00:00:04.799
Okay, here we are. This is one of our last talks for the day. We only have a couple of things remaining, and you're all in for a treat.
00:00:10.080
Mike has already expressed a sentiment I share, which is that Nick is one of my favorite conference speakers of all time. Nick has an incredible ability for storytelling. He’s able to walk us, as audience members, through a journey. So, you are all in for a treat if you're not familiar with Nick or Nicholas Means.
00:00:21.920
A couple of quick things before we dive into Nick. If you didn't know, there is a head-to-head competition going on—an unannounced competition between the five 'run, walk, roll' participants and the 30-minute exercisers. There are 25 participants who have logged it and 21 30-minuters that have logged it.
00:00:39.120
If you have not yet put in your 30 minutes, or if you've already done a 5K or 30 minutes of exercise and just haven't recorded it in the Airtable form, now's the time! I mean, this is an unofficial competition, but hey, why not? We're so close! The last thing I want to throw out there is your 60-second Ruby story. There is a channel called 'My 60-Second Ruby Story,' and I would love if you took a moment to share what got you into this community.
00:01:07.360
It's an incredibly vibrant, loving, and caring community, and I encourage all of you who have a story—any kind of story—what got you here? What was that inciting blog post, video, or person that brought you into all of this? So, if you would, head on over there and let us know.
00:01:25.040
Okay, well, without further ado, I want to introduce Nick Means and bring him onto the stage. Almost there. There we go. It’s coming! Ah, yes it is! Well, hello Nick, my friend.
00:01:56.719
Hello! I am very excited to introduce you. I really mean it—you're one of my very favorite speakers. I’m excited to share you with the world, Nick. That's what we're going to be doing—sharing you with the world.
00:02:07.920
I'm excited to be here! Before I go on, I have a question for you. If I’ve done two 5Ks and 30 minutes of exercise, should I log it all? I don’t know, I didn’t create the rules; I only created the rules, Nick. Okay, who knows? But you know, why not! Alright, very good, without further ado, the floor is yours, or the stage is yours.
00:02:40.160
Thank you so much for that introduction, Adam. It is such a privilege to be back with my friends in the Ruby community. I had to miss RubyConf and RailsConf last year, and that was such a bummer. So, I am so happy to be back.
00:02:47.040
Some of you may remember seeing a different talk on the schedule from me. I had to make a change at the last minute. Unfortunately, we lost our sweet 17-year-old dog last Friday, and I just didn't have the emotional capacity to finish turning my giant pile of notes into a finished talk.
00:03:03.760
The good news is that I have another talk that I wrote recently that actually touches on a lot of the same themes, so I hope you enjoy it. It’s no secret at this point that I like planes, but today is a special day for me because I get to tell you the story of one of my very favorite planes—Concorde.
00:03:21.200
Now, to tell the story well, I have to start several decades before anyone even started thinking about Concorde. To understand what Concorde achieved, we must begin with understanding supersonic flight, which means starting with the Bell X-1.
00:03:39.519
This plane, piloted by Chuck Yeager and powered by four rocket motors, was the first aircraft to fly faster than the speed of sound in level flight, achieving a speed of Mach 1.06, about 600 miles per hour, on October 14, 1947. Breaking the sound barrier was a huge achievement. Until Yeager did it and returned safely, it was widely believed that doing so would be unsurvivable, and for good reason—many previous attempts to fly close to the speed of sound had proven fatal.
00:05:01.199
Pilots exceeding Mach 0.7, entering the transonic zone, often encountered strange problems with their planes. For example, the controls in the Mitsubishi Zero would freeze due to aerodynamic loads on the wings, while the controls on the Supermarine Spitfire would reverse unpredictably between Mach 0.7 and Mach 0.9. The plane would react contrary to what the pilot commanded it to do.
00:05:23.680
The de Havilland DH.108 Swallow, flown in progressively faster dives in an effort to fly faster than the speed of sound, experienced severe buffeting just above Mach 0.9, causing it to break apart. There’s a reason it came to be called the sound barrier.
00:05:39.280
So, what exactly happens to a plane as it approaches the speed of sound? To understand that, we need to talk about how a wing works in the first place. Bernoulli's principle states that in any fluid, including air, an increase in speed results in a decrease in pressure. Airplane wings are designed to take advantage of this principle.
00:06:10.560
The curve of the top of an airplane wing slightly increases the distance air has to travel to get over the top versus underneath, meaning it has to move faster. According to Bernoulli's principle, faster speed means that the pressure on top of the wing is lower, and that lower pressure is what provides lift.
00:06:37.760
This all changes as the plane approaches the speed of sound. At speeds below Mach 0.7, air flows around the wing smoothly. However, as the air speeds up, it starts to move too fast for the air to flow out of the way before it reaches the leading edge.
00:06:56.560
The air at the leading edge of the wing starts to compress, causing tremendous drag. Once the air has passed the leading edge, it rapidly decompresses, creating a shock wave that disrupts the flow of air over the wing. This makes it difficult for the wing to efficiently generate lift, explaining why it seemed like there was a barrier at Mach 1.
00:07:30.400
The X-1 was able to break Mach 1.0 because it was essentially a flying bullet. Its fuselage was modeled after a .50 caliber machine gun bullet, a shape known to be stable at supersonic speeds. It had short, thin wings that minimized drag but also didn’t generate much lift. The meaningful payload of the X-1 was fuel plus a single pilot.
00:07:56.160
People around the world speculated about our supersonic future, dreaming of flights from New York to London after hearing how fast the Bell X-1 could go. However, we were a long way from making it a reality. The next major breakthrough in flying supersonically was the ferry Delta II, which first flew in 1954 and became the first plane to exceed a thousand miles per hour in level flight.
00:08:24.079
The FD2 introduced the concept of a delta wing, which had a couple of significant benefits. First, on a traditional design, the elevators—control surfaces that govern pitch—are located on the tailplane. Because the delta wing is so elongated, it doesn't need a tailplane; instead, it uses elevons, a combination of elevators and ailerons on the trailing edge of the wing.
00:08:54.239
Secondly, the delta design has a huge advantage in how much surface area it presents to the air it's moving through. Both designs have roughly the same wing surface area, but because the wings are so deeply swept and there’s no tailplane, the delta design has much smaller areas facing forward, reducing drag at supersonic speeds.
00:09:23.360
However, the delta design does have one huge disadvantage—it is incredibly inefficient at subsonic speeds. To generate enough lift to take off and climb, it has to fly at a steep angle of attack, which consumes a lot of fuel. The FT2 demonstrated the superiority of the delta wing for high-speed flight, but the inefficiencies at low speeds meant that a delta-wing airliner would have to carry so much fuel that it wouldn't be able to carry passengers.
00:09:42.159
This advancement was a step in the right direction, but it wasn’t enough. Shortly after, in early 1955, Doctors Dietrich Küchemann and Johanna Weber, working at the Royal Aircraft Establishment, published a series of papers detailing a concept they called the slender delta wing. It was known that any delta wing flying at low speed and a reasonably high angle of attack would create a vortex running along each side of the fuselage.
00:10:18.560
Normally, one aims to reduce vortices and other kinds of turbulent airflow over a wing, but in this case, Küchemann and Weber theorized that these vortices might serve an important function, speeding up airflow over the top of the wing. Following Bernoulli's principle, faster air results in lower pressure, meaning these vortices were generating lift.
00:10:48.399
Küchemann and Weber went a step further—their studies indicated that the more swept the wing was, meaning the smaller the angle between the fuselage and the leading edge, the more pronounced this vortex effect. The longer the wing, the more surface area the vortex had to act on, increasing the lift. This suggested that a slender, long delta wing could generate more lift at low speeds than a standard delta design.
