You know, when one is sitting in First, Business or Coach, does it really matter what the exterior of the plane looks like??? I think the A380 looks interesting, the 747 is cool but my favorite profile comes down to the the L1011 and the DC-10 (my favorite overall with that massive engine above the aft end of the plane)....then again, the most shocking image of an L1011 is the tail end of Delta's L1011 (Flight 191, August 2nd, 1985).....sticking up open to the sky...the plan crashed because of wind shear during a thunderstorm at DFW)...

Cheers,

http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/dl191/2.shtml

I love Tante JU! Flew in one out of Dübendorf in 2002. Very noisy inside but the best flying day of my life!

I love the A380 and find it to be quite spacious and open. I would much rather spend my time flying on an A380 than sleeping in some worn down bed at a Motel 6(:

That is a great looking aircraft!

As is the Curtiss C-46 Commando.

I got to fly in a C-46 one fine day in SBA.

The crew kept the rear side cargo door open during takeoff so we had excellent and cost effective air conditioning.

We were also able to wave at a UA 737 as we rolled by them to the active runway.

The UA flight crew waved back.

yes the a380 looks very ugly on takeoff, as well as generally.

Looks too big for an airplane. That thing is massive.

To me, the A388 doesn't look visually appealing. It's just too "chunky" and not proportionate. That could change though if and when the A389 comes online. I have never been on an A380 so I can't really comment on the comfort factor.

In those grand picture books of the a/c of yesteryear are both beautiful and strikingly ugly birds. But the production numbers and years of utilization say more about the birds than do their pictures. Obviously, some a/c become legends because of their "beauty", while others achieve that status through use and familiarity, while for each of us, "beauty" is in the eye of the beholder.

Having seen them flying and on the ground, I'd never call the Ju-52 beautiful, simply functionally utilitarian, while the "nose heavy" look of the B747 certainly detracts from the otherwise graceful design. The Caravelle was certainly more beautiful than the DC-9, but the Caravelle lingered briefly, while, "plugged and stretched", the DC-9's children acquired a grace not visible in the early "fat and stubby" look of the early models.

Beautiful? Around since 1952 or so, the diminutive A4 was/is beautiful in flight, but less so on the ground or carrier deck, where long gear legs (to give clearance for tanks and ordnance) gave it an awkward look. The "stretch' DC8s were too long for beauty, but aside from its 'stalky" landing gear, the B757 came close to beauty, other than an almost "drooped snoot" look.

C-46 Commando? A bit "whalish" for beauty, while from prototype to the last of the line, even the electronic warfare and maritime surveillance versions, still graceful even when humped and domed, the Constellation may well deserve the title of most beautiful prop-driven a/c.