The REAL story About the Crash that Killed Concorde! | Air France flight 4590
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 май 2024
- Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today’s video. Go to curiositystream.com/?coupon=m...
and use code MENTOURPILOT to save 25% off today, that’s only $14.99 a year.
Check out this video about pilots playing around in their aircraft, next: • When Pilots treat the ...
On the 25th of July 2000 the world changed forever. With the first fatal crash of a Concorde since it first came into service, the confidence in the worlds only super sonic passenger jet was shattered. But what actually happened on during that fateful takeoff of Air France Flight 4590 in Charles de Gaulle Airport in France? What cased the huge fire and the eventual loss of controls?
In this video I will go to the bottom of all the little details that led up to this crash, I hope you will find it interesting.
If you want to support the work I do on the channel, join my Patreon crew and get awesome perks and help me move the channel forward! 👇
👉🏻 / mentourpilot
Get the Mentour Aviation app and discuss what You think about this! Download the app for FREE using the link below 👇
📲
📲 Join the Mentour Pilot Discord server here! 👉🏻 / discord
I have also created an Amazon page with Aviation books, material and flight simulator stuff that I think you will enjoy!
👉🏻 www.amazon.com/shop/mentourpilot
Follow my life on instagram and get awesome pictures from the cockpit!
📲 / mentour_pilot
To find the right HEADSET for YOU, check out BOSE Aviation 👉🏻 boseaviation-emea.aero/headsets
Artwork in the studio 👉🏻 aeroprints.de/?lang=en
Get some Awesome Mentour Pilot merch 👉🏻 mentour-crew.creator-spring.c...
Below you will find the links to videos and sources used in this episode. Enjoy checking them out!
Concorde 1969: @ André Cros
www.aerotime.aero/upload/file...
Concorde 1969 2: @ AFP 2021
sputniknews.com/20170721/conc...
CDG: @ NEW NEWS
n00news.wordpress.com/2010/10...
airfrance check in: @ caen-airport.com
caen-airport.com/check
Aircraft Maintenance @ gla.ac.uk
www.cud.ac.ae/sites/default/fi...
Memorial site: @ Christopher P. Hood
hoodcp.wordpress.com/2020/07/...
Wires: @ lectromec.com
d2wwvh76f5odon.cloudfront.net...
Concorde in flight: @airlineratings.com
www.airlineratings.com/news/c...
9-11: @ AP Photo/Chao Soi Cheong
ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/di...
Last Concorde: @ Pedro Aragão
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
CFA1VX7XZ1G8FFY7
00:00 - Intro
00:36 - A Marvel of Engineering
03:36 - The Fuel System
04:41 - Performance Penalty
06:13 - Cockpit Inspections
07:11 - Engines Start
08:28 - The DC-10
10:40 - The Taxi to 26-R
13:51 - The Line Up
15:05 - 121 Seconds
19:03 - Watch Out!
23:08 - Airborne
25:33 - Uncommanded Roll
27:13 - Too Late
27:13 - The Jigsaw Begins
30:00 - Offset Landing Gear?
31:55 - The DC-10 / Continental Airlines
32:58 - Crew Performance
34:30 - Conclusions
DC-10, a plane so troubled that when it’s not crashing itself it’s crashing others.
For the many DC-10/11 design problems, it's not right to blame McDonnell-Douglas for Continental's shitty maintenance.
Yeah, now look at Boeing. That's how Mcdonnell Douglas destroyed aviation. MAX profit at MAX probability of in flight crashes.
It's cursed.
Yeah. After becoming an aviation enthusiast years ago, I vowed never to fly on any DC aircraft. Maintenance, bad design that made them unstable (which has been talked about in one of the incidents on this channel), or whatever it was, they always seemed to be finding their way into the ground. No thank you, I’ll stay away from these cursed aircraft.
The Concorde was built so weak that it's own tires can catastrophically destroy the aircraft.
One of my classmates died in that flight. We were 8 at the time, so when our teacher told us that he wouldn't be back after the holidays, we didn't really grasp it and just were sad about him dying. Since this was before the wide spread of the internet and we were kids, I never knew the details of the crash until I accidentally stumbled over this video today. His last moments must have been so horrifying.
His name was Michael Kahle, he just finished 2nd grade, loved soccer (especially Borussia Mönchengladbach and trading soccer cards) and joked a lot. I think, I'll pay his grave a visit soon.
It must have been difficult to post this but I appreciate your sharing your memories. For you to remember him so clearly he must have been a really good kid. I am very sorry for your loss.
You are a good person, I like it that you shared this with us random anonymous posters in the comments section.
When you visit his grave, please think about it that way too, that when such thing happens so quickly in an aircraft, it was more a sense of optimistic disbelief than a sense of fear that overwhelmed his last moments feelings.
His last hours at the Airport and his last days preparing the wonderful journey were all joy and excitement.
Rest in Peace, Michael Kahle!
WALL st ruins everything it touches,,when food "service' companies started growing bigger & getting traded on Wall st quality & employee payroll s went down.Boeing is a BIG example of that Wall St scum gthat demanded those planes be designed on a budget...killed all those people for Greed
I'm so sorry for your loss.
Rest in Peace Michael Kahle...
And all those on Board on that fateful day also the people on the Ground at the Hotel complex
Ahh the DC-10. Not only dangerous to itself, but dangerous to every other plane around it.
I remember the news report as a kid. Even if it was expensive, it was such a beautiful plane.
I don't think, logically, you can call it "dangerous to every other plane around it" for something that is a maintainence issue.
For that matter, once you get past thje design issues that were fixed after the relevant accident, it went on to have fewer hull losses statistically (for all subtypes) than the 737, and even the A320!
The flying coffin!
Dont belittle the DC-10.
It was rivet heads that were worn down which held the titanium strip on to the reverser cowling. The strip departed because of insufficient rivets heads to hold it on.
Even the DC-10's most famous accident in Chicago was caused by a maintenance problem. The crack caused by that maintenance problem was also present in several Continental Airlines DC-10s immediately after the American Airlines disaster. It could just as easily have been one of their DC-10s that had the same failure as American Airlines 191.
Here the lax maintenance standards at Continental Airlines actually resulted in consequences.
The DC-10 was an excellent aircraft that fell victim by majority to negligent maintenance practices and procedures.
This episode and your episode on Tenerife are some of the finest aviation documentaries I've ever watched, seriously better than many I've seen on TV.
Same
Without doubt
Yeah, the TV ones is mostly full of unnecessary fillers and drama
Almost didn’t watch it ,seeing that it was 37 mins and I had read about this crash .But once I started ,stayed glued and did not skip a second .Beautifully explained.
Thank you! So happy you thought so
How could you think about not watching any of Mentour Captains great videos no matter the length!
@@Sajin688 Theres a few creators that are on my short list of the longer the better, Petter is an anchor member of my top 3. Low-key jealous of the future pilots that have the fortune of being his students
@@wraith8323 I like his thorough explanation about each contributing factor to this catostrophic ending to a magnificient marvel.
His mentoring should be heeded by up and coming pilots and even the veterans as well!
RIP to all of the crew and passengers.
My Dr Dr Quinta was on that flight
I started flying at age 16 and recently retired from aviation at age 72 and your series is the BEST of its kind that I've encountered in accuracy, clarity, depth, and content. Exceptional sir! Exceptional!
this is truly an amazing channel that i just found out by chance.
That is very impressive. 56 years of flight experience, you must’ve flown so many different models of planes throughout the years and experienced both all the innovations and tragedies in the airspace insustry! I hope you have a great retirement.
I tell people about this channel.... I've been watching it from the start..... Love it
Flying till 72. Wow
wow
My best friend called me in Miami and asked me what my opinion was on Concorde... I'm an aviator at heart and was active pilot there at the time... He then opened up to me, he had just lost both his parents, his sister, her life partner and their young son plus 1 more... father was a successful bus entrepreneur contracting line bus services to the City of Munich. Liebe Familie S., RIP
Blame the French, not the aircraft
One small detail which was missed out was the day Concord did it's first test flight with the new modifications was September 11, 2001. The Concord flew from the UK, over the Atlantic and then back to the UK. The pilots only realised about the terrorist attacks when they returned. The biggest tragedy in the Concord story was that when it was announced they were folding, everybody wanted tickets to fly Concord again and the last flight was sold out. Thanks for your detailed explanation.
Should never have been grounded after the crash and certainly after the refit they should have been allowed to continue in service
Air France never really made their Concordes a success,Airbus withdrawing COA was the final nail in the coffin for this magnificent aircraft.
it was way too loud, especially early mornings where it would wake up everyone, it was a major nightmare for, many residents, especially near airports ,
@@freetheworld12I lived in Kingston-upon-Thames for 10 years during Concorde. Never bothered me.
Not trist-attacks ... INSIDE shadow-govt job!
@@squirrelmanning7889
Good for you specifically… not everyone is you.
I don’t live near an airport but loud planes wake me up… super irritating. Can’t imagine being woken up by sonic booms regularly…
My one and only Concorde flight was on this exact same aircraft with the exact same crew 1 month before the crash. I'll never forget the beautiful, elegant flight attendant in her pearl necklace. After lunch was served she learned I was a travel agent with a group on board and she invited me to the flight deck Mid-Atlantic to meet the Captain. (Remember, this was pre-9/11 when you could do that.)
That's pretty cool
How fast do you think that pearl necklace melted in the fireball?
@@SurvivingAnotherDay wtf is wrong with you?
@@SurvivingAnotherDay Wow. I feel so bad for bursting out with laughter there.
