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

The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 378 posts

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#161

Post by anonymars »

WalterBright wrote: post #150
anovikov wrote: post #2

But really, it was just about four-engine planes becoming too expensive to run. Two-engine planes won. 777 burns 30% less fuel per passenger and has almost the same cabin width. And top level became a flop because it's too narrow for a first class cabin by today's standards and all other uses for them make no sense. Top floor existed at all because it was Boeing's entry for a heavy cargo plane competition in which C-…

> it was just about four-engine planes becoming too expensive to run Four engines are also less safe than twin engines. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but Boeing did the math and made the case.

Can you link to the source?

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#162

Post by kps »

wiredfool wrote: post #37
SoftTalker wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah economy class on a 747 sucks as much as it does on any other airliner.

One time I got an entire center row of 5 seats going from Seattle->Heathrow overnight.

One time I was on a 747 YYZ→LHR with a total of 14 passengers.

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#163

Post by stephen_g »

massysett wrote: post #154

This article is but one example of a tiresome genre: the paean to the supposed glory days of aviation. Passengers dressed up, dined on caviar, and smoked cigarettes. Stewardesses were sexy, and liquor flowed in the expansive 747 lounge. These pieces then bemoan today’s bus of the sky, with the unwashed masses donning sweatpants and dragging screaming toddlers who leave orange Goldfish crumbs in the seat cracks. I am…

For the money things have actually got better. If you pay the equivalent (adjusted for inflation or compared to wages) of what they were paying back then for an international flight, you're in first class and on a good airline that's hugely better than anything from the 'golden age'. Even business class is cheaper and (again on good airlines) is better than what people had then - the planes are quieter, the seats lie flat, the food is good, lounge access with free food and drinks before and on any stopovers...

It's kind of crazy that people compare the experience on a $1000 transalantic ticket and bemoan that the experience doesn't seem quite as good as something that was costing people the equivalent of 10-20x as much back then!

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#164

Post by fosk »

massysett wrote: post #154

This article is but one example of a tiresome genre: the paean to the supposed glory days of aviation. Passengers dressed up, dined on caviar, and smoked cigarettes. Stewardesses were sexy, and liquor flowed in the expansive 747 lounge. These pieces then bemoan today’s bus of the sky, with the unwashed masses donning sweatpants and dragging screaming toddlers who leave orange Goldfish crumbs in the seat cracks. I am…

Function over form, or form over function? The endless debate.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you but I understand the merits in cherishing “form” in a world that is - for the most part - devoid of beauty and taste.

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#165

Post by wkipling »

chrisss395 wrote: post #156

I know less about the airframe differences across the -400 and -8, but I can say the 747-8 represented a major upgrade in Flight Management Software. I re-wrote the Central Maintenance System (portion inside the FMS) in C from scratch because no one had the original detailed design documents. The original -400 code was written in Pascal if I'm remembering correctly. I gleamed what I could from the source and relied o…

Awesome. Was this part of the NG FMS program? I find it interesting how the 747 FMS is newer than the 777s yet due to type similarity retains legacy features.

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#166

Post by ggm »

nradov wrote: post #142
sidewndr46 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the whole thing a little odd. The 747 seems to be a great aircraft. It's also a quad jet and the change in regulations for ETOPS makes twinjets a no brainer for reducing cost. There's no reason to hurry and up and get rid of them, many will continue in cargo service for many years. But there isn't any reason to build big quad jets any longer

We might still reach a point in a few decades where capacity constraints at major airports make larger quadjets economically viable again. That was the thesis behind the Airbus A380, and it didn't work. But is it possible that they weren't so much wrong as just too early?

"Didn't work" meaning did not result in 5,000 orders. The aircraft in use by the middle east and asian airlines (and Qantas) are doing fine. They are also less economic than the modern 2 engine widebodies, despite being more economic than a 747 on the same route, with higher comfort levels and less intrusive engine noise.

They just didn't turn out to fit the emerging economics of flight. They "work" fine.

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#167

Post by projektfu »

GMoromisato wrote: post #91
moojacob wrote: post #31

Didn’t read the full article but it starts with > The jet was perhaps the pinnacle of American engineering excellence. Its retirement signals an end to an era of American culture—and ambition. End of American ambition? SpaceX landing is rockets… today! That’s apples to apples also, both aerospace. In other fields we have literally taught computers how to talk.

I agree with you, and I would have expected Ian Bogost to take a more holistic view. Talking about why, for example, Boeing never build a larger passenger airplane, or why the Concorde is no longer flying, would actually make for an interesting analysis of technology and business. Why did the progression from the Wright brothers to the 747 not continue for the next fifty years? The answer has to do with physics and e…

You could say that engineering excellence at GE (and competition with RR and P&W) led to ETOPS which made it less attractive to simply build larger airplanes with 3+ engines. Why send one 747 per day when you can send multiple A330s or 767s, accommodating more schedules?

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#168

Post by kkylin »

zabzonk wrote: post #129
kkylin wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We got front lower deck seats once when I was a kid. My sister and I had extra open floor space for playing. It was great.

Oh no - you were THOSE kids.

Actually we weren't (& aren't) able to afford this kind of thing. Dad worked for the airline & somehow got this perk, just once.

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#169

Post by scorpioxy »

chrisss395 wrote: post #156

I know less about the airframe differences across the -400 and -8, but I can say the 747-8 represented a major upgrade in Flight Management Software. I re-wrote the Central Maintenance System (portion inside the FMS) in C from scratch because no one had the original detailed design documents. The original -400 code was written in Pascal if I'm remembering correctly. I gleamed what I could from the source and relied o…

That executive has lost any human decency and should be fired.

Re: The Boeing 747 begins its final descent

#170

Post by DangitBobby »

WalterBright wrote: post #148
jquery wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most interesting thing about SpaceX is how it convinced a lot of otherwise sober people that data centers in space was a $50 septillion addressable market. You might laugh and think I’m joking but a lot of people seriously fell for the nonsense in the public filing, which should’ve been a one way ticket to SEC jail.

When the first transcontinental railroad was proposed and being built, it was beset with controversy and skepticism. But when it opened, it exceeded the wildest expectations of its most optimistic boosters. It transformed the country overnight. A similar thing happened with the first transatlantic cable.

Transcontinental railroads weren't fighting against physics.

There's a reason people are pretty sure it won't work and it's not the difficulty of getting them into space or maintening them space or generally protecting them from space. Of course, those are all considerations as well. No, it's the cooling.

https://taranis.ie/datacenters-in-space-are-a-terrible-horri...

Post reply on HN