10318 Concorde revealed!
Posted by Huw,
Hot on the heels of the teaser and numerous leaks, here's the press release and official imagery for the Concorde:
10318 Concorde
2,083 pieces, rated 18+
$199.99 / £169.99 / €199.99
Available from 4th September at LEGO.com
The LEGO Group today unveils a set that is sure to reach new heights – the LEGO Concorde Set. Arguably one of the most iconic and famous aircraft in history, the Concorde could cruise twice as fast as the speed of sound.
An engineering masterpiece, the Concorde now comes in LEGO brick form. Built in the 1960s as part of a joint venture between the United Kingdom and France, the Concorde was the first supersonic passenger carrying commercial aircraft. This 2083-piece set is an accurate scale model of the aircraft, that can be showcased in the home using the display stand, allowing the possibility to pose the brick-plane either in flight mode or tilted mode for take-off and landing.
The set is also rich in detail, with a removable roof to show off the opulent cabin interior, landing gear, as well as the nose and visor tilts. It measures 105cm in length with a wingspan on 43cm.
203 likes
138 comments on this article
I'm impressed that they made the interior actually 1:1 with the real Concorde!
The snoot droops!
This one goes straight on my wish list. Freeing up display space will be an issue, though! When the first rumours leaked I thought this set would have a similar size as set 10283, but it is much larger than that!
The build is impressive but I honestly don't like the way the nose looks. This is one of those cases where I think a custom piece would have been better.
Otherwise, pretty cool.
I prefer boats, but I know my late father would be all over this one so I might get it in his memory.
I like this a lot. Great shaping and a good size for a display model. The hidden landing gear mechanism is really impressive, as is the very compact display stand.
Is it all prints, no stickers?
Looks great, but same case as Rivendell for me. Could afford the price, can't afford the space.
@mods, could you consider adding 'no, I don't have the space for it' / 'no, it's too big' as an option to the interest poll.
I'm not collecting "space" sets but this one is impressive!
HOWEVER, I have strange feeling about that twister nose, and it reminds me horse drawing meme: https://i.imgflip.com/2siu6l.jpg?a469848
There was not enough time to finish it properly?
Can't afford to buy it. But that is awesome!
I'm blown up by this giant white pointing arrow xD but to be honest I love it just it's so big what will be positive aspect for some folks but for me it's hard to deal and find place for such set.
Can someone explain the AIRBUS reference? Airbus didn't contribute to Concorde afaik?
Most of sets today would be amazing to see in convention, but are simply not very fun to build or even display because they are just too big.
Very excited about this - we have the last Concorde to fly in a museum here in Bristol and we pay regular visits to see it as a family as it’s amazing to see in person. Having a Lego version is the next best thing!
@TWRAddict said:
"The snoot droops!"
I am so relieved to finally have confirmation that the snoot droops.
@Stoker_stu said:
"Can someone explain the AIRBUS reference? Airbus didn't contribute to Concorder afaik?"
Airbus hold the licence for it, for some reason.
Had my doubts when I saw the leak, but I think this turned out pretty good. Price isn't that bad either (when it comes to LEGO anyway), but I'm not an aviation nerd and I learnt the struggles of collecting/storing/display LEGO planes the hard way when I got the 7734 for Christmas as a kid.
I still wish I hadn't begged my parents for that one, especially when I see the oversized pieces turn up every now and then.
I think it's a great model, but apart from the size and thus space requirements, I just dread the fact that in a couple of years the white will start to show discolorations... And on a virtually white-only set, that is a big detractor for me...
Over a meter long! For me, this would only be a candidate to hang from the ceiling. I can't see occupying 1.5' x 3.5' of surface space with this.
@Stoker_stu said:
"Can someone explain the AIRBUS reference? Airbus didn't contribute to Concorde afaik?"
Airbus acquired Sud Aviation at some point...Sud being 1 half of the partnership that developed the aircraft (the other half being British Aircraft Corp, now part of BAE Systems) and now owns the license.
@Stoker_stu said:
"Can someone explain the AIRBUS reference? Airbus didn't contribute to Concorde afaik?"
What was once Sud Aviation is now Airbus so they probably hold the copyright too.
@Briczk said:
"I'm not collecting "space" sets but this one is impressive!
HOWEVER, I have strange feeling about that twister nose, and it reminds me horse drawing meme: https://i.imgflip.com/2siu6l.jpg?a469848
There was not enough time to finish it properly? "
This craft never went to space
Conflicted on this because I like the result and the price seems fine to me...but the size makes it prohibitive. I remain on the fence but eagerly awaiting the review, which often puts me over the edge when I'm waffling. I'm not bothered by the nose, it's Lego afterall, and the interior vignette is quite successful (bonus points for the loo). Also anxious to see the landing gear function.
Well, I am an aviation nerd. I will be buying this, just not sure if it will be day one or wait until next calendar year to add it.
I like it, but I'll skip this one as I have to be more selective now due to space restrictions…
I wonder if this set will… fly off the shelves!
@sirventricle said:
" @Stoker_stu said:
"Can someone explain the AIRBUS reference? Airbus didn't contribute to Concorder afaik?"
Airbus hold the licence for it, for some reason. "
Airbus purchased Aérospatiale (who built Concorde) in 2000
@sirventricle said:
" @Stoker_stu said:
"Can someone explain the AIRBUS reference? Airbus didn't contribute to Concorder afaik?"
Airbus hold the licence for it, for some reason. "
My understanding is that the French company that helped develop the Concorde ended up being part of Airbus through various acquisitions and mergers. The British company that helped develop the Concorde eventually became part of BAE Systems, which owns a 20% stake of Airbus as well.
Pretty close to perfect. The nose looks a tiny bit stubby but I'm very glad they didn't 'cheat' by just producing a new nose element.
At 40" long it might be one to hang from the ceiling rather than trying to find shelf space for.
I hope the toilet comes with a floater!
I feel like 10177 is still better than this. It brick built lots of the detail, this set is completely reliant on stickers.
I’d say instabuy, almost. But I’ll wait for an interesting GWP, ehm… rumoured Majisto
Why no BA or AF livery? Would have cost too much to offer both options maybe?
Only not an instant buy cause the crane is first in line in my budget right now. Awesome set
@Norikins said:
"I feel like 10177 is still better than this. It brick built lots of the detail, this set is completely reliant on stickers. "
Where are you seeing stickers? It looks to me that most of the detail is brick built and printed parts.
@CDM said:
"Also anxious to see the landing gear function."
Briefly shown in video on Lego.com... looks good'
@huw time to update the landing page for 10318. Still has the future coming page with no details :)
Does the livery on the LEGO set match any actual livery that Concorde was painted in at any point?
If the set had been offered in BA livery (or better yet, both BA and AF with a choice of which one to use) I would be a lot more interested. But since it has no airline livery, its less interesting to me (and I have other things I want more like Sonic and Donkey Kong and that Statue of Liberty head)
The tiny, easy-to-lose quarter circle tile jammed between two studs on the roof is giving me anxiety
(I hate that that is considered a legal building technique by TLG nowadays)
The interior is about as cramped as the real thing too.
I learned about the Concorde thanks to Silverbolt from the Transformers. One of my family members recognized what kind of plane he was and could tell a bit about it. These were the days before Wikipedia, don't you know.
I did get a bit of interest in the Concorde after that. It didn't last long, but I did feel excited when I read about Lego making this set.
I guess it's been too long ago for me, but I really like what they made.
Day 1 purchase for me. My late father had the privilege of flying on one of them in the mid-80s. I have loved the plane ever since. I still have all of his Concorde swag and this will be an amazing addition. Super excited for this set.
Looks amazing except for that nose, which looks a little clunky.
Edit: that's because it can title up and down, I guess. Titled up it looks pretty solid. Title down looks a little tougher but it's a neat feature to have and it doesn't have to be displayed that way.
My favorite airplane, despite never flying in one. The idea of a supersonic airliner fascinated me so much when I was a kid. I will get this one for sure.
Also, let's not forget that the first Lego Concorde was the set 346-1 from 1970... (despite its bizarre name 'Jumbo Jet')
@kkoster79 said:
" @huw time to update the landing page for 10318. Still has the future coming page with no details :)"
It hasn't even been two hours... relax!
@TWRAddict said:
"The snoot droops!"
Well it is over 50....
Though I'm not planning on buying this set, I will definitely take a look at the instructions to see the working of the landing gear mechanism.
A truly beautiful model! I'm blown away by the size, and the mechanism for the landing gear is superb. Now I just need to see if I can clear enough shelf space...
Sorry but I think it looks terrible, certainly not accurate enough to justify the price tag.
This is far more interesting to me than spacecraft. If it had released even ten years ago, I would have snapped it up.
Theae days there just so many big builds vying for your money and shelf space, something like this is easy to put off until it's too late.
It’s pretty cool. That nose though. Hmmm…still, I can live with it.
I’ll never be able to display it in this house. But I’m hoping for a house that is someday bought with adult LEGO display areas as one of the main factors for what to get into, instead of, um…kid spaces and their boogery covered playthings. :D
@jonwil said:
"Does the livery on the LEGO set match any actual livery that Concorde was painted in at any point?...."
Yes, whilst in development. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh3ty6wp6qQ
Stickers, blobby nose, neither British Airways or Air France livery... I'm most bothered by the constant use of the definitive article in the press release. Concorde was 'Concorde', not 'the Concorde'!
I know I voted for "Yes, eventually," but I hadn't really noted the dimensions when I did that. This is another one that will have to go on the "If I were rich and fully able-bodied" list, with 10294 and 10307. Not that it's that expensive compared to those two, but I'd need to be able to afford a house with more space, and building a model that big with limited use of my left hand sounds difficult, to say the least.
