This Date in Aviation History: October 28 - October 30

"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn) 10/30/2020 at 12:35 • Filed to: wingspan, Planelopnik, TDIAH

3

32

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Welcome to This Date in Aviation History , getting of you caught up on milestones, important historical events and people in aviation from October 28 through October 30.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Air France A300B2 at Farnborough Airshow in 1974

October 28, 1972 – The first flight of the Airbus A300. By the decade of the 1960s, air travel had become a booming industry. With the introduction of long-range jet airliners such as the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , passengers were traveling abroad and overseas in record numbers. To satisfy the demand for larger airliners, Boeing introduced the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! in 1970, the world’s first twin-aisle wide-body “Jumbo Jet” airliner. With the 707 and 747, and smaller !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , Boeing was well on its way to developing a worldwide stranglehold on airliner production. Across the Atlantic in Europe, the aviation industry was struggling in the postwar environment, unable to produce profitable airliners simply because production runs were too small. It soon became apparent that to compete with Boeing, Europe would have to work together in a similar fashion to the agreement that created the Anglo-French !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . But where Concorde was produced in relatively small numbers, the airliner the European consortium envisioned would be built on a much larger scale, and would be the first product of an international company that was hoped would one day rival Boeing.

An A300B1 operated by Trans European Airways of Belgium. This was the second A300 built and one of the first to enter airline service in November 1974. It was finally retired in 1990.

On September 26, 1967, the governments of the United Kingdom, France, and then-West Germany signed a Memorandum of Understanding to begin work on what would be a 300-seat airliner to take on the 747. The generic term “Airbus,” which had been coined by British manufacturer Hawker Siddeley in 1959, would eventually be used to signify the European consortium, even after England’s departure from the group in 1969. At the Paris Air Show in 1969, government officials from France and Germany officially signed the documents committing to the development and construction of what would be called the A300, a number that reflected the planned accommodation for 300 passengers. The company was originally based in Paris, but later moved to Toulouse, where final assembly of the aircraft components produced by member countries would take place.

Lufthansa A300B2-1C “Westerland Sylt” taxies London Heathrow in 1982

While Boeing and Douglas, and to a lesser extend Lockheed, had the jump on the Europeans, Airbus was able to look at what the Americans were doing and to improve upon it. The first thing they did was to make an effort to include a higher level of technology and advanced materials in the design of their airliner. The use of glass fiber reinforced plastics in the tail and wing leading edges was the first use of composite materials in airliner design. Airbus also pioneered the use of specialized fuel transfer systems to maintain the aircraft’s center of gravity, and a circular fuselage cross section that would allow for eight-across seating. The A300 was the first airliner with a wind shear detection system, as well as an autopilot that could control the aircraft from just after takeoff to landing. With the later 200FF (Forward Facing) variant, the A300 became the first airliner in the world with the ability to operate with just two flight deck crew members, eliminating the aircraft engineer position.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

But the most important feature of the A300, and one that would have the most far-reaching impact on the commercial aviation industry, was the use of two engines rather than the four found on the 747 and DC-8. This allowed the wing to be moved forward on the fuselage along with the incorporation of a smaller tail fin, which in turn made the airliner more fuel efficient. The A300 was the first airliner to be !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! compliant, which meant that it could fly transatlantic routes with only two engines, where a minimum of three had been required before.

American Airlines Airbus A300-605R lands at Miami in 2003

The A300 entered service on May 23, 1974 with Air France on a flight from Paris to London, and the first orders were placed by Air France and Lufthansa. However, sales were slow. Airbus had misread the market, and airlines had trouble filling the large aircraft on short flights. They were forced to offer fewer flights in an attempt to fill the wide body, and were being undercut by other airlines flying similar routes with narrow body airliners (Airbus would respond to this problem with a narrow body of their own, the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! ). It wasn’t until Eastern Airlines CEO !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , who was impressed with the fuel efficiency of the A300, ordered 23 aircraft, that the scales began to tip in favor of Airbus. Having cracked the American market, the A300 was now seen as a threat to the dominance of Boeing. With aggressive sales to Asian airlines, and the granting of an ETOPS rating in 1977, the A300 finally reached a measure of success. The fledgling Airbus airliner was developed into a popular cargo hauler, and later stretched into the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and the four-engine !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . It was also shortened into the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , and served as the basis for the oversized !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! super transporter. Over a 36-year production run from 1971-2007, a total of 561 A300s were produced, and the type remains in operation today, primarily in the cargo role.

A United Parcel Service A300 F4-622R takes off from Dallas-Fort Worth Airport

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

North American FJ-4 Fury, the ultimate iteration of the Fury line of fighters. Note the elongated landing gear compared to its F-86 progenitor, used to increase the Fury’s angle of attack.

October 28, 1954 – The first flight of the North American FJ-4 Fury. The US Army was the first branch of the US military to enter the jet age with the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! in 1942. The US Navy followed with the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! in 1945, and then the woefully unsuccessful !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . The Pirate was followed by the much more successful !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . However, by the early 1950s, these straight-winged fighters were being completely outclassed in the skies over Korea by the faster and more maneuverable swept-wing Russian !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . The Navy had two swept-wing fighters under development with the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , but those aircraft would not be ready in time. They needed a modern fighter immediately. So, in a somewhat uncharacteristic move, the Navy looked to the US Air Force to quickly fill the void in their combat line up by procuring an Air Force fighter that, ironically, had originally been designed for the Navy.

The straight-winged FJ-1 Fury, which shared the wings, tail, and cockpit of the P-51D Mustang

The !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! was an early, straight-winged jet fighter whose design had borrowed heavily from the piston-powered !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . It turned out to be a disappointing fighter, and only 33 were built. But North American took the basic design of the FJ-1 Fury and developed it into the remarkable !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , a swept-wing masterpiece that was every bit the match of the MiG-15 and ultimately one of the best fighters of the Korean War. So the Navy decided that the Sabre would be the perfect candidate to fill their fighter gap until the Cutlass and Cougar entered service. But the land-based Sabre needed significant modifications to handle the specific requirements of Naval service, including catapult gear, an arrester hook, folding wings, and a lengthened nose gear to increase the angle of attack during takeoff and landing. This aircraft was designated FJ-2, and retained the Fury nickname of its FJ-1 predecessor. The Navy’s need for the new fighter was so urgent that they ordered 200 before the prototype had even flown, and the FJ-2 was soon upgraded to the FJ-3 with the addition of a more powerful engine. The Fury served the Navy well and over 700 were produced. But the modifications weren’t complete yet, and the FJ-4 became the ultimate development of the Fury line.

A Sabre in a Navy uniform: a North American FJ-3 Fury on the flight deck

Where the FJ-2 and -3 looked every bit like a Sabre in US Navy livery, the FJ-4 bore a certain family resemblance but was an entirely new structural design. The wings were made thinner, and the overall wing area was increased to hold more fuel. The landing gear was also redesigned and given a wider track, and the fuselage was deepened and stretched to accommodate more fuel. The cockpit was also enlarged. To save weight, North American removed armor plating and decreased the ammunition load, which resulted in a 50% increase in range over the FJ-3.

An FJ-4B Fury from Attack Squadron VA-63 Fighting Rednecks flying from the aircraft carrier USS Midway (CVA-41) in 1958. The FJ-4B bomber variant had six underwing hardpoints and four 20mm cannons in the nose.

