Yes, the performance was amazing. So were the maintenance costs, what with
130 or so different shapes for external sheathing and no two ribs the same
Repair costs killed the Connie more than anything, along with the goofy triple
tail, a requirement from TWA that it fit a DC-3 hanger.
The Wr
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 12:43:23 -0500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll never forget seeing the Super Connie on the runway - it's landing
> gear was long and elegant - kind of like the Concorde but *more*! ;-)
>
> The performance they got in the 50s from piston engines and straight
> wings was re
/SL500.htm
http://homepage.mac.com/deneals/Sites/My_Commanders.htm
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 11:43 AM
To: Mercedes mailing list
Subject: Re: [MBZ] Super Connie...was OT Brit Aircraft
TED]>
To: "Mercedes mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: [MBZ] Super Connie...was OT Brit Aircraft
Back when I was at the Naval Academy, the Naval Reserve unit out of Dallas
used to fly a Navy transport Connie up to DC to pick
Back when I was at the Naval Academy, the Naval Reserve unit out of Dallas
used to fly a Navy transport Connie up to DC to pick up the Texas boys for
Christmas leave. Of course it didn't have the nice commercial
seats...remember the aluminum frame seats with the mesh you sit on? It was
also kinda
