IslandHopper
Topic Author
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 8:28 am

Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 3:40 am

The BAC 1-11 was one of the best selling British airliners at 233, but production was nothing compared with the similar sized DC-9 that was launched at almost the same time.

On the other hand, the 1-11 got a lot of foriegn orders unlike the Trident and VC10. American, Braniff and Mohawk operated them, as did many other major carriers around the world. The planes also had a long service life, unlike the Trident which were usually WFU within ten years.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Williams



The 1-11 also had an interesting afterlife, as production was moved to Romania in 1982. Production there must have been difficult, because they only built nine planes in seven years! After production ended, Romania tried to update the plane with RR Tay engines and call it the AirStar 2600, but no orders and thus no production. Here is one of the Romanian built ROMBAC 1-11s:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Fred Seggie



Considering its history, do you consider the 1-11 a success or a failure?
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 3:46 am

Big success. The British plane makers of the 50s and 60s were little companies, for example Boeing sent people over to de Havilland in the late 40s and early 50s on friendly visits to see how the Comet was coming along, and they consistently reported back to Seattle (ah, Seattle, those were the days) that there was nothing to worry about.

I grew up near where the VC10 was built, and I'm telling you, it wasn't the big production lines we see now in Toulouse etc., this was a different era. The VC10 made money for Vickers despite only selling 60 or so planes. They were all tiny companies, and there were dozens of them.

So yes, the BAC111 was a big success. Think of a little record company who usually sell a couple of thousand records worldwide, and they put something out that goes to number one everywhere and sells millions. That's the BAC111. Anyone name the company who started the BAC111 before they were consolidated into the British Aircraft Corp? It was someone tiny like supermarine or Airspeed. Let me put it this way, they weren't Boeing.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
astrojet
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2000 9:11 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:01 am

the initial project was made by Hunting Aircraft, as H.107, and after Hunting became a part of BAC in 1960 it was renamed BAC-107 and enlarged to the BAC-111.
 
MD80Nut
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 6:43 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:15 am

I agree with Cedarjet, it was a success. They had a good safety record, a long service life and were used widely around the world. I flew on one once, a -500 operated by LIAT. A nice flight.

Are they still being used commercially? I've seen a couple of short body variants used as private aircraft over the last few years.

cheers, Ralph
Fly Douglas Jets DC-8 / DC-9 / DC-10 / MD80 / MD11 / MD90 / 717
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:39 am

Approx 250 were sold in a much smaller av market than we have today. I agree.....it was a success.

Could it have been more successful? Of course.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:26 am

Cedarjet, I don't know how many times I have to tell you on this forum the VC10 did NOT make money for Vickers/BAC, it lost them £20 million at '70's values. To back this up Sir George Edwards, Chairman of BAC said at a presentation he gave on 29 Nov 1982 said "the VC10 also lost us money".


As to the 1-11, it was a comparative sucess but it did not meet its true potential. Essentially the 500 series was underpowered. Had the RR Medway engine been built, the 1-11 could have been stretched like the DC-9.

The Medway was the original engine for what was to become the Trident, but because BEA said the original Trident was too big DH cut down the Trident to a size where it didn't need such a powereful engine as the Medway, it could use the exisitng Spey. As soon as BEA got their Trident deliverys they said it was too small so DH set about stretching it and RR set about increasing the thrust of the Spey. The upshot was both the Trident & the 1-11 stretches were underpowered.

[Edited 2003-11-18 23:29:29]
 
RiverVisualNYC
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:33 am

That's a great pic from LGA, my local airport. Anyone know where AA flew the 1-11s to from LGA, and until when?
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6430
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:41 am

The world's worst disaster in airliner production was in the 60'es and early 70'es when Britain put all eggs in one basket, the Concorde.

If only they had moved forward with planes like the BAC 3-11, then they would have been producers of a whole family of modern airliners today.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
Cessna172RG
Posts: 642
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2000 8:31 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:43 am

One of the US Airline magazines had a great article on the 111 a few months back...lemme see if I can dig it up...

***checks stack of magazines***

It's the May/June 2003 issue of Airliners, No. 81.

Article is called "BAC in America," and it's a wonderful read. Talks all about all of the carriers that flew her, including American, Braniff, Mohawk, Allegheny, US Air, Aloha, Quebecair, Britt, Pacific Express, Air Wisconsin, Cascade Airways, Atlantic Gulf, Florida Express, Classic Air (charters), Jet Travel (dba Sahara Tahoe), and the Seattle Supersonics even had one!

The one thing that caught my eye was that in the article, it says that at the dawn of the jet age, it was this bird that introduced jet powered flight to many more people. Why? It was used on a comprehensive domestic structure. More often than not, your average "Joe" is going to be one one of those domestic flights, than on a Pan Am 707 to Barbados (for example, I'm not even sure if Pan Am had 707s to Barbados! Would make a good topic though...).

If you guys have the chance, stop by a library and look for that article. It's a very very good read overall.
Save the whales...for dinner!!!
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:56 am

Prebennorholm,

I disagree. The first big mistake was cancelling the V1000 in 1956. As for the BAC 2-11 & 3-11 projects plus the HS 134 (a 757 look alike, years before the 757) I am sure BEA & BOAC would have screwed them up just like they did to the Vanguard, VC10, Trident & 1-11.
 
RiverVisualNYC
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:58 am

The British aircraft industry of the '60s indicates what is going to happen to the industry in America. Britain in the end had to team up with France and Germany to form Airbus, because building globally competitive aircraft in the UK or any one of those other countries was too much of an expensive proposition. Today, we see Boeing buying more and more subassemblies from overseas partners, i.e. outsourcing systems and jobs that once belonged to Americans. The concept is they need to outsource these components to lower costs and be...globally competitive. So how long will it be before they move all the production offshore, probably to China? After all, they are no longer just competing with Airbus, they are competing with Embraer and its 3rd world cost structure. So someday we will be talking about American made aircraft in the past tense, the way we speak of the 1-11 today.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:59 am

The BAC 1-11 did sell, but it couldn't compete against the likes of Boeing's 737 and 737 and Douglas DC-9 series by the late 1960's.

Small wonder why after the Airbus consortium was formed their first significant project after the A300B derivatives was a single-aisle airliner, which resulted in the extremely successful A320 Family of airliners.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 8:01 am

I agree with vc-10, though the 1-11 was well regarded by those who operated it, and it was built like a brick!
However, the cancellation of the 3-11 was nothing to do with Concorde and everything to do with a change of government in 1970.
I until recently worked with some people who were at BAC in this period, they reckon that there was a noticeable change of attitude when the Heath government came to power, and soon enough 3-11 was dead.
And these people had no love for the outgoing Wilson government with all the cancellations in the 60's, some of them had started out on the TSR.2 military aircraft project.
Maybe it should never have been started, but having cancelled 3-11 the government failed to rejoin the fledgling Airbus project right away, Hawker stayed in with their own money until the UK re-joined in 1978 as part of BAe.
Maybe a loss of nerve following the lack of sales success of VC-10 and Trident, but the customer airlines for both behaved appallingly in this respect.
If the Medway engine had been on the 1-11 you would likely have seen a line of development right through to the 1980's when the CFM-56 was available, for a further stretch, BAe planned one and called it the 1-11/800.
But the 1-11 was a solid aircraft that served it's customers well.



 
Trident
Posts: 477
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2000 4:49 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 8:46 am

I don't think that the BAC 1-11 ever made much in the way of profits for BAC or British Aerospace. However, it was a well built and reliable machine. I well remember my uncle, who was a technical instructor with Aer Lingus, telling me in 1975 that the 1-11 208s in the fleet were in much better shape than their more recently acquired fleet of Boeing 737-248s.
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 10:33 am

I don't think that the BAC 1-11 ever made much in the way of profits for BAC or British Aerospace

The quote Sir George Edwards again from the Christopher Hinton lecture he gave in Nov '82, "The BAC 1-11....showed a respectable profit with 230 sold, two-thirds of them being for export".
 
IslandHopper
Topic Author
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 8:28 am

Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 10:34 am

So was the 1-11 the most-produced jet airliner in Britains history? Too bad the Romanian version didn't take off. I heard that Kiwi airlines was going to order it, but went belly up before placing an order.
 
IslandHopper
Topic Author
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 8:28 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 4:23 pm

>The quote Sir George Edwards again from the Christopher Hinton lecture he gave in Nov '82, "The BAC 1-11....showed a respectable profit with 230 sold, two-thirds of them being for export".

No surprise the VC-10 didn't make money...all that engineering and testing work for a production run of 60 some? Glad to hear that the 1-11 made money for the company.

But why no investment into improving a frame that is selling well and profitable? The design was basically the same in 1982 as it was in 65, Spey engines and all (gotta love the name of that engine!  Laugh out loud)
 
airxliban
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:14 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 4:29 pm

i used to ride Cyprus Airways BAC 1-11's between Beirut and Larnaca in the early 90's/late 80's.

all i remember is that they were smelly, filthy and quite noisy.

i remember being pleased when the route was given to the A320's around 1993 or 4 or so.
PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:10 pm

The 1-11 programme effectively ended in the late 1970's, when BA went for B737-200s rather than the offer of a 're-fanned' Spey powered 1-11 development.
Hence the deal with Romania, as well as a fear of competing with the newly relaunched 146, which went on to sell better than the 1-11.

The VC-10s entire production was ironically about the number the BOAC said they wanted originally, until they cancelled many of the orders, this was an aircraft designed for them in the first place.
It really needed improvements to the Conway engine, originally the Super VC-10 was to be longer than actually happened, putting it in the DC-8-60 series capacity, guess who wanted it shortened?
Worse, BOAC put it about that it was more expensive to operate than the 707, which was later found not to be the case, in fact the VC-10 had huge pax appeal that lasted well after widebodies came along.
 
ben
Posts: 1369
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 1999 9:27 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 7:31 pm

in fact the VC-10 had huge pax appeal that lasted well after widebodies came along.

...and crew appeal!!

My father flew on VC-10's for BOAC and you can still see the odd tear when he talks about them, even to this day.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 7077
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Wed Nov 19, 2003 9:01 pm

One of the better Airliners.net articles in a long time. As someone who grew up on the EI and BA 1-11's, and then the Ryanair Rombac's (complete with business class no less).

Its amazing how long these aircraft flew for... European Aviation's LTN - DUB service on behalf of Ryanair was going strong until recently - as were AB airlines 1-11's into Stansted - frequently subbing in for those terrible 146 replacements.
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
IslandHopper
Topic Author
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2003 8:28 am

Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Thu Nov 20, 2003 3:40 am

>One of the better Airliners.net articles in a long time.

Thanks! I searched through the archives and couldn't find a good discussion on the 1-11.

I thought only TAROM flew the ROMBAC 1-11, did Ryanair really fly them?
 
RiverVisualNYC
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Thu Nov 20, 2003 5:22 am

Someone sent me an email about this thread, and I accidentally deleted it before reading, stupid I know but I thought it was spam because I didn't recognize the sender...So as the pilots would put it, "Say again?"
 
BestWestern
Posts: 7077
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Thu Nov 20, 2003 7:49 pm

Ryanair operated the Rombacs for a good eight years, complete with Romanian Pilots!
You are 100 times more likely to catch a cold on a flight than an average person!
 
diesel1
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 9:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Thu Nov 20, 2003 9:36 pm

The Rombac 1-11's also flew for Dan Air & British Island Airways in the UK.

Haven't some also operated in Pakistan too?

Sure there are some other airlines as well.
I don't like signatures...
 
Ryanair737
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 5:14 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Thu Nov 20, 2003 9:58 pm

Nationwide Airlines of South Africa have one operational BAC 1-11 ZS-OAH. There is some flying in Nigeria as well.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sven De Bevere



Ryanair737
LAST FLIGHTS= Ryanair LPL-BGY-LPL - EI-DPS/DWV - MAY 08 // NEXT FLIGHTS= TBC
 
diesel1
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 9:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Thu Nov 20, 2003 10:04 pm

Ryanair737

I thought that the Nigerian 1-11's were all grounded by the aviation authorities there after the accident last year

Perhaps some are still operating disregarding the rule?
I don't like signatures...
 
Ryanair737
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 5:14 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Thu Nov 20, 2003 10:23 pm

I think there is one last example still flying as the private transport of an airline operator in Nigeria.

Ryanair737
LAST FLIGHTS= Ryanair LPL-BGY-LPL - EI-DPS/DWV - MAY 08 // NEXT FLIGHTS= TBC
 
diesel1
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 9:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Fri Nov 21, 2003 7:29 am

Thanks for the update fr737

I checked and found some details on Rombac 1-11 operators.
Tarom
BIA
Adria AW
Istanbul AW
JAT
Aero Asia
Dan Air
Ryanair
Aerolion International
Executive Airline Services
Albarka Air Services
LAR
Romavia
Romanian Government
London European Airways / Ryanair Europe
Loganair
Citylink Airways
Air Memphis

This is a lot more than I expected
I don't like signatures...
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Crew
Posts: 11182
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Fri Nov 21, 2003 7:35 am

The only (?) modern British manufactured plane flying today, would that be the BAe-146 (aka Avro RJ)?
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
RiverVisualNYC
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Fri Nov 21, 2003 7:54 am

Kai
Also still flying today in airline service are the British Aerospace ATP and the various Jetstream models, but these are turboprops. And the RAF is still flying Comet-based Nimrods and of course the VC-10 I believe....
 
FlagshipAZ
Posts: 3192
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 12:40 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Fri Nov 21, 2003 7:54 am

To answer RiverVisual's question, AA flew the 'pocket rocket' to all the eastern major cities in the late 60s & early 70s. I've seen them in BUF, DET, ORD & even in TUL! AA received the first 1-11 in late 1965 & retired the last one in early 1972. AA operated 30 -401/AK series. Personally I considered this aircraft a success, as it was a trailblazer next to the Caravelle in terms of a twin-engined t-tail. It flew before the DC-9, and probably was the genesis for the Douglas airplane. My two cents here. Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
 
RiverVisualNYC
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:00 am

Flagship - THANK YOU! Spending alot of time as a kid in the '70s in the LGA flightpath, I was always curious about that - and sorry I never got to ride the AA 1-11 or for that matter, the UA Caravelle! I think by mid-'70s LGA was dominated by the 727...
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:06 am

The 1-11 was the spur that Boeing & Douglas need to start the 737 & DC9 projects. As stated previously the Spey then limited its development.

BEA only ordered the 1-11 after the government didn't let them order the 727 & 737. The potential 727 order is ironic as the original DH121 (Trident) would have out performed the 727. Unfortunatly BEA said the 121 was too big so DeHavilland cut it down and in the process we lost a 727 competitor and the engine that that would have allowed the 1-11 stretch to the 700 and beyond.
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:39 am

I was thinking about this further today, and realised another ironic feature of this saga is that some 727's now have an updated version of the Spey fitted - the Tay
 
FlyGuyClt
Posts: 1579
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:23 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:31 am

I don't know if it was a success or failure. But as a flight attendant with Florida Express Airlines and then Braniff. I had a blast working the bugger. It was like the Sherman Tank. One of our ships, N1543 had it's own personality and she was known in house as "Christine." ( like the B movie ) Sure do miss those days. Fun and Flying.
Florida Express, Braniff II and ......
 
sprxflySWA
Posts: 587
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 3:37 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:34 am

I personally liked the BAC 1-11.Only flew it twice (BOI-PDX-BOI,July 1982 Pacific Express).Trip over was in full colors,but had seat cushion about 1" thick,very hard.On way back,all white w/ "Pacific Express" on sides.World of difference.They had put newer seat cushions.Thicker!
It was a good plane to fly in.
I used to live 5 miles from BOI rw 10,and would see their trail of smoke for quite awhile after they took off.Neat to see their flight path!
 
Olympus69
Posts: 1571
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 11:21 pm

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Sun Nov 23, 2003 12:01 pm

AA also flew the 1-11 to YYZ in the '60s - from LGA I presume.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Kelley


 
Guest

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Sun Nov 23, 2003 1:51 pm

Here are some pictures of Adria Airways' (Slovenia, then still part of Yugoslavia) leased (ROM)BAC 1-11s from 1987:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alastair T. Gardiner




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johan Ljungdahl



Note the interesting livery: The airline had dropped the name "Inex" and became simply "Adria Airways" by this time, but the old logo and the basic design were still in use. Only that in these cases, the aircraft kept their red Tarom cheatlines, resulting in a pretty unusual combination. I've also seen leased BAC 1-11s in the standard Adria colors of the day, but I can't find any of those on a.net.

Does anyone know if Adria leased both ROMBAC 1-11s and BAC 1-11s from Tarom? The captions indicate that the picture on the top is a ROMBAC and the one on the bottom a BAC, but I don't know how accurate that is. Unless I'm mistaken, Tarom used both BAC 1-11s (delivered before Romainian production began) and, of course, ROMBAC 1-11s, so it could be either type.

Any clarification is appreciated!
 
avt007
Posts: 1989
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2000 4:51 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:09 pm

Libyan Arab Airlines has just taken delivery of a 111, from overhaul at Malta, previously owned by a South African charter operator. This was reported in Flight International recently. Why they aquired the aircraft is a mystery to me.
 
aaway
Posts: 1239
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:07 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:53 pm

RiverVisualNYC,
Just to add to FLagshipAZ's comments...AA aacquired the 111's in response to the 111 purchase by Mohawk. MO deployed the 111s on N. Y. intrastate routes that AA dominated: LGA-BUF, LGA-SYR, LGA-ROC. MO became the 1st carrier providing jet service on these routes. AA, for the most part, was flying DC6s on these routes.
AA also flew LGA-YYZ, LGA-DTW, LGA-CLE. AA also scheduled 111s to MDW/ORD and STL.
"The greatest mistake you can make in life is to continually be afraid you will make one." - Elbert Hubbard
 
diesel1
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 9:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:21 am

FR737...
Apparantly Chrome Air of Nigeria kept a 1-11 flying as a freighter after the grounding of the pax 1-11s - it was seen in Romania recently - for maintenance?
I don't like signatures...
 
Ryanair737
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 5:14 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:40 am

Thanks Diesel1, do you know what series of 1-11 is it?

Ryanair737  Smile
LAST FLIGHTS= Ryanair LPL-BGY-LPL - EI-DPS/DWV - MAY 08 // NEXT FLIGHTS= TBC
 
diesel1
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2001 9:11 am

RE: Was The BAC 1-11 A Success Or Failure?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:53 am

I read it was 5N SEO which makes it 1-11-525FT (255)
I don't like signatures...