Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
cpd
Posts: 6559
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:22 am

Probably the 747-300 Tri-jet, the 777 tri-jet and the 757 tri-jet all never had a chance. Never made production or went further than designs and models.

The T-tail 757 also falls into that category. There are plenty of others.
 
User avatar
Adipasquale
Posts: 831
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:39 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:25 pm

Quoting lat41 (Reply 97):
I do not see mention of the Bristol Brittania, a fabulous long range four engine turboprop that had it all together. Sadly it's introduction came too late and too close to the introduction of pure jets. Among those sold, many went on to be successful freighters. the "Whispering Giant" missed the boat by a few years.

There were still 85 of them produced, according to wiki.
I don't think it has been mentioned, but the Saunders-Roe Princess flying boat might fit the criteria laid out by op. A flying boat in the era of jets...not a chance of success.
DH8A DH8B CR1 CR2 CR7 CR9 E45 E70 E75 E90 D93 M88 318 319 320 321 333 343 712 732 733 734 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77L 77W
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27316
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Fri Feb 12, 2016 3:45 pm

Quoting WIederling (Reply 99):
(The A340-8000) was a bespoke effort. Probably never destined to be offered as a subtype.


Originally known as the A340-213X, Airbus renamed it the A340-8000 for marketing purposes (due to it's 8000nm design range). Airbus aimed it at customers like Singapore, American and EVA Air, all of whom were looking at the 777-100X to open new ULH markets., and whom Airbus could get them the A340-8000 much earlier (as the baseline A340-200 already existed).

So Airbus did actively shop it to airlines with the intent to put it into serial production if the orders had materialized. It ended up as a one-off VIP airframe when said orders didn't.
 
Rafabozzolla
Posts: 988
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 1:27 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Fri Feb 12, 2016 6:44 pm

Quoting bohica (Reply 53):
Embraer CBA-123

It was a 19 seat regional turboprop with a shortened EMB-120 Brasilia fuselage. It was designed to replace the EMB-110 Bandierante and other 19 seaters in its class. The most unique feature was the pusher props mounted on the rear fuselage. Only two prototypes were built.

Wonder it took so long to be mentioned. Perfect example.
 
Grummancat
Posts: 133
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 4:49 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Fri Feb 12, 2016 7:14 pm

Quoting Adipasquale (Reply 101):
Saunders-Roe Princess flying boat might fit the criteria laid out by op

+1 on the Princess! Good example!

If the plane in question doesn't have to be actually built yet, may I suggest the Boeing "Hunchback of Mukilteo"? 
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2368
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Fri Feb 12, 2016 7:54 pm

Quoting WIederling (Reply 99):
and later sold to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, then-President of Libya; the aircraft was operated by Afriqiyah Airways and was often referred to as Afriqiyah One.[78]

What happened to this aircraft? Was it still in Libya during all the fighting, and if so, did it survive?
 
User avatar
UltimateDelta
Posts: 2233
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 7:56 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Fri Feb 12, 2016 8:15 pm

I realize they may have been overlooked in my earlier post due to formatting, but I found a few more Lockheed examples:

Model 75 Saturn- intended as a DC-3 replacement (like so many small postwar transports!), but ended up costing more than planned and wasn't sufficiently more capable than the DC-3 to earn much interest.
http://f-86.tripod.com/saturn3.jpg

Constitution- jointly developed as an airliner and a Navy cargo aircraft, but didn't work out too well in either role.
http://www.air-and-space.com/Lockheed%20R6V%20Constitution/Ground%20level%20m.jpg
Midwest Airlines- 1984-2010
 
Wingtips56
Posts: 1295
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:26 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:44 am

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 20):
The Fairey Rotodyne
One built and flown.

And just now, I found an article in BBC News on the Rotodyne. Interesting reading.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35521040
Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines (Retired). Flight Memory: 181 airports, 92 airlines, 78 a/c types, 403 routes, 58 countries (by air), 6 continents. 1,119,414 passenger miles.

Home airport : CEC
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8138
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sat Feb 13, 2016 2:32 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 37):
I don't mean A300B or A300-600, I mean the Airbus 300 which the French, British and West German governments agreed to make in 1967. An "air bus" for 300 passengers. A high capacity, short range, subsonic airliner to supplement the intercontinental range Concorde.

People forget the original Airbus A300 proposal was a 300-passenger airliner with (I think) a range of around 2,500 nautical miles, powered by the proposed Rolls-Royce RB.207 turbofan rated at around 51,000 lb. thrust. But when Rolls-Royce ran into development issues with the RB.211-22B and couldn't devote time to develop the RB.207, that's when Airbus was forced to scale down the design with a shorter fuselage and General Electric CF6-50 engines.

But you are right, by the middle 1980's, engine technology had advanced far enough that Airbus proposed a final "stretch" of the original A300B design (TA9) that became the A330--a stretch that finally made it the equivalent of original A300 proposal from 1967, but with 5,600 nautical range--enough for transatlantic flying.
 
superjeff
Posts: 1377
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:14 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sat Feb 13, 2016 3:09 am

Quoting UltimateDelta (Reply 106):


Model 75 Saturn- intended as a DC-3 replacement (like so many small postwar transports!), but ended up costing more than planned and wasn't sufficiently more capable than the DC-3 to earn much interest.

Constitution- jointly developed as an airliner and a Navy cargo aircraft, but didn't work out too well in either role

Agreed. The Lockheed Constitution came close though. it was a double decker designed to carry about twice the payload of a L-749 Constellation or a DC6, and the prototype was able to fly coast-to-coast nonstop with a full load of military troops. Probably too big for the early 1950's though.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:20 pm

Quoting g500 (Reply 1):
back in the 90s, Comair went to Embraer and said "if you could build a regional jet, what would it look like" Embraer's offering was not very good. It look like a Brasilia with jet-engines.... eventually Comair went to Bombardier and the CRJ was born

Comair was not the reason for the CRJ. The original CRJ concept (based on the CL600 Challenger business jet) was shelved over a decade before the final design was finally produced. The first CRJ customer was LH with delivery October 29, 1992 (though the 2nd prototype did earlier route proving for LH). Comair was the first North American customer with EIS April 28th, 1993.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
Bingo1
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:12 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sun Feb 14, 2016 2:48 am

Quoting czbbflier (Reply 49):
The Avro Jetliner.

1st Flight- Aug 10, 1949.
The Comet beat it by only 13 days.
Designed to Trans Canada specs.
Howard Hughes "borrowed" it.

Many American airports were concerned that the jets would melt the asphalt runways.
Many airlines had just made major purchases of turboprop airliners so there was no demand.

It was put on the back burner to allow for the design and production of the CF-100

Sadly, it was ahead of its time.

This one makes me the sickest. It's a classic story of "what could have been". There was demand in the form of Howard Hughes who was ready to sign an order for a minimum of fifty planes for his National Airlines and TWA. He not only borrowed it he was so desperate for them he was offering to produce them under licence if only he could have them. Convair was intrigued enough they were ready to produce them for Hughes and Avro. Unfortunately the government cancelled it and thus only the one prototype ever flew. If Convair and Avro had collaborated, would Convair currently be the big name in American aviation instead of Boeing?
Planecrzy
 
maxpower1954
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 1:14 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:16 am

Quoting bingo1 (Reply 111):
This one makes me the sickest. It's a classic story of "what could have been". There was demand in the form of Howard Hughes who was ready to sign an order for a minimum of fifty planes for his National Airlines and TWA. He not only borrowed it he was so desperate for them he was offering to produce them under licence if only he could have them. Convair was intrigued enough they were ready to produce them for Hughes and Avro. Unfortunately the government cancelled it and thus only the one prototype ever flew. If Convair and Avro had collaborated, would Convair currently be the big name in American aviation instead of Boeing?

