Paya Lebar Airport
-
nvmOriginally posted by mhcampboy:aiyer.. i just wanna show the plane... earlier on u all talkin abt it wad..
-
Hehe..
The PLAB runway cycling event is here again
-
Alternative to the Concorde, I guess you guys know the Tupolev Tu-144 too, that's my favourite to the Concorde, 'cos Concorde is just too popular and plus, the Tu-144 have a higher cruise speed (Mach 2.35) but endurance wise, it would lose out to the Concorde.
It would be great to fly something so fragile, old, dangerously fast and equally complicated as the Tu-144... Concorde just gives me the safe feelings, you wont crash much and only 12.5 chances you would die in it out of a million flights times a hundred persons... -
Not..
it a military airport...
-
You won't crash much? How many tiimes do u need to crash ? IMHO, once is more than enough! and please don't go believing all those stats & numbers, they meant nothing when an aircraft goes down n lives are lost.
That aside. the Tupolev wasn't famous & didn't see commercial service worldwide was because of certification,amongst the rest of the "unreliable parts " where Tupolev didnt convince the western world of their Safety Management System aka QA.
Same for the IL96-300. It could only fly over jurisdiction of the old soviet/COmmunist system/soverignty ,nearest point is HANOI airport where SU operates SVO/HAN/SVO. lovely plane though.
just my 2cts.Originally posted by jetabt767400:Alternative to the Concorde, I guess you guys know the Tupolev Tu-144 too, that's my favourite to the Concorde, 'cos Concorde is just too popular and plus, the Tu-144 have a higher cruise speed (Mach 2.35) but endurance wise, it would lose out to the Concorde.
It would be great to fly something so fragile, old, dangerously fast and equally complicated as the Tu-144... Concorde just gives me the safe feelings, you wont crash much and only 12.5 chances you would die in it out of a million flights times a hundred persons... -
Hmm, i see, yeah the chances of accident happening on oneself is so little, and aviation travel is almost 'safer than walking on an everyday street'.Originally posted by megatron:You won't crash much? How many tiimes do u need to crash ? IMHO, once is more than enough! and please don't go believing all those stats & numbers, they meant nothing when an aircraft goes down n lives are lost.
That aside. the Tupolev wasn't famous & didn't see commercial service worldwide was because of certification,amongst the rest of the "unreliable parts " where Tupolev didnt convince the western world of their Safety Management System aka QA.
Same for the IL96-300. It could only fly over jurisdiction of the old soviet/COmmunist system/soverignty ,nearest point is HANOI airport where SU operates SVO/HAN/SVO. lovely plane though.
just my 2cts.
But what I admire the Soviets and Tupolev is the fact they went through much more than out well known Western countries. The amount of sweat, toil, blood and materials outnumber much of the Western counterparts' monetary values, and neither of that turned out with much products, they suffered more casualties than the West. All this is in reference to the Soviet era.
Come the new 21st Century, i think Tupelov and other Russian companies came up with something practical, no more of the tough race with west, but a better and conducive environment, but nevertheless they are still underfund and not really much investment. I have certain faith in the Russian planes, and although they will not excel much in the come decade, they are definitely rising...
Cheers! -
Oops! We're getting a teeny bit off-topic here.
