Why We Lost The Vietnam War

"D. Patterson" wrote in message
...

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

"D. Patterson" wrote in message
...

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

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

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in
message
...

The Tu-104 was in service before the Comet 4 and 707
for sure.


The Tu-104 began passenger operations in September 1956.



I once flew to Moscow in one during the
mid 70's , strange aircraft with that glazed nose one
almost expected to see a bombardier sitting there.


The Tu-104 was essentially a modified Tu-16 bomber.

The 707 was essentially a modified bomber too. Uncle Sam paid for
the
development.

No, the Boeing 707 was never a bomber.

They took a lot from previous Boeing bombers. Look at the wings of some
of
them. What a give away. A company that is making bombers, essentially
large transports, of course would fall back on the technology they are
familiar with. They didn't forget it, pretend it wasn't there and start
all
over again.

Previous Boeing jet bombers, B-47 and B-52, all had swept-back high wings
suited to bombers, which are unlike the low to swept-back mid-wing design
of
the Boeing 707 series suited to airliners.

Fighter aircraft also have wings, but that certainly does not make them
bombers either.

Boeing's experience in producing bombers AND airliners does not make a
Boeing airliner a non-existant Boeing bomber.

Most of the bomber experience was transferred over to the 707. The wings
are virtually the same angle and shape. In reality Uncle Sam paid the lions
share of the 707s development.

Spiv wrote:



Most of the bomber experience was transferred over to the 707. The wings
are virtually the same angle and shape. In reality Uncle Sam paid the lions
share of the 707s development.


Maybe DeHavilland should have transferred their extensive experience
with their highly successfull bomber - the Mosquito - to the Comet
project; then they might have had a winner?

Dave

In article ,
Dave Holford wrote:

Spiv wrote:

Most of the bomber experience was transferred over to the 707. The wings
are virtually the same angle and shape. In reality Uncle Sam paid the lions
share of the 707s development.

Maybe DeHavilland should have transferred their extensive experience
with their highly successfull bomber - the Mosquito - to the Comet
project; then they might have had a winner?

Remember that the Mosquito was used for passenger service in WWII,
probably being the fastest "airliner" of the time. It was, of course,
in a limited market niche....


--
David H. Thornley | If you want my opinion, ask.
| If you don't, flee.
http://www.thornley.net/~thornley/david/ | O-

"David Thornley" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dave Holford wrote:

Spiv wrote:

Most of the bomber experience was transferred over to the 707. The
wings
are virtually the same angle and shape. In reality Uncle Sam paid the
lions
share of the 707s development.

Maybe DeHavilland should have transferred their extensive experience
with their highly successfull bomber - the Mosquito - to the Comet
project; then they might have had a winner?

Unless the Comet was made of wood, then it would have been dynamite.

Remember that the Mosquito was used for passenger service in WWII,
probably being the fastest "airliner" of the time. It was, of course,
in a limited market niche....

In 1942, the US and the UK split some aircraft development with the USA
concentrating on transports. This put the UK back after WW2. Despite this
they still came up with the Comet, the world's first jet airliner, soon
after.

Spiv wrote:
"David Thornley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
Dave Holford wrote:

Spiv wrote:

Most of the bomber experience was transferred over to the 707. The

wings

are virtually the same angle and shape. In reality Uncle Sam paid the

lions

share of the 707s development.

Maybe DeHavilland should have transferred their extensive experience
with their highly successfull bomber - the Mosquito - to the Comet
project; then they might have had a winner?


Unless the Comet was made of wood, then it would have been dynamite.


Would have had problems with humidity on some of the stops on the London
Joburg run!

Remember that the Mosquito was used for passenger service in WWII,
probably being the fastest "airliner" of the time. It was, of course,
in a limited market niche....


In 1942, the US and the UK split some aircraft development with the USA
concentrating on transports. This put the UK back after WW2. Despite this
they still came up with the Comet, the world's first jet airliner, soon
after.

Which literally was dynamite. As it tended to blow up regularly.

John

In article ,
"Spiv" writes:

"David Thornley" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dave Holford wrote:

Spiv wrote:

Most of the bomber experience was transferred over to the 707. The
wings
are virtually the same angle and shape. In reality Uncle Sam paid the
lions
share of the 707s development.

Maybe DeHavilland should have transferred their extensive experience
with their highly successfull bomber - the Mosquito - to the Comet
project; then they might have had a winner?

Unless the Comet was made of wood, then it would have been dynamite.

Or not. Check out the record of the DeHavilland 91 Albatross, their just
pre-war 4-engine airliner. One of the most beutiful airplanes ever
made. And horrendously prone to strucural failure.


Remember that the Mosquito was used for passenger service in WWII,
probably being the fastest "airliner" of the time. It was, of course,
in a limited market niche....

In 1942, the US and the UK split some aircraft development with the USA
concentrating on transports. This put the UK back after WW2. Despite this
they still came up with the Comet, the world's first jet airliner, soon
after.

UMM.Hmm. Explain the following Brit wartime transport designs, then:
Avro 688 Tudor: Designed 1943-1945, 1st flight June, 1945.
Avro 685 York: 1st flight July, 1942
Bristol 170 Freighter: 1st Flight December 1945
Handley Page H.P.68 Hermes Designed 1943, Put on hold until the
failure of the Avro Tudor.
Handley Page Halton
Short S-25 Sunderland/Sandringham
Vickers-Armstron VC.1 Viking 1st Flight early 1945

There doesn't seem to have been any lack of effort.

Then there wre all the trnasport flavors of the
Whitley, Wellington, Warwick, Stirling, Halifax, and Lancaster.

So many prototypes, it almost seems German.

But the World, (And BOAC), bought DC-4s, Constellations, & Strats.
For one overriding reason: You could fly them over a useful range,
with a useful load, earn more money than it cost to own and run them.

Brit Airliners have, as a general rule, had problems with structural
weight fraction and thus payload/range tradeoffs.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

In article ,
(Peter Stickney) wrote:

Or not. Check out the record of the DeHavilland 91 Albatross, their just
pre-war 4-engine airliner. One of the most beutiful airplanes ever
made. And horrendously prone to strucural failure.

Looks like a slightly-pudgy Lockheed Constellation (that's not a bad
thing).

"Spiv" wrote in message
...



Unless the Comet was made of wood, then it would have been dynamite.


Lots of luck pressurising a wooden fuselage or getting pax to wear pressure
suits

Remember that the Mosquito was used for passenger service in WWII,
probably being the fastest "airliner" of the time. It was, of course,
in a limited market niche....

In 1942, the US and the UK split some aircraft development with the USA
concentrating on transports. This put the UK back after WW2. Despite
this
they still came up with the Comet, the world's first jet airliner, soon
after.


Which fell out of the air shortly afterwards

Keith

In article ,
Keith Willshaw wrote:

"Spiv" wrote in message
...
they still came up with the Comet, the world's first jet airliner, soon
after.

Strictly speaking, it wasn't: that honour goes to the Vickers
Nene Viking. Comet I was, however, the first into commercial
service (the Nene Viking being more in the nature of a trial run).

Regardless of the problems, Comet was in a different class to
abominations like the Tudor.

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

"ANDREW ROBERT BREEN" wrote in message
...

Strictly speaking, it wasn't: that honour goes to the Vickers
Nene Viking. Comet I was, however, the first into commercial
service (the Nene Viking being more in the nature of a trial run).


Did the Nene Viking ever carry a passenger? As I recall, the Viking served
as a Nene engine testbed only and reverted to piston engines after it had
served that purpose. That doesn't sound like a jet airliner to me.