link

Two in the past twenty-four hours.

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), January 30, 2000

Answers

One aircraft had an engine failure. The other had an alert light (one of many) which wasn't specified in the article. Not enough information here to identify a trend of related failures that have the same root cause.

-- Mikey2k (mikey2k@he.wont.eat.it), January 30, 2000.

Would it be possible for embedded chips time functions in these two Concords to be synchronized to real time through GPS or other universal time. Would there be any reason for this?

MrsPeal

-- MrsPeal (...@...COM), January 30, 2000.

'Trend' specificly is a stiatistical term which required 20 to 30 base line points and then 12 to 20 points for comparison. I'm not sure that you can have a 'trend' unless you have a significant fleet operating over a significant time. There aren't that many Concordes.

Of course most people who fly probably would not be reassured by a statistic. They just want to get where their going safely. 100% safe.

-- ..- (dit@dot.dash), January 30, 2000.

Having mades several thousand flights on a myriad of aircraft and airlines, I would travel Concorde, preferably BA, every time if I could. A perfect safety record, pretty good in this day and age. Cerainly a few apparently unuasual airline glitches cropping up though.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), January 30, 2000.

Yes, you're right, Mikey2k. Another article says:

"The spokeswoman said there was absolutely no connection between the two flights. "Yesterday there was an engine shut down - today there was nothing wrong it was just a precautionary measure. It is just a coincidence."

Are these two problems the norm for the Concorde, or an aberration? And, more important, is there any similarity between the causes of these and the causes in reports of other airplane types we've seen lately?

-- Rachel Gibson (rgibson@hotmail.com), January 30, 2000.