It's al
Printable View
It's al
This is appalling!! Such a beautiful plane rotting away. I am ashamed and disgusted. :oops: Lets hope they refurbish it soon.
It's always been clear Aviator Sports Complex doesn't give a rats ass about the plane. There is no security around the bird, the guardrails do not keep enough of a zone of safety around her, she is in very close proximity to a driveway, I could go on and on with logistical and tactical issues. Couple that with some savages, and you have a recipe for disaster. I'll be driving by her soon and I'm sure I'll be looking to fornicate with someone's eyesockets afterwards. Phil, iffin there's anything further we can do, let us know and count me in.
Phil DQuote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
Thank you for the warm welcome :) :), i appreciate it.
I'll do my best to be a good forum member :)
After reading your recent comments about G-BOAD i feel greatly saddend and utterly disgusted at the way she's been treated and about British Airways USA not doing a thing about her living conditions.
Her sister Concorde G-BOAB at Heathrow is parked out side the old Concorde hangers see the following photos i took of her on 29 Oct 2007
:-
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0042.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0045.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0046.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0052.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0054.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0056.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0057.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0058.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0059.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0060.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...07/App0061.jpg
Anyway I heard BA are still working out what to do with G-BOAB but she has 24 hr CCTV watching her, regular security and armed Police patrols and she is also behind huge tall fence with barbe wire etc so she is very very safe and well looked after by BA staff at Heathrow and there is no way Heathrow Airport would ever allow G-BOAB to be treated as badly as my Concorde.
A few months ago we had a load of tree huggers at Heathrow protesting to stop the 3rd runway being built........ BA and Heathrow staff moved G-BOAB to a safer place so no one could attack her or throw paint on her....... so she is well looked after.
Its a pity G-BOAD in New York hasnt had the same TLC.
I am utterly horrified at how kids are allowed to play under her and wack hard rubber balls at her, she's being treated as badly as the russians treat some of their TU144s......
I thought the Aviator Sports Complex was safer than Intrepid but after what you said I was wrong.
If BA USA ever inspect her she may need body filler to fill the dents or panel beater to get the dents out of the metal before a full respray etc.
If Aviator Sports Complex and Intrepid had better security and had put her in a safer place, the money needed now to restore her to the condition she was in on 10 Nov 2003 would not be needed and could have been spent on other things........ but its clear those guys didnt care.......
I'm appreciate you guys keeping an eye on her and letting us brits know whats happening.
Just wish i could go back to New York and help you guys save her ......... but alas i cant.........
Since I had the day off today :wink: I ended up down at FBF this afternoon (Phil, we must have just missed each other!) In addition to checking out the damage, I spent some time in the HARP hangar, shooting photos and talking to some of the volunteers (turns out I met one of them last week at FRG with the Red Arrows). They said a delivery truck hit the nose. There is a roadway not open to the public, and the nose overhangs that - you can see it in the photo below. Apparently the guy also hit some of the portable fencing that normally blocks the part of the road under the nose - I did see some mangled fence sections. Although I'm not sure, I got the impression from the guys that the truck may have backed into it.
http://moose135.smugmug.com/photos/3...39_V6UeK-L.jpg
Hi
I just joined but I am responsible for the Thread on Alpha Delta"s nose on airliners.net Civil Aviation Forum which is Focusing the Worlds attentions on the Plight of Alpha Delta.
I am also a member of the Concordesst.com forum and a member of the Brooklands Museum Concorde team looking after Concorde Delta Golf.
Mark
:!:
...considering the alleged money situation, when's that supposed to be?Quote:
Originally Posted by moose135
[quote="Project Oxcart"]Hi
I just joined but I am responsible for the Thread on Alpha Delta"s nose on airliners.net Civil Aviation Forum which is Focusing the Worlds attentions on the Plight of Alpha Delta.
I am also a member of the Concordesst.com forum and a member of the Brooklands Museum Concorde team looking after Concorde Delta Golf.
AND.........?????
Hi Mark, welcome to the site! Glad to have you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Project Oxcart
A question comes to mind what has the Intrepid said if anything about the State of Alpha Delta in her present Location/
As there appears to be a total lack of News Coverage on Alpha Delta to me looking in from the out side 3,500 Miles out side that is.
At the momment a lot of news people are getting all flusterd about the French Concorde Trial but I have seen and herd Nothing about Alpha Delta"s nose Problems.
