Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Most fun flying...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Which would be the most fun to fly?

  • Ford Trimotor

    Votes: 8 7.1%
  • Douglas DC-3

    Votes: 40 35.4%
  • Lockheed Constellation

    Votes: 33 29.2%
  • Boeing 707

    Votes: 6 5.3%
  • Lockheed Tristar

    Votes: 14 12.4%
  • Boeing 777

    Votes: 12 10.6%

  • Total voters
    113
  • Poll closed .
A Squared said:
So, ask yourself, if the Constellation is really all it is made out to be, why aren't they flying anymore?
I feel the same way about the 707. It was..and many say still is...a revolutionary airplane that forever changed the way we think about air travel. Truly a masterpiece. But outside of the military, they're gone.

And DC-8's are everywhere! :D
 
Vector4fun said:
Hey A Squared,

All kidding aside, who's still operating a -7 and where?

In addidtion to the one posted by Crash-Proof, there's several being operated as an air tanker. I don't know by whom, but there's at least one on contract every summer in Alaska. There may be others hauling cargo in South America






[QUOTE".......CV-240 overflights yesterday.... [/QUOTE]

Hmmmm...there's those R-2800's again
 
Last edited:
Why are there not more Connies left? I don't know, but I have a theory, The Connie, like all Lougheeds was probably more expensive to begin with because it was much more complicated than its competition. This fact led to fewer being produced, and also led to much higher maintenance costs. It's pretty easy to understand that a complicated airframe and systems would be retired early.

Mr. Douglas' products on the other hand tend to be stone simple. As long as maintenance knows how to properly rig all the cables, a Douglas will last forever.

Here's a trivia question, Why did the Army Air Corps not utilize more P38s in WWII? It had great range, as proven by Lucky Lindy himself. Ask Yamamatos ghost. It was a great gunnery platform, Bong and Maguire both flew Lightnings. It was fast, decently manueverable and could get you home after suffering battle damage. Yet it wasn't as popular as other fighters. Why.

regards,
enigma
 
enigma said:
........like all Lougheeds.....

OK, if you're gonna play that game, it was actually "Loughhead" ;)

As for the trivia question; the p-38 was reputed to be much harder to bail out of safely, because of the horizontal stabilizer. This would tend to make it unpopular, but I'm not sure this would have much affect on military procurement.
 
Last edited:
A Squared said:
OK, if you're gonna play that game, it was actually "Loughhead" ;)

As for the trivia question; the p-38 was reputed to be much harder to bail out of safely, because of the horizontal stabilizer. This would tend to make it unpopular, but I'm not sure this would have much affect on military procurement.

double h, I should have rememmbered. Oh well.

The P38 was originally designed for an order of 50. As such, it wasn't engineered to be mass produced and required many more man hours to produce than its competitors. Not that that stopped production, because they were produced in fairly large numbers, but had they been simpler/cheaper, we would have had them earlier and in larger numbers. It's been a long time since I read this, it was in a Wings/Airpower magazine in the middle 70's.

reggards,
eniggma

:-)
:-)
 
Actually, the double h was a typo on my part, it was really loughead. Anyway, that's interesting about the p-38, in a similar vein, i heard that the Merlin, outstanding engine that it was, was very expensive to manufacture originally. When RR licensed it to Packard they made some changes which allowed it to be manufactured much more cheaply, while still remaining essentially the same engine.
 
AA, that's an interesting tidbit about the merlin. I could certainly see where it could be true. I've always wondered if the merlins put in PT boats were of aircraft quality or if they had some lower spec parts. Any ideas?

Now if I could only remember how to spell Locheed.

regards,
DD
 
enigma said:
I've always wondered if the merlins put in PT boats were of aircraft quality or if they had some lower spec parts. Any ideas?

no idea

Now if I could only remember how to spell Locheed.


Hmmmm, would that make the Connie the "Loch Heed Monster"?

Sorry <g>

AA
 
I voted for the Connie, but would prefer the China Clipper...
 
P-38

The P-38 was not successful as a day fighter in the European Air War, it was outclassed by the German airplanes, and when damaged, probably lost due to liquid cooled engines damaged over enemy territory. In the pacific it was the top fighter for a shore based airplane, due to its range, speed, and fire power against an outclassed Japanese airplanes.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top