>"7E7 front's design has the Caravelle style.">>I thought the Caravelle was one beautiful aircraft, although>now I consider the EMB-170 in that category--I find it among>the most beautiful commercial aircraft out there--something>about the sleekness of the nose combined with those winglets.>>-John>> My declaration is without nationalistic concept ok :?)The Embraer 170 family concept it's very different, modern and "Embraer's Nose Style" combined with winglets, are a happy combination in design conception.

>>Fred, the Caravelle was a British aircraft - in fact the>>first commercial passenger carrying jet.>ermm that would be the Comet, The Caravelle came 6 years later and >was very much French In 1970 I returned from Singapore to the UK for school at the end of the summer holidays on a "Crab Air" (RAF Transport Command) schoolkid special that I later found was the last ever long-haul passenger flight of a Comet. Dan-Air continued to fly them on charters between the UK and the Med for a few more years, and the militarized "Nimrod" versions are still flying today.Richard

>"7E7 front's design has the Caravelle style.">>I thought the Caravelle was one beautiful aircraft, although>now I consider the EMB-170 in that category--I find it among>the most beautiful commercial aircraft out there--something>about the sleekness of the nose combined with those winglets.>>-John>> .I don't wanna to start a war between Bombardier x Embraer but, telling about design it's very interesting thing. What do you think about the CSERIES new Bombardier aircrat regional family ? This style rembember what aircraft series ?http://www.bombardier.com/en/3_0/ml/4180/2...s_plane_low.jpgFrom Bombardier.comBombardier announces new commercial aircraft family name at Farnborough Airshow 2004Montr

No discussing taste but some people obviously has none.IMO the 7E7 looks extremely graceful, far more than that fat lump of plastic Airbus calls an A380.

I can't see why people keep comparing these two aircraft. They are totally different beasts. The A380 is hardly beautiful, but that was never the intention anyway. A 747 with a full upper deck would be ugly too. I am not too fond of the 7E7's looks either, but a lot will probably change before it goes into production. For now I can say that Boeing's vision reminds me of the way modern car design have turned cars into shapeless blobs. Wish they would have stuck with the Stratocruiser design, that would really be something.- Oyvind

G'day Tom,>Fred, the Caravelle was a British aircraft - in fact the>first commercial passenger carrying jet. :-eek :-eekReally!! - on both countsJust what have the French done to upset you Tom. Have a bad bottle of Champagne last night did we. :-lolAny limited licensing aside I'm sure Sud Aviation must be given full credit for a very original and unique (at that time) aircraft. You are of course confusing it with the DeHavilland Comet.I guess I'm just showing my age :-)Cheers,Roger @YSSYEDIT: Appologies Tom. I didn't realise the correction had already been made in another post. I'll have to check next time before jumping in on a thread.

The vertical stabilizer/rudder looks far to small for single engine control authority. I also dont like the cockpit window design. They should stay with the proven 757/67 window structure,for better visibility.

Well, the Caravelle DID have a Comet nose/cockpit section, you know... :)

>IMO the 7E7 looks extremely gracefulIt does. And since it is recognizably different than other "typical" aircraft some call it "ugly". Some people just hate anything slightly different if it challenges the status quo. Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

How about the Boeing Blending Wing Body design? Do you guys think it's ugly?http://www.aerosite.net/bwb.htmI wonder if they are still developing it.

I'm sure they are still developing the concept - as are BAe, Airbus, and probably several others. Lifting bodies have advantages over traditional wing/fuselage aircraft that will probably see them coming more and more into use in the next few decades.... But yes, oh man are they ugly :-(Richard

>How about the Boeing Blending Wing Body design? Do you guys>think it's ugly?It would probably be ugly in the eyes of many people. However there is another way to look at it - nothing that was designed using advanced math/physics is ugly.However I don't think you will see this flying object at any airport soon. Based on what I read in aviation magazines it is not the "ugliness" that designers worry about - it is rather things like compatibility with existing airports and potential non-acceptance by flying public based on rather wierd interior with few windows.Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

The Blending Wing Body design is way cooler than the 7E7. My problem with the 7E7 isn't that it is different, but that it is too conservative. Boeing should be more daring. The 7E7 looks like any airliner with a cheap styling kit added. There is even something retro about it, with its Comet style front windows.- Oyvind

>Boeing should be more daring. As 'daring' as Airbus ? :-lol Too bad customers are not so daring. ;-)Michael J.

Airbus are daring in another way by exploring a new market segment. The A380 looks somewhat dull, but then it is not marketed as a Dreamliner. One would have to be an extremely dull person to only come up with the 7E7 in a dream. Perhaps the dream belongs to an accountant.- Oyvind