Spiv wrote:

"John Mullen" wrote in message
...

Spiv wrote:

(snip)


No, *this* is balls. April 8 1954 was the last of *three* Comet crashes
through the same cause. October 19 1954 was the date of publication of
the crash report giving metal fatigue as the cause. July 15, 1954 was
the date of the 707 prototype's first flight.


The prototype was not the finished article. Also British research on

the

Comet was ongoing from the first crash. All this went to the USA.



The 707 was a better, safer plane than the Comet. End of story.


IT was a larger plane

Yes.

B707

Wingspan 145 feet 9 inches (44.42 m)
Length 152 feet 11 inches (46.6 m)
Wing Area 3,010 square feet (280 m2)

Comet

Dimensions [m] Comet 1 Comet 1A Comet 2
Overall length 28.61 28.61 29.53
Wing span 34.98 34.98 34.98
Wing surface [m2] 188.3 188.3 188.3

Actually making it bigger with a thicker skin and oval windows were all
(obviously) designed into the 707 *way* before the Comet crashes.

with 10 years of the Comet before it to fall back on.

No. See actual dates from my previous post.


The world's first transatlantic service was by the Comet not the 707.

No. See Keith's post.


I did and it is just inane babble. The Comet was first in 1958.

As has been patiently explained to you, it wasn't the first air service
from UK to USA. Props like the Constellation and the DC 4 and even
Zeppelins had flown that route before. The Comet couldn't do the
Atlantic non-stop any more than the first 707 (367-80 Prototype (1954)
could.

It was the first jet airliner in regular service, but it was too unreliable.

The 707 was first non-stop. A better, safer, plane. If it hurts you that
it was American, get over it.


Better
plane? The Nimrod, which still fly's today, is a "Comet".

Absolutely not. You are in fantasy land if you think the Comet was in
any sense 'better' than the 707. It had a truly awful safety record.


The crashes were put right. The Nimrod (a Comet) and the Comet have flow
many miles and years and the Nimrod is still flying.

The after-effect of the many crashes which were caused by design errors
that ought never to have been made was a lack of confidence and a
massive cancelling of orders from airlines.


The perpetuation of the Nimrod has
been IMO a financial and military
disaster for Britain.


The Nimrod (a Comet) is a cost effective plane and very god at what it does.

You must have forgotten the smiley here surely? I knew people in
Ferranti who worked on the system in the 80's. It was an over-budget
under-capable piece of job-creation then and it still is now.


And, as Keith points out, military versions of the
707 are still pretty common, certainly more so than the Nimrod. Who else
other than us flies the Nimrod? Who else other than UK and commonwealth
carriers ever even flew the Comet? How many were built compared to the
707? etc etc...


The USA did give tasters to many buyers.

True. OTOH at least one of the lost Comets was on some kind of round the
world publicity stunt. Same difference.


I quite like Jeremy Clarkson, but if watching the occasional bit of TV
is the sum of your knowledge about aviation (as it appears), you should
maybe go away and read up a bit more before posting here.

I worked in aviation.

No offence, but that isn't always obvious from the things you post.


Then pay attention.

I'll certainly try to. How about in return, you posting something worth
paying attention to?

John