@jonwil said:
"Does the livery on the LEGO set match any actual livery that Concorde was painted in at any point?
If the set had been offered in BA livery (or better yet, both BA and AF with a choice of which one to use) I would be a lot more interested. But since it has no airline livery, its less interesting to me (and I have other things I want more like Sonic and Donkey Kong and that Statue of Liberty head)"
Yes, but they were all test mules / pre-production aircraft. Here is a decent timeline: https://www.heritageconcorde.com/airframe-detail
Having a second license would have been costly and would probably need approval from Airbus. They may not have granted permission. Maybe a designer video will shed some light on the decision.
@ao_ka said:
"Also, let's not forget that the first Lego Concorde was the set 346-1 from 1970... (despite its bizarre name 'Jumbo Jet')"
Well it was from Samsonite... surprised they didn't call it a suitcase!
@sjr60 said:
Briefly shown in video on Lego.com... looks good']]
I saw that later on...interesting solution. I was struck by how enormous the model is. Very nice...but also very, very big.
AHHHHHHH CONCORDE!!!!!!!!!!!!
For something so long AND wide, finding space to display will be an issue for many people. It’s crying out for a Hang-on-the-wall solution like the batwings.
You know those little model airplanes you can get on commercial flights? This one won’t be so little, but BA should so partner with Lego to do exclusive BA versions of these. Missing a trick here?
This set is so cool. I wasn't expecting functions like moving landing gear here. I'd love more LEGO Icons airplane sets!
It's a really tough thing to try and take the sleekest commercial aircraft ever made and try to replicate it with...blocks. It's alright for what it is but the inherent lego-ness of the build really detracts from the final result, some subject matters just shouldn't really be tackled. I did a smaller scale concorde when i was like 10 and it looked closer to the source material than this.
This is too rich! Wasn't it Airbus, after they bought the company that owned Concorde, the company that decided to stop Concorde service in the wake of the September 11th attacks and the Air France crash before that. And they cited the high maintenance costs for a plane no one was really flying on anymore as the main culprit (i.e., money)?
Now 20 years later, that same company, Airbus, looks to make a little license money on the side by letting LEGO make a version of the Concorde for sale, a plane that really people only over 20 years old can remember at all? It's a cool-looking model, but I can't help but find the irony hilarious here, and that this only exists because people love "nostalgia" (i.e., money).
Beautiful set capturing a masterpiece of human technology.
Very nice looking, but why the hell do those models always need to be so friggin huge? I don't get it!
Looks fantastic and slightly cheaper than I was expecting. Hopefully not too many stickers? A definite day one purchase for me.
I love it and will definitely be buying this, but it will never replace my far superior Britannia Boeing 767 1599 .
The promo pictures for this on Facebook are epic. The dude is closely inspecting Concorde as if he's examining a inner tube for a leak, then in another picture he's sat down writing something in a notebook. But what is he writing???
I don't care about airplanes, but this is a solid set with a reasonable price-to-worth. Fans should be happy.
I am an aviation nerd (with a pilot licence) and I will eventually get this - even though I don't have space for it. I might have to consider hanging it to the ceiling as many have suggested. Price is fair for the number of parts and also for what you get. I'd wish Lego would produce an historical plane every year (or every other year) a bit like the modular (national demonstration planes i.e. Blue Angels, Red Arrows would be great too).
I don't understand the complaints about the nose. Have you seen the real thing? the real plane is also very ugly when the nose is down (for take-off and landing because the pilot would not be able to see where they are going). There is a picture of the real thing on the cover, it looks terrible! So this model is fairly accurate. The main issue I have with this model is the absence of a BA and/or AF livery.
There are a couple of new parts in this model. The dropping cowl for the wind shield and a new cone going from 4x4 to 3x3 (one in the front and one in the back).
Bristol!!!
Now that's a pleasant surprise! Sure, we all knew it was coming, and I had seen some leaked low res pictures, but those had me worried for a bit, as some parts seemed rather crude. But looking at these pictures, it as about as perfect as it gets with regular Lego pieces. And then all decorations seem to be prints? That surely is a great bonus as I still think that's the one thing that kept many good sets (like the 10283 Space Shuttle) from being perfect. And even the price seems quite reasonable!
Size is a bit of an issue though, hanging it from the ceiling would certainly be an option, or otherwise maybe hang it flat to a wall, like you could with the Batwing? Or build it with just one wing and somehow mount it to the wall like that.....
Next a Tupolev Tu-144? Or how about a XB-70 Valkyrie? I guess for pretty obvious reasons neither of those will ever happen, unfortunately....
