NoelG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4168 times:
I was reading the article about the 717 in Airliner World this month, and thought what a nice aircraft it was. Its a shame that it hasn't been more successful, would love to see these aircraft in more liveries!!
What "failed" aircraft (that flew or never got past the design stage) would you like to see more of now?
Mike77 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 203 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4134 times:
The MD-11. I don't know if it was considered a failure, but I do know that it did not meet expectations due to a variety of reasons. I love those planes, and wish that more airlines flew them. I have never been on an MD-11, unfortunately. I have flown many times on the DC-10's on American, Northwest and Western, and I had always imagined the MD-11 to be a more powerful, sleeker version of those DC-10's.
To AJ: Why were the 747SP and 764 aircraft considered failures? I'm sorry to hear that. Those are cool planes!
Airplanepics From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 2725 posts, RR: 46 Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4054 times:
Petertejthije,
Come on, Conocrde never really failed did it? Its been in service for over 40 years and theres not much aircraft around now that have been in service for that long. Conocrde is being used more than twice a day. Its a shame that concorde wasnt' bought by other airlines. But I think its been an excellent 40 years for these birds. And its a shame that BA are retiring them. In my opinion Conocrde has been one of the most successful aircraft of all time, due to its long service and style!
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7702 posts, RR: 55 Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4042 times:
The 747SP is a strange one for me, one of the routes it was specifically designed for was NYC - Tokyo nonstop, which the 747 classic couldn't do. Why JAL never bought any is a complete mystery. Maybe their flight attendents liked the stuffed polar bear in the lounge at Anchorage.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
American 767 From United States of America, joined exactly 14 years ago today! , 3320 posts, RR: 14 Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3899 times:
The Dassault Mercure was definitely a failure. Only 12 were built, 11 of which went into service with French domestic airline Air Inter, the only operator of the type. Not only it wasn't successful but it was the only jetliner Dassault has ever made. I can understand that airlines much prefered the B737 over the Mercure because it had a short range compared to its US rival, but Dassault could have designed a Mercure ER to attract other carriers and compete with US built B737. I don't understand why not even Air France, France's major flag carrier, was interested in the Mercure.
Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium
"Aimer jusqu'a l'impossible, c'est possible". Tina Arena.
L1011Fan From United States of America, joined May 2003, 271 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3714 times:
The L1011 was a partial failure with 250 being sold.
Sllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3561 times:
Convair's 990! How could you not love a plane with radical wing sweep, Whitcomb fairings ("speed humps") on the wings, and big rear-fan engines?
From a pilot's perspective, I've never met a pilot that flew one that didn't love it. I've had former 990 pilots talk about how great it was for hours on end!
Fanofjets From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1894 posts, RR: 3 Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3556 times:
The Vickers Vanguard was a fine aircraft but quickly outclassed by more modern equipment.
Tom in NO From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 7194 posts, RR: 41 Reply 16, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3527 times:
The L-1011 was one of the most popular civilian aircraft ever built, both with pilots and passengers. It was one of the biggest technological successes ever. It never suffered a crash due to the aircraft itself.
Unfortunately, it was a financial nightmare. I just finished reading "End of an Era: My Story of the L-1011" by James West, former President and CEO of Lockheed. An excellent book on the 1011, which, due to attitudes within Lockheed's high-level administration, was likely doomed from the start.
Tom at MSY
"The criminal ineptitude makes you furious"-Bruce Springsteen, after seeing firsthand the damage from Hurricane Katrina
DIA From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3273 posts, RR: 30 Reply 17, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3483 times:
How about the A342, the 753 and the 736? The Dassault Mercure was a good example above too. I suggest these with only sheer order numbers compare to "successful" airliners. These three just haven't sold well.
Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
Boeing727 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 934 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3435 times:
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7694 posts, RR: 5 Reply 19, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3412 times:
I think the reason why JL never bought the 747SP was the fact the major sacrifice in pax/cargo capacity was something JL disliked. So when the 747-200B versions with more efficient engines and the ability to carry extra fuel capacity became available to JL, they bought this plane instead, which could fly from JFK to NRT with only a small sacrifice in pax/cargo capacity compared with the regular 747-200B. Indeed, one of these specially-made JL 742B's is credited with the fastest flight from JFK to NRT--an amazing time of just over 11 hours!
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12705 posts, RR: 80 Reply 21, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3232 times:
VC-10, 747SP, Vanguard, BAC 1-11 (did ok, but with development of airframe and engines it could have done a lot better), Mercure (odd that the planned CFM-56 powered version was not proceded with), Bristol Britannia, CV-990.
Concorde has not been flying for 40 years, though it may seem like that!
Prototype first flew in 1969, first pax services in 1976.
Without this version, it is hard to see how further sales could have happened, but then we are probably talking about twice or three times as many sales, which would have made life much easier; http://concordesst.com/concordeb.html
The HS-748 did OK sales wise, in production for over 20 years, though it helps to remember what 'good' sales are nowdays, you expect more sales as air travel has expanded into a bigger market.