The Navy originally ordered 221 FJ-4s, with 71 of those aircraft converted to the FJ-4B fighter-bomber version. These had provisions to carry more external stores, including a single nuclear weapon. An additional order in 1956 brought the total number produced to 374. The FJ-4 entered service in 1955 and, with the exception of one Navy training squadron, the FJ-4 was flown exclusively by the US Marine Corps while the Navy trained on and operated the FJ-4B. In 1962, when the US military !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! the naming of aircraft, the FJ-4 became the F-1E, and the FJ-4B became the AF-1E. The Fury was eventually phased out in the 1960s, ending its service with units of the US Naval Reserve.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

A Douglas A3D-2 Skywarrior launches from the catapult of a US Navy carrier

October 28, 1952 – The first flight of the Douglas A3D (A-3) Skywarrior. Beginning in WWII, heavy strategic bombing was the purview of the US Army Air Forces, and then the renamed US Air Force following the war. The US Navy had historically focused on fighters and dive bombers, but by the 1950s the seaborne branch wanted to get into the strategic bombing business like their Air Force counterparts. The Navy’s first foray into a large, carrier-based bomber was the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , a hybrid bomber that was powered by two radial engines and one turbojet and was originally intended to carry a single nuclear bomb. But it soon became apparent that the Navy needed a purely jet-powered bomber to take over from the Savage, and they found a successor in the Douglas A-3 Skywarrior. Together, the two aircraft are the only strategic bombers ever operated in large numbers by the the US Navy.

The story of the Skywarrior began in 1948, when the Navy sought proposals for a large, jet-powered strategic bomber that would operate from the proposed !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! -class super carriers then under development. The new carriers would be roughly the same size as today’s !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! -class carriers, but without a flight deck island so they could accommodate large, heavy aircraft. Specifically, the Navy required a bomber that was capable of carrying 10,000 pounds of weapons or a single nuclear bomb and have a loaded weight of 100,000 lbs. Famed Douglas engineer !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , however, proposed an aircraft with a loaded weight of just 68,000 pounds, making it the smallest proposal submitted to the Navy. But more importantly, Heinemann’s bomber was capable of operating from existing carriers, and his smaller design was perfectly positioned when the super carrier project was canceled in 1949.

But even though the Skywarrior was the smallest of the naval strategic bomber proposals, it was still the heaviest aircraft ever to operate regularly from US carriers. And, with a wingspan of 72.5 feet and a length of just over 74 feet, it was also the largest. The Skywarrior was powered by two !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! turbojets mounted on pods under the wings and had a top speed of 610 mph. In an effort to save weight, Douglas made the controversial decision to exclude ejections seats for the crew, though they were included in the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! variant produced for the Air Force. Instead, the pilots were expected to use an escape chute similar to that used on the F3D Skyknight. Such a chute would be fine at high altitude, where the Skywarrior was designed to operate, but was useless in a landing accident. With no easy way to bail out of the big bomber, Navy pilots joked that “A3D” meant “all three dead.”

The Skywarrior was introduced in 1956, but once the Navy’s !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! submarines became operational in 1961 the Navy no longer had a need for a nuclear-armed deep strike aircraft. But the size of the Skywarrior made it ideal for other missions. Its large internal bomb bay could carry 12,000 pounds of conventional ordnance, or filled with electronic spying equipment. It could also be loaded with fuel to serve as an aerial tanker. Douglas developed a reconnaissance version designated RA-3B and an electronic countermeasures variant known as the EA-3B, and both saw extensive service during the Vietnam War.

A US Naval Air Reserve Douglas KA-3B Skywarrior from Tactical Electronics Warfare Squadron VAQ-308 “Griffins” refuels an LTV A-7 Corsair II from Attack Squadron VA-303 “Golden Hawks.”