It is almost as though AD dosent exhist at the momment. :shock: :shock: :shock:
Actually, there WILL be news coverage.
I stopped by the Concorde again today and there was a photographer that I know for a certain publication working on an article that we should see very soon. :)
I think we'll see some changes for the better in the near future.
Regrettable to see this aircraft deteriorating, and hope it can be restored to good order.
I imagine British Airways will want to have this airliner serving as a marketing tool, if its to be in New York, and in that case, Manhattan is perhaps preferable to JFK (where BA colors can already be seen) ..and also, it suggests there is an interest in the aircraft appearing in moderately clean or in "good condition" to the general public.
Still, its hard to entirely fault the Intrepid, if its true a truck took out the nose cone.
[meaning a rent-a-cop probably would not have prevented this incident..]
I am not sure how many museums had deeper pockets than Intrepid, (until now). They've had to (no choice here) rebuild their pier and repair Intrepid itself if it was to exist into the future. My understanding was there were no takers in New York, in the months before it was shipped off to Floyd Bennett.
(Although the Museum gets low marks in terms of the care of its display aircraft relative to the better in door museums).
I do have one heretical note to add here however. As much as I'd like to see this concorde cared for properly, from an historical perspective, Concorde as such, is well represented in the preservation sphere. Were a tsunami or hurricane blow this one into the Atlantic Ocean, there'd be about a dozen, perfectly preserved examples left. The same cannot be said of the Boeing 707. (Sure the prototype is in pristine condition under the care of the Smithsonian, but that is not representative of the standard model(s) that served and made history in their service).
IF I had my way, the National Park Service would dedicate a good portion of Floyd Bennett field to a Civil Aviation Museum with many large airliners (and of course take care of them).
Tom
I'm with NYC Addict. Floyd Bennett should be allotted space for an aviation museum. It should especially reflect LGA's and JFK's role in making NYC a major aviation influence in the world. And you do that by exhibiting airliners which made it possible. I doubt the NY/NJPA will allow any museum or interactive display at JFK. They're too paranoid and just don't care about history to allow this. I'm very surprised Mayor Bloomberg, who is a pilot and Councilman Anthony Weiner haven't tried to establish some thing like this at Floyd Bennett.
Mark (Lurch)Quote:
Originally Posted by Project Oxcart
Welcome :), In 2004 I was part of the Brooklands team who helped save G-BBDG as well and part of the forum you mentioned.
My name (with many others) is on the plaque near G-BBDG.
So the roomers about a truck hit G-BOAD where right, Moose135 thanks for looking in to this well done I really appreciate your help :)Quote:
They said a delivery truck hit the nose. There is a roadway not open to the public, and the nose overhangs that - you can see it in the photo below. Apparently the guy also hit some of the portable fencing that normally blocks the part of the road under the nose - I did see some mangled fence sections. Although I'm not sure, I got the impression from the guys that the truck may have backed into it.
What i can't understand is why wasnt any one watching the truck and telling the driver to stop if he got to close ?
Where is CCTV of this ?
Where are the security guards ?
Why didnt they stop him ?
Couldn't he have found a bit of road 100-200 ft in front of Concorde and reversed there and before he got close to Concorde ?
I'm sorry but from the photos i saw there was a lot of space next to G-BOAD, i can't understand how he failed to reverse in to there.
At airports they use trucks to ferry stuff to / from planes, during her long life in service nothing like this ever happened, but this year it did :( :( :(
I aint an engineer but the forces on it mach 2 must be huge and it was designed to stay in place but that truck must have slammed very hard in to it, to brake it off.
Where is the broken nose cone ?
Did any one get the truck drivers licence plate number ?
When the accident happened were the Police called ?
I agree but since the bad news i've done my bit in high lighting her case by contacting people i feel could help, but will need to think of many others to contact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Project Oxcart
Mark (Lurch)
As hard as its to swallow you need to understand interms of priority the Concorde crash is more "news worthy" than G-BOADs nose being broken (as the crash took lives and was the first of many triggers which in the end grounded the Concorde fleet).
If crash news had been released 1-2 months earlier or after then ADs nose would have been in the news........ Today in The Sun even a cat having kittens is more "news worthy" than Concorde's nose broken
:-
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... 384273.ece
doh ................