00:11:25.040
To test their theory, they built a prototype. The Handling Page HP 115 served as nothing more than a testbed for the slender delta concept. They only built one, and it served no other purpose, but it worked perfectly. You can see the plane flying at a high angle of attack, with a visible vortex swirling off the trailing edge. Given the extra lift generated by these vortices, the plane was controllable as slow as 70 miles per hour, marking a 300 percent improvement over previous delta wing planes.
00:11:53.920
This discovery was enough for the UK government to fund study contracts for two British aircraft manufacturers to design a slender delta Supersonic Transport (SST). Meanwhile, the French had launched their first successful supersonic plane—the Dassault Super Etendard. Acknowledging the British SST project, the French began pursuing their own SST in earnest.
00:12:33.040
The French government awarded grants to three manufacturers—Nord Aviation, Sud Aviation, and Dassault—to develop SST concepts for design competition. Across the Atlantic, late in 1956, the Americans had just flown the Mach 2-capable Convair B-58, the first supersonic bomber.
00:12:48.960
Though it wasn’t a great design—it was difficult to control and had a narrow flight envelope—it could carry significant loads at twice the speed of sound. American aircraft manufacturers were eager to leverage this expertise in creating a passenger-carrying SST, but the U.S. government just wasn’t interested.
00:13:19.120
Meanwhile, the USSR, focused on the space race, was also venturing into supersonic flight. They had developed a few supersonic fighters in the famous MiG series, including the MiG-21, and by 1958, just after Sputnik's launch, they debuted the Tupolev Tu-144.
00:13:46.880
The Tu-144 wasn’t large, but it was a bomber, contrasting with the MiGs being mere cockpits strapped to engines. This plane had a significant load capacity. The Soviets, aware of the British and French efforts to build a supersonic passenger plane through their extensive espionage network, began their work as well.
00:14:18.320
By the end of the decade in 1959, four nations were in the race to fly passengers faster than the speed of sound: the UK, France, the U.S., and the USSR, all just getting started. The French were the first to tip their hand, announcing their SST prototype at the 1961 Paris Air Show.
00:14:44.960
Designed to carry 75 passengers at Mach 1.2 on mid-range overland routes in Europe, the Super Caravelle had won the competition among French manufacturers. The French announcement at the Paris Air Show prompted key developments in the SST race.
00:15:17.680
First, to not be outdone by the French, the Soviet government announced their SST project, the Tupolev Tu-144, in early 1962. This publicly confirmed to the UK, the U.S., and France that the Soviets were indeed pursuing an SST, sparking interest.
00:15:59.760
Second, despite the lack of funding from the government, NASA had been funding SST research and development in the U.S. via the SCAT prototypes as part of general aeronautical research. The inauguration of John F. Kennedy in 1961 changed the U.S. government's position on SST almost overnight.
00:16:22.080
The U.S. government handed research contracts to four major U.S. aircraft manufacturers to develop the NASA prototypes, with competition entries due three years later, in 1964.
00:16:42.480
Finally, the French announcement provided a solution to a problem the British were eager to solve. Bristol Aircraft had won the UK SST design competition with its Bristol Type 223, intended to seat 90 people and fly at Mach 2.2.
00:17:16.880
However, BOAC (British Overseas Airways Corporation), the predecessor to British Airways, stated that, while they would be happy to buy and operate SSTs if they made economic sense, they wouldn’t cover any development costs. This meant that the British government needed to fund the project if it were to happen.
00:17:57.679
Given the estimated development costs and the associated unknowns, the British government needed a partner to share the risks. The Super Caravelle design the French announced was so similar to the Bristol 223 that they complemented each other perfectly.
00:18:36.639
The French were similarly in a dilemma; they had a great design but couldn’t afford to take on the development risk. Therefore, the transport ministers of both governments instructed BAC and Sud Aviation to collaborate and devise a combined design.
00:19:06.560
A short treaty signed in late 1962 cemented their relationship and named the project Concorde, meaning peace and unity in both English and French. While the Americans were busy with their design competition, things started moving swiftly in Europe.
00:19:41.520
The design for Concorde was finalized, and construction of two prototypes began in February of 1965—one at the Sud Aviation factory in Toulouse and the other at the BAC factory in Filton. The following year, Boeing's entry, the 2707, won the U.S. design competition.
