AFC_ajax00 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted
Sun Sep 29 2002 20:32:21 UTC (13 years 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2409 times:
I think the RR nacelles look better.
Once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward; for there you long to return
JFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted
Sun Sep 29 2002 20:41:17 UTC (13 years 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
The Pratts, I think they look and sound much better. IMO.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16473 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted
Sun Sep 29 2002 20:49:47 UTC (13 years 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2398 times:
I prefer the look of the PW's. It's just a personal aesthetic preference I guess!
Wonder whether AA will keep the 27 PW 752's? There's probably no market for 27 used PW 752's anyway.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
TWAMD-80 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 1006 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted
Sun Sep 29 2002 20:53:50 UTC (13 years 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2395 times:
I like the Pratt and Whitney's better. They look more fitting for the airplane. Don't get me wrong the RR's on AA's 757's look pretty cool but I like the engines on TWA's a little better.
Two A-4's, left ten o'clock level continue left turn!
Aamd11 From UK - Wales, joined Nov 2001, 1066 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted
Sun Sep 29 2002 22:43:44 UTC (13 years 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2364 times:
I prefer the RRs, i love all RR engines,
but i would say that wouldnt i