Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Miloch <Miloch_member@newsguy.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: Re: Blackburn Beverley
Date: 15 Jan 2017 13:08:54 -0800
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <o5god601p98@drn.newsguy.com>
References: <o5eaqj02od@drn.newsguy.com> <ebmm7c5s0c5sqqcoqm39cmdabc9g5o87gn@4ax.com> <o5g8eg0rmu@drn.newsguy.com> <t6kn7cheromu36jfhp0bvlf7f1vbmeeun5@astraweb>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p98dc7daa8cc37b93ff6f881b41115a9c5d81f625b81fa9ed.newsdawg.com
User-Agent: Direct Read News 5.60
X-Received-Bytes: 1306
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1065051956
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:5327
In article <t6kn7cheromu36jfhp0bvlf7f1vbmeeun5@astraweb>, Henry says...
>
>Miloch maundered:
>
>> With the exception of the Spitfire, lack of aesthetics seems
>> to be ingrained in British aircraft design.
>
>Pup
>Hart
>S.6
>Mosquito
>Hornet
>Dove
>Hunter
>Canberra
>Comet
>VC10 (the "Beverley-cockpit" you just posted, BTW)
>TSR 2
>Concorde
>
>Aircraft are designed not to please the eye but to do a job;
>if they do it's happenchance. You seem to have a bee in
>your bonnet about this.
Mmmmmmm...nope! "to please the eye" is definitely not happenchance.
Aesthetics is a major part of good design.
*
|
|