Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 122 posts

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#101

Post by _Codemonkeyism »

joezydeco wrote: post #19
avar wrote: post #12

For anyone wondering why airlines are retiring the 747 this Wikipedia section summarizes it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747-400#Retirement_and_... Summary: Old, inefficient, less need for jumbo jets. Everyone's either buying smaller or migrating to the modern Airbus A380.

Remember that Boeing's original plan was to use the 747 as a freighter. Passengers would fly on supersonic jets like their prototype 2707 SST. This is why the 747's cockpit is on top, it provided a continuous open tube for cargo underneath. http://www.nycaviation.com/newspage/wp-content/uploads/2015/...

The form of a 747 is the result of technology studies for the Air Force CX-HLS program

http://www.boeingimages.com/archive/CX-HLS-Transport-Study-2...

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#103

Post by dingaling »

agumonkey wrote: post #35
jacquesm wrote: post #15

I used to fly these every two weeks, KL691 and KL692 the flights between Schiphol, Netherhands and Toronto, Canada. Then at some point they moved to 777's, and even though it was a nice plane and far more modern the 747 almost never had a turbulent ride whereas the 777 trips were far less comfortable, especially the red-eye return flight rarely was smooth enough that I could get some sleep. Retiring the 747 was one (…

Now that's a making of I'd like to see.

A couple of books that make an interesting contrast across three decades:

"Widebody: the making of the 747" by Clive Irving

"21st Century Jet: the making of the Boeing 777" by Karl Sabbach. Augments a TV series of the same name.

They sit side-by-side on my shelf.

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#104

Post by lmm »

WalterBright wrote: post #96

In an era when corporations are constantly accused of short term thinking, the 747 was a bet-the-company deal for Boeing. There was no government financing nor subsidy. It was in service for 10 years before it began to show a profit for Boeing. And then, boy did it ever show a profit. And not just for the Boeing, but for the airlines who loved its ability to make money. The 747 was a triumph any way you want to look…

The company was being heavily government-subsidised at the time, both in their cancelled supersonic project and from the military side as other replies mentioned.

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#105

Post by WalterBright »

_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #100
WalterBright wrote: post #96

In an era when corporations are constantly accused of short term thinking, the 747 was a bet-the-company deal for Boeing. There was no government financing nor subsidy. It was in service for 10 years before it began to show a profit for Boeing. And then, boy did it ever show a profit. And not just for the Boeing, but for the airlines who loved its ability to make money. The 747 was a triumph any way you want to look…

"There was no government financing nor subsidy." I assume that the military part of Boeing, which was heavily subsidized by the government, paid for the tech development in the CX–HLS program - which resulted in the C5 - and from which many technologies were taken into the 747 program. The 747 has the raised cockpit because of the CX-HLS being a front loading transport airplane, it wasn't designed because of a first…

The C5 was a Lockheed project.

The CX-HLS was just a design study. (A design study is several years from a prototype airplane.) As 747 Chief Engineer Sutter put it:

"I should add that fostering large high-bypass engines was all that the USAF C-5 competition contributed to the Boeing 747, as my new airplane would be called. Time and again there appears in print the logical but false assumption that Boeing took its losing military C-5 bid and revamped it as the commercial 747. In fact, the 747 would be an entirely original design that owes nothing to the C-5."

http://www.seattlepi.com/business/article/Aerospace-Notebook...

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#106

Post by Gibbon1 »

WalterBright wrote: post #98
function_seven wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My father worked for Boeing during (or shortly after) the time the 747 was designed. It was all done with pencil and paper. Thousands of draftsmen drawing every little component. I can't imagine the scale of such a process. My favorite bit about that. If you were take all the drawings produced during the design phase, and put them on a 747, it would't get off the ground. Not sure if apocryphal or not, but I buy it. E…

There was a joke that the design was not done until the weight of the paperwork exceeded the weight of the airplane, but I doubt anyone added it all up. The 757 was the last Boeing airliner to be designed on paper. They were experimenting with CAD software at the time, but it was pretty primitive. Slide rules were long gone. Engineers used calculators, and I snuck into the computer room and used Fortran for my work t…

My dad[1] worked on I think can't find the right term, but the fixtures that hold satellites while they're carried into space. Back in the late 60's they were using numerical analysis to design the things. But have a gut feeling before 1980-1985 likely wasn't anything that could hold, retrieve and display, edit all the cad drawings for something as complex as a 757.

Bonus I remember retraining our draftsman to use CAD back in the late 80's, twuz painful.

[1] Bonus my dad is as old as the DC3.

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#107

Post by WalterBright »

lmm wrote: post #104
WalterBright wrote: post #96

In an era when corporations are constantly accused of short term thinking, the 747 was a bet-the-company deal for Boeing. There was no government financing nor subsidy. It was in service for 10 years before it began to show a profit for Boeing. And then, boy did it ever show a profit. And not just for the Boeing, but for the airlines who loved its ability to make money. The 747 was a triumph any way you want to look…

The company was being heavily government-subsidised at the time, both in their cancelled supersonic project and from the military side as other replies mentioned.

The Boeing 2707 SST had nothing in common with the 747. You'd be hard pressed to find any common parts or design elements. Supersonic airplanes are very, very different from subsonic ones.

Look at the picture. There's no resemblance.

https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=15481905

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#108

Post by WalterBright »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #106
WalterBright wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a joke that the design was not done until the weight of the paperwork exceeded the weight of the airplane, but I doubt anyone added it all up. The 757 was the last Boeing airliner to be designed on paper. They were experimenting with CAD software at the time, but it was pretty primitive. Slide rules were long gone. Engineers used calculators, and I snuck into the computer room and used Fortran for my work t…

My dad[1] worked on I think can't find the right term, but the fixtures that hold satellites while they're carried into space. Back in the late 60's they were using numerical analysis to design the things. But have a gut feeling before 1980-1985 likely wasn't anything that could hold, retrieve and display, edit all the cad drawings for something as complex as a 757. Bonus I remember retraining our draftsman to use CA…

Computer numerical analysis was used in some areas. But not with anything I was involved in (other than the programs I wrote myself), and it was not connected with CAD software.

Bonus: my dad flew DC-3's :-) He had nothing but good things to say about them.

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#109

Post by mseebach »

sjtgraham wrote: post #52
hkmurakami wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as an info drop, the 2nd floor is business class. First class is on the first floor, in front of the cockpit geometrically.

There are no hard and fast rules for the configuration. I've travelled on aircraft where the top deck was business class and others where it was premium economy.

Virgin Atlantic even has a few rows of regular economy in the rear half of the upper deck of (some of?) their 747s (front half is premium economy, business class is downstairs).

Re: As the 747 Begins Its Final Approach, a Pilot Takes a Flight Down Memory Lane

#110

Post by lmm »

WalterBright wrote: post #107
lmm wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The company was being heavily government-subsidised at the time, both in their cancelled supersonic project and from the military side as other replies mentioned.

The Boeing 2707 SST had nothing in common with the 747. You'd be hard pressed to find any common parts or design elements. Supersonic airplanes are very, very different from subsonic ones. Look at the picture. There's no resemblance. https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=15481905

That's not what I said. The company was being heavily subsidised, and money is fungible.
Post reply on HN