Originally Posted by
john_tullamarine
Your comments might be a tad superficial, methinks.
You might find that the Comet investigation work was disseminated fairly freely to the opposition and the opposition (read Boeing) took full advantage of the data so obtained. As a consequence, the Brits fell by the commercial wayside and the Americans raced ahead.
JT,
Contained in one of the final volumes of the Inspector's Report into the Comet in-flight breakups is reproduced a copy of advice from Boeing, in the early days of the Comet design, telling DeHavilland they were going to have problems, and why. Needless to say, nobody in UK at the time gave it headline treatment, after all, how many read beyond the Executive Summary (as it would now be called).
And, as I am sure you know, the fuselage structure of the Comet IV was quite different to the I and II, in that it was now, engineering-wise, the same as already long since adopted practice by Douglas, Boeing etc, on lower differential pressure hulls. Put another way, in the Comet IV, DeHavilland followed long established US practice.
That Inspector's Report has some very interesting connotation, you should find it --- and that DeHavilland "discovered" fatigue in aircraft structures was for the consumption of the good old British Empire -- the Yanks, French or Russians and their satellite would not agree.
A board-brush comment, yes, but not superficial, the Myths of Empire still have remarkable currency.
Tootle pip!!