00:20:09.600
The early full-scale mock-up of the design was intended to carry 277 passengers and was designed for Mach 2.7. One of the key components was a swing-wing mechanism, enabling the wings to swing forward for efficiency in low-speed flight and swing back into a delta configuration to minimize drag during supersonic flights.
00:20:46.560
Boeing expected to begin on a prototype in early 1967, aiming for a first flight in 1970. They knew they were behind Concorde but wanted to ensure they delivered a better SST that could carry more passengers and achieve higher speeds.
00:21:12.560
On December 11, 1967, the first Concorde prototype was rolled out of the hangar at Sud Aviation's factory in Toulouse in a ceremony attended by the media and dignitaries from both countries.
00:21:37.680
Now, while the wings are obviously the biggest innovation in the Concorde, let's discuss a few other aspects that make this design so special. First, if you know anything about the Concorde, besides its speed, you probably are familiar with its droop nose.
00:22:04.440
But why was that necessary? It goes back to the wing shape. Despite vortex optimization, the Concorde still had to fly at a significant angle of attack to generate lift while flying slowly, such as during landing.
00:22:42.720
That steep angle would mean the pilots couldn't see the runway due to the nose of the aircraft. So they designed the nose to fold down, revealing the primary windscreen behind it. This double windscreen design also reduced the need for cockpit cooling by preventing some of the kinetic heating from reaching it.
00:23:11.760
However, it wasn't just the windscreen where kinetic heating was a concern; it affected the entire plane. As air compresses, it gets warm. If you've ever filled car tires and noticed the hose getting warm, you might have experienced this phenomenon.
00:23:44.000
Significant friction also occurs against the leading edges during flight, generating heat. When Concorde flies at Mach 2, temperature at the tip of its nose could exceed 240 degrees Fahrenheit, with slightly lower temperatures elsewhere.
00:24:26.160
To cope with this heat, the Concorde designers made specific choices. They deliberately chose a target cruise speed just above Mach 2.0, as exceeding Mach 2.2 would necessitate using exotic metals like titanium, extending development timelines.
00:25:01.120
Mach 2.0 was a very pragmatic choice. Even at Mach 2.0, Concorde would still accumulate a lot of heat. The designers needed to ensure passenger comfort and prevent overheating in systems like hydraulic fluid and oil.
00:25:39.760
They came up with a clever solution: using fuel as a heat sink. Just before burning fuel, heat exchangers in the engine feed tanks took heat from the air conditioning packs, hydraulic system, and oil system, warming the fuel.
00:26:14.080
All this excess heat was vented through the engine exhaust, keeping passengers cool and operating the plane efficiently. Concorde also utilized fuel in an interesting way to maintain trim during flight.
00:26:48.320
Flying supersonically changes the forces exerted on the wings by pressurized air and shockwaves, pushing the wing's center of lift further back as the plane accelerates. This causes the back of the plane to rise and the nose to drop.
00:27:23.440
Normally, one would use elevons to counteract this and apply a slight nose-up force. However, using elevons would generate drag, reducing Concorde's range. Instead, fuel was utilized to counteract this shift.
00:27:56.200
Fuel was gradually pumped from tanks in the front to a tank in the back of the plane. This added ballast counteracted the shift in the wing's center of lift by moving the plane's center of gravity rearward, helping to keep it level without incurring drag or reduced range.
00:28:39.199
However, Concorde's most notable innovation was its ability to super cruise. Most supersonic aircraft developed thus far could only maintain supersonic speeds for a few minutes because they required afterburners to achieve those speeds.
00:29:01.520
The orange glow of afterburners is what comes to mind for many when thinking of jet engines, but most commercial planes do not use this method. An afterburner injects fuel into a jet engine's exhaust stream and ignites it, occurring past the engine.
00:29:40.160
This combustion increases the heat of the exhaust gases, causing them to expand and accelerate through the jet nozzles, creating significant thrust. However, this method is very inefficient, burning a vast amount of fuel.
00:30:19.600
This is why most planes using afterburners can only fly supersonically briefly, as they would rapidly exhaust their fuel. Concorde did utilize afterburners as well, but only for specific phases during takeoff and while breaking the sound barrier.
00:30:52.400
Above Mach 1.5, they turned the afterburners off, and the engine intake ramps performed the work. The doors over the intakes would swing down to reduce the intake opening, creating significant compression.
00:31:24.160
This compression allows the engine to take a large scoop of air, compress it, and then release it as a much faster stream in the back. Concorde was most efficient flying at Mach 2.0, traveling further per gallon of fuel than during any other phase of flight.
00:31:56.240
Supercruise enabled Concorde to have the longest supersonic range of any aircraft built until that time. It could fly from New York to London in three and a half hours, which is about twice as fast as a conventional jetliner—but all these innovations remained theoretical until Concorde could fly.
00:32:25.040
The rollout ceremony celebrated the completion of the first prototype; however, a year’s worth of ground testing was necessary before Concorde's first flight, which was planned for early 1969.
00:32:56.640
As you might have noticed, we haven't focused much on the Soviet effort. The Soviet iron curtain kept their advancements secret until they were ready to reveal them, so it was a big surprise when, on December 31, 1968, news emerged from the Soviet Union of the first flight of the Tupolev Tu-144.
00:33:30.960
To the world's astonishment, they had beaten Concorde into the air—but not by much. Concorde would take to the skies for the first time a few months later, on March 2, 1969. It was a short flight of only about 30 minutes at 10,000 feet and 300 miles per hour.
00:34:06.560
Captain André Turcotte never even raised the landing gear during the flight, keeping things as simple as possible. The plane flew beautifully, with Turcotte declaring afterward that it was even easier to fly than he had anticipated.
00:34:42.080
However, in the U.S., things were not going smoothly. Late in 1968, the American team realized that their Concorde competitor, the 2707, was an unworkable design. They faced insurmountable challenges with the hinge mechanism for the swing wing, essentially leading to a decision to discard it.
00:35:22.080
One Boeing engineer stated that in order to cross the Atlantic, they’d need to choose between the hinge and accommodating passengers, ultimately pivoting to a fixed double delta wing.
00:36:01.680
Despite the shift, they were way behind their competitors, who had already flown their prototypes, and were starting nearly from scratch. The Americans underestimated the Soviets; the Tu-144 would go supersonic for the first time on June 5, 1969, again beating Concorde to another critical milestone.
00:36:34.320
However, Concorde would quickly follow, achieving supersonic speeds on October 1, 1969. In 1971, the U.S. SST project ceased due to Congress eliminating funding, despite Boeing spending more than the entire Concorde program budget, ultimately yielding only a full-size wooden mock-up.
00:37:07.040
Meanwhile, Concorde completed all required tests and trials by 1975, receiving its certificate of airworthiness from European regulators, thus paving the way for commercial service.
00:37:42.080
The first Concorde was handed over to British Airways on January 15, 1976. A week later, coordinated take-offs initiated from London and Paris, marking Concorde's entry into commercial service.
00:38:25.920
The British Airways flight flew from London to Bahrain, and the Air France flight traveled from Paris to Rio de Janeiro. Why those destinations? Because the U.S. Congress, in a largely protectionist move, had banned Concorde from U.S. airspace for six months.
00:39:00.960
Six months later, on May 24, 1976, the ban expired. British Airways and Air France celebrated with synchronized landings at Washington Dulles Airport just ten minutes apart.
00:39:38.080
Interestingly, it was not directed to New York. After the congressional ban expired, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey banned Concorde based on noise concerns.
00:40:14.160
It wasn't until October 22, 1977, a staggering 17 months later, that the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Port Authority overstepped its authority, allowing Concorde to land at JFK, establishing the iconic London and Paris to New York route.
00:40:59.520
The Tu-144 would eventually enter passenger service on November 1, 1977, nearly two years behind Concorde, but by most accounts, it wasn’t a comfortable experience.
00:41:36.400
Cabin noise measured at 95 decibels—about as loud as a lawnmower when it's running. Passengers seated next to each other could only communicate by yelling.
00:42:06.360
Furthermore, it had an incredibly high failure rate, and Aeroflot operated the craft only due to governmental pressure. During a flight, they would often have four Tu-144s prepared, hoping that one would successfully complete service.
00:42:34.640
The Tu-144 managed only 55 passenger flights before being withdrawn from service. So, what led to Concorde’s success? Why did the Anglo-French consortium deliver a working passenger plane when the Americans and Soviets could not?
00:43:03.120
The answer is straightforward compared to the American effort; the Concorde team made much more pragmatic choices. The Boeing design was far more complicated and required exotic materials due to its higher speed; this overreach ultimately led to the project's cancellation.
00:43:35.680
The Soviet comparison is more intriguing, but the key takeaway is partial understanding. Much of the Tu-144’s design was derived from Concorde, courtesy of the KGB.
00:44:13.520
However, the Soviets applied the concepts incorrectly; while the wing shape appeared similar, the Tu-144 was missing key elements that made Concorde’s wing effective at producing vortices. This dropped its takeoff speed requirement significantly.
00:44:42.800
Interestingly, even though the Tu-144 positioned its engines similarly to Concorde and used some of the same internal technologies, it was unable to supercruise, severely limiting its range.
00:45:12.720
The lesson is to cautiously consider what practices and product decisions your team adopts from others; without deep understanding, the desired results are unlikely.
00:45:39.520
These lessons are crucial, but as I delved deeper into writing this talk, I discovered a more compelling question: was Concorde truly successful? Let’s examine some figures.
00:46:05.200
The estimated development cost for Concorde was £70 million, roughly $168 million at historic exchange rates. However, the actual development cost exceeded £1.134 billion (approximately $2.7 billion) – a staggering 1600% cost overrun.
00:46:36.080
This equates to roughly $20 billion today and was funded by the British and French governments. Let’s consider sales: at its peak, Concorde had over 100 outstanding options—essentially reservations from airlines for delivery slots.
00:47:09.760
British Overseas Airways, Air France, and Pan Am were identified as launch customers, with six Concordes each. Ultimately, though, only 14 Concordes went into service, with seven each for British Airways and Air France.
00:47:45.520
Several factors contributed to this. One was fuel economy; Concorde could fly a passenger 17 miles on a gallon of fuel, while the Boeing 707 achieved 33 passenger miles per gallon.
00:48:18.000
Concorde was about half as efficient but that was an acceptable trade-off for its speed. Then came the Boeing 747-400, which featured new turbofan engines, yielding 73 passenger miles per gallon.
00:48:51.920
Concorde's engines were so inefficient that it could burn two tons of fuel, roughly 2% of its full load, just taxiing out to the runway.
00:49:27.360
Another issue was sonic booms. The shockwave produced by the compression and decomposition of air in front of the plane travels to the ground, creating a sonic boom akin to the way lightning produces thunder.
00:50:03.680
It's not just a single boom while crossing the sound barrier; it creates continuous booms along the flight path. In spring 1964, the FAA conducted an experiment known as Project Bongo over Oklahoma City.
00:50:38.560
For six months, residents endured sonic booms—eight per day starting at 7 AM—and in total, they experienced 1,253 booms during the initial 14 weeks of testing.
00:51:10.640
The FAA received nearly 10,000 complaints, and during testing, 147 windows were broken in the two tallest buildings in Oklahoma City. The conclusion was clear: regular supersonic flight over land was a complete non-starter.
00:51:44.720
This led to the U.S. prohibiting it in 1973, restricting Concorde to over-water routes, with the London to New York route being its only viable option.
00:52:23.280
Given the limited markets, only British Airways and Air France followed through with their Concorde commitments. So, was Concorde a success? With massive cost overruns, poor fuel economy, and minimal sales, one could argue a clear no.
