annual (or not) maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(06 Jan 2021 20:20 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Ethan McKinney
(06 Jan 2021 20:33 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(06 Jan 2021 20:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Thomas RUX
(06 Jan 2021 20:39 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(06 Jan 2021 20:54 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Peter Vernon
(06 Jan 2021 21:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(07 Jan 2021 02:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Rupert Boleyn
(07 Jan 2021 06:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(07 Jan 2021 16:43 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Thomas RUX
(07 Jan 2021 00:12 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Jeff Zeitlin
(07 Jan 2021 11:14 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(07 Jan 2021 16:53 UTC)
|
Re: annual (or not)maintenance
Charles Hensley
(08 Jan 2021 05:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: annual (or not)maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(08 Jan 2021 08:06 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: annual (or not)maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(08 Jan 2021 11:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Re: annual (ornot)maintenance
Charles Hensley
(09 Jan 2021 17:33 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
ewan@xxxxxx
(10 Jan 2021 01:49 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(10 Jan 2021 17:01 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Kurt Feltenberger
(11 Jan 2021 00:08 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(11 Jan 2021 00:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(11 Jan 2021 12:21 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not) maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(11 Jan 2021 12:35 UTC)
|
Cutting Edge = 'Bleeding Edge"?
Phil Pugliese
(11 Jan 2021 12:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Cutting Edge = 'Bleeding Edge"?
Cian Witherspoon
(11 Jan 2021 16:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Cutting Edge = 'Bleeding Edge"?
Phil Pugliese
(11 Jan 2021 20:11 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
Charles Hensley
(15 Jan 2021 00:09 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
Kurt Feltenberger
(15 Jan 2021 00:43 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
Ethan McKinney
(15 Jan 2021 04:30 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
ewan@xxxxxx
(16 Jan 2021 16:57 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(16 Jan 2021 17:11 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance Rupert Boleyn (16 Jan 2021 22:48 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
kaladorn@xxxxxx
(31 Jan 2021 18:41 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(02 Feb 2021 09:36 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
kaladorn@xxxxxx
(02 Feb 2021 14:31 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
Timothy Collinson
(02 Feb 2021 17:26 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
Phil Pugliese
(16 Jan 2021 19:19 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] annual (or not)maintenance
ewan@xxxxxx
(16 Jan 2021 22:30 UTC)
|
On 17Jan2021 0611, Timothy Collinson - timothy.collinson at port.ac.uk (via tml list) wrote: >> And showing that good design against required specification really >> is the thing with the 2^nd longest production run of >>any military >> aircraft (the C130 above being the longest) I give you the: >> * Antonov AN-2 >> Entering service in ’40s and still in active military service >> today > Wow! The old An-2 is an amazing design. A biplane, well after eveyone else had decided that biplanes were a thing of the past, it's simple, robust, easy to fly, carries a decent payload a reasonable range, and has an exceptionally low stall speed (so low that in strong headwinds landing it can be tricky, in fact). Some things they are not: comfortable, quiet, economical. They're a really good example of the practical sort of designs the Soviets came up with in the 40s-60s, before the stagnation set in. -- Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>