I enjoyed your comment very much, how elegantly written, so i'm disgusted at some of the crass replies you got , you did'nt deserve that. 😖🗨
My wife and I were flying Air France from Munich to London with about a 2 hour layover in Paris. As we waited, we talked to a few of the other passengers waiting to catch their flights. Some were going to London with us. Others were headed for Copenhagen. One American couple and one German couple we talked with were going to fly to New York. We boarded before the other flights. As we walked down the entryway we could see our plane to the left. To the right boarding later we could see the sleek Concorde. We commented that it was too bad we could not fly the Concorde to London, then laughed that we were taking the poor man’s plane.
We arrived in London and stayed at a bed and breakfast. We told the hosts we flew in from Paris. They turned the TV on and it was showing coverage of the crash of the SST.
To this day I remember that my first thoughts were that we had talked to people that were on that flight and that our plane could have been the one with the tragic ending.
@@voltydequa845 Da fak...? Not funny bro.
@@vejet 1. knowledge 2. (kind of) sense of humour. 3. it is not nice to try censoring by means of "not funny"
@@voltydequa845 How about, "plain dumb"?
@@NYCBG It all depends on reciprocal depth of thought.
Great creepypasta
As someone who owns several bikes and forgot a spacer or two on reassemble - the tremendous stakes riding on each and every component in aircrafts never cease to amaze.
That is why us aircraft engineers get such thorough training
How awful for all those people on that flight 😓 I find anything like this horrifying. And difficult to comprehend - a little strip of metal on the runway led to this horrific outcome in 2 minutes. Scary. Thank you for the upload, your detail and compassion is evident.
This one made me more sad that any other story, not only did a lot of people tragically lose their lives in a horrible and totally avoidable accident...... it was the beginning of the end of the flying career of probably the greatest, the most glamorous, the most famous, the most beautiful and iconic aircraft in aviation history.
Concorde was expected to remain in passenger service until around 2010, by which time it is likely that the airframes of all the British Airways and Air France SSTs would have reached their permitted numbers of Hours Flown and Cycles Completed, which together governed the safe Metal Fatigue Lifetime Limitations. The Gonesse Mishap did not, despite many Intenet statements to the contrary, affect these plans. The end of service in 2003 was actually caused by the unilateral action of Airbus, when it unforeseeably reneged upon its Treaty Obligations to provide the necessary support for supplying Certified Maintenance and Repair Parts and Materials for the Type. Without such a mandatory system in place, no Concorde could receive Annual Airworthiness Certification for 2004 or beyond, and no paying passengers could be carried any longer. Fortunately, 18 or the 20 Concordes built still exist, the majority are on public display, and the SST is unlikely ever to be forgotten.
@@johnstedman4075 Am I correct in thinking that the Americans have been resurrecting the supersonic option for aircraft industry? I thought I’d seen models of one that they’d made. It was to be bigger than Concorde but with amazing similarities in the design features.
@@AlanFielding-jc1tb You are correct, I wouldn't be surprised if the Americans have succeeded.
@@AlanFielding-jc1tb @Jamezy316 While we are constantly looking into super Sonic passenger planes I don't believe we have much more than prototypes.
We did however have an experimental super sonic bomber being tested called the XB-70 Valkyrie back in 1969. It has strong similarities with the Concorde aside from some new air foils and more engines.
The logistics and abilities of supersonic passenger aircraft is just hard to get into as most airports, aside from of the major international ones, cannot accommodate for the needed runway length for takeoff and landing.
Just because we may have some airports that can accommodate those needs we also have to include the fact that intended destinations would also need to have these accomodations.
Personal Opinion:
Maybe a large scale cable system similar to that on an aircraft carrier could be designed to assist with landing distances.
It’s not an SR-71 it was a massive noisy polluter for the rich to brag that they’ve flown on and it never made economic sense
Cheers
My wife's aunt was aboard the Concorde that crashed. We were in close contact with her. We frequently visited each other both in Germany and here in Minnesota. She had called us the day before and told us that she was on her way to an Amazon River Cruise and would be changing planes in New York. The group was too large to all fly on the Concorde so the tour group had a lottery to select those who would fly on the Concorde. My wife's aunt won a seat. She was very excited and sent us her itinery. We were close to her and shared her excitment. We were thinking of her as we saw a news flash on the TV about the crash. It was a real shock. It happened so fast, we hope she was drinking Champagne at the time. Air France called my wife and made arrangements for her to meet the Air France "consoler" who accompanied her to the fumeral in Munich. We miss her so very much.
Sorry. Such a heartbreaking story. Thank you for sharing anyway. May they all rest in peace.
Such a tragedy
May she rest in peace..
Chanhassen?
F
I took the same route from France at a different time. 1986
Service was fantastic. I was able to go up with the pilots and get some instructions on how they flew the Concorde. I really didn’t want the trip to end.
I was working at a major airline res center during this time, and I remember walking past the break room to see dozens of people standing and watching the TV in horror. I thought "Oh no, there's been a crash." Absolutely awful day. We all felt so terrible for those aboard the aircraft and everyone at Air France.
my dad flew on the concorde once from London to New York. He said it took only about 4 hours and it was basically all first class. The cutlery was all real silver and he said it got really hot during takeoff and landing. I wish they'd bring it back so I can fly on it one time... what a magnificent piece of work...
I wanna go with you then.
An American company is currently developing a supersonic aircraft for civil transportation. It is designed to fly at Mach 1.7 and carry up to 68 passengers.
@@anguyom where can we keep track of any developments on that, perhaps the company name?
It’s only a matter of time before it comes back don’t worry
@@v1nigra3 it’s been 23 years ,it’s not coming back.
It wasn’t economically feasible to fly back then and it wouldn’t be now.
I was on the flight (Paris to Dulles) that was to take off immediately after flight 4590. Wife and I had waited to board with the passengers. We were boarding when the accident happened and the passenger behind me saw it happen. That was one quiet ride to DC.
That must have been quite the experience. Brrrrrrr
Very interesting video.
I have worked quite some time in the Air France family crisis centers for the Concorde crash, both in Paris and in Germany ( as most victims were German and i speak both languages ).
It was quite taxing emotionally to talk to the families of the deceased in the hours, weeks and months following the crash.
Oddly i never looked into the various reports and videos about that crash.
I think because at the time i would have seem it as morbid curiosity.
Finally decades later I’m looking at this video…
Strange feeling
I don't think it would be morbid, but dealing with the shock, disbelief, confusion and anger of the grieving relatives over an extended period of time must have been very challenging. However well trained one might be for these kinds of scenarios, being present for such intense, raw emotions, and engaged with the needs of the bereaved people in a way that makes them feel heard and understood, and does not add to their distress, is draining. There must be some degree of transference.
People who deal with these sorts of crises usually have a strong sense of obligation to do a difficult job to the best of their ability; and if they work in teams there will be a shared sense of purpose, and canaraderie. Once the crisis is over, and duty has been done, there is time to relax and reflect, and they may realise that they have been affected more than they realise.
I don't presume to know how you were feeling, but I can imagine myself being reluctant to re-engage with something so distressing. You had already done as much as anyone for those families, and reading a report would not make any difference to them, but might have been tough on you.
It takes a certain kind of person to step up for this kind of work. A lot of people find the grief of other people very difficult to deal with, because it's not something that can be solved, or made better with helpful advice, and they don't know what to say. There is a lot of power in iistening attentively, and without judgement. There is no need to do anything, or say anything, other than make the speaker feel heard, and acknowledge their feelings. Just letting them speak at their own pace, follow their own thoughts and say what they want to say, can be very powerful. It's a good rest for the ego as well, if it will stay quiet!
So here's to all the listeners. And thank you for what you did.
Hi Stephan, You should try and write a memoir about the crash and your work following it.
Bless you for your work
Having just read the book by the former BA chief Concord pilot I think there's only one important fact missing in this excellent video and that's that the pierced tank should not have been completely full. That was a procedure sometimes done to get more fuel on board but it allowed the mentioned shock induced movement within the tank that eventually led to it bursting. That one was on the crew/PIC.
John Hutchinson points to pilot error also in his RUclips video covering the subject
Wasn't it also mentioned that they overloaded the plane with newspapers that weren't on the manifest?
When I was seven years old, I was given a tour of a Concorde on the ground at Dulles Airport. I never flew on the plane, but I did get to meet the captain and even go into the cockpit. About six months later, a friend of my dad’s had me as a passenger in his Cessna. We were cleared for takeoff when we were told to hold because a Concorde needed to go in front of us. I still remember what it was like seeing it pull up, and then the afterburners glowing as it went into the sky. I also remember that the angle of launch was more like a rocket than an airplane.
It always looked to me more like a rocket taking off too!
You are very lucky man, getting to see that must've been amazing.
L
I remember with emotion the time i worked for Air France at Dulles airport when we received the plane we donated to the Smithsonian on its last flight.
How the concorde engineers cried when they bled that beautiful plane of its hydraulic fluid, essentially killing it.
And how every airport staff including the police chiefs came to pay hommage to it.
Touching memories.
I recommend visiting the air and space museum in Dulles where that concorde is on permanent display.
Pilots giving their all to the very end always gets to me. Never giving up. Such bravery that needs more attention. My heart goes out to all lives lost and their families.
I know it sounds stupid but they arent going to just give up are they.
