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

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

They were slow prop jobs, not fast jets. Do you know the difference?


So metal fatigue is a function of speed?



The Brabazon was "huge" and the Comet a jet. Both pioneering planes.


You're half right. The Brabazon flew two years after the Convair XC-99,
had
the same wingspan, was eight feet shorter, and had a 30,000 lb lower
takeoff
weight. The Brabazon pioneered nothing.

You are ignorant that is clear, and can't read either:
The Brabazon 1 had a pressurised cabin, hydraulic power units to operate the
giant control surfaces, the first with 100% powered flying controls, the
first with electric engine controls, the first with high-pressure
hydraulics, and the first with AC electrics.

All eventually adopted by all planes.

What garbage. The lessons of the Comet were taken notice of by all.
That is does not mean the same design of cabin/frame.


The lessons of the Comet with regard to
metal fatigue did not influence the
design of the Boeing 367-80 in any way.

It did!

You are obviously not from an engineering background.

Well, it's obvious you are not from an engineering background.

What clerical unit were you in?

More garbage. It was the forerunner of "every" modern airliner.

How can that be? Nobody operated an airliner similar to the Brabazon.

See above.

The wisdom of our resident redneck. I advise you to look into the
Brabazon project instead of babbling balls. It was the forerunner of
"every" modern airliner and too far ahead of its time, being too big.
Any problems seen were rectified and/or noted for future planes.

What future planes?

All of them, even American.