@Lego_Lord_Mayorca said:
"This is too rich! Wasn't it Airbus, after they bought the company that owned Concorde, the company that decided to stop Concorde service in the wake of the September 11th attacks and the Air France crash before that. And they cited the high maintenance costs for a plane no one was really flying on anymore as the main culprit (i.e., money)?
Now 20 years later, that same company, Airbus, looks to make a little license money on the side by letting LEGO make a version of the Concorde for sale, a plane that really people only over 20 years old can remember at all? It's a cool-looking model, but I can't help but find the irony hilarious here, and that this only exists because people love "nostalgia" (i.e., money)."
Airbus, as the owner of the IP, has to continue to use the trademark if they intend to keep said trademark. "Use it or lose it." So no, not really irony, just a savvy use of IP and a little bit of passive income as a bonus. If you're curious: https://trademarks.justia.com/792/13/concorde-79213940.html
Has anybody found out the exact scale of the Concorde set?
@dingbat591 said:
"Has anybody found out the exact scale of the Concorde set?"
The model is 105cm and the actual aircraft is 6157cm (give or take depending on variant) so that works out to 1:58.5 (ish) scale.
My heart says YES, my head says NO.
I love Concorde, for several reasons. I was born a stones throw from Heathrow Airport. My father worked for BOAC/then BEA/then British Airways (sometimes just British!). I would visit Queens building every summer at Heathrow to spot planes, although in strong weather, planes were visibly close enough from the back of the house to spot from there. I was lucky enough to see it almost every day. Concorde was always something else!
I never flew on it, but did work for a production company that had a photo shoot at Heathrow's technical block B (my memory is that this Concorde was a spare, always kept in hangar - how true that is... ), we shot film and photos right under and around it. Stunning for me to see it so close, I was in awe.
Another time, I was stuck in traffic on the Western perimeter road around the edge of the airport, when Concorde took off (around 11:AM) using the cross runway for poor weather - and I could hear it before I could see it - then it literally passed in front, and then overhead. The noise was incredible!
Lastly, I was there... parked on a verge like hundreds of others awaiting her final descent into Heathrow for the last commercial flight. Unknown to me at the time, my Dad had also made the trip and was on the grounds of Heathrow doing the same thing. This plane meant a lot.
Sorry for the long-winded response. I think it's a great model, and a set I wasn't planning on getting, but just knowing it exists might just tempt me in the end (Yes, livery could have been supplied - it looked stunning in the BOAC colours, and the nose looks a tad too long).
Set of the year for me!
I've seen a few of the Concorde airplanes once, multiple were parked together outside at Heathow in August 2000 , seen them from a window of an airplane landing there.
It was only a few weeks after the 25 July 2000 Paris Concorde crash, so I assume they were grounded and gathered for inspections during that time in August 2000 (modifications to the airplane were later made) , and the Concorde did commercially fly again 7 Nov 2001- 25 Oct 2003)
How long before the Chinese knock-offs offer a TU-144?
@Lego_Lord_Mayorca said:
"This is too rich! Wasn't it Airbus, after they bought the company that owned Concorde, the company that decided to stop Concorde service in the wake of the September 11th attacks and the Air France crash before that. And they cited the high maintenance costs for a plane no one was really flying on anymore as the main culprit (i.e., money)?
Now 20 years later, that same company, Airbus, looks to make a little license money on the side by letting LEGO make a version of the Concorde for sale, a plane that really people only over 20 years old can remember at all? It's a cool-looking model, but I can't help but find the irony hilarious here, and that this only exists because people love "nostalgia" (i.e., money)."
No. Airbus did not buy the company that owned Concorde and they did not operate any of the services. They could no more make the decision to end Concorde operations than you or I, though a decision they took did contribute to the decision by the owners of the aircraft to cease all operations.
Concorde - which started as a Royal Aircraft Establishment study into commercial supersonic transport - was built by the British Aircraft Corporation and Sud Aviation/Aerospatiale between 1965 and 1979. British Airways and Air France, who were the only customers to take delivery of aeroplanes, separately owned and maintained their own fleets using parts supplied by British Aerospace/BAE Systems (which had absorbed BAC in 1977) and Airbus (which had absorbed Aerospatiale much later, in 2000) - plus other suppliers such as Rolls-Royce. In April 2003 the two owner-operators agreed to end services and retire all aircraft. There were a number of reasons for this decision, mostly the various consequences of the Paris crash and the subsequent accident report, the reduction in air travel after 11 September attacks, and Airbus' announcement earlier in 2003 that they would no longer manufacture the replacement parts they had been supplying - a vacuum that other suppliers (such as BAES) decided not to fill. Air France retired their fleet in June and British Airways retired theirs in October.
It is also wrong to say Airbus owns the IP rights to Concorde i.e. for use in relation to commercial products. It is one of several owners of the rights to the name, in various contexts. British Airways also owns some rights (see https://www.trademarkelite.com/uk/trademark/trademark-detail/UK00000853730/Concorde which was first registered in 1963 just a few months after the name of the project was formally announced and is still valid).
@FlyerBeast said:
"The tiny, easy-to-lose quarter circle tile jammed between two studs on the roof is giving me anxiety
(I hate that that is considered a legal building technique by TLG nowadays)"
Let's call it a "legalized building technique" ;-)
@Lego_Lord_Mayorca said:
"Now 20 years later, that same company, Airbus, looks to make a little license money on the side by letting LEGO make a version of the Concorde for sale, a plane that really people only over 20 years old can remember at all? It's a cool-looking model, but I can't help but find the irony hilarious here, and that this only exists because people love "nostalgia" (i.e., money)."
I've never understood the use of "only matters to people over X age" to dismiss something. I cannot make any sense of it. There will always be people too young to remember something, but that doesn't somehow invalidate the knowledge and interest of those who are old enough. That's not even getting into the reality that people under that threshold are perfectly capable of taking interest in subjects older than them.
And of course people love nostalgia. Because people tend to like things they have significant memories of. Have you never sought out something that connects you to some facet of your past?
@CDM said:
" @Lego_Lord_Mayorca said:
"This is too rich! Wasn't it Airbus, after they bought the company that owned Concorde, the company that decided to stop Concorde service in the wake of the September 11th attacks and the Air France crash before that. And they cited the high maintenance costs for a plane no one was really flying on anymore as the main culprit (i.e., money)?
Now 20 years later, that same company, Airbus, looks to make a little license money on the side by letting LEGO make a version of the Concorde for sale, a plane that really people only over 20 years old can remember at all? It's a cool-looking model, but I can't help but find the irony hilarious here, and that this only exists because people love "nostalgia" (i.e., money)."
Airbus, as the owner of the IP, has to continue to use the trademark if they intend to keep said trademark. "Use it or lose it." So no, not really irony, just a savvy use of IP and a little bit of passive income as a bonus. If you're curious: https://trademarks.justia.com/792/13/concorde-79213940.html "
Airbus is one of several owners of the IP in relation to commercial products. For example, British Airways has owned some rights since 1963: https://www.trademarkelite.com/uk/trademark/trademark-detail/UK00000853730/Concorde
Airbus' registration, filed in 2017, includes 'toy models'. Hence the box.
The crash of that one Concorde was like the loss of the Shutties to me - very heartbreaking.
I’d love to have this, but I have nowhere to put it! It is a beautiful model, though. Love the landing gear/nose function.
Can't afford it and don't know where I'd put it, but I simply have to buy one. Damnit, LEGO.
@ICAbricks said:
"Pretty sure the IRL Concorde was a flop, but this looks kinda interesting"
Financially? Yeah, absolute blackhole of cash.
Technologically? Its development & existence had the U.S. military scared, which has gotta count for something. Mind you, the Americans also debuted a radical airliner in 1969, and that one was produced until this year, so I guess they had the last laugh.
@CDM said:
"(...)just a savvy use of IP and a little bit of passive income as a bonus.(...)"
And the Maker knows they need to make some money after chucking so much into the A380 hole... :-D
Love it! Day one buy for me. I haven't said that in a long time.
I like it but it’s way too big for me - being over a metre long makes it impossible to display unfortunately - I wish they had made it half the size and half the price
Beautiful model. Exquisite.
Blows the COBI version out of the water.
@legospaceslug said:
"I like it but it’s way too big for me - being over a metre long makes it impossible to display unfortunately - I wish they had made it half the size and half the price "
Well, the Cobi version LegoDad just mentioned has you covered! It only fails at one point: While it is almost exactly half the size, it's only about a fifth of the price. Way too cheap ;-)
As much as I appreciate what Cobi does, and with the help of some specialized pieces it looks pretty decent too, I do prefer how Lego does it with regular pieces. Though I guess that wouldn't work quite as well at half the size. And obviously they couldn't have incorporated those extra features.
@jonwil said:
"Does the livery on the LEGO set match any actual livery that Concorde was painted in at any point?
If the set had been offered in BA livery (or better yet, both BA and AF with a choice of which one to use) I would be a lot more interested. But since it has no airline livery, its less interesting to me (and I have other things I want more like Sonic and Donkey Kong and that Statue of Liberty head)"
I’m sure there will be 3rd-party guys that will printing quality stickers for this, in no time!
Great set!
Definitely on my want list, and price isn’t stupid.
Just SO big - I like the idea of hanging it from a roof, as someone suggested. Or maybe wall-mounting it!
@Spritetoggle said:
" @Lego_Lord_Mayorca said:
"Now 20 years later, that same company, Airbus, looks to make a little license money on the side by letting LEGO make a version of the Concorde for sale, a plane that really people only over 20 years old can remember at all? It's a cool-looking model, but I can't help but find the irony hilarious here, and that this only exists because people love "nostalgia" (i.e., money)."
I've never understood the use of "only matters to people over X age" to dismiss something. I cannot make any sense of it. There will always be people too young to remember something, but that doesn't somehow invalidate the knowledge and interest of those who are old enough. That's not even getting into the reality that people under that threshold are perfectly capable of taking interest in subjects older than them.
And of course people love nostalgia. Because people tend to like things they have significant memories of. Have you never sought out something that connects you to some facet of your past?"
So very true. But nostalgia is not always the only factor. I was not born for the 'space race' and its culmination: the lunar landing. Yet, I have the Saturn V and I went to rebrickable and bricks in space to get the models (bought the parts direct from Lego) for the Mercury Redstone, Mercury Atlas LV3-B and Gemini Titan II. They look very nice side by side and truly give an impression of scale (which is why I always wondered why Lego never produced them considering the huge success of the Saturn V).
Even closer to home: I can, with great certainty, claim that nobody alive now was alive at the time of the medieval castles and/or pirates and/or vikings and yet people like these themes anyway.
I bet the guy who originally designed this on LEGO Ideas is not happy about this.
90th comment... took a while, but never in doubt!
@HOBBES said:
"I can, with great certainty, claim that nobody alive now was alive at the time of the medieval castles and/or pirates and/or vikings and yet people like these themes anyway."
And don't forget about Star Wars, which also happened long, long time ago, in a galaxy far away! Lego seems to do pretty well selling that prehistoric junk!
@NickLafreniere1 said:
"I bet the guy who originally designed this on LEGO Ideas is not happy about this."
I find 2 Concordes on Ideas, one made it to 10k, the other not even close. And both seem built quite different from this one. Neither would have been the first to build a Concorde from Lego, nor be the last. So why wouldn't they feel happy about this?
Looks absolutely fantastic - this is the most excited I've been for a set in a good while! They did a fantastic job with the main shaping (especially the wing planform), but they've paid so much attention to the details too!
One thing I can't work out though - what is that part they've used for the cockpit visor? (the drooping section of the canopy)
@ChocolateCrisps said:
"One thing I can't work out though - what is that part they've used for the cockpit visor? (the drooping section of the canopy)"
You get a closer look at it in the videos and also on the picture of the back of the box, it does seem like a specialized (dual molded) piece I think?
That nose reminds me of White Spy from Spy vs Spy.
Nice parts usage for the toilets.
@NickLafreniere1 said:
"I bet the guy who originally designed this on LEGO Ideas is not happy about this."
I think with things like this is the guy doesn't have a license for the Concorde.
Are building techniques, etc the same? The interiors, etc.?
Cobi's got a Concorde and there's like a dozen guys out there with Concorde moc's from minifig scale on down with retractable landing gear, etc.
I wouldn't say he 'originally' designed it either.
@Lego_Lord_Mayorca: Consider the Sopwith Camel, a plane that's more than a hundred years old. Lego's done it thee times, 3451, 10226, and 40049. And even sticking to airplanes and ignoring the other historical subjects that @HOBBES mentioned, they've also done planes that few to no people alive when the sets released would have seen in their heyday, not only 10024, but all the (granted, not based on specific models, as far as I know) biplanes in the Adventurers line.
"Dear, sweet Concorde! You shall not have died in vain!"
"I'm not quite dead, sir."
@StyleCounselor said:
""Dear, sweet Concorde! You shall not have died in vain!"
"I'm not quite dead, sir.""
Well, he will be soon. He's very ill.
It seems kinda inefficient to only fly 12 people…
Could have chosen a better commercial aircraft with a better flight record that was more cost effective, had a better track record, longer service, and wasn't too expensive to fly on.
Blacktron parts pack. Nothing more.
I do want to get my hands on those new looking cone piece...
@Tony_D said:
"Could have chosen a better commercial aircraft with a better flight record that was more cost effective, had a better track record, longer service, and wasn't too expensive to fly on. "
So you mean one without all that darn baggage of technological and historical impact.
Memorability, even importance, isn't measured solely on quantifiable success.
A little background:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOBSeD20A_g
Trust me: "Bright Sun Films" do a great job in: research, timelining, and story-telling:)
Also: "Nose droops" but...Tail "swoops"...forgot about that, but it makes sense: the nose drops to annoy the pilots to see the runway, the tail raises to keep it from scraping the runway on take-offs and landings...and all-in-all, also contributes to aerodynamics on take-offs and landings: as well as safety...
Lastly: @DekoPuma, you're not completely wrong on the "interior scale"; a few years back I took a vacation in the Seattle area. Two of the most fun things I did/visited we're the Woodland Park Zoo, and next day, Boeing's Museum of Flight...which has a Concorde that you can walk through, though "Plexiglassed". The isle is narrowed by this, and you can't sit in the seats (although they're pretty 'plain':D)
I'm a bit late on this, but this is just "plane" awesome!
I’m surprised nobody has commented on the apparent lack of tail wheel or the fact the model’s visor doesn’t operate independently of the nose (as it did on Concorde). The latter detail would be hard/impossible to create as a mechanism though!
Nice model all the same. But maybe a bit awkward sized for display.
I feel lucky to have seen (and heard!) Concorde fly over many times when working near Heathrow, and have visited two on display including the pre-production example (which is in this colour scheme of course) at Duxford, UK.
I have visited Auto und Technik Museum Sinsheim. From what I gathered it's the only place on the planet that has both Concorde and Tu-144 on display next to each other. Quite an impressive sight to behold. And I can second the impression I got how cramped Concorde felt inside. Especially when compared with wide body planes like the 777 and similar.
https://sinsheim.technik-museum.de/en/concorde
@AustinPowers said:
"I have visited Auto und Technik Museum Sinsheim."
Still want to go there, seems like one of the most awesome museums in the world....
It's just a bit too far for a day trip, but should make for a nice weekend trip.
@smurfybloke said:
"I’m surprised nobody has commented on the apparent lack of tail wheel"
There actually is one visible in a few of the photos!
@WizardOfOss : I can definitely recommend going there. If you go for a weekend, make sure to also visit its sister museum in Speyer, not far away. Both museums are quite impressive.
https://speyer.technik-museum.de/
@ChocolateCrisps said:
" @smurfybloke said:
"I’m surprised nobody has commented on the apparent lack of tail wheel"
There actually is one visible in a few of the photos!"
Thank you. I see that now I’ve looked again. And delighted to see Lego’s video suggests it also extends/retracts with the other gear :-)
@AustinPowers said:
" @WizardOfOss : I can definitely recommend going there. If you go for a weekend, make sure to also visit its sister museum in Speyer, not far away. Both museums are quite impressive.
https://speyer.technik-museum.de/ "
And then I also see Museum Autovision in Altlußheim, right next to Speyer. And even a few more that seem interesting... like the Historischen Museum der Pfalz that will have a big Playmobil exposition. And who can resist a Weinmuseum?
A weekend won't be enough :-)
My father worked at an airport and knew a guy who flew in Concorde as a steward, he sat at the back and got tinnitus after a while.
I'm super impressed with this and actually love the livery, I've visited the museum at Duxford which has the production Concorde in this exact livery so if anything it's the look I most associate with Concorde even ahead of its BA and Air France liveries. While they are both iconic it'd mean adding additional licenses and I feel it'd take away from the focus of the set; it's not a set to promote a currently-existing airline, it's commemorating an iconic and historic aircraft. I never got to fly on Concorde but I do remember being a kid and hearing and seeing it fly overhead, it was quite something!
@jonwil said:
"Does the livery on the LEGO set match any actual livery that Concorde was painted in at any point?
If the set had been offered in BA livery (or better yet, both BA and AF with a choice of which one to use) I would be a lot more interested. But since it has no airline livery, its less interesting to me (and I have other things I want more like Sonic and Donkey Kong and that Statue of Liberty head)"
I agree - if this had 'classic' BA livery from the 1970's / 80's I think I would consider it, despite concerns about where it would fit in the house (I have a bay window in my office which is just the right size but the set would be yellow in no time...)
I walked through the prototype Concorde (IIRC) at the Paris Air Show in 1989; it's as narrow and cramped as everyone else says it is. But London-to-New York in 3.5 hours was a big selling point!
My family and I saw a BA Concorde fly a demonstration at the Oskkosh (WI, USA) air show back in the day. They took paying passengers up to Canada and did some supersonic flying around, then returned to Oskkosh and made a few "high-speed" passes of the flightline. My dad shot a picture which I still have framed on my wall; the Lego model would look good next to this one.
@Norikins said:
"I feel like 10177 is still better than this. It brick built lots of the detail, this set is completely reliant on stickers. "
10177 is riddled with brittle blue bricks and one giant sticker over the whole tail covering 24 bricks, which...dumb, and also cracked like crazy. This set looks like prints to me.
@smurfybloke said:
"have visited two on display including the pre-production example (which is in this colour scheme of course) at Duxford, UK. "
Yes, I also saw it at Duxford when I went to Wings and Wheels a few years ago!
Sorry, but I have to say this...This set cannot get here fast enough.
Sorry but it had to be said.
I would have preferred an official LEGO SR-71 Blackbird, but for supersonic airplanes, this will do for now.
Hrph: "...the nose drops to annoy the pilots..."...yeah, that should have been "...allow the pilots..."; guess that's what happens when you're typing a bunch of text in a constrained time...rest is right though.:)
As someone who is only building City sets now, this will be a hard one to resist.
@Ridgeheart said:
" @ElephantKnight said:
"Blacktron parts pack. Nothing more.
I do want to get my hands on those new looking cone piece..."