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3184 times:
There is absolutely no reason the MD-11 should have been more popular.
It was easitly outshadowed technically and economically by the 340 and 777.
Also, the inherent design flaws making it unstable in some flight regimes (slow speed flight) are again a good example of MD rushing a product to the marketplace. Had it been available five years earlier.....this post would likely not include the MD-11
It's may be nice for enthusiasts (definetely one of the more interesting looking aircraft)..but it was easitly overshadowed by much more capable competition.
Na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9602 posts, RR: 10 Reply 23, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3163 times:
I would have wished more success for the 747SP. Hundreds of them instead of the comparatively boring 777 that is of similar size and range will remain a dream.
Tonyctnyc From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3159 times:
Hey DIJKKIJK:
Check again -- the BAe/HS 748 was very definitely popular - - though not as popular as its rival, The Fokker F27 (my favorite plane) , The 748 flew in large numbers all over the world !! In fact, small numbers, I'm sure, are still flying !
The 748 was the inspration for the bigger failure-- the ATP .. which was a newer model stretch of the 748 which sat approx 65. That bottomed out quickly, thank god. AN awful, ungainly, slow, bad plane.
To add to the list of failed planes, i wish the Fokker 50 was able to have had more of a chance !
26 Shankly: The King of them all is the beautiful VC-10. Loved by pilots, crew and pax alike it was slagged off by BOAC, in what turned out to be totally unjustif
27 Trintocan: The Mercure - THAT is the one. Now if only it had better range characteristics it would have sold more and thus given greater impetus for the later CF
28 Elwood64151: GoAround: I've never been one to choose the "better part of valor"! I would choose the MD-90. Only, what? 120 were built? Something like that. Anyway,
29 CV990: Hi! My creteria for this topic is actually the number of airframes produced. I can't put in that list the L1011 or the MD11 because actually they had
30 Jetdeltamsy: the 717 project. very nice equipment.
31 BR715-A1-30: As popular as the DC-9 was, the 717 should be making just as popular. ALL DC9 operators should be replacing their 9s with 712s. JMHO
32 Sayem55: Here is my list 1) DeHaviland Comet: - It was the first commercial jet. 2) Tu-144:- First supersonic commercial jet...rolled-out before Concorde. 3) D
33 MD-90: MD-90 and MD-11 (too bad a new wing wasn't possible for either of them) VC-10 Caravelle 717 still has hope I'd say the L-1011 was successful enough no
34 Marcopolo747: The VC-10 is top on the list for me ! I had the opportunity to fly VCP(S.Paulo - Viracopos) to LGW with British Caledonian in it and it has impressed
35 Skymileman: First thing that Popped into my mind was the Dassault Mercure. I don't know the details on why it was unpopular, but it is cool looking, and that is g
36 Skymileman: Oh, I forgot One Thing, It hurt when Fairchild-Dornier went down, I was looking forward to seeing the 728, 928, and 528 in commercial service.
37 USAir330: The Spruce Goose!!!! Nothing else to say...
38 IMissPiedmont: I see a lot of people think the VC-10, Caravelle, Comet, L-1011 and MD-11 as failures. That's quite intersting as all were quite successful in their o
40 Codeshare: MD-11 all the way. I think there were even plans of and MD-12X. I wonder if Boeing scrapped the 777 project, would it redesign the MD-11? Next up: 767
41 ERJ135: Not a failure as such but I would love to have seen the A340 with propfan engines as was originally planned, it's just a pity the engine manufacturers
42 GDB: The VC-10 was designed for routes to Africa and the far East for BOAC, allowing a jet to operate out of restricted airfields, hence it's superb perfor
43 Angelairways: the VC-10 yep agree with post 42... so then the russians at Ilyushin liked the idea, made the Il-62 et voila... they're still flying actively in servi
44 Airsicknessbag: I´m really surprised no one mentioned the VFW 614 so far (how unpatriotic of Paulianer and Na ) - the first airliner to be built in post war Germany.
45 BHXviscount: Reading through all the posts above it seems that a "failed " aircraft means different things to different people. Try applying the following to some
46 S.p.a.s.: The CBA-123 Vector...(http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.cgi?120480 and off course de MD11 could have been more successful.. Cheers RS
47 Srbmod: What's interesting is that Embraer looked at putting the engines on the ERJ in much the same manner as the VFW 614, but the idea died pretty quick. Th
48 AvObserver: NoelG, you're jumping the gun with the 717 which appears to have future prospects with existing operators and is being touted to the Star Alliance. AJ
49 Jrlander: I would have to say the 767-400. I wish Boeing had built it with more range from the start, and had built it a bit earlier. I think that many more wou
50 GDB: The problem with making Concorde any longer would have been that you'd need to have an area-ruled fuselage for aerodynamic reasons, meaning new produc
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2376 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 616 posts, 
I'll keep out of this one!
From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 203 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jul 2001, 3230 posts, 
From China, joined Sep 2000, 696 posts, 
, 3320 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From France, joined Jul 2003, 1670 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2002, 875 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
