Date: 08 Dec 96 04:12:29
From: Evmcelravy@aol.com
References: 1 2 3 4 5
View raw article
or MIME structure
> >Douglas seems to be slow on the web thing, but all its airplanes are
> >ugly>anyway. My bet is that Airbus will release a new web site version
> >promptly to compete with Boeing's. Airbus can't be content for Boeing
> >to dominate anything, which is likely why there are more A320s around
> >than Comets.
>
> The MD-11 is a fine looking bird, IMO. I always preferred the DC-10
> over most others, but beside an MD-11 it looks too short.
> There is none uglier than the 747 humpback whale, and the A320 looks
> like a shortened version of a good design. The A319 must look really
> awkward.
>
> There may be more A320's built than Comets, but the A320 may still have
> a worse accident record, which at one time was the worst since the
> beginning of the jet age.
Yes, I do have to admit that the MD-11 is a handsome aircraft. I've seen a
few of them; a KLM make (the Maria Callas) at Memphis and two Americans at
O'Hare and was quite impressed, particularly with the KLM one, whose
already-striking appearance was augmented by the fact that I had just
taxied by a million little red NWA DC-9s and those ugly Dornier turboprops
Mesaba has.
The point about the Comet might have been misunderstood. I was not
referring to safety, but to the attitude of the aircraft manufacturer. The
Europeans had (for the most part: there were some successes) a regrettable
lack of success before Airbus
came along. I've always considered this to be due to a certain lack of the
required
extreme competitive spirit. But Airbus has a great fighting spirit. In my
humble opinion, Airbus' greatest contribution to the aviation world was
getting Boeing off its can and cranking out some better products. I'm a
Boeing fan, but I must admit that every clever airliner out of Seattle in
the last 20 years has been from Airbus competition.
Evan McElravy
cpa1@penn.com
