View Single Post
Old 5th Apr 2005, 07:51
  #8 (permalink)  
Seloco
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Outer London, UK
Posts: 304
I wonder if others would agree that the A380's currently perceived "unloveliness" is actually because it is TOO SHORT?!

Like many of its famous forebears, it is starting its life just a smidgeon stumpy in the fuselage department. Soon however the brightest of the best from GE, RR and P&W will come along bearing gifts of more powerful and frugal engines, whereupon the CAD in Toulouse will crank out not a short ugly duckling but the most beautifully extended swan. Think of what happened to DC4/6/7, Viscount, 737, 767, 777, VC10 over the years, where stubby little runts were transformed into epitomies of aerial grace by the addition of several well-placed frames. So come on some Photoshop whizz out there: show us what it could/should be like!

Incidentally, how many airliners actually got shorter than their prototype over time? I can think of 747>SP, L1011>500, but does A320>319>318 count?

Incidentally a mole in Toulouse told me this morning that the A380 formally passed to Airbus "essai en vol" yesterday for ground trials, designed to be a minimum of four days prior to earliest first flight. Sounds a smidgeon optimistic to me, I must say.......
Seloco is offline