best and worst looking aircraft.

mumhaabu

noblestee wrote: »

is that your video? I love the comment - "youre flying a littlebit high for a plane. "

No its not mine, I found it while searching for Concorde pics in Ireland!

cyrusdvirus

mumhaabu wrote: »

The worst I can't really say I'd say the Boeing 737 that Mick and the bandits use daily, it is boring cramped, ubiquitous and actually not very safe as loads of them have crashed. The are the Toyota of the skys, boring unsafe and unreliable but everywhere.

Pure total and utter waffle. 289 incidents as of August 2008, of which 140 are hull losses, giving a total of 3830 fatalities.
In 2005 in the UK alone there were 3201 road fatalities.

I'd say that puts an aircraft that's been in production for 40 years with 5854 aircraft built in a different league to your comments

Danbo!

mumhaabu wrote: »

The are the Toyota of the skys, boring unsafe and unreliable but everywhere.

You mean Fiat.

dogmatix

View Profile wrote: »

The 737-800 has quite a good safety record so I dont know where your getting that info from?!

Its quite a modern, sleek looking jet imho. Better than the A320 which lacks some nice design lines.

Your joking right? To say the 737-300 and above series is a better looking aircraft then the A320/321 is like saying TD Mary O'Rourke is a better looking bird then Beyonce. I know that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but thats going to far! That fat stubby body (the 737, not O'Rourke), the short undercarrige (reminds me of a fat chicken on spindly legs). And the worst feature - those awful looking engine cowls that look like someone dropped the 737 on the ground when they where testing the undercarrige but forgot that the plane was'nt jacked up at the time. Boeing have always put function and performance ahead of beauty with regards to their civilian airliners right from the hideous 377 Stratocruiser (later turned into the even uglier Guppy) to the current Dreamliner. Airbus have shown it is possible to have both (apart from the 380 - bit of a slip up there in the asthetics department, Airbus).

cyrusdvirus

noblestee wrote: »

You mean Fiat.

Don't encourage him!!

A_SN

I have to agree that the SR-71 is the best looking. But I'm surprised the B-2 didn't get more love! That thing is gorgeous! I like the F-5/T-38 too.

By the way, while looking up Wikipedia for an ugly aircraft which name I forgot, I read this, can you believe that the USAF is planning to retire the B-52 in 2040, when it first flew in 1952!? Mind blowing, that they'd let an 88 year-old airplane model in active service.

EDIT : The X-32B is the ugly one I was thinking of. I mean look at that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Boeing_X-32B_Patuxent.jpg

View Profile

Originally Posted by View Profile
The 737-800 has quite a good safety record so I dont know where your getting that info from?!
Its quite a modern, sleek looking jet imho. Better than the A320 which lacks some nice design lines.

Posted by dogmatix:

Your joking right? To say the 737-300 and above series is a better looking aircraft then the A320/321 is like saying TD Mary O'Rourke is a better looking bird then Beyonce. I know that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but thats going to far! That fat stubby body (the 737, not O'Rourke), the short undercarrige (reminds me of a fat chicken on spindly legs). And the worst feature - those awful looking engine cowls that look like someone dropped the 737 on the ground when they where testing the undercarrige but forgot that the plane was'nt jacked up at the time. Boeing have always put function and performance ahead of beauty with regards to their civilian airliners right from the hideous 377 Stratocruiser (later turned into the even uglier Guppy) to the current Dreamliner. Airbus have shown it is possible to have both (apart from the 380 - bit of a slip up there in the asthetics department, Airbus).

Try reading my post before you comment.
:rolleyes:

oztots

Sukhoi Su-47, Just cos it looks unique. And its russian.

And the blohm and voss 141, how they made it is beyond me.

FiSe

We need one more thread or we need to name 2 nicest and 2 ugliest aircrafts, me thinks.
You really can't compare military and civvie aircrafts or helis. Each is totally different. For example, how can you compare, let's say, one of my all time fav FW-190 and Gulfstream?
Uncomparable...

Silenceisbliss

A_SN wrote: »

EDIT : The X-32B is the ugly one I was thinking of. I mean look at that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Boeing_X-32B_Patuxent.jpg

I was waiting for someone to mention the x-32B

the sole reason boeing lost the contract to lockheed.....because boeing created a fücking monstrosity

dogmatix

View Profile wrote: »

Try reading my post before you comment.
:rolleyes:

Oh but I did - and perhaps you should re-read mine before responding? Also note - I said "737-300 and above series" meaning 737-300 to 800 and above. I thought that was obvious but apologies if it was'nt - I can put it in bold for you in the future if that helps. To my own eyes there is not much difference in appearance since the 300 arrived except for longer fuselage and those unattractive wingtips.

View Profile

Well I quite like the nose of the 737 over the A320's and I also find the winglets a nice feature.
As Airbus are considering adding similar winglets to the 320 series I think this will only improve the over all look of the airbus.;)

Boeing have always put function and performance ahead of beauty with regards to their civilian airliners right from the hideous 377 Stratocruiser (later turned into the even uglier Guppy) to the current Dreamliner. Airbus have shown it is possible to have both

And Airbus havn't??

