The producers are clever. No “mil spec” = no warranty. Bureaucrats are not the type of people who will take any riscs related to that!
Remember about “the egg of Columbus”. All seem to know it can be done, but very few will do it really.

While Columbus idea was indeed flawed. He assumed the earth to be of 30.000km radius, while the Spanish researchers had 40.000km in their notebook. Nobody could expect another land-mass lying inbetween.

BIO … my sympathies my friend… a couple perfectly good posts in the thread (and a worthy thread at that, given the pre-orders to date and EADS’ whining about their Canadian exclusion) and everything else goes to pot.

when all else fails, walk away – somethings are better left unanswered. Shaking my head, this one’s starting to look as bad as a few of the south asia related flame jobs.

If someone wants to discuss the ‘birthplace of aviation’, start a separate thread!

JJ

The thread started with an outdated 5-liner, which was never confirmed by anybody. If that was a valuable thread, please don’t show me the useless.

The U.S. House voted 378-3 for a resolution naming Dayton, Ohio – home of Wilbur and Orville Wright – as the place where aviation was born.

I know that Americans are sometimes different and so their politics. But it always amazing what one can get out of congress and court-houses.

So, I guess when the Congress votes for it, the UN summit has to override it? Or the security council?

Why don’t use “the tax free state”. I always found that most appealing, especially when the tiny state does marginally fit a shopping mall. (Sorry, Delawarians, your state was the first, I know).

Not argueing about anything for or against what you said because it is completely stupid and pointless in my opinion ( we both have better things to do ) , but if you had time to save and look around other then critisizing my Profiled Location ( which many people have which arent necc . cities etc) then you’d notice there is a good reason why i wrote the BIRTHPLACE OF AVIATION .

P.S. – looking at a car number/licence plate from one of the vehicles of my state might help you out 😉

Why the heck Ohio?

To call any location in the world “the birthplace of aviation” is non-sense and reflects either a misunderstanding of early aviation history or … something else.

Even if the Wright Brothers were flying first, the neither invented the aviation, nor did they spread the technology over the world. Other nations build aircraft, without any input from the Wright brothers. The USA actually lagged behind in aviation technology (mostly because they were so damn peaceful 😀 ).

You can open a thread and we can each name a “birthplace of aviation”. I suggest Berlin. 😉

Just released !!!!

http://www.liga.net/news/211008.html

The second An-225 will be finalised until 2008 !

…. besides, this is the second hull !!!! 😮

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0699985/L/

Cheers, Deino 😎

Deino,
I would be very careful about this. The source of information is one single internet site and a minister is not the by defintion most believable person. Actually, can you read the site? The link is in Russian. I would clearly doubt this, especially would I like to know where the money comes from.
Happy holiday.
Schorsch

the Soviets never felt confidant about there bombers until the arrival of the Tu-160, but the Blackjack came too late.. sods law or what. we have to remember the days of stratigic bombers lumbering, loaded up with bombs, miles into hostile airspace was obsolete by the end of WW-2, it was tried in Korea and Vietnam but with little effect, just like the battle ship that went before, heavy bombers are just too easy to destroy, loads of fire power but sitting ducks to enything but poorley defended airspace. i think if eny conflict haapend in the early 60s all heavy bombers on both sides would have been shot out of the sky within days. when low level “under the radar” tactics was applied and better defencive aids in the late 60s things would have been better, but it was still hit and miss.. until the arrival of decent stand off weapons in the 70s and 80s did eny large bomber stand a chance of surviving…..

I would disagree on this point. Bombers were actually sitting ducks waiting to be shot down even in WW2. The fact that American bombers actually flew into German airspace and finally defeated the Luftwaffe wasn’t a prove of concept than rather the 10:1 ratio in industrial capacity and organisational benefits (on US side).

Large bombers are vunerable and are definitely not small man’s most efficient way of strafing his opponent. But a powerful air force can have it in its asset and by that build up a huge concetration of power. In Vietnam 1972 (Linbacker II) the B-52 got out with a loss rate of less than 5%, but only through heavy assistance by Navy and TAC aircraft. However, in the end of a 11 day period (not 2 years like in Germany) the North Vietnamese air defence was largely crippled and reduced to a fraction of its original strength.

One thing is right: the simple idea to fly to the enemy and bomb him with a large bomber is obsolete and was obsolete even in the 1930s.

Boeing doesnt have an all that bad of a track record of delivering , but it is pointless and counterproductive to argue on this topic ( wouldnt you agree ? ) as the entire thing will unfold infront of our eyes in the comming 12-24 months!!

I would greet any user to be more careful on commenting either manufacturer as long as he is not top-level executive. Any comments about how stupid or ignorant Airbus was will be answered by me in the same currency, not because I like Airbus so much, but because I can’t stand this attitude. I know I won’t come away with any unproven statements about Boeing – which is possible here the other way round. Always interesting to note – as this is a British forum in the first place. Seems sometimes to me that BAe’s sell of Airbus stakes comes from the deep heart of British people itself. But that might be a flawed impression.

That’s it from my side.