit thick. The evidence is in your face and amazingly also in your own statement and you ignored it, people paid premium for the exclusive journey speed of Concorde, that is fact even after the crash when the trust had to be won back. The value of the price point had nothing to do with the width of the seating isle, you wouldn't get much use out of a first class cabin in a 3 hour flight anyway. Then you start blabbing on about the poor value of first class cabins on long duration flights, a complete irrelevance because Concorde had a monopoly on a niche premium market. It was taken out of service because the parts were becoming too costly to maintain and the airline industry has moved to one where fuel efficiency was paramount. Quite different to the 1960s when Concorde was designed, note flight cabins in the 50s were far more spacious and luxurious than todays first class

@@harshallashar1069Only because the first class in normal plane doesn't take you anywhere faster than the economy class. You only pay shitloads of money for prestige, luxury service and a good deal of snobbery

No way! The SR-71 was way more improvised (in the meaning of riding on the edge of feasibility) and could never be flown from a normal airport.

A Jumbo jet passenger crosses the Atlantic using SIXTEEN TIMES LESS FUEL than a Concorde passenger. Ignorance is bliss. And expensive.

I watched them come into Heathrow from Richmond Hill in Richmond Park with hundreds of others, It was a sad day indeed.

@@danielraiterThat must of been great to see!

Fireflash. It always reminded me of Concorde.

747 is a pure classic too, seeing it take off on a sunny bright day is just marvelous so sad that it too will be nothing but a memory and on video before we know it.

Odd looking back on the reasons for it ending while at the same time NASA still working on it: "X-59"

​@@phillipbanes5484there being putative reasons for it ending and yet NASA continues to do work contributing towards Supersonic transport is why I remark. Why, if it's "not worth it", continue to work on it?

​@@phillipbanes5484NASA's own Quesst page: "Reaction to the quieter sonic "thumps" will be shared with regulators who will then consider writing new sound-based rules to lift the ban on faster-than-sound flight over land". Isn't it remarkable, given "not worth it"?

@@phillipbanes5484 Troll spotted

@@phillipbanes5484wasn’t worth keeping around? BA certainly were eager to get it back in service

That's not really true. No really obvious advances in shape or speed, but huge advances in engine reliability and efficiency. The first RB211 in 1970 had a life of 1,000hrs. Now engines have upwards of 35,000 hrs. As for faster, unfortunately physics gets in the way, supersonic requires just so much more power than subsonic that it's just not cost-effective, and like it or not, bean-counters rule the world.

Umm one concord. blew up and 2 shuttles blew up both rank at the bottom per units made.

🤣😂👍

😂

BAe used to service US Air Force F-111s at Filton back in the eighties

I was lucky enough to work at both Hurn and Filton in the 1990s… don’t think I ever saw a Concorde at either of them though!

@@scottishwildcat April 21st 1996 Concorde was at Hurn Airport. Think it was organised by Bath Travel.

BA was making money and had a relife program, the French put a blocker on it!

BA themselves said it returned more profit during its lifetime than any other aircraft in the fleet?

@@stuartmcgovern4466 The accident put a blocker to re-life 2. Unfortunately passenger numbers never recovered and BA Management and the French put the kybosh on it.

Not true. It was equal to one wide body and yes BA made serious money for many years.

@@cjmillsnunAirbus pulled support, you can’t operate such a small fleet without this given the lack of parts and spares in the used market. Of course AF likely wanted it retired also as they are always mismanaging