You think Airbus splash out extra cash on sexy designs to make their aircraft look prettier. I'm afraid not dogmatrix. They make them as cheap and functional as they can, just like Boeing.

To say the 707, 747,757, 777 and the Dreamliner are ugly is beyond me!!

The Dreamliner is a very well designed a/c with extra effort put in to please the passengers. Eg; the bigger windows and the lower cabin altitude for better level of humidity and hence passenger comfort.

And in relation to the Guppy, well just look at Airbus' Beluga.

The only sexy Airbus i can think of are the A330 and the A340-600.
A lot of it down to the winglets btw.

I was desperately hoping that the A350 would have some nice design touches . They had two flightdeck window designs/nose section designs and I think they have gone for the more boring choice.

Sexy option:


Bland option: (which they went for)


And don't get me wrong. I'm not a Boeing person, I actually prefer the European company as a whole. Its just a pity manufactures dont put more effort into sleek and sexy designs as they did in the past.

oztots

Its a pity bus manufacturers dont produce sexier looking busses?

Because in all honesty thats all modern comercial aircraft are. They're made for what goes inside, not for whats on the outside.

dogmatix

View profile it looks like the only thing we can agree on is that we have different opinions on aircraft beauty! Many of the reasons you put forward for Boeing aircraft are the main reasons why I think Airbus looks the better aircraft.

I wouldn't say the dreamliner is ugly - but those flippity-flappity flexible wings it has look terrible, in the artisit impressions of flight at least. All points about about efficency and economy aside it almost looks like Boeing could dispense with engines and power the dreamliner by flapping its wings.

But all of the above are just my own views - beauty/ugliness will always be a matter of personal opinion that cannot be explained away with logic or facts. Thats what makes these types of threads such good fun!

Steyr

While on the subject of Airbus, what new Airbus type are EI supposed to be getting? XWB?

View Profile

Yeah they've put in an order for six A350-900s and six more A330-300s as far as I can recall.

FlutterinBantam

:eek:

View Profile

This order was made a while back so they may reduce the numbers due to the current economic climate.

Fabio

Going back on topic I reckon the Ilyushin IL-62 is one of the sleekest aircraft around though it's slowly but surely dying out (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Deta-Air/Ilyushin-Il-62M/1419836/L/&tbl=photo_info&photo_nr=14&sok=keyword_(%5C%27%2B%5C%22il-62%5C%22%5C%27_IN_BOOLEAN_MODE))_&sort=_order_by_photo_id_DESC_&prev_id=1420935&next_id=1419751)

Worst looking....too many to mention!

Reoil

F-14 for me!

APM

Fabio wrote: »

Going back on topic I reckon the Ilyushin IL-62 is one of the sleekest aircraft around though it's slowly but surely dying out (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Deta-Air/Ilyushin-Il-62M/1419836/L/&tbl=photo_info&photo_nr=14&sok=keyword_(%5C%27%2B%5C%22il-62%5C%22%5C%27_IN_BOOLEAN_MODE))_&sort=_order_by_photo_id_DESC_&prev_id=1420935&next_id=1419751)

Worst looking....too many to mention!

IL62 is beautiful but it is a carbon copy of the VC10 or vice-versa!

IL62


VC10

crisco10

APM wrote: »

IL62 is beautiful but it is a carbon copy of the VC10 or vice-versa!

IL62


VC10

Both gorgeous aircraft, what is the bulge at the junction of the vertical and horizontal stabilisers though?

dogmatix

Maybe the aviation equivilent of "go faster" stripes? Bulges like that where very popular on cars in the 50's and 60's...

I always thought the VC10 had the narrow edge over the IL62 in looks. But thats a personal opinion.

FOGOFUNK

dogmatix wrote: »

Maybe the aviation equivilent of "go faster" stripes? Bulges like that where very popular on cars in the 50's and 60's...

I always thought the VC10 had the narrow edge over the IL62 in looks. But thats a personal opinion.

Im gonna say the bulge is to hold all the stabiliser trim control gear.

Pride Fighter

The Eurofighter Typhoon and the Saab Gripen are my favourites for being the best looking.
Worst for me is an F-8 crusader.

Fabio

FOGOFUNK wrote: »

Im gonna say the bulge is to hold all the stabiliser trim control gear.

Yeah it's something like that I think and also the extra room needed for more supports for the stablisers as they're not attached directly to the fuselage. I think!

Tabnabs

A couple of classics include


DC3


Vulcan

And my least favourite

cyrusdvirus

Pride Fighter wrote: »

The Eurofighter Typhoon and the Saab Gripen are my favourites for being the best looking.
Worst for me is an F-8 crusader.

I remember reading about an F-8 pilot who took off with the wings still folded in the stow position, did a quick circut of the ship and landed back on....

And I'd prefer a Crusader to a Corsair....

APM

crisco10 wrote: »

Both gorgeous aircraft, what is the bulge at the junction of the vertical and horizontal stabilisers though?

I could be corrected on this but I believe the VC10 and IL62 had fin tanks for fuel, so could be extra space for storing the fuel

Fabio

Dyflin wrote: »

A couple of classics include


DC3


Vulcan

And my least favourite

I dunno...the 757 is cool in new Delta colours I think. Still wouldn't pick traveling over the pond in one if given the choice between it and an EI A330.