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

Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 223 posts

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#51

Post by makerofspoons »

bregma wrote: post #48
makerofspoons wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lifecycle impact of a 747 is much worse than a 737 or an Embraer 145: https://escholarship.org/content/qt6m5865v5/qt6m5865v5.pdf Regardless of the plane size however, there's no getting around planes depositing pollution in the upper atmosphere is worse than we thought and cannot be thought of in the same way as emissions from a train or power plant: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2207886-it-turns-out-pl...

Running an electric train on a transatlantic -- or transpacific -- trip causes an awful lot of environmental degradation, too.

I believe the alternative to phasing out air travel isn't finding another mode of transport to replace it but instead asking whether or not in a world with teleconferencing and the internet if it's worth the damage to be physically moving people around.

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#52

Post by jlcummings »

Tiltowait-- wrote: post #26
sesuximo wrote: post #23

It’s a little sad that we’ve retired the 747, the Concorde, and (almost) the A380. And we haven’t introduced anything cool :(

The Concorde was done in by fuel prices, and because it was a small aircraft. I visited one in a museum and it was claustrophobic. Also nobody should be sorry that elites have to sit on long overseas flights just like we do. The A380 was a boondoggle from the beginning, an attempt to outdo Boeing by having TEH BIGGEREST aircraft on the market. Having to rebuild airports to accommodate it wasn't a good idea. The 747 i…

The B52 first was first rolled out for production use on 18 March 1954. The "...long-rifle of the air age..." -- Nathan Twining. It has not been manufactured since 1962. They are still in active military service, the ones that remain, and continue to see upgrades and evolving mission scope. 100 years of service is feasible.

Cost per flying hour of a modern B52: $70,000 [1]

1. https://www.airforcemag.com/article/re-engining-the-b-52/

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#53

Post by manigandham »

Tiltowait-- wrote: post #26
sesuximo wrote: post #23

It’s a little sad that we’ve retired the 747, the Concorde, and (almost) the A380. And we haven’t introduced anything cool :(

The Concorde was done in by fuel prices, and because it was a small aircraft. I visited one in a museum and it was claustrophobic. Also nobody should be sorry that elites have to sit on long overseas flights just like we do. The A380 was a boondoggle from the beginning, an attempt to outdo Boeing by having TEH BIGGEREST aircraft on the market. Having to rebuild airports to accommodate it wasn't a good idea. The 747 i…

747 has been continually updated but the all modern airliners still have the same fundamental design.

> "Also nobody should be sorry that elites have to sit on long overseas flights just like we do."

Anyone can fly as long as they can pay for the ticket. First-class passengers subsidize economy seats for most flights, and new tech generally starts with wealthier early-adopters before it becomes accessible for everyone.

By the way, if you live in the West then you're an "elite" compared to billions. Let's drop the classism.

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#54

Post by vladvasiliu »

sesuximo wrote: post #23

It’s a little sad that we’ve retired the 747, the Concorde, and (almost) the A380. And we haven’t introduced anything cool :(

The A380 is as good as retired. Production was scheduled to stop in 2021 since 2019 [0]. It seems to have been advanced by the coronavirus crisis [1].

Air France has stopped flying the A380 [2].

[0] Airbus announces stopping production of A380 in 2021: https://www.capital.fr/entreprises-marches/airbus-annonce-la...

[1] Coronavirus gives the final blow to the A380 https://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-eco/le-coronavirus-donne-le-co...

[2] Air France flies the A380 for the last time https://www.lefigaro.fr/societes/air-france-fait-voler-l-a38...

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#55

Post by smohnot »

Sad day for me; for a plane geek, frequent traveler, son of immigrants, and someone who has been to the factory (incredible - visit the Everett Boeing facility if you get a chance), this is super nostalgic.

The "Queen of the skies" really changed air travel, and I'm a bit sad that they won't be flying much longer. The economics, size and scale of travel were drastically different before the 747. Before the 747, only the richest folks could really cross the globe at will. The 747 changed everyday notions of distance and ushered in the age of travel that we get to enjoy today. This plane shrank the world and allowed for the middle class to explore the world in a way that they never could before.

When my parents came to the US, they came on a 747. Before the 747 they probably would have had to make 5-6 stops, instead of the 2 that they came on.

Crazy enough, the 747 was designed with obsolescence in mind because when it was developed in the 60's, we thought all passenger jets would be flying supersonic... so they made the 747 with this hump to easily convert them into cargo jets (cargo would continue to fly subsonic even though passengers wouldn't).

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#56

Post by WJW »

Johnjonjoan wrote: post #46
manigandham wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't takeoff/landing cycles on the engines and airframe counteract the fuel savings? EDIT: Specifically pressurization cycles and metal fatigue, since that's how aircraft lifespan is measured.

I wonder if the limiting fact to cargo capacity is weight or volume. If it's weight then perhaps the additional freight offsets those costs rather than saving fuel.

IIRC it really depends on the cargo. A very cool example I came across was iPhones being fairly heavy relative to their volume while roses were very light relative to their volume. The solution of the air freight company was to fill their aircraft 50/50 with roses and iPhones so that they were both at their weight limit and at their volume limit.

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#57

Post by WJW »

the-dude wrote: post #43

In The Netherlands we have an iconic train which must have been inspired by the 747. https://www.ns.nl/binaries/_ht_1533730717772/content/assets/...

The designers elevated the driver cabin so that it would be possible for passengers to walk underneath it when they coupled multiple trains together into a longer one. Sadly, it turned out the doors for the interlocking mechanism were very error prone so in the end they just welded them shut and you have to go around outside (at a station) if you want to move between trains sets.

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#58

Post by fsckboy »

Johnjonjoan wrote: post #46
manigandham wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't takeoff/landing cycles on the engines and airframe counteract the fuel savings? EDIT: Specifically pressurization cycles and metal fatigue, since that's how aircraft lifespan is measured.

I wonder if the limiting fact to cargo capacity is weight or volume. If it's weight then perhaps the additional freight offsets those costs rather than saving fuel.

it's not a limiting factor but fwiw, air freight market is driven by the value of the cargo. Expensive stuff sitting in a container on a ship is like paying interest on the money invested; the sooner you get it to market, sooner the green comes rolling in.

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#59

Post by beamatronic »

whatgoodisaroad wrote: post #38
sjm-lbm wrote: post #4

I know it's not the most important thing, but I feel that 747s are easily the prettiest passenger airplane in the sky right now. Going to miss the variety they provided at the airport.

Strictly in terms of appearances, I think Antonovs look really nice. Granted, it was rare to see one in a western airport even in the best of times.

Just move to Mountain View, California and you can see it every week

Re: Boeing quietly pulls plug on the 747, closing era of jumbo jets

#60

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

A couple of years ago, I made an international flight with my children. I made sure that one leg of the journey was business class on a 747 on the upper deck. I wanted my children to have had the memory of flying in the most iconic location (upper deck) of the most iconic passenger airplane in history.

If you can get a flight on the 747, I urge you if you are able to, pay the extra and get a seat on the upper deck. It will be one of those things you talk about for years.

Post reply on HN