Discussion
Glosphil said:
Apache said:
of all the airliners I've flown in, the VC10 was my fave.....even if you did sit back to front
Wasn't rearward facing seating only in RAF versions? Same as all RAF passenger planes? Certainly the RAF VC10, Hasting and Yorks in which I flew.el stovey said:
Glosphil said:
Apache said:
of all the airliners I've flown in, the VC10 was my fave.....even if you did sit back to front
Wasn't rearward facing seating only in RAF versions? Same as all RAF passenger planes? Certainly the RAF VC10, Hasting and Yorks in which I flew.Nuclearsquash said:
Aren't rear facing seats supposed to be more survivable in the event of a crash? I could well be mis-remembering something, but it does kind of make sense.
Yes, they are safer. However, rear facing seats are more likely to break away from the floor in the event of a crash due to weight distribution, and so would need to be much stronger (and heavier) to meet todays stringent safety regulations. Extra weight, bulk and expense is exactly what airlines don't want. Plus, most passengers are happier looking at where they are going as apposed to where they have been!There are a few exceptions, the Dash 8-300 has a rear facing passenger seat against the front bulkhead to allow for a forward right emergency escape door.
Edited by Sifly on Thursday 8th November 12:07
Scotty2 said:
At Duxford, I was told by the guide that their VC-10 was the actual record holding plane.
Is this record actually a fact? You think it would be well published but what was the record and when did it happen? Where was the flight from and to and was it a flight time (T/O to Landing) or block time (chocks to chocks) ? I can't find any reference to these details anywhere. The VC 10 was fast but I'm surprised a crossing with huge tailwinds in an other type on a day with minimal delays, since back then hasn't been faster.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff