Why We Lost The Vietnam War

In article ,
Keith Willshaw wrote:

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

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

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

And - though for various reasons it didn't enter service - the Avro
Canada C-102 was flying at the end of the 1940s. That probably
as the best claim to being the first regional-distance jet. Next
one - the Tu-104, maybe?

--
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
...
In article ,
Keith Willshaw wrote:

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

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

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

And - though for various reasons it didn't enter service - the Avro
Canada C-102 was flying at the end of the 1940s. That probably
as the best claim to being the first regional-distance jet. Next
one - the Tu-104, maybe?


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

Keith

"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.

"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.

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

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


No. The 707 was never a bomber. The Boeing 367-80 served as the prototype
for both the 707 and the KC-135 tanker, Boeing financed the 367-80 itself.

"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. "Military Derivatives. Another
aircraft type that traces its ancestry to the 707 prototype is the U.S. Air
Force KC/C-135 tanker-transport/cargo airplane...Additionally, three
707-120s plus two 707-320Bs, designated VC-137s, were delivered to the
Military Airlift Command for transporting high government officials...Recent
military applications of the 707 are the E-3 Airborne Warning and Control
System or AWACS (used by the U.S. Air Force, NATO, the Saudi government and
the French and British air forces for airborne surveillance, command and
control) and the E-6 used by the U.S. Navy for submarine communications...."
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/707family/

No, Boeing paid for the development itself. "Production go-ahead for the
Dash 80 was announced by Boeing Aug. 30, 1952, as a company-financed $16
million investment."
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/707family/

"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.

"Spiv" wrote:
"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.

I probably shouldn't ask this, but do you actually know the name of any
bomber produced by Boeing?

"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.

"Spiv" wrote in message
...

They took a lot from previous Boeing bombers. Look at the
wings of some of them. What a give away.


Right. The 707 wing looks just like the B-29 wing. They just bent it back.



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.


That's what de Havilland did with the Comet.