Why We Lost The Vietnam War

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

"Peter Stickney" wrote in message
...


Two mendium range turboprops,
(Brittania and Vanguard), which not
only undercut each other, but were
so long delayed that they had no market
niche when they finally went
into service.

They sold well enough and filled the niche they intended too. The
British
have made planes that were better than their US equivalents: VC10 v
707,
Britannia v other US props, BAC 1-11 v DC9, etc, but never sold that
well
because US companies could keep prices down because they had larger
production lines as US carriers preferred them.

Let's see: 60 Commercial Britannias,

No. 85 built.


23 of which went to the RAF and 2 prototypes paid for by the
ministry of works, that does indeed leave 60 sold to
commercial operators


Not that we didn't have our share of flops. The Boeing 377
Stratocruiser, with its turbosupercharged R4360s and advanced systems,
required much more maintenance hours than the L.1049 Constellation, or
the DC-7. So only about 50 were made. (However, as the KC-97 (Model
367), flown by the U.S. Air Force, who didn't mind doing the
maintenance, it got built to the tune of 888 airframes.)

The VC.10 Superior?

Yep.

Well, if you count moving fewer passengers a
shorter distance slower, while burning more fuel/mile, I suppose you
could say that. (To be fair, the VC.10 did have a shorter takeoff
roll, but by the tim it came out, runways had been extended so that
that wasn't relevant any more.)

The Super VC10 was larger and any problems ironed out.


And yet only 22 were ever sold


The BAC 1-11 was a neat little jet, but, unfortunately, it was a
_little_, short-legged jet. Just the thing for tooling between the
U.K. and Brussels, but not as economical as the DC-9 or the 737 over
the type of Stage Lengths that the rest of teh world required.

The BAC 1-11 was a massive seller.



Total One-Eleven production amounted to 235 aircraft which
was certainly respectable but doesnt compare that well
with the sales of the DC-9 (976) or Boeing 727 (1832)
let alone the 737 (4300)

Keith

"Brett" wrote in message
...


Not if Greenland is included.

Which it isn't and isn't even in Europe.

Yet it is considered part of Denmark.


For a little while. Parties advocating independence won
the 2002 elections by a wide margin. There's going
to be a referendum and the island is expected to
achieve full independence in 2006.


Note that while Greenland is a large geographic area
the inhabitable regions are a very small part of the
land mass and the population is less than that of
a medium sized town.

Keith

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

The Britannia derived from No. 111.

The Brabazon and Britannia were different aircraft.

Read about the Brababzon project.

Not in the early to mid 50s they never. The Viscount was a big seller
in
the US, so was the BAC 1-11.


The stretched Viscounts sold well in the US, the BAC One-Eleven was not
a
turboprop.

We know. It was the second short haul jet, the first being the French
Caravelle.


That it was not

Deliveries began in 1965 , the Boeing 727 entered service in 1964
and the Tupolev TU-124 entered service between Moscow and
Ulyanovsk in December 1962

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:
"Brett" wrote in message
...


Not if Greenland is included.

Which it isn't and isn't even in Europe.

Yet it is considered part of Denmark.


For a little while. Parties advocating independence won
the 2002 elections by a wide margin. There's going
to be a referendum and the island is expected to
achieve full independence in 2006.


Note that while Greenland is a large geographic area
the inhabitable regions are a very small part of the
land mass and the population is less than that of
a medium sized town.

Keith the only one in this thread that needed (and most likely ignore) that
information would be "Spiv".

"Brett" wrote in message
...
"Spiv" wrote:
"Peter Stickney" wrote in message
...


Two mendium range turboprops,
(Brittania and Vanguard), which not
only undercut each other, but were
so long delayed that they had no market
niche when they finally went
into service.

They sold well enough and filled the niche they intended too. The
British
have made planes that were better than their US equivalents: VC10 v
707,
Britannia v other US props, BAC 1-11 v DC9, etc, but never sold that
well
because US companies could keep prices down because they had larger
production lines as US carriers preferred them.

Let's see: 60 Commercial Britannias,

No. 85 built.

The comment was "Commercial Britannias", the RAF's purchase would be
considered a military buy.

Not that we didn't have our share of flops. The Boeing 377
Stratocruiser, with its turbosupercharged R4360s and advanced systems,
required much more maintenance hours than the L.1049 Constellation, or
the DC-7. So only about 50 were made. (However, as the KC-97 (Model
367), flown by the U.S. Air Force, who didn't mind doing the
maintenance, it got built to the tune of 888 airframes.)

The VC.10 Superior?

Yep.

You really are clueless.

Well, if you count moving fewer passengers a
shorter distance slower, while burning more fuel/mile, I suppose you
could say that. (To be fair, the VC.10 did have a shorter takeoff
roll, but by the tim it came out, runways had been extended so that
that wasn't relevant any more.)

The Super VC10 was larger and any problems ironed out.

20% higher fuel burn than JT3D equipped 707's doesn't indicated it "ironed
out" "any problems".

The BAC 1-11 was a neat little jet, but, unfortunately, it was a
_little_, short-legged jet. Just the thing for tooling between the
U.K. and Brussels, but not as economical as the DC-9 or the 737 over
the type of Stage Lengths that the rest of teh world required.

The BAC 1-11 was a massive seller.

Even with Romanian production it would not be considered "a massive
seller"

It would

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

Not that we didn't have our share of flops. The Boeing 377
Stratocruiser, with its turbosupercharged R4360s and advanced systems,
required much more maintenance hours than the L.1049 Constellation, or
the DC-7. So only about 50 were made. (However, as the KC-97 (Model
367), flown by the U.S. Air Force, who didn't mind doing the
maintenance, it got built to the tune of 888 airframes.)

The VC.10 Superior?

Yep.

Well, if you count moving fewer passengers a
shorter distance slower, while burning more fuel/mile, I suppose you
could say that. (To be fair, the VC.10 did have a shorter takeoff
roll, but by the tim it came out, runways had been extended so that
that wasn't relevant any more.)

The Super VC10 was larger and any problems ironed out.

And yet only 22 were ever sold

You have this great ability not get any point. The point is that the
British made better planes but never sold well.

The BAC 1-11 was a neat little jet, but, unfortunately, it was a
_little_, short-legged jet. Just the thing for tooling between the
U.K. and Brussels, but not as economical as the DC-9 or the 737 over
the type of Stage Lengths that the rest of teh world required.

The BAC 1-11 was a massive seller.

Total One-Eleven production amounted to 235 aircraft which
was certainly respectable but doesnt compare that well
with the sales of the DC-9 (976) or Boeing 727 (1832)
let alone the 737 (4300)

Proves the point. The 1-11 was a better plane than its eqivs yet sold well
but inferior US planes sold better.

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

The Britannia derived from No. 111.

The Brabazon and Britannia were different aircraft.

Read about the Brababzon project.

Not in the early to mid 50s they never. The Viscount was a big
seller
in
the US, so was the BAC 1-11.

The stretched Viscounts sold well in the US, the BAC One-Eleven was
not
a
turboprop.

We know. It was the second short haul jet, the first being the French
Caravelle.

That it was not

Deliveries began in 1965 , the Boeing 727 entered service in 1964
and the Tupolev TU-124 entered service between Moscow and
Ulyanovsk in December 1962

The 727 was a larger plane.

"Brett" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:
"Brett" wrote in message
...


Not if Greenland is included.

Which it isn't and isn't even in Europe.

Yet it is considered part of Denmark.

For a little while. Parties advocating independence won
the 2002 elections by a wide margin. There's going
to be a referendum and the island is expected to
achieve full independence in 2006.

Note that while Greenland is a large geographic area
the inhabitable regions are a very small part of the
land mass and the population is less than that of
a medium sized town.

Keith the only one in this thread that needed (and most likely ignore)
that
information would be "Spiv".

It is irrelevant info. Greenland is NOT a part of Denmark, no more than
Gibraltar or the Falklands being a part of the UK. You obviously can't
understand this.

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

No. 85 built.


85 total, how many were built for the military?



Yep.


Of course it was, it was British.



The BAC 1-11 was a massive seller.


Massive? Four times as many DC-9s were sold.

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

Only to your mind.


I think the few minds that are contributing to this discussion would agree
with me.