I can see their point of view as 9/11 planes took off from New York airports so security is bound to be extremely tight.Quote:
I doubt the NY/NJPA will allow any museum or interactive display at JFK. They're too paranoid
Do they know G-BOAD's been broken ?Quote:
I'm very surprised Mayor Bloomberg, who is a pilot and Councilman Anthony Weiner haven't tried to establish some thing like this at Floyd Bennett.
I’m sorry I have to disagree as that’s like saying when E-Ron went bust, it wasn’t the fault of the management………. of course it was as they where in charge, the “men in power” at E-Ron paid the price and are in jail.Quote:
Still, its hard to entirely fault the Intrepid, if its true a truck took out the nose cone.
[meaning a rent-a-cop probably would not have prevented this incident..]
So it is Interpids fault as Concorde was put in their care and responsibility, they should have done what ever to make sure Concorde was safe at all times…….. but they didn’t ………
That may be the case and good on them for rebuilding the peer, but all the other Concordes (including the ones in the UK) are very very well cared for and their staff do a brilliant job.Quote:
I am not sure how many museums had deeper pockets than Intrepid, (until now). They've had to (no choice here) rebuild their pier and repair Intrepid itself if it was to exist into the future.
But Intrepid failed ……… big time.
So why didn’t they ask BA for hanger space at JFK or other airports ?Quote:
My understanding was there were no takers in New York, in the months before it was shipped off to Floyd Bennett.
Why didn’t they ask the US government for help in finding space at an Air force base ?
Why wasn't she sent to Kennedy Space Centre (which has a port and i guess could have moved G-BOAD to a safe place until Intrepid and finished rebuilding work).
America is huge and with all heavy lifting gear the US military has moving Concorde to safe place would not have been hard.
When Concorde G-BOAA was moved down the river Thames from London to Scotland she had to be taken apart and rebuilt in her new Scottish home.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...202004-7-S.jpg
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/j.sira/...de/App0114.jpg
When the Concorde at Brooklands had to be moved from Bristol to Weybridge (Surrey), we safely did this by road so moving G-BOAD anywhere is do-able.
Why didn’t they ask the UK for help and advise ?
Agreed in Intrepids favour G-BOAD was safely to where she is now (and they did a great job J) but as we can see later on in time that was a bad choice ……….
I don’t know what problems they had but they could have done a much much better job of keeping her in a safe place but they didn’t …….
No offense but compared to the 707 (which was every where) only 14 Concordes where ever made and flown with regular passengers.Quote:
I do have one heretical note to add here however. As much as I'd like to see this concorde cared for properly, from an historical perspective, Concorde as such, is well represented in the preservation sphere. Were a tsunami or hurricane blow this one into the Atlantic Ocean, there'd be about a dozen, perfectly preserved examples left.
3 where sent to North America inc Barbados and 4 where kept in the UK.
So Concorde is rare than gold dust………and each one needs a heck of a lot of TLC and respect as no other passenger plane could do what she did for 27 years…..
It's very sad to see G-BOAD, knowing that it crossed the Atlantic in 2:52:59, and to see camp counselors bouncing balls off of it after a truck took its nose off. It's beyond poor care, but complete disregard.
"Jetinder" wrote
<< I’m sorry I have to disagree as that’s like saying when E-Ron went bust, it wasn’t the fault of the management………. of course it was as they where in charge, the “men in power” at E-Ron paid the price and are in jail.>>
Hi Jetinder.
Well, with EnRon, I do remember the folks on trial claimed to not be aware of the situation, but my impression was that was a legal defense, and what was implied and most of the public believed is that there was "intent" and a scheme. I agree Intrepid is responsible for what has occurred, but I don't feel there was any intent.
"Jetinder" wrote
<<....good on them for rebuilding the peer, but all the other Concordes (including the ones in the UK) are very very well cared for and their staff do a brilliant job.
But Intrepid failed ……… big time.>>
My understanding was there were no takers in New York, in the months before it was shipped off to Floyd Bennett.
Jetinder wrote:
<<So why didn’t they ask BA for hanger space at JFK or other airports ?
Why didn’t they ask the US government for help in finding space at an Air force base ?
Why wasn't she sent to Kennedy Space Centre (which has a port and i guess could have moved G-BOAD to a safe place until Intrepid and finished rebuilding work).
America is huge and with all heavy lifting gear the US military has moving Concorde to safe place would not have been hard. >>
I agree, the tools to do the job right, exist in America, but perhaps not the will to use money to this end. I doubt Intrepid requested Kennedy Space Centre but I do like your ideas. Not to suggest BA is the culprit here, because they obviously are *not*, but I do think they were keen to have plane serve as a marketing tool in New York City and not be tucked away in a hangar.
"Jetinder" wrote:
<< When Concorde G-BOAA was moved down the river Thames from London to Scotland she had to be taken apart and rebuilt in her new Scottish home.
When the Concorde at Brooklands had to be moved from Bristol to Weybridge (Surrey), we safely did this by road so moving G-BOAD anywhere is do-able. >>
Those were impressive operations. Were these paid for by public funds or private? I am not sure anyone would help Intrepid here beyond their regular donors or beyond whatever their normal public sector funding is/was.
"Jetinder" wrote:
<<No offense but compared to the 707 (which was every where) only 14 Concordes where ever made and flown with regular passengers. >>
The fact concorde flew the affluent and celebrities on a regular basis is of marginal interest to me in terms of their preservation vis-a-vis comet or 707, but I assume you meant it was in commercial passengers service. But didn't the Soviet SST fly passengers as well?
"Jetinder" wrote: <<3 where sent to North America inc Barbados and 4 where kept in the UK.
So Concorde is rare than gold dust………and each one needs a heck of a lot of TLC and respect as no other passenger plane could do what she did for 27 years…..>>
It was rare when it was in service compared to other jetliners, but not so sure how true that is compared to preserved examples of other significant jet airliners - The only commercially successful SST, (not counting its Soviet counterpart), counts for a lot, but other considerations make 747, 727, 737, Comet, etc very important as well, and I am not sure we'll see surviving numbers preserved.
What SHOULD'VE had at LEAST one (1) example preserved would be the Pan Am Clipper SeaPlanes, don't you think?
It would be as if nearly all the German Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet Comets and Messerschmitt Me 262 Schwalbe Swallows were preserved in greater numbers than spitfires, B-17s, etc and accorded greater importance.
Tom
Please forgive me I never meant to say nor imply in anyway that Intrepid deliberately meant to hurt G-BOAD, (some times my typing can be a bit bad and I leave out stuff).Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
I meant Intrepid was responsible for G-BOAD’s well fare and health.
I’m very surprised, I would have thought Concorde was prize which any one wanted to have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
It’s a pity Intrepid didn’t look outside New York.
I agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
From what I heard Floyd Bennett airfield isn’t that easily accessible by the general public or tourists, so how BA would have thought G-BOAD could have been used as marketing tool from there is beyond me.
While Intrepid rebuilt the peer, BA and Intrepid should have moved G-BOAD to a safer place, In Jan 2008 I heard one of her flight deck windows got cracked, proves that airfield isn’t safe.
Looking back it would have been better to store G-BOAD in BA hanger at JFK than leave it to rot at Floyd Bennett.
Not 100% sure who paid fully for the brooklands Concorde, I think it was BA + Brooklands museum + money raised by me and many others which brought her to brooklands for full restoration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
G-BOAA (the one in Scotland) was paid for by BA + museum of Scotland, both moves where huge and in the London area I was there to witness and record it.
With G-BOAD BA should have helped out (as BA still own the plane).
That’s exactly what I meant J, with Concorde as long as you had the money BA didn’t care if you was the Queen of England or Joe Bloggs living on the dole. As long as you could pay the airfare then any one could fly on Concorde and be as fast as mach 2 fighter pilots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
They did but their version wasn’t as good as Concorde.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
On paper it was a bit bigger, faster and flew a bit higher than Concorde = in theory better.
But the TU144 (Russian Concorde) had less range than Concorde this was due to its engines using after burners all the time.
Where as on Concorde she used afterburners on takeoff , then to brake the sound barrier (mach 1) as soon as she reached mach 1.7 the afterburners where turned off and the plane continued to fly to mach 2 at full power on supercriuse for 3 hrs.
Supercruise saved fuel and gave Concorde the range she needed to fly to New York or Barbados non stop from London or Paris (the same range a 747 and Airbus A380 has) but Concorde flew 2 ½ times faster than these planes……… think about it.
The TU144 never had this technology, if it had been given better engines then the TU144 would have flown to the USA, but Russians never developed it. The TU144 was just a political thing.
I think the range was Moscow to France at mach 2, the TU144 needed to fly Moscow to New York non stop (which its engines would not let it do as they drank fuel by the lorry load).
If the TU144 had been a real rival to Concorde then I bet the USA would not have scrapped their SST (as they wouldn’t have wanted the Russians having one and USA not having one).
Unlike Concorde the TU144 was a real death trap, in the 1970s it flew for 2-3 years only in the USSR (taking people or mainly first class mail across the USSR), but had a lot of fatal crashes so the soviets took it out of service and grounded it for life.
I fully agree with you, trouble is we are not “men in power” we don’t decide what stays or happens…….. If I had my way believe me Concorde would still be flying now with passengers etc all over the world, I also would have some how got the TU144 in to full service and I would have had “son of Concorde “ being developed but that’s all a dream as I ain’t a “man of power”…….. I ain’t Bill Gates = richest man in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
The know how to do it is there…… finding “men of power” with the will and money to make it happen is the impossible task.
On Save Concorde Group we are trying to get a Concorde back for airshows……. technically it can still be done, but we can’t make it happen as so far the “men in power” at BA and Airbus have refused at all cost to let us do it…….. so who knows…..
>Floyd Bennett should be allotted space for an aviation museum. <
That would be very cool but it wouldnt be a local issue. FB is part of the National Park Services Gateway National Recreation Area meaning you would
have to deal with Uncle Sam. Good luck on that.
> I'm very surprised Mayor Bloomberg, who is a pilot<
My guess is that he is busy with bigger issues but it is possible he has no clue like all of us did until this thread started.
>Councilman Anthony Weiner <
Forget this guy. He tried to shutdown the West 30 Street Heliport a year or so ago, tried to introduce anti-helicopter legislation for NYC and is
too busy trying to introduce a bill to get 1000 new visa slots for fashion models (I kid you not).
His last name is very appropriate.
:D
No one would pay to move it out of NYC, then return it after work on the Intrepid was complete. FBF was a good choice - in NYC, on the water so she could be moved by barge, lots of open space. Unfortunately there was an accident, but that doesn't take away from the suitability of the site.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetinder
If you are driving, there is a main road right off the Belt Parkway, and while I don't use them, I suspect there are buses that go down that was as well. The Aviator sports complex gets people there, so it's not really inaccessible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetinder
We had a thread about that here - I believe that was caused by water seeping through a window seal and freezing, causing the crack, not vandalism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetinder
That would have been completely inaccessible, not to mention the cost of renting hangar space for two years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetinder
>From what I heard Floyd Bennett airfield isn’t that easily accessible by the general public or tourists, so how BA would have thought G-BOAD could have been used as marketing tool from there is beyond me
If you are driving, there is a main road right off the Belt Parkway, and while I don't use them, I suspect there are buses that go down that was as well. The Aviator sports complex gets people there, so it's not really inaccessible.
Flatbush Avenue is the main road that runs past FB. Flatbush Avenue starts at the Manhattan Bridge and cuts right across Brooklyn to the Marine Park Bridge
into the Rockaways. The Q35 Bus goes from Midwood to Rockaway Park down Flatbush Avenue. Just north of FB on Flatbush Avenue is the Kings Plaza Shopping
Center which has numerous buses stopping there. IF a museum WAS built there I would think they would extend some lines and add stops.
Its amazing to me that Vulcan is flying. It is a shame..nothing technical exactly stopping either concorde or Canopus (comet) from flying an limited airshow circuit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetinder
Cheers,
Tom
Camp Counsellors Bouncing Balls of Concorde WTF are these Morons on.
It"s a good job she is in Newyork AD that is and too far for a lot of us to reach her Bouncing Balls of Alpha Delta?!?
When / If BA sends a team over to check AD for them selves and sees any one doing that I can see them going Ballistic.
:shock:
I am really surprised as to us America is the land of the free where nothing is impossible, but in G-BOADs case I was wrong and that’s extremely sad to hear.Quote:
Originally Posted by moose135
Location wise FBF was suitable but in keeping G-BOAD safe no, it was an extremly bad move L
G-BOAD was meant to kept in semi storage until Intrepid rebuilt the peer so BA or JFK should have given her hanger space or at least space inside JFKs parameter fence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetinder
Getting the Vulcan back was a huge achievement and they succeeded as I think they bought the Vulcan and then got all the parts and experts to get her running but there is no way BA or AF would allow any one to buy Concorde.Quote:
Its amazing to me that Vulcan is flying. It is a shame..nothing technical exactly stopping either concorde or Canopus (comet) from flying an limited airshow circuit.
Cheers,
Tom
Second thing is even if some one bought Concorde Airbus would not allow it to fly as they made the parts and issued certificate for Concorde which the CAA wants. No parts and no certificate = no Concorde flying……. so there are a lot of “negotiations”
to cover.
Technically getting Concorde back in the air would not be problem, look at what Nasa did to the TU144 they borrowed so it is possible.
Up to today we have more chance of buying the TU144 and getting that flying that getting Concorde flying………
On this thread I’ve seen pictures of those dents……… words can’t describe how disgusted and upset I am with the people who did this……….Quote:
Originally Posted by Project Oxcart
If some one bounced balls off Air Force 1 and made dents in that the US Police and CIA would go mad, they'd send Rambo, Dirty Harry and Homer Simpson after them for denting the Presidents plane.
But with all due respect Air Force 1 is just a "pimped my ride" 747, its not Concorde so isnt as special as it can never fly as high nor as fast as Concorde......
It would be better if President Bush or the new President Obma could buy G-BOAD off BA and then use her as Air force 1, at least this way she'd be flying at mach 2 and would be extremely well looked after and protected.
But will they ?……….Quote:
When / If BA sends a team over to check AD for them selves and sees any one doing that I can see them going Ballistic.
:shock:
BA America could send a team from JFK now to see G-BOAD but has it been sent over ?
I don’t think so and since 10 Nov 2003 why hasn’t that team been watching over G-BOAD which isn’t that far from JFK…………
Its a bit odd about Floyd Bennett. The Park Police, as they are throughout the "Gateway National Recreation Area", are ever present, and not shy about enforcing low speed limits, permits, curfews and an array of other "rules", but I have to believe they have viewed Concorde as a gimmick under the supervision/'security" of Aviator Sports, which probably pays good rent to the facility/park.
The easiest solution right now, would be for Mayor Bloomberg to simply "ask" the NYPD to allow concorde to be towed across the airfield anyplace within the considerable space now utilized by the Police Aviation and training unit. That area, once minimum security under the Coast Guard while they based their helicopters there (you could walk right up to the choppers) is now guarded about as well as "Area 51". Again - it is just a short tow away and no more vandalism of any type will occur.
While Intrepid was facing vacating the Hudson River Pier, attempts were made to find a suitable home away from home for concorde on (an interim barge) where it would still be viewable to the public and I believe BA was ok with this. But the Hudson River Park Trust which arguably might've had the space, and South Street Seaport etc. all passed on the offer. I presume Chelsea Piers and others did as well.
btw - Comet Canopus has the same problem getting certification as the concorde now does. Ironically they'd likely have an easier time getting an experimental certificate in the US.
Tom
You know Phil - This makes me more angry (by far) than the nose being broken off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
At least that was an "accident", and if the those responsible were/are otherwise negligent or under distress such that they are unable to care for the subject properly, at least this can all be repaired or worked out in short order.
But left unattended like this, benighted savages amongst the populace will of course bounce balls off the fuselage. The airframe has an only slightly better chance than a crab or turtle in a "touch and feel" exhibit for school children.
All that was needed was an around the clock security person properly briefed on his responsibilities.. The Fuji, Airshipman and Tommy Hilfiger blimps all stayed at Floyd Bennett in past years, and thats all they required to be safe. Had they been damaged, it would have cost...
Tom
That sounds perfect and this way she can be repaired and kept safe at all costs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
Intrepid will need to learn from this lesson and make sure it doesn’t happen again.
This makes me very angry………. These guys are meant to set an example to the young……… bouncing balls off an extremely expensive plane isn’t the way to teach kids to behave and respect things…….Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
If they went on Intrepid and did the same to the SR71 i bet the Police and US military would have very strong words with them.
I myself cannot blame the counselors or the children. Not everyone can be expected to know all about aviation history or the significance of a particular artifact. I CAN, however, expect management of the company that promises to take care of such an artifact, so implement measures to protect it and see to it that those things do not happen.
