Why We Lost The Vietnam War

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Eunometic" wrote in message
om...


With a modified Fueselage it of course became a great maritime patrol
aircraft known as the Nimrod. Nimrod is apparently superior than the
Orion: at least as far as the airframe is concerned.


Please xplain your reasons for arriving at this conclusion.
While the Nimrod is a fine aircraft the P-3 has had rather
more export success.

Our master of logic enters the fray. The VC10 and Super VC10 was a
superior
plane to the 707, yet the 707 outsold it.


It was far from superior which is why harly anybody except BA bought
the thing and they only did so because the government made them.
There was a famous leaked memo from BOAC requesting a subsidy
because they were having to compete with 707's that were
cheaper to run

Not only were the initial operating costs of the VC-10 higher but
the buried engine design meant that it couldnt use the new
more efficient (and quieter) powerplants that the 707 and
DC-8 were requipped with which meant the aircraft became
increasingly uncompetitve and it could not meet the new
noise restrictions introduced in the 70's and 80's.

The burried engines ( speys and now BMW/Rolls Royce BR715 ) provide a
significantly reduced radar signature. (Here lies the disadvantage of
burried eingines: installing high bypass ratio engines required
re-engineering of the wing roots)

I seriously doubt that any real advantage accrues from this.
Nimrod has a LARGE radar signature.

The engines which are close to the fueselage mean that opperation with
engines shutdown does not create significant asymetric thrust
problems. Indeed opperation on 2 engines is I believe normal on long
loitering patrols.

The latest Nimrods I believe have a range in excess of 6500nm and can
launch cruise missiles. They can be armed with sidewinders and
presumably AMRAAM style self homing missiles is a possibility.


AMRAAM is highly unlikley

He is gussing now.


No and I'm not guessing either, AMRAAM requires rather more
in the way of system integration than AIM-9 including a suitable
aircraft radar fit to get a lock at BVR

With the correct systems and sighting they might even provide the RAF
with a mini B52. The big wings must provide good altitude
performance.

Thats just silly. Nimrod simly doesnt have the payload carrying
capacity.
The RAF used to have a mini B-52 , it was called the Vulcan

You must read what was written.


I didnt, it was full of errors

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Spiv" wrote in message
...



The Comet is still flying (the Nimrod) . The last civilian plane was
in
1987. That is a long civilian service life. The British government
prevented one of the last from being sold to the USA.

This means the last Comet retired from service while the
Boeing 707 line was still producing new aircraft since the
last 707 rolled off the lines in 1991.

Think about it.

I did and the Comet was introduction for longer being about 10 years
ahead
of the 707 - a pioneering ground breaking plane.

Hardly

This one can't even count.

** snip **

"Spiv" wrote in message
...



This one can't even count.

** snip **

Sigh

I did and the Comet was introduction for longer being about 10 years
ahead of the 707

Comet 1 entered service 1952
707 entered service 1958

1958-1952 = 6

6 is not approx = 10

Both your syntactical and mathematical skills clearly
need work.

Keith

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

I did and the Comet was introduction for longer being about 10 years ahead
of the 707 - a pioneering ground breaking plane.


Ten years ahead? How did you determine that? The Comet made it's first
flight on July 27, 1949, the Boeing 367-80 made it's first flight on July
15, 1954, not quite five years later. The Comet began passenger service on
May 2, 1952, the Boeing 707 began passenger service on October 26, 1958,
some six and a half years later.



History will show it far
more important to aircraft advancement than the 707.


As a bad example?

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

It has the distinction of being the first but the simple fact is that
Boeing made a shed load of money selling over 1000 aircraft
and went on to build almost 3/4 of the airliners in service
in western markets by the early 90's

DeHavilland sold a grand total of 46 Comet 4 aircraft


The Comet was first in service, but just barely the first to fly. The Avro
C-102 made it's first flight on August 10, 1949, just two weeks after the
Comet.

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

The lessons from the Comet, the most extensive research
into one plane and metal fatigue ever, were used on virtually every plane
after in some way or other.


How so?



His point is that it can be used for other functions too, which is cost
effective. B52/Vulcan types of planes cost a "fortune" to make and
maintain - 40 million people in the USA are excluded from medical care,
make
the armed forces more efficient and your people, benefit.


Nobody in the USA is excluded from medical care.

"Peter Skelton" wrote in message
...

The Comet was quite like the Avro whatever that was cancelled at
the request of DND so that they could concentrate on military
aircraft production. The Avro flew before the Comet, I don't know
if there were other aborted aircraft too.


If you're referring to the Avro C-102, it flew two weeks after the Comet.

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

The topic is jets.


If you review the thread you'll see that it is not.

"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
om...

The Czechs used to keep two fat guys on call to sit on either side of
Western passengers. One requirement was they eat their lunch just
before takeoff and outgass to relieve cabin pressure at regular
intervals. Not my experience but one of a very thin friend.

LOL

I sat with the journalist Robert Fisk on our way to Prague (he wasn't as
gassy as he is in print, but then, what might he have said of me?) and
with an attractive young Czech woman on the way to Mirabel (Gas? What
gas?).
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

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

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

One or two certainly are slow indeed.

The Comet investigation covered parts of metallurgy not known in depth
to
science. It was the largest investigation into an aircraft ever.
Everyone
wanted to know the reason "in depth". The lessons on "fatigue" was
taken
on
board, by just about everyone and applied to what they were
designing/building. If something was in the design or prototype stage
they
would look again in depth. Is that clear?


What's clear is that you're flying the airways of life with a couple of
props feathered.

I really like that one cheer cheer