Airbus have the type certificate, and have given notice of their withdrawal
from supporting the aircraft. Without their active support, the type
certificate is revolked, and the individual certificates of airworthiness of
the aircraft themselves are worthless.
This is what grounded the BA fleet in 2000. Air France persuaded the GCAC
(french equivalent of the CAA / FAA) to revolke the type certificate (it's
the aircraft, not our crappy maintenance or poor runway inspection regime
that's to blame), so BA had no choice, despite not sharing the risks (better
tyres - Dunlops - and not retreads like the AF ones). The GCAC then insisted
on armour - plating of the tanks and the fitting of Michelin (oh where to
they come from?) tyres before restoring the cert.
BA are trying to get the type Cert transferred to its own maintenance
organisation so that they can keep one bird flying (no passengers though).
Julian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] OT photo ops
> Jon, continued operation of the aircraft requires more than just
ownership -
> it needs the assistance of the manufacturers for technical/engineering
> support. At the very least, that means spare parts availability. In
> reality, I suspect it means a much greater range of resources to underpin
> the airworthiness of Concorde. It is my understanding that BAE Systems
> and/or Airbus were unwilling to commit scarce technical resources to a
> flying museum piece (overstated for effect). So BA could deliver on its
> undertaking to sell the aircraft, but that would not alter the commercial
> decision by its manufacturers to cease technical support, and effectively
> cause withdrawal of its certificate of airworthiness.
>
> I always liked flying in the Vickers Viscount - a much better view than
from
> Concorde!
>
> Piers
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Jon Mitchell
> Sent: 15 October 2003 12:43
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [OM] OT photo ops
>
>
> <snip>
>
> --snip
>
> When British Airways were given, yes that's GIVEN, the fleet of Concorde's
> by the government (who paid for them), it was with the agreement that if
> they were to stop the service then they MUST sell the fleet to any
> interested party for the fee of 1GBP (yes ONE GBP !) for the purposes of
> continuing the Concorde service. Now granted, the person buying the fleet
> would have some very large costs to keep the service going, but a certain
> enterprising individual here did actually make the bid. His reasoning
being
> that it would make good business sense, and keep a spectacular piece of
> engineering in the air.
>
> Why has this agreement between BA and the government been so swiftly swept
> under the carpet and ignored ? I don't know, but given the way things
have
> been going with our current leadership over the last few years - frankly
it
> doesn't surprise me.
>
>
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|