00:52:53.359
But if it was such a failure, why do iconic images of Concorde flying in formation with the Royal Air Force Red Arrows in 1985 exist?
00:53:04.320
This is a 1986 photo of an Air France Concorde leading the Patrouille de France, the French air force demonstration team in the Luffol air show. Or even this 2002 picture of a British Airways Concorde leading the Red Arrows past Westminster Abbey during the Queen's Golden Jubilee.
00:53:38.640
Why is the UK and France so proud of Concorde if it was deemed a failure? Turns out, the answer is quite nuanced.
00:54:11.760
Returning to our earlier question about Concorde's success, let’s examine how we address challenging questions about ourselves—Daniel Kahneman discusses this in his book 'Thinking, Fast and Slow.'
00:54:43.680
Kahneman outlines concepts like the law of least effort, suggesting that we often use minimal energy for tasks, leading our brains to seek shortcuts.
00:55:24.520
One common shortcut is the availability heuristic, a cognitive bias causing us to rely on information that's easiest to recall—often the most recent.
00:55:54.560
This is why, after sharing Concorde’s remarkable story, it merely took six slides to prompt a mental shift declaring Concorde a failure.
00:56:38.320
What happens when we take a moment to reconsider and reflect? One perspective is that the designers at BAC and Sud Aviation were tasked with building a plane capable of carrying 100 passengers across the Atlantic at supersonic speeds.
00:57:17.960
They created a machine meticulously built for that purpose—beautiful, not merely for aesthetics but necessity owing to its speed and distance capabilities.
00:57:54.040
A plane that felt revolutionary, even decades later. Concorde’s designers likely viewed it as a remarkable success.
00:58:26.000
The British and French governments, having invested £1.1 billion, may have felt dismayed by its lack of sales. However, they were not primarily aiming for profit.
00:58:56.440
They were paying for a point of national pride; multiple commentators have referred to Concorde as Europe’s moon landing. It was Europe's major technological triumph.
00:59:29.600
Concorde represented a showcase of aviation capabilities; British and French entry into commercial aviation had suffered from various issues. The governments believed a supersonic transport was vital to regaining status in the market.
01:00:03.200
As time went on, they eventually achieved what they had hoped for: Airbus, a direct descendant of the Anglo-French consortium that created Concorde, became a major commercial player.
01:00:37.360
Today, the Airbus A320 remains the second most produced commercial aircraft line in history, just behind the Boeing 737 and likely to surpass it.
01:01:04.400
Reflecting on Concorde's legacy, did it succeed? By short-term metrics, it could be argued it didn’t; however, when considering the longer-term impacts, it was indeed a success.
01:01:25.680
Looking back on other questions we might have, we often don’t have the same luxury of hindsight.
01:01:37.040
We rarely have clarity in the heat of the moment and often reach critical conclusions that aren't true or fair. We tend to invalidate our entire being based on short-term assessments.
01:02:05.440
So here's my challenge to you: zoom out. Consider the enduring impact you want to make in life, which matters far more than immediate tasks.
01:02:30.320
In life, every relationship nurtured along the way will matter, while the stressors of today are fleeting. Your brain will try to take shortcuts, but if you allow it, you can choose to live intentionally.
01:02:54.040
When you feel overwhelmed by immediate questions, pause. Resist accepting the instant reply because when you take the time to zoom out, your answers will become as evident for you as they were for Concord.
01:03:32.720
Thank you very much! I’ll be hanging out in the Slack room afterward if any of you want to chat. I’d love to talk—thank you for being here.
01:04:00.080
Well, very good Nick. I’m sorry about that. Exceptional! Thank you all so much for joining us. This brings us to the very end of our three days together.
01:04:16.560
With that being said, let us dive over again to the last and final reminder: Don't forget to jump over to the Slack channel where Nick will be available to answer any questions you might have.
01:04:30.720
Enjoy the break, and then we will move into our closing keynote and finalize our three days together. Thank you very much, everybody—it has been my pleasure, and I look forward to seeing you soon!