@@leedrummond164 many people would think you’d just give up on trying because you know you’re going to die anyway
Well what else are they supposed to do? There lives are at stake too..... never get these kinda comments. There's not just gonna sit there with there arm crossed. We'd all do the same
trying to save themselves
Pilots don’t think of the passengers, if their lives are at stake they will try and save theirs
I remember being in the paris airport seeing the concorde take off, which was amazing to watch. Then a few years later this tragedy occurred and pretty much put an end to its legacy. You did a great job of putting this report together, thanks
I watched it take off from JFK one day. Long story from when I was young and crazy!😂
Despite the piece of DC10 metal that has been blamed for the disaster it's less reported that maximum take off weight had been exceeded and this was known by the crew on the flight deck who ignored that fact, shoddy maintenance and poor procedures by the crew also contributed to the crash. The French authorities were very quick to blame Continental.
It is unheard of for Air Crash Investigator teams not to provide total cooperation, particularly between the Nations responsible for the joint development of the aircraft. The French clearly had their reasons ......what did they hide ? 🤔
@@garymoore2535 Unfortunately Gary I do not think the truth will ever be known its obvious that AF have some blame as did the airport operators but it was convenient to put the entire blame on Continental and the DC10 but I'm certain vital information has not been made public.
Just the fact that it ruptured from the inside is enough to point at the fuel levels being much too high
My uncle was part of this investigation as one of the engineers for the tire manufacturer. It was the most stressful period of his life. The closer you push any complex system to the edges of it's engineering margins, the less fault tolerant that system becomes, and the more likely a failure will be catastrophic. this crash and loss of life deeply affected people al over the world. The concord was such a marvel of engineering.
Love hearing your story. My uncle [Godfather] who was (as he recently just retired) the principle quality engineer at Northrop Grumman who worked on the James Webb Space Telescope that recently went up into space on 25Dec2021, mentioned that his job was really stressful too. Can you image such engineering wonders these manmade machines are and the level of intelligence our uncles have.
Erica: "The closer you push any complex system to the edges of its engineering margins, the less fault tolerant that system becomes, and the more likely a failure will be catastrophic." 🖒🤠
So your Uncle helped develop the Tyres for Concorde ?
@@1SmokingLizard Amazing Intelligence to develop something that flys so fast through the air - Mind Blowing that Humans created this Engineering Beast.
They should have done a better job copying the plane from the TU-144. And in fact do what both the Americans and the Russians did, abandon the project. I'm afraid the real perpetrator is the guy who allowed the Concorde to continue to fly.
As a professional pilot of over 41 years, mostly on international jets I have to say this was one was one of the best I have ever watched. Well done!
Next is the 747 botch job haha
@@Killereggman "International jets"? That term is not colloquially correct among actual pilots. You're not an airline pilot, troll.
No kidding well done indeed. U pilots all rock !!!
I am a humble health worker with zero knowledge about aircraft engineering. And even I was able to follow this. I found it incredibly well structured for the lay person to follow.
@@largefolder Kenneth, the 'troll' above is Capt. Terry McCarthy, retired American Airlines...Kenneth, do your research!
Im not an aviation nerd but ever since i started watching your channel ive never once complained about flight delays
You are one of the most amazing story tellers. I've seen and read material on many of the crashes you cover, but i still can't stop watching your videos. Heading out from a pilots perspective is amazing. And the way you tell the stories makes it even better.
One of the things I love about these videos is I feel like I'm being spoken with, rather than instructed. It feels like a conversation, not a lecture.
Well done, Captain. Thank you.
Exactly, and it's not like those made for television shows where they rehash all the facts after the ad breaks just to fluff it up to a time schedule.
That’s what I’m trying yo do!
I think this is one of the single biggest things separating mentor pilot from some other RUclips pilots. A modest tone rather than a sometimes condescending (albeit unintentional) one from others.
i like how he never makes me feel stupid even though i haven't really a clue about any of this
Lectures have their place, they suit me. This sounds like entertainment, bit like The Beano. I want people to get to the point not listen to a load of pap.
The hotel was virtually empty because a youth orchestra (or choir...I can't remember which) from Suffolk, UK, was booked to arrive that day and fill up the entire hotel. However, they were 30 minutes late to arrive. I know this because my father organised and lead the trip and he was on one of the three coaches due to arrive at the hotel that day. Thank goodness they were running late otherwise it would have been an even bigger tragedy than it already was.
Wow, talking about luck 👍👍
Your Father is Truly Blessed! 😇
Being late is not actually always bad I reckon. Gonna tell my boss this every Monday. Jokes aside, I am glad they were late.
@@robertrachels1870 Apparently God didn't care much for the people on the plane.
@@cyberpleb2472 what a disgusting comment
I think I recall a former Concorde pilot saying that the shutting down of the engine by the flight engineer doomed the plane as there was insufficient airspeed, and even a burning engine provides some thrust.
Yeah, and keeping a fire on a engine next to fuel tanks will also weaken the fuselage, I promise you, loosing a wing will also cause some casualties. At the end of the day, the plane was poorly built, they lost a tire, and it set fuel tanks and two engines on fire, truly remarkably horrendous engineering there .
@@mathis8007 Reducing airspeed was certain to generate a stall, but no one knew for sure if the burning engine would prevent an emergency return to the airfield.
Claiming Concorde was an engineering bucket of bolts is silly. The French maintenance let the team down.
@@electronwave4551 I’m calling the concord poorly engineered for good reason. No tire failures, should lead to a fuel fire that leads to a double engine failure. I mean come on ! The concord’s engineers couldn’t contain and isolate a tire burst so It didn’t lead to severe damages, on a plane who is famous for having tire bursts. That’s actually hilarious when I think about it. The pilots needed a ridiculous level of insight to correctly diagnosed the amount of problems they were in. They only stalled because he was bellow the planes VMC the instant engine no 1 died. Him being bellow VMC meant that he lost all lateral control, the plane entered a severe roll toward the working engine and that roll made him go over his maximum angle of attack, causing the stall. You need to understand that a plane doesn’t stall at a speed : it stalls at an angle of attack . Even keeping that engine on for some odd ass reason, it wouldn’t have generated enough thrust to keep him above VMC .
@@mathis8007 AFAIK, the pilots filled the tanks to near capacity to extend the flight duration for the German tourists and were also weight overloaded. When the tire fragments hit the underside of the tank, there was an insufficient air pocket in the tank to buffer the shock waves, which led to fuel being shot out of the tank. And the metal strip the tire ran over could easily shred any tire. And further, the maintenance crew did not reinstall the wheel assembly properly. Well, yeah, technically stalls are exceeding AoA.
@@electronwave4551 ok tanks being filled to the brim, ok ? Who cares ? It shouldn’t be major weakness and if it is : it’s the engineer job to find out and warn pilots. Matter of fact the plane being heavy actually helps them, it decreases their Vmc 👍. Now how the Mac% is, I really don’t know but since the investigators didn’t complain about it was probably ok. Now I’m fine with the tire blowing: that’s to be expected. What’s not expected is how a tire blowing up, leads to a chain reaction, sets a wing on fire and kills two engine .(Yes I know how that chain reaction happened and my argument isn’t that I don’t understand the chain reaction. It is that the chain reaction shouldn’t of happened. In a good plane, the tire would of bursted and that’s it that’s all .)That’s unacceptable in any aircraft especially a plane known for tire failures . All of these are engineering issues, because at the end of the day a singular failure of one component should never takedown an airplane, that’s not how aviation works .
I’m pretty sure I’ve watched every single video of yours, I’m so fascinated with why and how air crashes happen. Nobody explains it better than you.. I wait eagerly for each video to come out. Thank you for all your work that you put into each video.
same lol
If I remember correctly a whole family passed at this flight. A millionaire father invited his whole family including wife, his adult daughter, his son in law and his grandchildren to celebrate his birthday on a cruise ship. The family was completely wiped out. I was 22 back then and cried when reading this story.
Wow! A whole family lineage wiped at once!
@@GG_Booboo Killionaire
🤓
@@westfieldracerthe state, obviously. I'm sure they were deeply saddened, too.
Bro really cried for a millionaire
There is a retired Concorde parked at the Museum of Flight (along with the JFK Air Force 1) in Seattle. As an engineer I can appreciated the design and engineering of the Concorde, and marvel at the cooperation of the French and the British in its realization. Fine job by the pilot describing the events. Well done.
There is also a Concorde on display at the Intrepid museum in New York City. That one can be boarded as part of a special add-on tour for a small additional charge, the guided tours are limited to 10 people every 20 minutes.
The VC-135B Air Force One in Seattle was used by presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy from 1959 to 1962, although at the time they used it it was painted in the standard Military Air Transport Service orange, white and silver colors. In 1962 it was replaced by a larger VC-135C which was the first to be painted in the blue, white and silver Air Force One colors selected by Jackie Kennedy, and was the plane that Kennedy flew to Dallas in 1963, and that now-President Johnson flew back to Washington with Jackie and JFK's casket. That plane is now at the Smithsonian annex in Washington D.C., where there is also a Concorde.
The Seattle plane was also in Dallas that day in November, operating as Air Force Two carrying Vice-President Johnson. By then it had also been painted in the newer Air Force One colors but with a splash of orange on the nose and tail. Later it was painted in the standard Air Force One colors as it now appears at the Museum of Flight, and continued in VIP use until 1996. Definitely a historic airplane.
@@StevePemberton2 I've been on both planes. History for sure. Thanks for sharing!
@@bobjordan5231 Correction on my part, the JFK VC-135C is at the USAF museum in Dayton, Ohio. You are able to walk through it but there are plexiglass walls protecting everything that you look through. Not a problem really and it makes it accessible to a larger number of people. Especially now that it has been moved to the main museum, when I saw it it was still in the annex hanger on base which only had two bus loads of about fifty people each per day, so only about 100 people per day could see it out of the thousands that visit the museum. They moved the X-15 and XB-70 over there also.
