Date: 11 Sep 97 03:35:31 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Malcolm Weir) Organization: Little to None References: 1 2 3 4 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
On 08 Sep 97 02:03:48 , "Robert J. Carpenter" <email@example.com> caused to appear as if it was written: >>No, there were 20 crashes with Comets. De Havilland underestimated the >>forces and stress at high altitude and speed. However there were no >>references at that time so the constructor can't (fully) be blamed. Also >>calculators and computers were not existing .. After solving the >>structural problems the Comet4 was pretty safe, meaning that most >>incidents could not directly be blamed on design defects. > >Doesn't the Nimrod soldier (sailor?) on even today as the British long >range patrol aircraft, roughly the same mission as the US P3V. > >Isn't the Nimrod is a Comet in wolf's paint, while the P3V is an Electra >in wolf's clothing? Yup. And allegedly the Comet will be rejuvenated as part of a huge Nimrod 2000 program (although there is gossip that this program will be scrapped, and that a in-country onboard upgrade program will fix the everyday problems (unsupportable systems). Then one of these years the MPA forces of the world will get thier collective acts together and build a MPA specific air flying machine........... p.s. Boeing tried this a few years ago with a 757 derivative, then Lockheed and the U.S. Navy got involved with turning old "Desert Stored" P-3's into UDIV's, another lost program..... enough said....... The P3 and Electra are related, but not the same. The fuselage (of the P3) is 28ft shorter, the wings are different, different power plants, etc. The connection between the two is more historic than functional: much of the original P-3 design and validation work was done using Electras, and P-3s were produced on Electra lines. Malc.