Gotta disagree with you there Phil. To me, the counselors and children are also partly to blame. The kids for being little savages and doing things they probably knew were wrong in the first place, and the counselors for not stopping the kids from doing what they were doing. Common sence...just because you can, doesn't mean you should.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
For all they know, the Concorde could be a fake mockup. If I didn't know any better, I wouldn't think that they would actually position a real Concorde unguarded where children could even play to begin with.
There is poor planning on all sides of this.
Kenny blame the counselors not the kids...bouncing a ball off of something to a kis is a normal activity. The counselors even if they think its a mock up should have stopped them.Quote:
Originally Posted by wunaladreamin
>The easiest solution right now, would be for Mayor Bloomberg to simply "ask" the NYPD to allow concorde to be towed across the airfield anyplace within the considerable space now utilized by the Police Aviation and training unit. That area, once minimum security under the Coast Guard while they based their helicopters there (you could walk right up to the choppers) is now guarded about as well as "Area 51".<
To digress from the original topic, I had to laugh when I read this. Back in the 90s when I spent many a weekend at Floyd B. when my kids were young we used to go
by the Air Station and the copters would taxi right past us on the access road to the runway and there was never any security about unless Marine 1 was parked there. PD Aviation was even more open. Had some nice talks with the pilots and looks into the ships.
NOW? FORGET about it!! Too bad.
>While Intrepid was facing vacating the Hudson River Pier, attempts were made to find a suitable home away from home for concorde on (an interim barge) where it would still be viewable to the public and I believe BA was ok with this. But the Hudson River Park Trust which arguably might've had the space, and South Street Seaport etc. all passed on the offer. I presume Chelsea Piers and others did as well.<
Forget that Hudson River Trust. This is the group behind the ending of sightseeing flights at West 30 Street AND the eventual closing and relocation (Hopefully) of
the whole heliport. Too many self important special interest groups in Manhattan (and the other 4 boros) that somehow wield power. Thankfully we do have a
pro-aviation mayor in the house.
It doesnt matter if its a fake or not, they need to have respect for it as it wasnt their property. It belonged to BA and the UK taxpayer who paid for the entire development of Concorde.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
Did any one find out who these councellors where as they need to be spoken to by NYC Police and charged for possible criminal damage.
There use to be a fake Concorde on the round-about just outside Heathrow but that was never vandilised or broken as it hand Heathrow Police station 5 seconds running time from there and 24 hr CCTV watching the whole place.
IIRC Anthony Weiner was a vocal ADVERSARY of Concorde. I read the local newspaper on the day of Concordes last flight and he was very much against Concorde.
No offense, but, you're not from around here, are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetinder
I think if you called the police about this, they might get around to coming out sometime next year. Not exactly the "crime of the century" in New York City, even if there was actual physical damage involved.
And even iffin they did respond, the job would be ****canned to keep crime stats down.Quote:
Originally Posted by moose135
Hi Moose135Quote:
Originally Posted by moose135
No offense taken :), you're right I aint from New York, I'm from a small town just outside London in England.
I don't know to much about NYC Police but I'm suprised about how low they'd rate this.Quote:
I think if you called the police about this, they might get around to coming out sometime next year. Not exactly the "crime of the century" in New York City, even if there was actual physical damage involved.
In the UK if anything like this happened the Police would come over pretty fast and start to investigate.
How powerful is this guy and how come Concorde was allowed to use JFK. if Anthony Weiner was so against her.Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrodie
On her last day sounds like while the rest of us Concorde chasers (from both sides of the ocean) got very depressed about it I feel he must have been extremely happy inside.
Since Aviator is currently in charge of the Concorde, and they are the ones that broke it, do you really expect them to call the cops on themselves?
If I go outside and kick in my own car, I'm not gonna call the cops.
It's also not on public property, and if the Intrepid or BA would like to pursue something, then maybe THEY have that option. As sad as it is, though, I wouldn't call it criminal.
The aptly named Anthony Weiner can seem like an okay enough guy, and his power is quite limited at the moment, but unfortunately he is somehow perceived to be a viable candidate to become Mayor one of these days. And for all the issues people may have had with Bloomberg and Guiliani before him, the city has been "spoiled" by having them, considering the rogues gallery/freak show of possible candidates that are ever present in New York.
Again, Weiner does not generally seem terrible, just a bit of lightweight, but when it comes to aviation, this guy is a Demagogue - against concorde, against the heliports, against general aviation in vicinity of the city etc.. Lets hope he stays in Brooklyn; he's not ready for prime time.