The Concorde in New York is limited to about 200 per day but that allowed them to not install plexiglass because of the small groups of guided tours. You even get to go up one at a time into the cockpit, which is tiny but you can't touch anything and the tour guide is up there with you. Not sure if they still do the cockpit visit as this was about ten years ago not long after they started the tours. Prior to that you couldn't go inside of the Concorde, the tour guide told me they were originally planning to do plexiglass but decided on the limited guided tour method instead. It's nice because it really gives you the feeling of having been on the Concorde, except of course for the supersonic part!
@@StevePemberton2 The Concorde at the Udvar-Hazy Center is one of the first that ever flew into Dulles, inaugurating transatlantic service from Paris and London. I remember that flight--there was an Air France Concorde and a British Airways Concorde, and my second-grade teacher took us outside to watch them circle and come in (we were very near Dulles Airport).
I retired two years ago after a 40 year career in aviation, thirty three years at Continental/United Airlines. It’s needless to say but in this case I will; I’ve read a lot of accident investigations during my career and I am completely impressed with your presentation! Keep up the good work!
This was an excellent assessment of the Concorde tragedy. I saw the Concorde fly low over Rhode Island on its way to landing at T.F. Green Airport around 1989. It was a beautiful sight to witness the plane come in low and relatively slow while making its approach.
What's really sad about this crash is whole families were wiped out. Children, parents, and grandparents. What a tragedy. People here in the USA paid their respects by dropping 113 flower boats into a South Florida canal.
I heard one retired couple saved their whole lives for this trip of a lifetime and brought their daughter and her young children. They all died 😭
I feel Honored I once flew London - NYC in 1991. I took it after saving up because I thought I would splurge just the once to experience arriving before I left. I recall sitting in a very low to the floor bucket seat rather like a sports car, that it was a remarkable feeling being pressed back as we broke the sound barrier. My forebears crossed in Ships that took days and now here I was doing a once in a lifetime thing in a few hours. I am naturally always horrified by fatal crashes, but this one in particular hurt my heart. May their memories be a blessing to those left behind. 🙏🏻
A beautiful expression Annie.
Days.... Try Weeks and Months.
I was sailing offshore on a calm sunny day when a bang made me think we were under fire, it was sonicboom from Concorde
I don't think I would,d have grown in Concorde after the accident
@@justinsmith4562 The duration to travel westbound from Europe to North America when a new transport innovation was introduced for commercial use is listed below:[21]
1620: 66 days: Mayflower (Southampton to Cape Cod)
1838: 18 days 4 hours: paddle steamer SS Sirius (Cork to New York City)
1863: 8 days 3 hours: single screw steamship RMS Scotia (Queenstown to New York City)
1889: 5 days 19 hours: double screw steamship SS City of Paris (Queenstown to Sandy Hook)
1907: 4 days 20 hours: steam turbine-equipped steamship: RMS Lusitania (Queenstown to Sandy Hook)
1929: 4 days 3 hours: bulbous bow-equipped steamship: SS Bremen (Cherbourg to Ambrose
Elegant upscale ships usually took 5 days most of my life. That was a spectacular speed compared to Mayflower!
The detail and clarity with which he explains these accidents is incredible.
Incredibly beautiful plane. My family and I flew it London-Washington in Feb 1982. So sad that it ended the way it did. Thank you for your detailed video.
I shall never forget this crash...such a disaster....on so many levels. I also read the story of a girl who jumped out of the hotel window as the Concorde crashed the building, escaping with just a foot fracture if I remember it well.
horrible times for for so many people and horrible times for the aviation history!
thanks for sharing
Happy for that girl who escaped
I WAS in Europe when the concorde crashed I was in complete denial, saw it in dutch newspaper
I lived in Colnbrook very close to Heathrow. Virtually every afternoon Concorde took off and flew over my rear garden. I would often rush out and watch the beautiful British Airways Concorde soaring gracefully into the air. When they were grounded I missed my giddy schoolboy moments racing out to watch this amazing plane. So sad for all concerned.
Was great at the viewing area they had when she went up in the evening, especially if it was a wet cold winters evening as the reflection from the runway was awesome.
I lived near Sandy Hook NJ and though we could often see aircraft on approach they typically were a bit distant. On one occasion though I heard a deafening roar as I got out of my car and Concorde broke through a low layer of cloud cover headed to JFK. Breathtaking sight.
Was the Concorde louder than the other jet planes while taking off?
@@dannydaw59 you bet it was! One day i was at hatton cross when a concorde took off from 09R. The noise set off dozens of car alarms. sounded kinda like a welding torch, only one hell of a lot louder.
Another time, also at hatton cross, it was dark, so I could see the exhaust gas glowing purple. And I could also see the mach diamonds in the exhaust gas.
the noise of a jet engine increases AFAIK with the square of the exhaust speed, and at exhaust speeds of more than 700m/s it increases even faster. thats why the concorde was so noisy.
Colnbrook? That's practically under the departure path of 27R. You must have got a lot of noise, especially from concordes.
Loved the video and how you handled the tragedy. Also enjoyed your lack of the typical 'like and subscribe' at the end, and subtle nod visually while still offering more info. Got yourself a lifetime sub here
I always felt it was such a pity that the Concorde was grounded but your explanation makes me have a better understanding why it was
I'm no aviation expert but I found this video completely understandable, very well explained and oh, how tragic. I was a teenager when the Concorde began to fly and my French class flew on it from Washington D.C. to Paris, although I did not go with them. What a shame that this innovative means of travel came to such an abrupt and terrible end, so many lives lost.
This guy doing the narration is EXCELLENT. You will find him on many of these youtube presentations about aircraft. He finds the way to make technical and sophisticated events understandable to us.
It's ironic both Concorde and the TU144 met their commercial demise at Paris.
that must have been quite a school you and your friends attended
I must have watched dozens of videos about the Concorde, but you managed to teach me some new interesting details. Thank you!
I watched only one about 1 year ago and I already knew everything that was said here. Unfortunately I dont remember which channel the first video was on :/
He has left out many important details, he's no engineer some of his analysis is total rubbish.
@@coyote5735 ok,so I am waiting for your video.
@@aliceswanderland Go do some reading, don't be so lazy. I have read the official report and I have had access to evidence the French chose not to admit. I'll give you a clue start with the overhaul of the left wheel bogie by AF mechanics. Look up the firemen eye witness reports.
@@aliceswanderland OMG Alice. He's right. He not some loser living in his mum's flat and trolling RUclips as a cartoon coyote. He really does have access to official reports and secret information multiple governments don't want you to know about. Plus those firemen saw something...several kilometers away from their fire station. They saw something and it's up to us to find out. It's to you, me and Nicolas Cage to fly to France and meet codename: coyote's Brittish contacts that have info that is not total "rubbish". Are you with me?
Thank you for the video, it jogged my old memory back to Vietnam era training pilots.
I was in the USN during Vietnam in a pilot training squadron with a number of accidents but the worst was because of a pilot's temper. I was called to the "hotspot" (prop plane engines running). There was a problem with something that I told him I would have to "down" the plane to fix. He said he wasn't listening to "a girl". (I was the only female at that time but I knew my job.)
I sent the young man I trained who said the same thing.
Then I saw another shop going in telling him to down the plane!
The pilot had the call, not any of us. He took off anyway.
About 30 minutes later the hangar went silent. Eeriest feeling I ever had.
If you've worked in a noisy hangar you'll understand. Just silence.
I just knew.
I ran to control and asked if he'd crashed and he said "I can't confirm" but he nodded.
I was so angry! and terribly sad. There were three student pilots on board.
I know there was a faster push for pilots during that time but a pilot has a lot of responsibility and needs to leave his issues out of the cockpit.
Strangely, the USN never questioned anyone who worked on those planes ever after any crash.
We knew those planes best. They were Grumman S-2 Trackers, we'd strip out the tracking equipment and rewire, re-fit the planes for training. And we worked on them every day. Did anyone ask us anything, no.
Whatever, that was well over 50 years ago. Hope things have changed.
Another great video from Mentour Pilot and a tragic end to surely, the most beautiful aircraft ever seen. I was so fortunate to have had a tour of the facilities where the Concordes were being built at the time.
For those who have never seen the actual plane, it was very tall, but small (to me)!
I recall that inside the passenger cabin (mock up) it was akin to the upstairs of a UK double-decker bus but smaller, with pronounced curved walls and tiny windows.
Interesting footnote at the end about the report appendix where you said that the French effectively witheld information from the UK team. Never heard that before.
My father took my brother & I to London Heathrow Airport in 1977 so we could see Concorde taking off. A fantastic childhood memory. Beautiful plane. Thank you as always for such an informative, engaging & respectful production. R.I.P. to those onboard and on the ground. So very sad.
Your dad sounds pretty cool 👍
If you Need Asset Manager, Accounts And Tax Manager, Audit Manager, Transaction Handle I Do work with safe And Secure
I flew as a private pilot (1200 hours/300 instrument). As part of my own learning/safety procedure, I got the accident reports (available free to anyone) published by the US feds after every aircraft accident. Fascinating reading which hopefully made me a safer pilot. This report was one of the best I've ever seen.
Ok in
I just found out this excellent channel and I want to thank you very much for sharing your precious knowledge. I’m a big fan of Mayday episodes, I like to be uptaded with what’s going on with the aviation industry and airplane disasters, and you are doing an excelent work, you detailed everything and that’s what makes the difference to me, and your knowledge as a pilot it’s a must have.
I know everything can happen and it’s more complicated than it seems regarding airplane crashes, but definitely as long as it’s flown by a competent crew and maintained by competent mechanics that is the difference.
Wishing you smooth sailings through clear blue skyes!
This is the first time I have heard a detailed and very clear, concise explanation of of flight 4590 and it comes from a Pilot's perspective! I personally remember so clearly that event and it was tragic for those lost and their families and at the same time for the whole body of people connected to Concorde. It was the pinnacle of Aeronautical Engineering of it's time.
Hands down the most well produced video on the Concord disaster.
I have never heard a more detailed explanation of a plane crash and what went wrong. If I fly I want this man to be my pilot!
He couldn't have done anything to save you from this crash.
Glad you mention about the missing spacer - there was also a 'mudguard' thing that BA fitted, but AF didn't
Your videos are so informative and fascinating. You tell the story so well and I will be here for more content.
Your concise narrative of this accident adds to the coverage of this disaster. The crew understanding of their aircraft was displayed to the very end, kudos for the attempts made by them to save that flight.
i disagree the crew were the reason this happened along with air france engineers failing to put the steering gear bogey pins back in after routine maintenance thats why it started crabbing to the left the crew were in far to much of a rush to get the passengers to there cruise ship after the delay of getting the reverser fixed.
the plane also did not need anywhere near that amount of fuel the fuel tanks on concorde for safety were never in normal conditions filled above 75% full the captain decided to override the safety shutoffs and fully fill the tanks taking on far too much fuel plus the extra 2 tons on top of that for taxi fuel leaving no room in the tanks.
if they had took the time to work out how overweight they actually were taking the wind into account instead of rushing the plane should never have been taking off in the first place.
@@haydensupra if debris was not on runway the chain of events would not have started!!!!
The crabbing happened after the debris; the weight could have played in maximum take off speed never being reached, but the pilot was trying to get up so he could get back down, he knew something was wrong and there was no thrust from two engines.
@@Linguaholic23 your example reminds me of an automobile insurance company argument for denying a claim.
"The accident is half your fault, as if you had only stayed home, he accident would have never happened."
Interestingly, the courts eventually dismissed that nonsensical claim.
The tire was chopped by the Continental aircraft's engine cowl fragment, tire fragment impact caused fuel tank #5 to rupture. The fuel from tank #5 then flowed into engines 1 &2, producing asymmetric thrust that began at V1, the fuel igniting appearing to ignite in the damaged landing gear's well.
The quantity of fuel isn't exceptionally relevant, post V1, aborting takeoff is unsafe with that aircraft. One can debate until proton decay if the tank would've remained patent if it was filled to 75%. Given that 5 out of 6 prior tire failures resulted in tank ruptures, one being a severe rupture, the amount of fuel isn't exceptionally relevant, especially given one side of the aircraft being plumb out of engines. Being 810 kg overweight was relevant, given the loss of thrust and damage, once past V1, the flight was doomed.
@@Linguaholic23 you are propositioning something that is not part of the discussion. The flight was cleared for takeoff, everything else is supposition.
@@spvillano Agreed
I really enjoy this series. You don't sensationalize anything, it's all fact based, and you treat it as a learning experience. I hope you're okay with doing this series as well. The topic of deeply exploring accidents of your fellow pilots cannot be easy. I saw a lot of sadness in your eyes after talking about the loss of life. I just wanted to say that I appreciate the videos and at the same time, I hope that they aren't a mental burden to produce. Take care of yourself! Thanks for the content :)
Exactly
Yep, this saddens me a bit too even by only watching it. The worst thing (in the broadest imaginable meaning) I had to experience while flying as a passenger was a go around because of some apparently minor landing gear issues which were solved before the next approach. So I have absolutely no business to complain about aviation safety
I couldn‘t say it better! This summarizes perfectly this amount of respect, careness and commitment to the topic with heart and soul. Thank you!
@@Great-Documentaries He pretty much has to do that to work within the boundaries of the RUclips algorithm… or so I think. What do I know? Lol
@@Great-Documentaries this is what the mighty youtube algorithms wish
This was so good that I am going to watch some more vids. Keep it up 👍
Absolutely awesome video detailing a horrible tragedy. I learned a lot and greatly appreciate you posting this. Videos of this quality are few and far between on RUclips. Easily one of the best crash investigation videos I’ve ever seen. Amazing work. Thanks again!
I remember the Concorde fondly. I had the opportunity to experience it on a daily basis when I worked at JFK airport during the 1980s. Takeoff time is seared into my consciousness to this very day. 2pm everyday . Takeoffs literally shook the entire airport as well as the neighborhoods around the airport for miles in every direction
I remember seeing this in a aerospace museum and it was kinda interesting of reading the article facts
Great recollection!
Funny americans always making things sound more hectic then what they are.
Or maybe our plane just sounded different in the US then what it did in EU
@@Reginald-Erasmus I lived about 5 miles away from JFK and on my off days I could hear the Concord taking off at 2pm from my house
@@Reginald-Erasmus Funny EUs with chips on their shoulder who probably never even heard or experienced a Concorde takeoff, or even taken the time to visit a museum to see such an amazing piece of aeronautical history jn person; yet has such strong opinions for no reason. Funny EUs.
I think the number of comments indicate just how well this was explained and put together considering you also go into the engineering of the aircraft and helping the lay person understand. So we’ll done for that. I watched this because I always wondered what happened to Concorde as I was a child at the time of the crash and why it disappeared completely and you covered all the bases.loved it.
Thank you! Glad you liked the video.
This is NOT a comment on the quality of the video. The number of comments has little to nothing to do with the video's explanatory power or how it is otherwise informative. Documentaries on RUclips, as well as elsewhere on the net or tv or cinema attract attention and negative or positive audience comments almost entirely due to the subject matter of the documentary and how many viewers are emotionally struck by the the documentary and especially the subject of the documentary. To comment on the documentary, one has almost certainly seen it. Here is where the subject matter determines the number of comments far more than any other factor. If a million people watch a documentary about a rock concert, there will almost certainly be more comments than any documentary about a performance of an opera. The emotional factor matters as well, but to a far lesser extent. A tragedy of this proportion will almost certainly elicit many responses. Nothing more than emotion motivates people to act, or in this case write.
@@ephraimlessell who asked
Your work is incredibly well researched, prepared and delivered. That’s a very impressive video. Thank you.
As always, gut wrenching when the crew does everything right and are doomed out of pure happenstance. Rip to all those people and amazing coverage. You’re by far my favorite aviation channel and always do these justice
For an alternative perspective on the crew’s actions I must recommend you read the book “Concorde” by Mike Bannister. It points out some serious mistakes not covered here. It also goes into more detail about the motives of French investigating authorities in apportioning blame and ensuring Concorde had no future with Air France.
The crew, at least partially, were to blame. If you read Mike Bannisters' book, he explains it in simple to understand terms.
Sad fact is a broken part from the most infamous aircraft destroyed the most famous.
The broken wires idea doesn't fit because it would have triggered an alarm in the systems.
It's running costs destroyed Concorde.
It could have been updated had there been interest and money.
Once Fuel Tank 5 was breached, the Master Alarm would have tripped because a cascade of system failures would have begun to occur in the port wing and the temperature sensors alone would have alerted the flight crew to the location and likely nature of the emergency. The crew silenced the Alarm quickly so that they could communicate and think more productively in the rapidly escalating crisis. Whether the severed wiring or the heat from one of the port engines ignited the fire is largely moot, since approximately 100 litres of fuel was escaping and atomising each second and there were numerous ways in which ignition could have occurred. PF Christian Marty, who contrary to logic had only 317 hours on type (whereas the First Officer had 2,698 hours) then, having made a number of dubious decisions pre-flight, proceeded to make the key errors that would doom his aircraft.
@@5Andysalive The entire remaining fleet of airworthy Concordes, seven at British Airways and five at Air France, were fully updated to the required standards and flew scheduled services and charters again from 2002 to 2003. It was the world downturn in the aviation sector caused by the 9/11 terrorist atrocities that caused Concorde to then cease operations. If 9/11 had not occurred, it is probable that the SST would have continued in service until late in the decade, by which time the limits of Flight Hours and Cycles would mean an end to operations with the type. Most likely, Concorde would have ended its career in 2008, due to the many effects of the global banking crisis that year.
TFOA can happen with ANY aircraft and probably happens more than people realize. It was poor maintenance practices that caused this mishap, not the "infamous" DC-10.
@@scottmurphy650 Yes, the things that Runway Inspections turn up are amazing and sometimes scary. If the Management at Charles de Gaulle had rescheduled the earlier RI instead of cancelling it, and had done that just after the Continental had departed, things may have been different. It still surprises me that an RI was not an SOP just before every SST takeoff and landing at any airport in the world. You are right that Air France made a diabolical mistake by leaving out a part when they maintained the left main undercarriage, and that the wear strip on the DC10 was a poorly fitted and uncertified component, and that the 'Supervisors' in both cases dropped the ball appallingly. In my judgement, the primary causes of the mishap were the many dubious actions (and inactions) of the Concorde Flight Crew, and the primary cause of the Concorde fleet being grounded for good in 2003 was the economic aftermath of 9/11.
We've all known about this accident for years, so it rather caught me by surprise when at the moment of the crash I started to cry as if it happened yesterday. It's a terrible and wonderful thing that you can bring these to life for us. Thank you.
That’s so true! I also still feel that sadness - sadness for the passengers who got to fly in one of the most beautiful planes ever which then ended their lives; sad for the crew, which tried so hard to save their plane; sad for those on the ground who died unexpectedly, and sad for all the loved ones left behind. I feel so sad for France and the UK, for the loss of that beautifully designed aircraft! 9/11 was a horror… that kept on giving and keeps on giving in ways we never imagined or realized!
Yes.
I've watched quite a few videos about this accident, but not a single one was as thorough and well made as this one! Fantastic work you did here (and in your other videos of course :)
You’re videos are great. You explain in detail all facts which really gives a proper explanation of the incidents of the accidents. Please continue to properly educate myself and the public about what really happened. Good luck I look forward to learning more about the aviation industry from your informed explanations of these events.
My mom flew this same route on the Concorde a couple years before this accident. Other than the obvious reason I’m glad this didn’t happen to her, she was a Gulfstream 3 and 4 pilot at the time, so she would have been fully aware how doomed this flight was at the sight of the massive flames. RIP to the 113 people lost that day.
So she would have known exactly what had happened, what was wrong and what was going to happen! wow that is amazing.
Oh that response is from a son of someone from the AIB
OK bro 👌I was on this flight myself but I jumped out before the crash and survived
@@EFFEZE Wow that’s awesome! Can’t believe Petter didn’t think to mention you in this video.
Does she still fly Gulfstream? I work on the g600
@@Reginald-Erasmus You need help, sport.
There is also a really good analysis of this accident with a chap called John Hutchinson, who is a former Concorde pilot. The cruise ship they were due to go on was ultimately bound for Sydney for the Olympics in September of that year.
You know what breaks my heart, all the comments saying and giving their last prayers to people they knew on this flight. May they all Rest in piece.
It's crazy how you know how it ends yet your mind scraps for any positive outcome.
I lived in Feltham, Middlesex, from 1985 to 2008. We were quite close to Heathrow Airport and I remember that when we first moved, we were astonished by how loud the Concorde was when it took off and landed!! The takeoff was a lot louder than the landing. Twice a day it took off and we got used to it after a while. We became familiar with the timetable!! Visitors were always shocked at the noise though!! We would see it sometimes when we drove past the airport, either in the hanger or just outside. It was such a shock when this happened. Sad as well, for all the people that perished, and the end of the Concorde. Yes, I know it flew again after this, but it never recovered its former glory.
I lived at Windsor in 1999, directly off the end of the Heathrow runway. Can confirm takeoff was very loud indeed!
@@snich63when we first moved to Feltham, my family and I were amazed at how loud it was taking off!! We certainly got used to the noise very quickly though!! I used to get a train to Windsor and Eton Riverside sometimes, to go shopping there. Nice place.
Did it go supersonic over populated areas then? Or was it just loud because it took off faster than other jets? I had an idea that they waited until it was over the sea to accelerate to mach 1, but maybe I'm wrong.
@ibahart3771 it didn't go supersonic over land, but boy was it loud. I was a local and would sometimes watch it take off from the end of the runway. It would set car alarms off as it flew over Hatton Cross Station car park.
@@markreynolds1436 every time it flew over Dedworth people would just stop and watch. Not much else you could do simply because it was so loud.
The main challenge facing the 1950s UK supersonic transport study group was to find a suitable wing. The big breakthrough was the short slim ogival delta, which has low supersonic drag and, at a high incidence, provides lift for take off and landing, by generating upper surface vortices. The high incidence necessitated a very tall landing gear, and a droop snout so that the pilot could see the runway, giving Concorde an iconic swan-landing-on-ice appearance on approach.
Take off and landing speeds were 250mph and 187mph respectively, which is pretty high, and greatly stressed the Michelin designed tyres, both mechanically and thermally, especially as Concorde was heavy at 185 tons. By comparison, the Boeing 737 take off and landing speed is 150mph and it weighs 75 tons and has a short landing gear. The lofty landing gear, meant that it was subject to high leverage. These factors caused continual problems, particularly tyre disintegrations and subsequent damage to the aircraft structure, throughout the life of Concorde.
At Charles de Gaulle airport on 25 July 2000, a Concorde's tyre burst while accelerating down the runway. Pieces of the tyre smashed into the left wing and caused a pressure wave in a tank which ruptured, allowing fuel to gush out and catch fire. The aircraft subsequently took off and then crashed at low altitude. Controversially, the French Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis (BEA) blamed a thin strip of titanium, measuring 17.1in (435mm) x 1.3in (32mm) x 0.06in (1.4 mm), that was found on the runway, for the burst. The accident led to modifications to Concorde, including more-secure electrical controls, Kevlar lining in the fuel tanks, and specially developed burst-resistant tyres.
Here is a summary of an Observer report shortly after the above crash:
On the 16 August 2000, the Civil Aviation Authority revealed that Concorde has suffered 70 tyre-related incidents, that makes it plain that the Paris disaster on 25 July 2000 could have happened at any time during the plane's 26-year commercial history.
The fact that a single tyre blowout could cause potentially catastrophic damage to Concorde's landing gear, wings and fuel tanks was known as long ago as 1979. Despite a string of design and maintenance improvements, this type of blowout has repeatedly occurred since then.
Concorde has suffered seven tyre bursts that resulted in punctured fuel tanks. Two, in 1979, happened to Air France planes taking off and landing in Washington, triggering a mandatory upgrade in tyre specifications and the introduction of a puncture alarm system.
But by 1982, following half a dozen similar incidents, including a holed fuel tank on a British Airways Concorde taking off from New York, the US National Transportation Safety Board was still sufficiently alarmed to order extra safety measures: Concorde's landing gear and tyres were to be inspected before every take-off.
Subsequent serious incidents, in 1985, 1988 and 1993, all involved BA Concordes at Heathrow and New York's JFK. In each, tyre bursts led to pieces of landing gear or rubber being ingested by the aircraft's engines, and wing skins being damaged, with fuel leaking from the punctured tanks.
Further improvements were ordered in 1983, 1985 and 1993, when pieces of the landing gear's water deflector had punched holes in the wings. But in spite of all the changes, Concorde's wing skins still remain vulnerable to flying debris.
Refs:
_(Wiki: Concorde)_
_(Wiki: Air France Flight 450)_
_(theguardian: concorde world)_
@@sizey8105 Yes, afraid that is true.
Thank you so much for this very informative video. Sadness for all the lives lost and a huge piece of aviation history...
I flew BAW Concode from JFK to Heathrow in late spring 1985. My only reference point to the magnificent aircraft was from docufilms and photographs. I imagined it to be much larger than it was, however, it was not a disappointment in any way. I was blown away by this marvel of aviation engineering and couldn't stop bragging about it upon my return to the U.S.
I took pictures from the waiting area, inside, the azure sky during transit, and the London approach. The service, needless to say, was superb. I still have some of the stationary and pens that were given to all passengers which I used as part of my bragging to various friends and family.
I remember exactly where I was when the news broke out telling of the terrible fate of that flight. I was not very communicative that day at work. I also didn't mention to any of my colleagues that I had flown Concorde before. I don't know why, but deep down inside, I thought that the victims, as well as the Concorde, demanded my solemn prayers and silence. On my way home I stopped by a liquor store and purchased a bottle of Veuve Clicquot, the same champagne I drank plenty of in route, and drank one glass in honor of the lost passengers, crew, and plane. The rest was left on the mantle until it went flat.
I dis JFK to Paris in 1988 and 1998. The first flight was half full business men and women all in suits, canapes, gifts and flowers for the women and a limo service to a hotel in Paris, I forget which, all included. Ten years later it had changed, the flight was full with most in casual dress and even men in vests. I sensed it was the end for Concorde and the terrible crash confirmed it.
Bragging about going on concorde..how pathetic and sad.
@@suzannedouglas9280 Good to know hypergamy is alive and well.
The buying of the champagne turns this story into a drama Queen and a excuse to be a drunk.🤡
@@suzannedouglas9280 That's not kind, Suzanne Douglas.
An amazing story, with such a tragic end. I had the pleasure of spending a couple of days in 1991 with Andre Turcat, the test pilot for the Concorde. He headed a safety review of the airport at Madeira and I was on the review committee. I had recently earned my flight instructor rating and was curious as to how one goes about flight testing such a one-of-a-kind aircraft. Speaking a minimal amount of French, he expressed appreciation that I was at least trying to speak the language and patiently gave me insights on how they tested the Concorde.
This is so very heartbreaking & my Mum knew a lady, who was working her shift, then tragically died in the hotel where the Concorde crashed.
To watch this video, reignites the disturbing memories once again & reminds us all, regarding the fragilities of flying & the potential risks to occasionally be. I've watched prior, the actual documentary via you tube & for me, it was completely bittersweet & once the crash occurred well.......😢
Concorde was a truly superb, amazing & unique aircraft & for those who were so fortunate/blessed, to have flown on this mighty aircraft, seriously, how WOW for them!
I came to find out, that my husband's Father, who worked with aircraft, flew on the concorde & he came back saying how amazing the entire experience was & that he really didn't feel the speed in full flight (which is normal & to be expected).
To think that concorde's cruising @ Mach 2 , @ 1,350 mph & @ at 60,000 feet & flying 5 miles above & @ 800 mph faster than the subsonic 747's flying across the global seas, is a truly astonishing feat & the knowing/thought in & of itself is simply surreal.
Concorde was surely in a class/league all it's own.
What a tragedy. Rip to everyone on flight and the hotel ppl as well. I was hoping they could recover and land safely.
I'm not particularly interested in aviation or plane crashes but I LOVE listening to someone who knows what they're talking about, and does it with passion and excitement. Great channel!
I was born in the summer of 1965, my Dad was RAF and working out of Farnborough when I was 3-5, I remember the sonic BOOM of Concordes 1st "flight" I remember My Dad telling me to remember this day as it was very special. I remember this terrible incident in Paris 30yrs later, I am saddened to this day.
I had no clue that the Concorde was developed in the 60's ... And flew into the early 2000's , thats hella impressive that such a plan was built back then . Great video
Even more impressive is the fact that the concept design for Concorde began in early 1954, and was effectively completed by the end of the 1950s. All of that work was carried out in relative secrecy at the Royal Aircraft Establishment in Farnborough, under the leadership of Sir Arnold Alexander Hall. The International Partnership for Development of the Type did not commence until 29th November 1962, when Great Britain and France signed their Treaty for the project. So the Design of the SST actually began over 70 years ago. A quite extraordinary story.
Usually I put disaster videos to play on the background while I clean but every video is too captivating I can't look away.
Very well summarised and compelling narrative. The graphics were exceptional including Terminal 1 (“Moonraker”) at CDG airport. I sadly remember this very well - was in a Paris office on the day and was the first to advise local colleagues of the sad events. CDG the day after was a very somber place on my return. Years later I watched a Concorde landing for the final time at Manchester from the office window. A truly great aircraft - sincere condolences to those affected by the tragic event.
Very well elaborated not summarized..
So many nearby airpoirt offices
I already knew that Concorde jets had issues with sonic booms and warping under high temperatures, but I never knew they also suffered from fatal tire explosion failures. Guess it's not really surprising they stopped flying. Sad, though, because they really were beautiful aircraft.
@Kent Slocum.........Concorde's operational and safety record was exemplary [and considerably better than other commercial aircraft at that time - particularly of Boeing]. As mentioned in this video, there was an issue with tyre bursts and subsequent penetration of the fuel tanks. But none of these had resulted in major incidents.
In fact, these problems were largely addressed by the improved standard and housing of the tyres as well as reinforcement of the wing fuel tanks and introduction of heavy-duty rubber 'cells' within the tanks to hold the fuel itself. Inspection and maintenance of the tyres and housings was also stepped up and pilots/flight engineers required to carry out close visual checks during their 'walkaround' of the aircraft pre-flight.
It also needs to be mentioned that in the case of Air France flight 4590 there were a series of 'critical events' [ie: overloading of baggage and fuel onto the aircraft, pilot error not to mention debris on the runway] that led to this tragic accident. However, it has always seemed 'uncomfortable' to me that probably the finest [and safest] aircraft ever built was so summarily removed from service. There was undoubtedly a determination [especially from the Americans] to have Concorde removed from the skies.
This was almost certainly due to the fact that none of the U.S aircraft manufacturers were able to produce a supersonic aircraft - and the vast leverage Boeing held in the U.S legislature. Despite the on-going oil crisis at that time [which favoured the trend towards the larger 'wide-bodied' airplanes such as the 747] Concorde still managed to be highly profitable and exceptionally fast - literally halving travel time on the transatlantic route.
Indeed, throughout its entire service, Concorde was faster than all but one military aircraft [including Russian MiG's and USAF F-series fighter jets etc] and that was the utterly phenomenal English Electric 'Lightening'. [which like Concorde, was the only aircraft capable of Mach 2].
@@thesoultwins72 Thanks for pointing out that there were a multitude of factors that led to both the success and discontinuation of the Concorde--and that the aircraft's design wasn't necessarily the most significant factor. The Amazon Prime streaming series "The Man in the High Castle" featured an alternate reality in which German-made supersonic planes were the dominant commercial aircraft, and it is almost heartbreaking to think that regular flights via Concorde were almost our current reality, too.
@@kentslocum The tyre bursting incidents were largely minor with a few major cases, but none of them resulted in the crash of Concorde until Air France 4590. It is also worth noting that even before the accident there were different responses to the previous tyre incidents from the British and the French. (Or at least what I've read). The British responded to these incidents by slightly strengthening the fuel tanks and fuselage on all the British Concordes (albeit not the Kevlar fuel tanks), the French by contrast did nothing and left the French Concordes as they were.
@@thesoultwins72 all aircraft should be illegal. How many unnecessary deaths are we supposed to accept and act like everything is fine and dandy?
@@thesoultwins72 *"Concorde was faster than all but one military aircraft [including Russian MiG's and USAF F-series fighter jets etc]
and that was the utterly phenomenal English Electric 'Lightening'. [which like Concorde, was the only aircraft capable of Mach 2]."*
Your pining over the Concorde almost makes me feel terrible pointing out to you that at least TWO US planes SMOKED the Concorde.
the A 12 and the Blackbird....
that could make NY to London in under 2 hours.,...
*SR-71 Blackbird from New York to London in 1 hour, 54 minutes, 56.4 seconds. The 1,806-mph flight still holds the transatlantic speed record between the two cities.*
That's Mach 3 plus...
here's a box of kleenex for ya
Better than the title suggests! Anytime REAL is used in caps - it usually isn't... Great video! Broadcast quality!
The cause of the Concorde crash is not because of the pilot or the plane, it is the cleanness of the runway, period
I still recall being in the hotel - Les Relais Bleus - exactly a year after. First time in Paris near Disneyland. Hotel tickets were cheap and before we left we couldn't figure out why. There was a fence around a collapsed building, and the hotel images showed two buildings still. Two days into our holiday we left for Disneyland, seeing buses with relatives of those that died coming in for the 1-year anniversary of the Concorde crash.
Can't remember a thing about Disneyland, but that hotel is written in my memory.
😍🏆♥️
Ive been to Paris & didnt even kno there was a Disneyland!
Crashes like this where the pilots did everything right and still couldn't save the aircraft just make me sad. Such a tragic loss of life.
This was what i call a kobayashi maru situation.
no they did not. they failed to abort takeoff.
@@esecallum thats easy for you to say. they were already beyond V1, so there was no way to stop before the end of the runway. plus it was already burning, so they were doomed, no matter what. a classic kobayashi maru situation.
@@mrxmry3264 That is caveman thinking.
v1 ? so what? just because it says so in a book does not mean it not defiable.
all the pilot had to was to cut the engines and switch onto the grass verge or curve the plane into a circle to lose speed.
i dare say if we have people like YOU in ancient times we would still be in the caves.
@@esecallum a circle, huh? and how big would that circle have to be?
considering that nonsense you just vomited out, you must be a flat earther or other reality denier.
if we had people like you in ancient times, we'd all be dead.
I took a tour of Concorde onboard the USS Intrepid in New York City. While we were boarding, we had to pass underneath the plane right under the Delta wings. Holy cow. It is a lot bigger from underneath than you think! What a wing span and what a magnificent airplane! I sure wish I had a chance to fly on it. Oh well.
Thank you, thank you so much for covering this accident. This is my favourite plane, and this incident broke my heart. Rest in peace to all of the victims and my heart goes out to all affected ❤❤
This was, without a doubt, the most informative and detailed breakdown on the Concorde accident I have seen. Your presentation is superb. Thank you.
100% agreed. Superb!
I was about to say the same.
Full agreement!
This was a typically excellent Mentour presentation but, in this particular case, I think Cpt. John Hutchinson's (15 yrs as a Concorde pilot) review of this terrible event is the definitive one. It's incredibly detailed and, if I remember, very critical of the decision-making of the flight crew (both before and during take-off) and of Air France.
Just found the continued description of the lift-off as 'rotating' the aircraft weird..
I'm an elderly Frenchman ,and I 've been inquiring this story for 25 y. ...What you perhaps don't know is that both Air France , the then French President (J.Chirac)*** the official crash enquiry agency and the tyre manufacturer ...all had decided never to let the truth come out ! One thing IS very important to know ... that piece of metal from an US plane ...had nothing to do with the crash ! As a very interesting Anglo-German inquiry showed # a year after the crash - The missing "spacer" , the OVERLOAD of luggage AND fuel in the tail of the plane ...; given a type of tyre that had exploded several times before ... and the choice of the wrong wind take off direction...had been the true cause of the crash !*** By the way :President Chirac was sitting in the plane that was supposedly waiting to take off for Tokyo ...and obviously he saw himself the flames ...at least about 300 yards before the spot where that metal piece was supposed to have crushed that tyre ! Furthermore a group of firemen on duty had also seen the flames long ahead of the metal-piece ! But they had been forbidden to speak ....PS my comment was just censored by YT !....
Respect for the pilots and engineer who, based on your analysis of the sequence of events, did everything in their power to save themselves and their passengers. I can't imagine what it must have been like in those few moments trying to save the situation. Seems like their fate was pretty much determined from before they were airborne.
Regrettably, the opposite is true. The Principal Cause of the loss of AF Flight 4590 was the poor airmanship of the PIC, Christian Marty, who had only 317 hours on Type and had rather obviously not used that time wisely to obtain an instinctual understanding of the atypical behaviour of Concorde. He chose to be PF on 25th July 2000 and was thus aware not only of all of the ominous technical issues which had accumulated during his botched Pre Flight Procedures, but then sealed the fate of all 109 souls aboard by critically failing to comprehend the tactile sensations felt through the yoke, pedals and seat as his aircraft revealed that it was steadily becoming incapable of safe flight. Marty made the flawed and fatal decision to Rotate, failed to realise that such action was fundamentally in error, and (supported by the incompetent decision of his Flight Engineer Gilles Jardinaud to shut down an engine without authorisation) then came to the wrong decision to attempt to achieve a Positive Rate of Climb in a fiercely burning and disintegrating Concorde which had half the necessary power, showed no sign of wanting to attain Controlled Flight, and unsurprisingly fell out of the sky in less than two minutes. First Officer Jean Marcot, who incidentally had 937 hours on Type, was the only person in the SST Cockpit who appeared to have maintained his Situational Awareness, at least made the suggestion of attempting to land at the nearby Le Bourget Airport because this lay only slightly to port, but he would not have realised that the Captain was losing all Command Authority of the rudder and elevons and that a fatal Mishap was by then inevitable. The subsequent BEA Report, which appears to be the main source that Mentour Pilot used for this episode, is widely discredited because of its omissions, bias, poor attitude towards the weighing of the Evidence, failure to properly engage with the Dissenting Opinion of the AAIB, and its dubious choice to dismiss several apparently significant facets of the Mishap without thorough investigation or appropriate justification.
