22 ms·
From the video: 1. Over engineered 2. More generic design choices (easy to upgrade) 3. Continued support to upgrade it and keep it relevant 4. "the crew con
by class3shock 2y ago
From the video:
1. Over engineered
2. More generic design choices (easy to upgrade)
3. Continued support to upgrade it and keep it relevant
4. "the crew concept" (not really sure how this supports the title claim)
In general it's almost always cheaper and less risky to reuse something than to start from scratch and design/build something new. The downside is the longer between clean sheet designs, the more knowledge is lost on how to design something from scratch.
- fuzzfactor 2y agoFrom the comments: >These aircraft were designed with slide rules plus 20 percent for structure components.
- class3shock 2y agoYeah, I will add that things weren't overbuilt back in the day just because they "built things better" (although sometimes they did) but because the engineering wasn't advanced enough to build them with lower safety margins (this is a simplification). There's a saying in civil engineering that it's not hard to build a bridge that will stand but it is hard to build a bridge that will barely stand. We could still build things that way we just choose not to as it generally means things cost more, or have worse performance (more conservative limits), or both.