In a message dated 3/28/2003 10:49:34 AM US Mountain Standard Time, dplaflamme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: > Was there a second? (Anyone answering "DC-10" or "MD-11" will be banished > to the gulag for excessive historical revisionism!) (And I'm not allowing > the first proposal of a 777, a tri-jet version of the 767 that never got > off the drawing board -- and wasn't needed as ETOPS came into play.) > > You're right! It was so damned good, Boeing didn't need to build a second tri-jet ....unless you're referring to a B747 with one engine out! :<)) RT Simpson Phoenix