Re: Subsidies ...

From: (Michael Jennings)
Organization: University of Cambridge DAMTP
Date:         30 Mar 96 16:01:08 
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.417@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
Russell K Ching <> wrote:
>Andrew Sapuntzakis ( wrote:
>: In addition to 707 production depending on the KC135, one source
>: (which I can dig up) I have read claims the DC-10 did not have enough
>: (commercial) orders to justify production until the U.S. gov't
>: stepped in with a request for the KC-10.
>I don't think so.  The KC-10 went into operation in 1980, about 10 years
>after the first production DC-10 went into service.  Yes, the USAF is the
>largest operator of DC-10s (at 60), but (no) they didn't save the project.
>BTW, the DC-10 was selected from a pool of candidates which included the
>747, 767 and (possibly to my recollection) the L1011.  I'd be interested
>to see your source, though.
	They probably did have something to do with MD being
able to launch the MD-11, however. KC-10 production allowed
the DC-10 production line to stay open until the launch of the
MD-11, something that likely would not have been possible otherwise.
Of course, you can argue whether or not this was actually beneficial
to MD.

Michael Jennings
Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics
The University of Cambridge.

"Much of what passes for quality on British television is no
more than a reflection of the values of the narrow elite which
controls it and which has always thought that its tastes are
synonymous with quality" - Rupert Murdoch