"Bertie the Bunyip" <T@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:Xns9A55D872C622Bpissupropeeh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Phil B" <phil.remove.brady@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> news:1KOdna3Bg4GWylnaRVnytAA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>
>> "Brian Gaff" <briang1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:k6Yvj.12029$XI.9020@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>A bit odd that. Of course I'm talking about the Heathrow 777 crash
>>>landing.
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>> --
>>> Brian Gaff - briang1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
>>> in the display name may be lost.
>>> Blind user, so no pictures please!
>>>
>>
>> The Paris Concorde crashed after it hit debris on the runway. They
>> were all grounded, even though the cause was external (bits fell off a
>> previous flight).
>> Forgive my ignorance, but why hasn't that been mentioned for the 777
>> fleets, or has it? What is the difference?
>
>
> Well, one is a big fat transonic airliner in the traitional mold, and
the
> other was a skinny little paper dart model that went real fast.
>
> Bertie
yep, real fast, but with a good 25 year record up to that point. Still
puzzled.
Phil
|