The Avro Jetliner did not employ fail-safe construction techniques in the airframe and neither did the doomed Comet 1. If the C-102 had gone into service it's a very real possibility it would have experienced the same fuselage failures as the Comet.

I've owned a beautiful hard-bound book about the C-102 for over twenty years. I've always been fascinated by this promising design and what could have been. I've seen the cockpit section on display in the National Aviation Museum in Ottawa, the only physical remains left of the program.
 
eielef
Posts: 724
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:07 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:34 am

What about the Tu144 Supersonic? about 14 were built, but only 55 flights were ever performed. The program was abandoned because of lack of founding, lack of safety, and lack of interest.
Also, the Douglas DC1 and DC5 weren't really successful.
I also though of the ROMBAC 1-11, the Romanian version of the BAC 1-11....
 
WIederling
Posts: 9462
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sun Feb 14, 2016 1:42 pm

Quoting eielef (Reply 113):

The SU never had the type of "eilig,eilig,eilig" passengers to even make up a use case for supersonic transport.
it was a time of "technological racing" and that had been done.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20610
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:31 pm

Quoting Prost (Reply 14):
Okay, I need to ask: What was the problem with the Fairchild 728? It looks E175 everyone is clamoring for now.

[ Edit Post ]

The 728 required quite a bit more development including creating a manufacturing plan. While Fairchild could have done so, the program wasn't at a point it could be handed over to another company and thus it was done. The program had all the potential of the E-jets, but due to bankruptcy court delays, by the time the plans could be sold off, the E-jets were established and that was that.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 110):
The first CRJ customer was LH with delivery October 29, 1992 (though the 2nd prototype did earlier route proving for LH). Comair was the first North American customer with EIS April 28th, 1993.

IMHO the CRJ only happened as it could be designed as a business jet and a regional jet sharing the same basic packaging and thus reducing the risk.

Quoting Adipasquale (Reply 101):
but the Saunders-Roe Princess flying boat might fit the criteria laid out by op. A flying boat in the era of jets...not a chance of success.

Agreed. There was no need. Places that were to be flown to had nearby airports where a small seaplane could carry the few passengers that were non-direct.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sun Feb 14, 2016 7:39 pm

Quoting Adipasquale (Reply 101):
I don't think it has been mentioned, but the Saunders-Roe Princess flying boat might fit the criteria laid out by op. A flying boat in the era of jets...not a chance of success.

Not a chance of success, but it was magnificent to see. When I was a boy I used to watch it doing trials on Solent Water, and it was the most graceful thing.  

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Sun Feb 14, 2016 8:05 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 115):
IMHO the CRJ only happened as it could be designed as a business jet and a regional jet sharing the same basic packaging and thus reducing the risk.

The use of the Challenger business jet platform as a cargo/regional jet came over a decade after the biz jet launch. It was the "brainchild" of an ex-Canadair employee, Eric McConachie (often referred to as the father of the RJ). As an aviation consultant, he literally had to personally sell BBD on the viability of the CRJ project.  
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
airways1
Posts: 540
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 1999 3:05 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:58 pm

ARJ21. OK, so one has been delivered so far, but it has still to enter commercial service, and I can't see it lasting for very long. I doubt many will be built.
 
GrahamR
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 4:13 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Mon Feb 15, 2016 9:56 pm

Quoting airboeingbus (Reply 26):

Not concepts, ones that where actually built

Slightly off topic then, but only slightly... there's a book by a certain Richard Payne entitled "Stuck on the Drawing Board - Unbuilt British Commercial Aircraft Since 1945". Dozens and dozens of examples.

The publisher proudly proclaims "... this illustrated history tells the tragic tale of Britain's failed aircraft designs and industrial decline". Really cheery, uplifting stuff

-- sigh --
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:03 pm

Quoting eielef (Reply 113):
Also, the Douglas DC1 and DC5 weren't really successful.

As mentioned earlier, the DC-1 was only a one-off prototype. The production aircraft became the DC-2.
 
EMB170
Posts: 375
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:16 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:15 pm

Quoting HomSAR (Reply 15):

Didn't they also have plans for a 428 Jet, basically a stretched 328?

Yes, as Devilfish said, they were going to start by stretching the 328Jet to make a 42-/44- seat 428JET. The 728Jet, however, was to be a separate design anchoring the 50-70-90 seat market, with the 728 seating 70, the 528 as you saw seating 50, and the 928 seating 90.

IIRC At one point, ATR (Aerospatiale) was thinking about entering the RJ market as well. The ATR42 would have been replaced by a t-tailed jet (that looks not unlike the modern CRJ700/900) called the AI(R)58 while the ATR72 would have been replaced by either AI(R)70 or AI(R)90 (forget which).

Quoting American 767 (Reply 19):

-The Boeing 727-300. Even though United and Braniff showed an interest. The reason for this must be Boeing's decision to go with an all new model (a then new airplane), the 757.

Was the 723 basically a stretched 727-200? How many would it have seated? ~180?
IND ORD ATL MCO PIT EWR BUF CVG DEN RNO JFK DTW BOS BDL BWI IAD RDU CLT MYR CHS TPA CID MSP STL MSY DFW IAH AUS SLC LAS
 
Bingo1
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:12 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:39 pm

Quoting maxpower1954 (Reply 112):
The Avro Jetliner did not employ fail-safe construction techniques in the airframe and neither did the doomed Comet 1. If the C-102 had gone into service it's a very real possibility it would have experienced the same fuselage failures as the Comet.

Whether by accident or design Avro built the windows to be round and that alone would have helped to delay or even avoid the catastrophic fuselage failures that the Comet experienced. Due to the then current lack of understanding surrounding pressurized cabin design the C102 may have experienced the same thing but later on as the cycles started climbing. By this time the Comet would have given everyone a good lesson on fuselage design and it may have been that Avro would have retrofitted their planes before the cycles caused their design to reach failure stage. I realize this is a big "what if" discussion.
Planecrzy
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Mon Feb 15, 2016 11:01 pm

Quoting EMB170 (Reply 121):
IIRC At one point, ATR (Aerospatiale) was thinking about entering the RJ market as well. The ATR42 would have been replaced by a t-tailed jet (that looks not unlike the modern CRJ700/900) called the AI(R)58 while the ATR72 would have been replaced by either AI(R)70 or AI(R)90 (forget which).

You are correct. Every man and his dog was thinking about entering the RJ market. Few people will recall the IPTN turboprop prototype that actually flew and the designs for an RJ. Anyhow, there was a flurry of activity that ended up with ATR and BAe momentarily joining forces in the regional transport world as AI(R). The BAe ATP was going to be the turboprop flag-bearer alongside the AI(R) RJs.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
User avatar
OzarkD9S
Posts: 5734
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 2:31 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:15 am

Quoting bingo1 (Reply 111):


Howard Hughes who was ready to sign an order for a minimum of fifty planes for his National Airlines and TWA.

National Airlines was never his. TWA and Northeast flirted with a merger in the 60's I believe. But Northeast flirted with everyone.
Next up: STL DEN PSP DEN STL
 
cpd
Posts: 6559
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

RE: Planes That Never Had A Chance.

Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:02 am

Quoting eielef (Reply 113):
What about the Tu144 Supersonic? a

I believe it was built and entered service, so it doesn't count.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 738Pilot, Baidu [Spider], BDKLEZ, Bing [Bot], ConorB, Francoflier, frigatebird, gonkster, JFKalumni, jrfspa320, lammified, Okcflyer, PERA346, Rudenko, SirMS, Spacepope, strfyr51, Toinou, usflyer msp, Utah744, wjcandee, Zidane and 261 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos