Re: non man rated booster compared to shuttle?

From: Herb Schaltegger (herb.schaltegger_at_gmail.com.invalid)
Date: 08/19/04 

Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 06:47:09 -0500

In article <vc31gc-b2g.ln@Mineshaft.local>,
 peter@adelphia.net (Peter Stickney) wrote:

(Snipped lots of good stuff)

> I will grant that an Airbus is a more comforatable airplane. Boeing
> hasn't made a big cockpit since the B.377 Stratocruiser just after WW
> 2, and if you're in one of the sidestick Airbuses, you've got plenty
> of room to open your breifcase, eat you lunch, or peruse your
> investent prospectuses. But for me, I'd trade that comfort (And I'm
> 6'4") for knowing what to expect from the airplane.

That may be the key - my friend is kind of a large guy (and not just
height - he'd never pass a Naval aviator physical these days). He may
also need room to scan his portfolio. His father (I found out recently)
was a very high-level Ford exec up in Detroit - it took me a while to
figure out how he could afford a 5,000 square foot house on 6 acres with
a 2,000 square foot garage/workshop/guest apartment outbuilding, a pool
and pool house, three cars, boat, two four-wheel ATVs, etc., and a wife
who didn't work while he was (then) an airline first officer . . . :-/

(Snipped more good stuff) 

-- 
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
   ~ Robert A. Heinlein
<http://www.angryherb.net>
Quantcast