Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners Path: news From: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) Subject: Re: Safety and design rankings (was Re: Flight controls) X-Submission-Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 08:11:13 GMT References: Message-ID: Approved: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM Organization: Chicago Software Works X-Submission-Message-ID: <1992Dec15.081113.632@ohare.Chicago.COM> Sender: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM Date: 15 Dec 92 00:13:29 PST In article rdd@rascal.ics.utexas.edu writes: >> Is the MD-11 comparable to the 747-400 in this regard? I would assume >> so since they are of comparable vintage. >I would suggest not: the former is more of a derivative, the latter more of >a new type, with its new wing (which was designed to support the all-upper- >deck concept, plus maybe one more derivative after that) ... My understanding was that the 747-400 does *not* have a new wing but rather a tweaked version of the original. I recall some statement from Boeing regarding the lack of winglets on the 777, which noted that the 777 had a new wing and starting from a clean slate it was more efficient to not have them, whereas working from an existing design as with the 747-400 it was helpful to have them. >... electrical system, extensive use of composites, new APU, etc. Hmmm ... sounds a lot like the MD-11 as well the 747-400. >My PERSONAL mental "ranking" of the sophistication of these airplanes is >about: ... > FMS only, varying or no glass, no standards > | > 747-300,737-300,-400,-500, MD-8X, F.100 What I've seen suggests the F.100 is quite advanced, probably not far behind the A320 and perhaps closer to the Airbus philosophy than to Boeing's. > INS/PMS, conventional otherwise Ok, I'll risk it ... what's PMS? (We're talking about airplanes!) > two-man | three-man > DC-9,737-100,737-200<-----| Every first-generation 737 I've seen has a third seat for the flight engineer. I believe this was one of the selling points of the DC-9 over the 737. >The FMS's used on these airplanes are generally done by Honeywell, except >that Boeing's using Smiths Industries for the 737, for some reason. Boeing recently made a substantial change to the FMS on new 737s, and offers a retrofit kit for older new-generation 737s. I believe this was a replacement ... perhaps away from Smiths? Having observed the trials and tribulations of friends with MGs and their Smiths electrics I'm not enthusiastic about a Smiths FMS! :-) >LASTLY, note that the manufacturers are MUCH more assertive about preventing >customers customizing their cockpits. This really got out of hand ... I've always wondered just what the flight engineer really does on a 767 equipped for three flight crew. I believe QANTAS does this. Also, some A310s lack the FFCS (Forward Facing Crew Cockpit) having instead what I assume is a cockpit more like an older A300. All of these are due primarily to union/labor pressures. >Performance is now ensured by legal contract, rather than design, >with the dollar being the bottom line. Well, mandated, at least, if not ensured. -- Karl Swartz |INet kls@ditka.chicago.com 1-415/854-3409 |UUCP uunet!decwrl!ditka!kls |Snail 2144 Sand Hill Rd., Menlo Park CA 94025, USA Send sci.aeronautics.airliners submissions to airliners@chicago.com