r_a_d_ t1_iqv70wt wrote on October 3, 2022 at 10:18 AM

Reply to comment by ApprehensiveSorbet76 in [OC] Supersonic Inefficiency: Why the Concorde Was Decommissioned by haboo213

I don't agree with this at all. If you are going to make such a comparison, you should be reading the numbers of the axes, making your point moot.

If anything, OP's title is misleading. This chart just says that tickets on the concord should cost 6x more than a normal flight. Some people could be willing to pay that much due to the faster travel time or whatever. So it really doesn't bring us to the conclusion OP mentions in the title.

ApprehensiveSorbet76 t1_iqw1cyz wrote on October 3, 2022 at 2:52 PM

If you just want the numbers you should opt for the table of values. A graph adds value above and beyond a table because it enables visually derived insights into the differences and relationships between values. Physically skewing the visual characteristics of the graph can result in the visual derivation of false insights (Concourse appears to consume 10x more fuel when it really consumes 4x more).

r_a_d_ t1_iqw1r40 wrote on October 3, 2022 at 2:54 PM

This graph provides plenty of visually derived insight, but not the specific one you chose.

ApprehensiveSorbet76 t1_iqw5hxa wrote on October 3, 2022 at 3:20 PM

It's the specific insight the author chose, not me. If we focus on the regression line characteristics then its fine viewed like this. But a title like "Supersonic Inefficiency: Why the Concorde was Decommissioned" along with a red dot for the Concorde is intended to focus your attention on how inefficient the Concorde is relative to the others. In regards to the main point the author intended to convey, the graph is misleading.