Hey, come on. You should know I'm a staunch Blacktron-supporter as well, but if you're going to use this heap as a parts-pack, you're all but forcing them to reinvent themselves as 'Whitetron'."
Well, I didn't say it was a great parts pack. The balance isn't very good. But it's still got white and black parts.
@Hew : " LEGO Concorde Set. Arguably one of the most iconic and famous [passenger] aircraft in history"
@dreisbaugh: Yeah, but...SR-71 is/was a military aircraft...unless they use the "NASA Loophole"...
Also, funny enough; at the "Boeing Museum of Flight" while they don't have a 'true' "Blackbird", they do have an M-21 variant...
https://www.museumofflight.org/Exhibits-and-Events/Aircraft/lockheed-m-21-blackbird
(I also think this and/or the YF-12 is the inspiration for G.I. Joe's "Cobra Night Raven"...:))
Dang!
Nose "in bricks" is plain ugly imo. Having whatever interior within such a tight space is impressive though. But what's with those "Grand disasters" LEGO sets (Titanic, Concord) ...
Of course it wouldn't be a Lego vehicle model without some error or typo. The photo of THE real life one showcases F-WTSS prototype which differs from the serial production aircraft (most notably the nose and tail cone which can make some people believe that the Lego model is inaccurate) which Lego model represents. This particular photo is from the first flight of Concorde overall, so probably that's why they chosed it.
Amidst all the huge sets we now get, I don't mind this one as much. The Concorde is a beautiful marvel of engineering. It's FAR too large a model for me, but if we're going to crank out new 150+ euro sets every other week, I'd prefer this over some overblown Disney IP display model any day. It actually reminds me of the Boeing plane model from 2008, from back when large 'adult' (I hate equating 'adult' with 'super rich') sets were few and far between.
And at least it's not another car (looking at Technic right now).
Anyone know if the red stripe and Concorde name will be printed or stickers? Printed I hope.
No one knows, but based on these pictures it seems like mostly brick built with a few prints. Lego usually doesn't do much to hide that stickers are stickers, but I don't see anything here.
@yellowcastle said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
""Dear, sweet Concorde! You shall not have died in vain!"
"I'm not quite dead, sir.""
Well, he will be soon. He's very ill."
"Actually, I think I might pull through."
@aes1982 said:
"This one goes straight on my wish list. Freeing up display space will be an issue, though! When the first rumours leaked I thought this set would have a similar size as set 10283, but it is much larger than that!"
After signifying- via the poll- that I was unsure a mere 15 minutes ago, I thought some more and have concluded that I'll probably take it Sept 4th. The subject matter is fantastic- I was always in awe of this aircraft- the model is impressive, and the price point is surprisingly lite.
@TheOtherMike said:
" @yellowcastle said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
""Dear, sweet Concorde! You shall not have died in vain!"
"I'm not quite dead, sir.""
Well, he will be soon. He's very ill."
"Actually, I think I might pull through.""
'Well then you will not have been mortally wounded in vain!"
@Murdoch17 said:
" @TheOtherMike said:
" @yellowcastle said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
""Dear, sweet Concorde! You shall not have died in vain!"
"I'm not quite dead, sir.""
Well, he will be soon. He's very ill."
"Actually, I think I might pull through.""
'Well then you will not have been mortally wounded in vain!""
I'm feeling better. I think I can go with you, sir.
@StyleCounselor said:
" @Murdoch17 said:
" @TheOtherMike said:
" @yellowcastle said:
" @StyleCounselor said:
""Dear, sweet Concorde! You shall not have died in vain!"
"I'm not quite dead, sir.""
Well, he will be soon. He's very ill."
"Actually, I think I might pull through.""
'Well then you will not have been mortally wounded in vain!""
I'm feeling better. I think I can go with you, sir."
I feel happy!
@Spritetoggle said:
" @Tony_D said:
"Could have chosen a better commercial aircraft with a better flight record that was more cost effective, had a better track record, longer service, and wasn't too expensive to fly on. "
So you mean one without all that darn baggage of technological and historical impact.
Memorability, even importance, isn't measured solely on quantifiable success."
You just described the "Spruce Goose".
It's gonna be yellowish after 5 years on shelf :)
@NickLafreniere1 said:
"I bet the guy who originally designed this on LEGO Ideas is not happy about this."
Another clear snatch, grab and take credit for attempt for a great creation. Would say well executed for once, but at least ABStract had the correct builders listed on the UCS plaque he created. Glad I requested and got a copy of the original LXF file :)
Impressive design. I wonder how much time it'll take to become tan on display, however ^^
I'm sitting here in the Concorde lounge in T5 and just called out excitedly to my wife, this is the first I've read about this new set. I can see the Droop Nose from a 1979 Concorde on the terrace area, and agree the shape doesn't match, I know hard to do with Lego. I would have preferred in this case a (or several) new pieces to reflect the shape. I'll be buying, building and displaying!