Slashdot Mirror
The Flying Giant Is 40 Years Old
Ponca City, We love you writes "Four decades ago, Boeing's prototype 747 took to the skies over Washington State for a 75-minute flight that helped bring cheap airline travel to millions of people and would remain the world's largest commercial aircraft for 37 years until the advent of the double-decker Airbus A380. What made the 747 unique was that it was the first 'wide body' aircraft with more than one aisle — a big step towards reducing the sense of traveling in a narrow tube, and inducing a sense more equivalent to flying in a large room with high ceilings. But back in the 1960s, convincing people that the 747 would fly was a tough call. Joe Sutter, the director of engineering on the project, even spent an hour with Charles Lindbergh, going over all the data to prove that the jumbo would not flip over or become unstable at high speeds. Boeing has sold more than 1,400 jumbos in the past four decades, worth, at today's prices, more than $350 billion and although we might complain of traveling in 'cattle class' we have the 747 to thank for being able to do so at affordable prices."
FYI,
Standard cruise on a 747 is .85 Mach (567MPH) and a 777 is .84 Mach (560MPH).
Both of these planes are capable of much greater speeds, the limiting factor..... the sound barrier. They are not designed for the shock wave build up such speeds will generate.
If you were watching the NatGeo special on Air Force One, you'd of saw the interview with the Air Cap F-16 pilot who had to radio AF1 to actually slow down so he could limit his fuel burn. AF1 was cruising at .90 Mach at the time.
Don't think for a second these lumbering giants can't get up and move... Those cruise speeds are chosen for maximum efficiency and to limit air frame fatigue.
Uhm, what? Lets have a look at the 'entirely new' aircraft to have been launched in the past 20 years:
1. Airbus A330. Fantastic success, sold over 1,000 airframes and continues to sell well.
2. Boeing 777. Fantastic success, sold over 1,000 airframes and continues to sell well.
3. Airbus A380. Debatable, yet to be seen.
4. Boeing 787. Fantastic success, yet to fly, sold over 900 airframes to date.
5. Airbus A350XWB. Fantastic success, still 4 years to EIS, sold over 450 airframes to date.
Clean sheet designs are still massively profitable.
Nevertheless, since that first flight, the 747 has fulfilled the faith of its designers and has led to reductions in air fares, opening up air travel to many in a way that was previously unimaginable
The 747 was developed for the airline business before the Airline Deregulation Act signed into law by Jimmy Carter. Before that, it was profitable for the airlines to operate under the "hub and spoke" business model: condense a bunch of folks going to a certain destination at a hub and then send them all at once to said destination. Which worked at the time because because all the airlines had to follow Federal rules; which, by the way, the airlines really miss those Government regulations.
Now, the way to be profitabile in the air ravel business is smaller fuel efficient aircraft with schedules more like trucks: Atlanta to Fort Lauderdale to Tampa to New Orleans to Atlanta again - for example. Not get a bunch of people to go to Fort Lauderdale from Atlanta and go back. My point? Big jets for anything other than long haul (Ocean crossings) are not worth it. The 380 is not going to have the market Airbus thought it would have.
New York to San Francisco? Please. The airline that runs the most flights between those cities is going to get the lucrative business travellers; not the airline that has a slightly cheaper fare that runs once a day, at most. Those once a day airlines are going to get the tourist business and you know what those flights are going to be like for a 380: 2 hours to board because the tourists have to figure out where aisle '34' is and where seat 'H' is. And then they have to figure out where they're going to put their trunk that should be checked. Then they'll argue with the stewardess about how this is a carry on, while their little brat is screaming because they couldn't get their French Fries from McDonald's. Then the .....
In the meantime, rich fat cat Wall street Banker Federal Welfare receiver has his own jet and just sails over to San Francisco. Then the SOB has the nerve to comment on how your suit is wrinkled and how your tired and absent minded. ....
747s have broken the sound barrier on at least two occasions. One was during certification, and a second during a in-flight screw up on China Airlines 006. (Powered descent).
Both airframes survived.
I think they could change this if they took a different approach to those on vacation - specifically creating routes for vacationers and everything they expect. Get them started on their vacation early by providing them with large seats, good food, good movies. For the commuter or typical traveler they could offer a more traditional approach.
But imagine you want to fly to Japan from NYC. That's quite a long flight. Why not offer people on holiday the option to pamper themselves while flying? Give them a more leisurely route, better service, and better seating. Think a "cruise line" in the air. I bet people like myself would opt for it over the "sardine can to Asia" and be willing to spend the money on it. Sure I can fly first class now, but this whole everyone is the same approach is the past, we need more niche airlines that cater to specifics. I feel like a piece of cattle when flying, like somehow I'm not the consumer anymore and I'm just at the whim of the airline/FAA/TSA/various global agencies. It's become a "privilege".
BTW, I love to fly. So much I decided to learn how to fly and get my own private pilot's license. But I hate flying the airlines. It's not the same. One is a chore, the other is an experience everyone should try at least once.