Unfortunately you are right. Capt. was told it was out of trim aft and overweight - the dispatcher wanted to offload luggage for this reason but was overruled. The captain thought he’d burn enough taxi fuel to bring it below MTOW.
@@johnstedman4075 Mentour Pilot goes out of his way to protect pilots.
‘Before they were airborne’ touched a nerve with me. Imagine seeing your flight taking off with a gust of wind and fire and smoke and think God please don’t go up. The one time you do not want to take off. What a horrible death and one you literally saw coming.
When yoke started was the aircraft past stopping speed which is ridiculously easy reach .. you’ll run off the run runway causing catastrophic explosion…. Well known at certain speed takeoff attempt is million times better then over shooting these runs metropolitan runways full of fuel and a millions of ways to ignite and just planely break apart … most modern airports a over shoot is death
dc-10 always on the hunt for murderer even when it's not crashing itself
Those 37mins flew by so fast. I stumbled upon this video and i have to say it was so engaging and interesting. Thoughts go out to the loss of lives indeed.
When i was studying aeronautical engineering i went to a lecture by the AAIB on this accident. One thing they covered was the significant impact fuel ingestion had on the performance of the left engines. Apparently the engines were rated for a given continuous rate of raw fuel ingestion through the intake and on test they were unable to make the engines surge using this constant rate and they could not understand why the engines were surging. It turned out that the change in airflow during rotation caused a large gulp of fuel to be ingested, sort of like throwing a bucket at it. This gulp limit was far lower than the constant flow limit and was something of a shock to the investigators as the engines failed quite easily like this. They also discussed the tyre and a whole load of other things. ALl in all, it was a very interesting lecture and your video hits all the major points they raised perfectly.
@F. J. H I'm not the guy from the post but I am studying in Loughborough UK. Keep your maths up because there's a lot of it and with any luck you should be designing and making small RC aircraft within your first year there, if it's like the Loughborough course
@@ppaattpm - TO anyone who's interested in how the RR/SNECMA Olympus 893 functioned (and a general guide to the importance of mathematics and aerodynamics in jet engine design) I highly recommend reading Sir Stanley Hooker's autobiography "Not Much Of An Engineer". While it doesn't go particularly heavily into the maths, it gives a very thorough overview of the way things work and how they are applied.
I would have figured that ingesting the smoke and burnt materials was more effective at choking the motor. It reminds me of the F-14 tomcats original A model design in which launching munitions with excessive exhaust (such as an AIM-54 Phoenix) would choke the engine on the same side as the launch.
Anytime you ingest a lot of gas and particulates that displace the raw atmosphere, you chock off the oxygen level in the intake air volume and this results in a very poor burn in the combustor, leading to surges and a sudden loss in power. For the F-14, like the Concorde, such an event was drastic in flight as the engine placement was susceptible to severe asymmetric thrust events, thus a well noticed yaw and roll would happen if lost engines on one side.
The F-14z engineers fixed this issue by having the launch sequence activate louvers that would act as an alternate air bleed and a drop door would temporarily close off the main intake ramp during launches, temporarily reducing power but preventing an Engine Stall.
Very EVIL air traffic controller failed to tell the pilot the PLANE HAD A HUGE FIRE and to abort take off. He said 'flames behind you'. evil smirking scumbag when he was interviewed on tv. Otherwise many people would have been saved. Stupid pilot also failed to abort takeoff.
@@esecallum couldn't abort take off when they were already passing V2/Roll when they were finally aware of the blaze and scope. If they tried, they would've barreled off the runway and exploded on the ground due to their velocity.
I have no idea why you think the Concorde can just stop on a dime when the video made it damned clear to you that they were probably one to 5000 lbs over weight to begin before taking off.
The most remarkable aspect about this horrible day are the crew. As soon the fueltank failed, the crew knew, they were going to die.
But they did their job, without panic without second thoughts, they tried their best, respect to them.
As romantic as that sounds, that's not actually true. The crew didn't "know" they were going to die. They actually didn't even know the cause of the fire was from the fuel tank. They performed ENGINE fire procedures because the indicators were telling them of an engine fire. They tried to retract the landing gears so they could be aerodynamic enough to increase their speed to sustain altitude and they decreased thrust to the right engines to try to counteract the roll to regain control of the aircraft. They were actively trying to regain control of the aircraft and even had an intention to land the aircraft. Not actions of a crew who "knew" they were going to die. If that was the case they would have either not rotated the aircraft and risked running out of runway to prevent injury or death of people on the ground, or if once airborne would have intentionally grounded the aircraft in the empty fields just outside the airport rather than fly over the populated city around it. However please don't take my last comment as a criticism, I did NOT state that as an criticism that they shouldn't have flown over the town. My point is that the crew thought they would have been able to regain control of the aircraft and would have been able to safely land the aircraft. So I support the crew's actions and felt they did everything within their power to save the situation but unfortunately the circumstances didn't allow for it but they definitely did not surrender to the circumstances and were fighting to the very end.
No the crew were trying to land it again did you not listen
Im back here again for about the 4th time, as this is simply the greatest aviation stories out there. Its cast-iron facts and professionally experienced stance put it above the rest.
Thank you for covering the issues with the bogie spacer. I had previously read that the missing spacer was a major issue, but your explanation of how it was investigated and dismissed by the crash investigation is convincing.
The situation regarding the missing Axle Spacer was not properly assessed by the Mishap Investigators and was quite possibly Evidence of a Criminal Act that was deliberately concealed. There is significant supportable Evidence that the Air France Mechanics (or possibly their so-called 'Supervisor') belatedly realised that they had negligently omitted the Port Main Undercarriage Forward Axle Spacer four days before the Mishap occurred. F-BTSC then undertook two flights (without the Spacer installed) before it was suddenly brought forward (purportedly in 'fully airworthy condition') to replace another Concorde which had originally been scheduled to operate Flight AF 4590 on 25th July 2000. The doomed F-BTSC then spent an hour at the Gate having a Reverse Thrust Bucket Actuator repaired, and although this incident did not actually contravene MEL Regulations it was evidence of unprofessionalism by the Airline which, like British Airways, had a stated policy of always having a 'spare Concorde' available at instant readiness if the assigned SST became Inoperative. At any time over those four days, any of the Mechanics involved could have come forward (anonymously if they so chose) and reported their mistake of not replacing the Axle Spacer, but none did. When Mishap Investigators from the British Air Accidents Investigation Branch arrived at Charles de Gaulle Airport soon after the Mishap, they were initially prevented from entering the Air France Concorde Maintenance Hangar by Officers of the Gendarmerie. Only after an intervention by Legal Advisors to the British Government was the AAIB permitted to examine the Hangar, and after a detailed systematic search they found the missing Spacer at the back of a high shelf in a poorly lit corner at the rear of the building. There was a strong sense that this troubling matter required further investigation, but the BEA did not pursue any such Inquiries, and (wrongly) stated in the Official Report that the missing Axle Spacer did not adversely affect the safety of the Concorde. Such a statement is nonsensical, and Mentor Pilot was incorrect to tacitly agree with it.
This outline of the matter is not in itself conclusive Evidence that Air France deliberately attempted to conceal further Evidence of errors or malfeasance committed by their employees, but it does suggest that the 'Spacer Incident' was such an embarrassment to Air France that the Company may have attempted to conceal or interfere with Evidence, which if proven is a Crime under both British and French Law, and could certainly have added to the risk of a catastrophic Mishap affecting F-BTSC while it was carrying Passengers. When combined with the Evidence of Human Errors committed by the Flight Crew of F-BTSC, by Air France Operations and by their Senior Management, this would undoubtedly have brought calls for the French Flag Carrier to be banned from Operations across the entire European Union until major improvements had been effected in their Safety Management Policies, and until their accompanying Procedures had been substantially improved and been proven to meet International Safety Standards in all respects.
The key legal issue which followed the Gonesse tragedy is of course whether any individual, business or organisation could have been held Criminally Liable for the 113 preventable deaths. The only real option would have been to Prosecute the Air France employee who was in Command of the Mishap Flight. The Charge would probably have involved Multiple Counts of 'Manslaughter Involving Gross Negligence', and in my judgment, the chance of a Conviction would have been between 50% and 70%. Obviously, since their reckless pilot was deceased, Air France escaped that humiliating Verdict, and they skilfully manipulated the later Proceedings which were filed against five of their Senior Staff, all of whom had their Cases Dismissed.
The entire debacle is a textbook case of how not to operate an airline safely, and not surprisingly a book is being written about it. I rather doubt that the book will offered for sale in France.
You are one of the nicest persons I've ever seen discussing aviation. You are absolutely dedicated to getting a message across, and not to just promote yourself. Just someone very down to earth, even though you're a pilot. It is an absolute pleasure to watch your very clear videos. No wonder why you have so many subscribers. Thanks for your efforts.
heh, down to earth ehehe