7 ms·
The de Havilland Comet
- ozmaverick72 8y agoOne story I heard was that one of the production engineers added a rivet in the skin near the corners of the window. This was added because he thought it would strengthen the structure. Unfortunately it actually acted as an additional stress concentrator. I'm not entirely sure there wouldn't have been an issue without that extra rivet. The guy that made that change thought he was doing the right things but in fact made things much worse.
- lqet 8y agoAccording to Wikipedia: > The accident report's use of the word "window" when referring to the Automatic Direction Finding (ADF) aerial cutout panel[121] has led to a common belief that the Comet 1's accidents were the result of its having square passenger windows. In fact, Comet 1's cabin windows were very similar in shape, with similar corner radii, to those of the Boeing 377 and Douglas DC-7[122], both of which were pressurised aircraft. The windows in Northwest Airlines' B-377 were in fact larger and notably more rectangular[123] than those of the Comet 1. While stresses in the area of the passenger windows were significantly higher than de Havilland had calculated, nowhere in the accident report is it claimed that the fatigue failure of the Comet fuselage occurred was a result of the shape of the passenger windows, but instead from excessively high localised stress at bolt and rivet holes, for which insufficient reinforcing (and therefore structural load distribution) existed.
- kitd 8y agoOne amazing story about this is that the film 'No Highway in the Sky' [1], which (almost) predicts this exact problem, was made a couple of years before these actual events took place. [1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043859/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043859/
- garethrees 8y agoThe film was based on the novel "No Highway" (1948) by Nevil Shute, who had worked as an aeronautical engineer at De Havilland.
- arethuza 8y agoIt's good that not all of Nevil Shute's predictions were so accurate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beach_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beach_(novel)
- enriquto 8y agoHow do you know? As far as it goes, this novel might be actually an accurate prediction (except for the year).
- NeedMoreTea 8y agoI still think the Comet manages to look more futuristic than other civil planes. Something about the look of those engines in the wing roots with not a nacelle in sight. Such a shame it turned out to be doomed due to being first and the now well known metal fatigue story. The article, as with everything Comet related, ends with noting that lesson is why airliners now have very rounded windows. Yet none ever wonder or look at why cockpit windows remain decidedly rectangular. :)
- rsynnott 8y ago> Something about the look of those engines in the wing roots with not a nacelle in sight. Quite a few early jetliners lacked normal nacelles.
- andrewla 8y agoCan you give some examples? I'm curious as I also find the de Havilland Comet design to be quite remarkable for this compared to modern jetliners, and this is the first time I'm encountering the design. EDIT: I found this wikipedia page [1] and clicked around, and the only jetliners I found without nacelles are the Tupolev ones -- the Tu-334, Tu-104, Tu-110, Tu-124 -- and the Tuplev supersonic Tu-144. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jet_airliners https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jet_airliners
- mannykannot 8y agoThe Avro Canada Jetliner is another example, though it never went into production, and if you are including the Tu-144 then the Concorde belongs as well, and the original 737 also had its engines mounted directly under the wing, without pylons. While it is not quite the same, I think all trijets except the DC10/MD80 had the third engine buried in the tail. There were many military designs, such as the British V-bombers, with engines mounted in or directly on the wing, without pylons.
- mcguire 8y ago
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoThe foreshadowing was obvious when they called out the square windows in the first few paragraphs. Everyone who's ever slept through an engineering class knows corners cause stress risers.
- Graham24 8y agoMy Dad was a riveter in the Vickers Viscount factory in the 50s/60s. Ok, not Comets, but close.
- Wildgoose 8y agoChester Wilmot, author of "The Struggle for Europe" who was an Australian War Correspondent during the Second World War was one of the passengers who sadly lost their lives in the crash of the Comet over the Mediterranean Sea. I can recommend "The Struggle for Europe" - he wasn't just writing about the history, he was actively taking part. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chester_Wilmot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chester_Wilmot
- niffy 8y agoSuch a shame Nimrod is no longer flying. But it replacement(Rivet Joint) makes a mockery of regulations introduced because of Nimrod. Basically the MAA would like more information on adhering to regulations at time of production, they'd like an idea of when things start to fail. The RAF may not have even fully qualified for to fly because they were built in the 60s! They don't want the same mistakes like Nimrod because of fatigue
- aquamo 8y agoWhen I first saw the headline I was thinking it was this Komet :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet Also an interesting aircraft.
- adolph 8y agoI wonder why all the planes were names in some variation of Yoke [name, including Yoke]? Maybe: yoke: NOUN; Irish informal; A thing whose name one cannot recall, does not know, or does not wish to specify. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/yoke https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/yoke
- scolby33 8y agoIt looks like it's based on their registration "numbers" written out in the phonetic alphabet in use at the time: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/comets-tale-63573615/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/comets-tale-63573615/
- adolph 8y agoThanks! Comet 1—registration G-ALYP, dubbed “Yoke Peter,” from the phonetic alphabet then in use in Britain (George-Able- Love-Yoke-Peter)