The aerial refueling version was designated KA-3B, and a multi-mission version known as the EKA-3B could perform the dual role of electronic warfare and aerial refueling. And, though the Navy’s strategic bombing role didn’t last that long, the amazing flexibility of the Skywarrior allowed it to become one of the longest-serving aircraft in US Navy history. Particularly, the EA-3B had such a long service life that some even participated in the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! of 1990-1991, but most of the 282 Skywarriors produced were retired from active service by the end of that year.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 28, 1916 – The death of Oswald Boelcke. When WWI broke out in Europe in 1914, only 11 years had passed since the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! took the first powered flight at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. But aircraft development in the intervening years had been rapid, and airplanes soon appeared over the battlefield. At first, they were scout planes, providing reconnaissance on enemy positions in a similar fashion as the original scouts on horseback, and opposing pilots often passed each other with a friendly wave. But it wasn’t long before the crews began taking pistols and rifles into the air, which then gave way to machine guns. Scout planes seen became dedicated fighter planes, and pilots wheeled and turned in combat in the rarefied air high above the mud and blood of the trenches. At first, aerial combat was very much a one-on-one affair, with lone pilots ranging across enemy lines seeking out a willing opponent. But it quickly became evident that groups of aircraft were more effective than a single fighter, and one man, Oswald Boelcke, was the first to codify the tactics of aerial combat.

Fokker E.I monoplane of the type flown by Boelcke

Boelcke was born in Giebichenstein in eastern Germany on May 19, 1891, joined the military at age 20, and eventually becoming an officer in the Prussian Army. He started flying in 1914 and was assigned to an observer unit the following year. Before long, Boelcke, who was flying with fellow fighter pioneer !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , received a new !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! fighter armed with a machine gun synchronized to fire through the propeller. Boelcke quickly became an ace, and eventually led his own fighter squadron. He also tutored !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , better known as The Red Baron. But Boelcke’s lasting contribution to combat aviation came in his list of fighter tactics known as !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . Contrary to the single combat practiced at the beginning of the war, Boelcke advocated fighting in groups, and many of his tenets still hold true to this day.

Try to secure advantages before attacking. If possible, keep the sun behind you.

Always follow through an attack when you have started it.

Fire only at close range, and only when your opponent is properly in your sights.

Always keep your eye on your opponent, and never let yourself be deceived by ruses.

In any form of attack it is essential to assail your opponent from behind.

If your opponent dives on you, do not try to evade his onslaught, but fly to meet it.

When over enemy lines, never forget your line of retreat.

For the Jasta (squadron): Attack in groups of four or six. When the fight breaks up into a series of single combats, take care that several do not go for one opponent.

Obviously, in the modern age of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! (BVR) missiles and radar, some of these tactics must be modified. But the concepts of placing the sun at your back, never fighting without a wingman, and keeping sight of your opponent, still hold true today. As tactics evolved into the Second World War, Dicta Boelcke served as the basis for others to expand upon, such as the RAF ace !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! who put forth 15 rules, and RAF pilot and ace !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , who had his own set of ten rules, again expanding on the groundbreaking work of Boelcke.

Boelcke’s Fokker D.III on display at the Zeughaus museum in Berlin. Boelcke scored eight victories in this aircraft in 1916, but it was destroyed by Allied bombers in 1943.

There is a well-known axiom in the world of fighter pilots: “There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots.” Such was the fate of Oswald Boelcke, who was bold, but did not grow old. On October 28, 1916, Boelcke set out on his sixth sortie of the day with five other pilots, including two of his brightest students, Manfred von Richthofen and !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . While attacking a British !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! fighter, Boelcke and Böhme collided. Boelcke managed to land his damaged fighter, but his improperly secured lap belt did not restrain him, and he was killed. Boelcke was just 25 years old.  

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Short Takeoff

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 28, 1974 – The first flight of the Dassault-Breguet Super Étendard, a carrier-borne strike fighter that began as an upgraded version of the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! which first flew in 1958. The Super Étendard was essentially the same size as its predecessor, but had a more powerful engine, a more efficient wing, increased range, and the ability to carry nuclear weapons. The Super Étendard entered service with the French Navy in 1978, and first saw action over Lebanon, when aircraft of the French Navy attacked Syrian positions after artillery rounds were fired at French peace keepers. The Super Étendard was exported to Iraq, who used them to attack shipping during the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , as well as Argentina, who used Super Étendards armed with French-made !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! missiles to sink !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! during the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . The French Navy retired all of their Super Étendards in 2016 and replaced them with the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 28, 1962 – The first flight of the Westland Wasp, a turbine-powered helicopter designed to perform the anti-submarine warfare role (ASW) while operating from the deck of smaller Royal Navy frigates. Along with the land-based !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , the Wasp was developed from the earlier !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and was given a four-wheel castering undercarriage for stability on pitching decks. The Wasp’s rotor blades could also be set at negative pitch to hold the Wasp on a rolling deck until it could be lashed down. The Wasp entered service in 1963, and could carry two torpedoes, two depth charges or a single !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . A total of 133 were produced, and the type was retired by the Royal Navy in 1988.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 28, 1951 – The first flight of the Martin XB-51, an early three-engine jet bomber originally designed for the US Air Force as a low level attack aircraft. In an unusual configuration, the XB-51 had two !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! turbojet engines housed in external pods slung under the forward fuselage, while the third J47 was housed in the rear with air fed through a dorsal intake. The XB-51 competed against the English Electric Canberra which, if successful, would be built under license by Martin as the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , and while the XB-51 was more maneuverable at low level and faster than the B-57, the Canberra was chosen primarily for its greater range. The two XB-51 prototypes continued in a testing role, and one appeared in a Hollywood film as a fictional prototype bomber, but the first was lost in a crash while performing an aerobatic demonstration in 1952, and the other crashed during filming in 1956.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 29, 1998 – Astronaut John Glenn returns to space. Seventy-seven years old and a US Senator at the time, this was Glenn’s second trip to space, having previously piloted !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! on February 20, 1962 as part of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . At the time, Glenn was the fifth person and the first American to orbit the Earth (the two previous Mercury missions had been sub-orbital). With his flight on the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! as part of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , Glenn became the oldest person to fly in space, but his flight was controversial, with some seeing it as no more than a political favor. However, Glenn did perform useful scientific research into geriatric studies during his nine days in orbit.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 29, 1959 – The first flight of the Antonov An-24, a twin turboprop airliner that was designed to replace the aging !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! on short- to medium-range flights inside the Soviet Union. Like many other Russian aircraft, the An-24 was designed to operate from rough or unimproved airstrips, and nearly 1,400 were produced between 1959-1979, with some of that number built under license in China. Both the civilian and military versions of the An-24 were operated by a host of nations, and many remain in service today.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 30, 1979 – The death of Sir Barnes Wallis. Born on September 26, 1887, Wallis was an English scientist, engineer, and inventor perhaps best known for his contributions to the British war effort in WWII. Wallis pioneered the use of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! to strengthen British bombers such as the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , and designed the famous bouncing bombs that were used in !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! to destroy dams in the Ruhr Valley in an attempt to cripple German military production and disrupt hydroelectric power generation. Wallis also developed the 6-ton !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and 10-ton !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! blockbuster bombs that were used against German U-boat pens and other hardened structures. Following the war, Wallis dedicated himself to research into supersonic flight and the use of variable geometry wings, research which was later put to use in the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

October 28-30, 1977 – Pan Am Flight 50 sets a world speed record for circumnavigation over both poles. To celebrate its 50th anniversary, Pan Am scheduled a circumnavigation of the globe that took off from San Francisco on October 28. Flight 50 flew across the North Pole to London, then on to Cape Town, South Africa, over the South Pole to Auckland, New Zealand, then back to San Francisco in a successful bid to break the previous record set in 1965 by a !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! nicknamed Pole Cat (N322F). One hundred twenty passengers paid for the trip on board the Clipper New Horizons (N533PA), a !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! (Special Performance) variant shortened to increase range and speed. The flight totaled 54 hours, 7 minutes, 12 seconds of flying time, breaking Pole Cat’s record by more than eight hours and setting six new world records.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Connecting Flights

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

If you enjoy these Aviation History posts, please let me know in the comments. You can find more posts about aviation history, aviators, and aviation oddities at !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Thomas Donohue > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 12:43

2

Must be an Air France promotional shot. This plane is way too clean be AF.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 12:46

1

Barnes Wallis has probably one of the most unique bodies of work of any designer, ever.

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 12:50

2

Funny how the A300 really was the catalyst for huge changes in the airline business, despite being a relatively slow seller.

The one time in 75 years (pre MAX) where Boeing really missed a key development in the market’s evolution.

ttyymmnn > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 10/30/2020 at 12:52

0

Boeing is so lost right now. 

facw > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 13:01

0

Boeing clearly messed up, but I think they did so by being myopically focused on what the airlines were looking for rather than being lost.

facw > Thomas Donohue 10/30/2020 at 13:01

0

Have to clean them up for the airshow!

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 13:02

1

I still wish the feds would bust ‘em up, and flush the common shareholders AIG-style. (Lockheed gets back into commercial aviation, Space-X gets some tasty contracts and Northrup gets a big military business).

Instead we’ll open up The Treasury to the assholes, just like we did Goldman in 2009.

facw > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 13:07

0

Have some A300 pics (that are actually Super Guppy pics):

facw > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 10/30/2020 at 13:15

1

I really don’t think breaking up Boeing just to consolidate its parts in other companies really helps anything. If you were going to break up Boeing, the clear thing to do seems like it would be to sepa rate commercial/military (maybe send the KC-46 to commercial)/space. There shouldn’t be too much shared between those (except maybe lobbying), so hopefully they can stand on their own. I’m pretty sure ending up in a system where the US has two major aerospace companies rather than three would be a downgrade. Regardless, I do agree that we don’t need to be bailing out Boeing.

Svend > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 13:21

0

Very interesting stuff but:

the governments of England Great Britain, France, and then-West Germany signed a Memorandum of Understanding

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

the governments of England the United Kingdom, France, and then-West Germany signed a Memorandum of Understanding

ttyymmnn > facw 10/30/2020 at 13:22

0

You can put a big Airbus sticker on it, but it’s still Airbus parts being transported in a Boeing airplane. Not a good look.

ttyymmnn > Svend 10/30/2020 at 13:24

1

Thanks, and I will definitely edit. I know that the terms are not interchangeable, and it is hard to know which one to use, especially when I’m trying not to be redundant.

When I first started following international rugby many years ago, it took me a while to figure out why England had a totally different flag....

facw > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 13:25

1

Which is why they built the Beluga. But yeah, there was the (now outdated) saying that “Every Airbus flies on the wings of a Boeing”

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > facw 10/30/2020 at 13:29

0

“Management structures”.

Lockheed’s still run by engineers and analytical people.

Boeing’s dominated with accountants and empty shirts.

facw > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 10/30/2020 at 13:30

0

Nothing Lockheed’s done in the past 20 years has given me the impression of a well-run company. Just a company that has managed to be very good and getting and keeping government contracts, despite massive delays and cost overruns.

ttyymmnn > facw 10/30/2020 at 13:37

1

Which is why they built the Beluga.

Exactly.

Svend > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 13:49

1

Lol.

It can be tricky unless your brought up with it. Generally it’s British, Britain, Great Britain or United Kingdom.

So, ‘government of, the U.K/the United Kingdom/Britain/Great Britain’,

or ‘U.K./British government’.

It’s more inclusive of the other three nations.

For much of history the British have simply been referred to as the English, I suppose because of the English language thing but some get irked that they aren’t inclusive.

It’s one of those thing s like when people say, ‘the Queen of England’, when it should be, ‘the British Queen’ or ‘the Queen of the United Kingdom’.

It goes a little further too. Lol.

The Commonwealth now termed, the Commonwealth of Nations.

*The info above may of changed since drawn.

facw > Svend 10/30/2020 at 13:53

0

Is there a demonym for citizens of the UK including those outside the British Isles (e.g. UKian)? Or are they still just British?  

Svend > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 13:58

0

Also, the flag thing.

Of the Union Flag, Only the flags of St. Andrew (Scotland), St. Patrick (Ireland) and St. George (England) are repres ented as the Welsh came under the English flag as Wales was a principality to England, hence Prince/Princess of Wales. 

ttyymmnn > Svend 10/30/2020 at 14:01

1

I knew about the three crosses of the Union Flag, particularly St. Andrew (I was raised in the Episcopal Church). And then I see all the Dependency flags when I watch the TT. 

Svend > facw 10/30/2020 at 14:05

1

‘UKian’ isn’t a thing.

Places such as Gibraltar will call themselves Gibraltarian and/or British* .

The Falkland Islands they call themselves Islanders and/ or British*

etc...

*they do call themselves other things other things officially and unofficially.

facw > Svend 10/30/2020 at 14:13

1

The British war graves around here all get the previous one, minus St. Patrick’s cross, since that was the British flag during the Revolution:

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 14:24

0

English versus Scottish versus British explained...

ttyymmnn > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 10/30/2020 at 14:26

0

Chilean Navy?

ttyymmnn > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 10/30/2020 at 14:32

0

“I love being in Scotland, because everybody speaks their mind.”

Unfortunately, they aren’t speaking English.

Svend > facw 10/30/2020 at 14:46

1

Just like in Canada. Years after the adoption of the Maple Leaf, the Red Ensign was banned at official sites, but many WWII veterans and few remainin g WWI fought to have the Red Ensign reinstated because it was the flag they fought under at the time.

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > facw 10/30/2020 at 14:58

1

No, no competent engineering team releases dog shit code like “MCAS” without even basic error checking routines and redundancy.

Boeing engineering is rotten to its core. And tha t’s got NOTHING to do with the customer-preferences-and-demands that warped Boeing’s priorities .

Their management culture is completely rotted out. Nobody in their right mind would release safety-critical code like that— no matter what SWA and AAL were asking for.

I worked safety systems for Navy programs, which had Boeing as a prime, and on the military side there are design rules for software. Also have a college buddy who worked on the flight control software for programs from 767-400 and forward. He avers that the whole merger culture changed even basic interactions with Boeing management— suddenly they’d dictate crazy shit decisions to save a few pennies.

Boeing is absolutely lost on the commercial side.

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > facw 10/30/2020 at 15:02

0

My Raptor begs to differ...

InFierority Complex > ttyymmnn 10/30/2020 at 15:17

0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cochrane,_10th_Earl_of_Dundonald

Referring to this dude, I guess? I think he was one of the inspirations for the captain in the Master and Commander book series.

ttyymmnn > InFierority Complex 10/30/2020 at 15:18

0

I imagine you are correct. 

facw > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 10/30/2020 at 15:21

0

Your Raptor, who’s program got canceled for being massively late and over budget? Or the Kestrel helicopter which despite being based on an existing aircraft managed to be massively late and overbudget and so was canceled? Much like the F-35 program which is massively late and overbudget, but which Lockheed has engineered to basically be uncancelable. The Orion capsule might have been the least flawed part of the Constellation program, but it still can hardly be called a success. And Constellation’s successor, the SLS (built by ULA, which is a joint Lockheed/Boeing endeavor) is a continuing embarrassment to NASA, that grows evermore late and over budget.

If you want to argue Lockheed does anything well in aerospace for us, I think you are looking at churning out a zillion C-130s. Maybe the RQ-170 is good? Other than one ending up in Iran, we don’t hear much bad about it, but then we don’t hear much about it at all. That drone tanker might be good, but let’s wait until it is a production aircraft before we get too excited. The YF-22 and X-35 looked good too, and then their programs bogged down. They had some blimp thing, but that’s running half a decade or so behind schedule.

facw > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 10/30/2020 at 15:22

0

I’m not going to argue too much about Boeing having problems, I just think you seem to be putting significantly undeserved faith in Lockheed.