Skip to comments.
Mammoth Passenger Plane Lands in Britain
AP ^
| May 18, 2006
| JANE WARDELL
Posted on 05/18/2006 8:39:54 AM PDT by ConservativeStatement
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 next last
I'm more impressed by the 787.
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
2
posted on
05/18/2006 8:41:11 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
Obvious typo in the top of the article: "Sirbus."
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
"SuperJumbo"
Sounds like another word for "big white elepahant."
4
posted on
05/18/2006 8:41:44 AM PDT
by
MeanWestTexan
(Many at FR would respond to Christ "Darn right, I'll cast the first stone!")
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
so how many mammoths did it carry?
5
posted on
05/18/2006 8:42:11 AM PDT
by
woollyone
(Preacher; "If there was more love in the world, there'd probably be a lot less dyin'")
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
Looks like they're still, what 100 or so short on sales to reach their goal/break-even point?
And it's still only flown a couple of times
6
posted on
05/18/2006 8:42:16 AM PDT
by
digger48
To: Moonman62
Big Ugly Flying Fuselagethe euros have always been a bit clumsy at design. excepting the Italians and the Brits of course. Guess that basically leaves the French and the Germans whose designs are a bit...queer, let's say.
7
posted on
05/18/2006 8:42:44 AM PDT
by
the invisib1e hand
(It takes courage to live. Hence, the "culture of death...")
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
8
posted on
05/18/2006 8:43:22 AM PDT
by
oldleft
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
Landing looked a little on the shaky side to me. But it is new and i must say I do not know what the wind conditions were at landing time.
I am left wondering if Al Qaeda is foaming at the mouth over its new target?
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
Don't know if this pic will post...
but this airplane looks like its pregnant.
To: Moonman62
Yeah, I have every respect for Airbus for building the biggest passenger plane. But the fuselage does not even come close to the beauty of the 747 design that's roughly 35 years its senior.
11
posted on
05/18/2006 8:44:35 AM PDT
by
July 4th
(A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
I'd like to try and see it land on an aircraft carrier.
12
posted on
05/18/2006 8:44:38 AM PDT
by
Fruitbat
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
Apparently it can carry over 800 passengers, but they have it configured for 555. Sure glad they picked that instead of 666. heh heh!
It certainly is one big honkin' plane!
To: BlueStateDepression
Landing looked a little on the shaky side to me. But it is new and i must say I do not know what the wind conditions were at landing time. I am left wondering if Al Qaeda is foaming at the mouth over its new target?
Yeah, it did look quite shaky and almost unstable at low speeds. As you say, could have been a good wind.
As to AQ, if they can't hit a 747, then I doubt this is gonna help much. 747's aren't exactly "fleet of foot" on takeoffs and landings.
I know that I'm not getting onto one until it's been in the air issue-free for at least several years. Those wings looked a little too "floppy" for my liking.
14
posted on
05/18/2006 8:48:37 AM PDT
by
Fruitbat
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
15
posted on
05/18/2006 8:53:22 AM PDT
by
VaBthang4
("He Who Watches Over Israel Will Neither Slumber Nor Sleep")
To: lexington minuteman 1775
can you imagine the cabin clean up on a full flight. Turn around must be over an hour.
Being an Aircraft Mech in my past life, I can assure you the bigger or faster they are, the more maintenance required.
16
posted on
05/18/2006 8:54:05 AM PDT
by
Zavien Doombringer
(Mr. Franklin, what form of customes did you create in Tiajunna? A beeber, Madam, if you can stune it)
To: Fruitbat
Floppy wings are better than "Stiff"
17
posted on
05/18/2006 8:55:10 AM PDT
by
Zavien Doombringer
(Mr. Franklin, what form of customes did you create in Tiajunna? A beeber, Madam, if you can stune it)
To: Blue Jays
Hi All-
This graphic might post a little bit large, but it's a decent shot of the nose of the aircraft:
~ Blue Jays ~
18
posted on
05/18/2006 8:56:14 AM PDT
by
Blue Jays
(Rock Hard, Ride Free)
To: Zavien Doombringer
19
posted on
05/18/2006 8:57:41 AM PDT
by
al baby
(Father of the Beeber)
To: MassRepublicanFlyersFan
It's the biggest jet ever and I'd love to see it. Lots of amateur observers will say it looks slow, lumbering, or even "shaky" and "unstable". The fact is that your perception of how fast an airplane looks has to do with how many fuselage lengths it covers in a given period. A small jet going exactly the same speed as a superjumbo will always appear to be going much faster.
The freight version will gross at more than 1.3 million pounds-- a wonder of engineering.
20
posted on
05/18/2006 8:59:04 AM PDT
by
zipper
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson