De Havilland Comet, alternate history ideas...
Discussion
Just curiosity I guess but... what would've (or, more likely, could have) happened to aircraft aviation had the Comet been designed without 'square' windows? Would de Havilland still be a major player in the jet aircraft business or would Boeing and/or Airbus still be ruling the skies?
LP12 said:
Indeed, the ADF aerial notch was a major player in the fatige failures.
Exactly - it was this aperture that failed on G-ALYP. We don't really know what failed on the other Comets that crashed.The window failed in the water tank test at Farnborough so it was only ever a POSSIBLE scenario.
The Comet 1 had lots of issues around its structural strength above and beyond the shape of its windows.
I've thought about this for years and reckon there is a good alternative history book in it, if someone else hasn't already done so.
I'd call it, "Through the round window" and once it was made into a film, instead of getting Morgan Freeman to do the voice over, I'd get Derek Griffiths to do it.
Knowing our history though, lack of investment, bad management and strikes probably would have ruined it.
I'd call it, "Through the round window" and once it was made into a film, instead of getting Morgan Freeman to do the voice over, I'd get Derek Griffiths to do it.
Knowing our history though, lack of investment, bad management and strikes probably would have ruined it.
colin_p said:
I've thought about this for years and reckon there is a good alternative history book in it, if someone else hasn't already done so.
I'd call it, "Through the round window" and once it was made into a film, instead of getting Morgan Freeman to do the voice over, I'd get Derek Griffiths to do it.
Knowing our history though, lack of investment, bad management and strikes probably would have ruined it.
ThisI'd call it, "Through the round window" and once it was made into a film, instead of getting Morgan Freeman to do the voice over, I'd get Derek Griffiths to do it.
Knowing our history though, lack of investment, bad management and strikes probably would have ruined it.
Even without the Comet, the UK had a potential 707 rival in the form of the Vickers V1000. But BOAC said they saw no need for new jetliner because the Comet 4 and the turboprop Britannia could do the job. With no chance of a BOAC order the V1000 was scrapped. BOAC then bought 707s.
De Havilland had a second chance with the Trident. But BEA decided it was a bit too big. After furious arguments within De Havilland the design was scaled down slightly to match BEA's requirements, ignoring what the rest of the world wanted DH ended up building just 117. Boeing built the 727 the same size as the original Trident proposal, which they knew all about because De Havilland had discussed a possible collaboration, and sold 1800.
While BAC was collaborating with Sud Aviation on Concorde. Hawker Siddeley planned a similar joint venture with Breguet to make a twin engined wide body airliner. The UK govt wouldn't invest, but Germany got involved and it became the Airbus A300.
Hawker Siddeley later considered a twin engined development of the Trident, the HS 134 which unsurprisingly looked remarkably like the later Boeing 757, but couldn't get investment. A few years later HS's successor, BAE, set up a programme at their office in Weybridge planning to collaborate with French and German manufacturers to produce the so called 'Joint European Transport'. The resulting proposal was basically the same configuration of the HS134, but again the UK govt wouldn't invest. That programme got absorbed into Airbus and became the A320 and it's variants.
Simpo Two said:
Generally it seems that the British invent things, then the Americans market/sell/make money from it.
As it has been, and always will be. A great shame as some of the world's best innovations have come from this small island, but our government is usually too short sighted/short of cash to do much with it.
I just hope we do right by Reaction Engines, as I truly believe a viable SSTO craft would revolutionise LEO operations to a greater extent than even SpaceX.
But I expect what will happen is HM Gov. will decide it's not worth toffee, and the yanks will saunter in and hoover up anything worthwhile. DARPA have already been sniffing around and I believe RE have a test facility on the go in the US.
Looking at aviation, the fundamental point is that British industry is small.
Great for innovation, if a boffin needs to consult with someone expert in a totally different speciality, no need to request your boss to mention it to the other guy's boss to at the next regional meeting. Just buttonhole the expert during the tea break.
Bad for mass production, because you need investment from the government and even if you get it you end up making do with inadequate machinery. Comets and Nimrods were largely hand built, which was why the Nimrod was finally scrapped. It was impossible to upgrade them because they were all different.
Bad for marketing, because you invariably need orders from BOAC/BEA/BA. So you make it according to their exact requirements which are different from everyone else's EG Trident. They are even different from what they decide they really want once you're in production. EG VC10.
The only vaguely successful British airliners were the BAC111 and HS146. Neither had BA as the first customer.
Great for innovation, if a boffin needs to consult with someone expert in a totally different speciality, no need to request your boss to mention it to the other guy's boss to at the next regional meeting. Just buttonhole the expert during the tea break.
Bad for mass production, because you need investment from the government and even if you get it you end up making do with inadequate machinery. Comets and Nimrods were largely hand built, which was why the Nimrod was finally scrapped. It was impossible to upgrade them because they were all different.
Bad for marketing, because you invariably need orders from BOAC/BEA/BA. So you make it according to their exact requirements which are different from everyone else's EG Trident. They are even different from what they decide they really want once you're in production. EG VC10.
The only vaguely successful British airliners were the BAC111 and HS146. Neither had BA as the first customer.
Dr Jekyll said:
colin_p said:
I've thought about this for years and reckon there is a good alternative history book in it, if someone else hasn't already done so.
I'd call it, "Through the round window" and once it was made into a film, instead of getting Morgan Freeman to do the voice over, I'd get Derek Griffiths to do it.
Knowing our history though, lack of investment, bad management and strikes probably would have ruined it.
ThisI'd call it, "Through the round window" and once it was made into a film, instead of getting Morgan Freeman to do the voice over, I'd get Derek Griffiths to do it.
Knowing our history though, lack of investment, bad management and strikes probably would have ruined it.
Even without the Comet, the UK had a potential 707 rival in the form of the Vickers V1000. But BOAC said they saw no need for new jetliner because the Comet 4 and the turboprop Britannia could do the job. With no chance of a BOAC order the V1000 was scrapped. BOAC then bought 707s.
De Havilland had a second chance with the Trident. But BEA decided it was a bit too big. After furious arguments within De Havilland the design was scaled down slightly to match BEA's requirements, ignoring what the rest of the world wanted DH ended up building just 117. Boeing built the 727 the same size as the original Trident proposal, which they knew all about because De Havilland had discussed a possible collaboration, and sold 1800.
While BAC was collaborating with Sud Aviation on Concorde. Hawker Siddeley planned a similar joint venture with Breguet to make a twin engined wide body airliner. The UK govt wouldn't invest, but Germany got involved and it became the Airbus A300.
Hawker Siddeley later considered a twin engined development of the Trident, the HS 134 which unsurprisingly looked remarkably like the later Boeing 757, but couldn't get investment. A few years later HS's successor, BAE, set up a programme at their office in Weybridge planning to collaborate with French and German manufacturers to produce the so called 'Joint European Transport'. The resulting proposal was basically the same configuration of the HS134, but again the UK govt wouldn't invest. That programme got absorbed into Airbus and became the A320 and it's variants.
Kuwahara said:
Simpo Two said:
Generally it seems that the British invent things, then the Americans market/sell/make money from it.
I’m thinking TSR2 ,cancelled and then offered the F111 but ended up with the Phantom but with RR Spey to appease the Brits….
Equus said:
Fatigue issues aside, surely the fact that the design relied upon turbojet (not turbofan) engines, buried in the wing roots rather than suspended below them in pods, meant that it would have reached 'blind alley' status fairly quickly, anyway?
It didn't rely on turbojets, the Nimrod had turbofans so the Comet could have been developed to take them.Incidentally the V1000 would have had turbofans from the start, unlike the 707.
Kuwahara said:
Simpo Two said:
Generally it seems that the British invent things, then the Americans market/sell/make money from it.
I’m thinking TSR2 ,cancelled and then offered the F111 but ended up with the Phantom but with RR Spey to appease the Brits….Dr Jekyll said:
Looking at aviation, the fundamental point is that British industry is small.
Great for innovation, if a boffin needs to consult with someone expert in a totally different speciality, no need to request your boss to mention it to the other guy's boss to at the next regional meeting. Just buttonhole the expert during the tea break.
Bad for mass production, because you need investment from the government and even if you get it you end up making do with inadequate machinery. Comets and Nimrods were largely hand built, which was why the Nimrod was finally scrapped. It was impossible to upgrade them because they were all different.
Bad for marketing, because you invariably need orders from BOAC/BEA/BA. So you make it according to their exact requirements which are different from everyone else's EG Trident. They are even different from what they decide they really want once you're in production. EG VC10.
The only vaguely successful British airliners were the BAC111 and HS146. Neither had BA as the first customer.
MRA4 was scrapped because the beancounters in charge chose to do it the wrong way and spent 20 years & a couple of £bn doing it. In a parallel universe a modified VC10 became the staple of the kipper fleet and later was successfully modified further into a worldbeating AEW platform.Great for innovation, if a boffin needs to consult with someone expert in a totally different speciality, no need to request your boss to mention it to the other guy's boss to at the next regional meeting. Just buttonhole the expert during the tea break.
Bad for mass production, because you need investment from the government and even if you get it you end up making do with inadequate machinery. Comets and Nimrods were largely hand built, which was why the Nimrod was finally scrapped. It was impossible to upgrade them because they were all different.
Bad for marketing, because you invariably need orders from BOAC/BEA/BA. So you make it according to their exact requirements which are different from everyone else's EG Trident. They are even different from what they decide they really want once you're in production. EG VC10.
The only vaguely successful British airliners were the BAC111 and HS146. Neither had BA as the first customer.
Dr Jekyll said:
Equus said:
Fatigue issues aside, surely the fact that the design relied upon turbojet (not turbofan) engines, buried in the wing roots rather than suspended below them in pods, meant that it would have reached 'blind alley' status fairly quickly, anyway?
It didn't rely on turbojets, the Nimrod had turbofans so the Comet could have been developed to take them.Incidentally the V1000 would have had turbofans from the start, unlike the 707.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff