91–100 of 122 posts
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.
This isn't universally true. Lufthansa put their first class on some configurations on the top deck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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/...
Has there ever been a flying wing approach to freight flights?
Flying wings work fine for bombers because the "cargo" is very dense and will fit into a short bomb bay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason the FAA considered fuel tank inerting in the first place is because of a 1996 crash of a 747 that killed 230 people[1], and which is thought to have been avoided had the tanks been inert[2]. Other 747s were lost to the same issue, such as the ULF48 that crashed in 1976 killing all aboard[3]. To answer your question, no, the 747 is not "safe". No aircraft ever made is "safe". They will all crash and kill pe…
Theres a lot of speculation about TWA Flight 800 so thats pretty interesting. I some how stumbled on CPAN one night and the guy that wrote TWA 800 Crash Cover Up Conspiracy was giving a talk. Listening to the commenters afterwards, all were either engineers, pilots, or former air force and seemed to be in agreement with the author. Theres a TWA Flight 800 documentary as well. book: https://www.amazon.com/TWA-800-Cras…
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 (…
> Also, this is the only time I've ever gone faster than 1,250 Km/h groundspeed in a regular jet Wow! How fast was the air flying? I.e., how close were you to supersonic airspeed?
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 at it - free market, safety, engineering, money making, pleased customers, etc.
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…
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.
EDIT: I see in another comment you worked there as well. Maybe you can verify the "heavy documents" anecdote :)
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…
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…
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 that had traditionally been done graphically with drafting equipment (I had no idea how that worked).
My dad worked for the US diplomatic service when I was a kid. Our family started out traveling on ocean liners (on the North Atlantic route from Le Havre to New York in the winter: no glamour there). There was our journey from Lagos to NY in 1958: A DeHavilland Comet over the Sahara with four stops for fuel, and a diversion from Paris to Brussels for weather. Then a train to Le Havre on the English Channel, then five…
During Operation Solomon, an El Al 747 carried 1,122 Ethiopian Jews from Ethiopia to Israel.
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…
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 class lounge - in fact in the beginning no one had a clue what do with it.
http://www.boeingimages.com/archive/CX-HLS-Transport-Study-2...