Some fat old thing

[gamary]

You mean the Noratlas is as ugly as the Argosy? I disagree. That fuselage looks like something that's been digested, with a nipple added on the front.

Nice rendering, though.

[JMSmith]

right,

lets get this straight, the Argosy is NOT ugly, neither is the Noratlas

and the USA DID NOT MAKE ALL THE BEST LOOKING AIRCRAFT.

for beauty you need to study late 30's french aircraft, so sleek also the Japanese twins, and some of the Italian stuff.

right, you plonkas, here is a old Royal Observer Corps saying, " tell the difference between a Boxcar and a Noratlas at 10 miles"

what this mean't was, if you could you were the best at aircraft identification. ( and yes i could) not now though, could not even see them at 10 miles now

[inkworm]

The Argosy does look a bit like it is wearing a corset though, but I don't what is ugly about it better lines than the Noratlas.

Anyway can any jet have cleaner lines than the Hunter? Even the post war British jets such as the Javelin and Scimitar have an elegance not found in modern jets or those pointy American things.

[GiantFlyingRobots]

From a purely aesthetic point of view, the UK made some of the ugliest aircraft of all time in the 50's and 60's.

[Supah]

You british need more sunlight and create some Vitamine D, does wonders for the old eyesight The hunter was the last pretty jet the british made, Meteor wasn't exactly a looker though especially compared to the Sabre. Javelin was ugly, as was the tornado. I have a soft spot for the lightning because its incredibly cool but pretty .... mwah.

[BLOWHARD]

You mean the Noratlas is as ugly as the Argosy

No, I meant just what I said, it makes me think of old Heller kits

[inkworm]

No, I meant just what I said, it makes me think of old Heller kits

So you are implying that the Argosy is more ugly than the Noratlas

[BLOWHARD]

heheheehe, I'm saying they both are, in reality, plastic kits made by Heller, and therefore not real