|
de Havilland DH 106 Comet; the First Jet
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1044805)
787 gets FAA certification - Photo #1 - seattlepi.com
http://www.topnews.in/files/Boeing-787-Dreamliner_0.jpg http://www.seattlepi.com/business/ga...to-1554923.php Everything old is new again: http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/7480/dh106cometb.jpg |
Originally Posted by bcrosier
(Post 1045483)
Of course, that Comet (IV?) was of later design. Either way, how many did it carry, 80? How in Heaven's name do you compare a 787 to a Comet? Also, look at the nose of the Comet. On what part of of another aircraft do you think part of it was based on? Hint: They sit in museums today. It took just one crash and a poor economy to take them out of service. Y'a never knew that, eh? It's the truth though! |
Originally Posted by bcrosier
(Post 1045483)
|
Okay, educate me. How does the Comet have the same nose as a 787, and how does it bear any other resemblance to the 787?
I think I know where you folks are going, but you're just not there. Also, the 787's VS is not straight up enough! I recall a guy one time trying to tell me that the Comet brought on the "Jet Age" of jet passenger transportation. I told him, "No, the Boeing 707 did that, along with the DC-8. The Comet provided us with the means for modern crash investigation!" Few got off the ships and on to the planes until the 707 hit the skies! The Comet never did that, especially after they started popping like balloons, with loss of all on board. Welcome to the world of pressurization and metal fatigue. However, the British did serve to teach us modern crash investigation. They put a Comet in a water tank and worked her out until she cracked around the square window frames they had with the first model. No, not everything old is new again. But, knowing history is not a bad thing either. ;) |
Originally Posted by loubetti
(Post 1046311)
Okay, educate me. How does the Comet have the same nose as a 787, and how does it bear any other resemblance to the 787?
I think I know where you folks are going, but you're just not there. Also, the 787's VS is not straight up enough! I recall a guy one time trying to tell me that the Comet brought on the "Jet Age" of jet passenger transportation. I told him, "No, the Boeing 707 did that, along with the DC-8. The Comet provided us with the means for modern crash investigation!" Few got off the ships and on to the planes until the 707 hit the skies! The Comet never did that, especially after they started popping like balloons, with loss of all on board. Welcome to the world of pressurization and metal fatigue. However, the British did serve to teach us modern crash investigation. They put a Comet in a water tank and worked her out until she cracked around the square window frames they had with the first model. No, not everything old is new again. But, knowing history is not a bad thing either. ;) |
Originally Posted by loubetti
(Post 1046281)
I take it the Boeing 787 will break up in mid-air? I also do not see the 787's engines buried in the wings either. I don't quite see the resemblance!
Of course, that Comet (IV?) was of later design. Either way, how many did it carry, 80? How in Heaven's name do you compare a 787 to a Comet? Also, look at the nose of the Comet. On what part of of another aircraft do you think part of it was based on? Hint: They sit in museums today. It took just one crash and a poor economy to take them out of service. Y'a never knew that, eh? It's the truth though! |
History Channel
Originally Posted by loubetti
(Post 1046281)
Hint: They sit in museums today. It took just one crash and a poor economy to take them out of service. Y'a never knew that, eh? It's the truth though!
de Havilland Comet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia |
Originally Posted by loubetti
(Post 1046311)
Okay, educate me. How does the Comet have the same nose as a 787, and how does it bear any other resemblance to the 787?
I think I know where you folks are going, but you're just not there. Also, the 787's VS is not straight up enough! I recall a guy one time trying to tell me that the Comet brought on the "Jet Age" of jet passenger transportation. I told him, "No, the Boeing 707 did that, along with the DC-8. The Comet provided us with the means for modern crash investigation!" Few got off the ships and on to the planes until the 707 hit the skies! The Comet never did that, especially after they started popping like balloons, with loss of all on board. Welcome to the world of pressurization and metal fatigue. However, the British did serve to teach us modern crash investigation. They put a Comet in a water tank and worked her out until she cracked around the square window frames they had with the first model. No, not everything old is new again. But, knowing history is not a bad thing either. ;) I think they look a lot like especially if you compare either to the Dash 80, 737, 727, 7... same plane... 757, 767, A320, and so on. It's just a comparison. Funny picture. The difference is, again, the E175 is profitable and the Comet actually flew in service. :D |
Originally Posted by loubetti
(Post 1046281)
I take it the Boeing 787 will break up in mid-air? I also do not see the 787's engines buried in the wings either. I don't quite see the resemblance!
Of course, that Comet (IV?) was of later design. Either way, how many did it carry, 80? How in Heaven's name do you compare a 787 to a Comet? Also, look at the nose of the Comet. On what part of of another aircraft do you think part of it was based on? Hint: They sit in museums today. It took just one crash and a poor economy to take them out of service. Y'a never knew that, eh? It's the truth though! I do know my history, enough to know that there were actually five Comet crashes prior to it's withdraw from service, four of which were fatal: Two runway overruns (Rome & Karachi) due to improper rotation, an in flight breakup due to failure of the horizontal stabilizer in a severe thunderstorm near Calcutta, and of course the two infamous inflight breakups near Rome and Naples due to metal fatigue. And the Comet did usher in the the age of jet passenger travel, while due to the metal fatigue problem it was surpassed by the larger Boeing and Douglas products (as well as the VC-10), it was years ahead of them and was very popular and successful during it's initial operation. The Comet 4 was in use until the early 1980's, and the RAF version, the Nimrod was only recently retired. The parallel between the Comet and the Concorde is interesting - they both were cutting edge airliners, both the first of their kind, neither achieved the commercial success their manufacturers would have hoped for, and they were considered the most prestigious way to travel (at least initially for the Comet. For the record - I'm not really a rabid Comet fan, but I do think it had a very significant role in the development of commercial aviation, both in and of itself and in the accident investigation process. Incidentally, it is reputed that both Boeing and Douglas acknowledged that had the Comet not "paved the way" on the metal fatigue problem, they would likely have had the same issues. |
Bcrosier, interesting post.
|
Originally Posted by bcrosier
(Post 1046397)
I was only comparing the shape of the nose, I thought that was fairly self evident. Apparently not, but the poster after you picked right up on it.
I do know my history, enough to know that there were actually five Comet crashes prior to it's withdraw from service, four of which were fatal: Two runway overruns (Rome & Karachi) due to improper rotation, an in flight breakup due to failure of the horizontal stabilizer in a severe thunderstorm near Calcutta, and of course the two infamous inflight breakups near Rome and Naples due to metal fatigue. And the Comet did usher in the the age of jet passenger travel, while due to the metal fatigue problem it was surpassed by the larger Boeing and Douglas products (as well as the VC-10), it was years ahead of them and was very popular and successful during it's initial operation. The Comet 4 was in use until the early 1980's, and the RAF version, the Nimrod was only recently retired. The parallel between the Comet and the Concorde is interesting - they both were cutting edge airliners, both the first of their kind, neither achieved the commercial success their manufacturers would have hoped for, and they were considered the most prestigious way to travel (at least initially for the Comet. For the record - I'm not really a rabid Comet fan, but I do think it had a very significant role in the development of commercial aviation, both in and of itself and in the accident investigation process. Incidentally, it is reputed that both Boeing and Douglas acknowledged that had the Comet not "paved the way" on the metal fatigue problem, they would likely have had the same issues. Yes, the Comet did lead the jet transport age as did Frank Whittle and Rolls Royce. JJ |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:19 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands