"Queen of the Skies"...still alive.

[andrewg]

Boeing has an interesting plan and hope that if they can hang on until 2019, the 747 may very well get a new lease on life.
I hope so...I've been a big fan of this aircraft since I was a boy.
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/....html?ana=yahoo

 

[CT8]

My favorite aircraft model as well . I just love then for some strange reason.

 

[Cadenza]

I love that airplane, too.
It's a tough market and Boeing has had to shoehorn most of their recent customers (Cargolux and Korean) into purchases and leases, but it's also the best airplane for the business. It will continue to dominate.

 

[JHZR2]

Always wanted to fly in one, preferably on the top deck.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Always wanted to fly in one, preferably on the top deck.


When I was much younger, 747's were used for many domestic flights. I'd had the pleasure of flying on them fairly often. Same with the old DC-10 and L1011.

These days it's almost impossible to do that and most domestic flights are 737, A320 stuff. Even when flying to Hawaii you can find yourself on a 737 from my location.

At least if Boeing's plan works out, we'll see cargo versions flying for a couple more decades.

 

[Yah-Tah-Hey]

Saw my first 747 in Tulsa in spring of 1970 standing across the street from. American's maintenance facility. It was the airline's first 747. Upon landing, the crew misjudged the turning radius turning off of the runway and one set of trucks got stuck in the mud. I remember that AA had a lot of trouble pulling the aircraft out of the muck. They had to bore a hole in the concrete and sink a heavy pipe in the ground and then used a bulldozer to winch the aircraft onto the taxiway. True story. Got my A&P at Spartan and never turned a wrench on an airplane.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
Saw my first 747 in Tulsa in spring of 1970 standing across the street from. American's maintenance facility. It was the airline's first 747. Upon landing, the crew misjudged the turning radius turning off of the runway and one set of trucks got stuck in the mud. I remember that AA had a lot of trouble pulling the aircraft out of the muck. They had to bore a hole in the concrete and sink a heavy pipe in the ground and then used a bulldozer to winch the aircraft onto the taxiway. True story. Got my A&P at Spartan and never turned a wrench on an airplane.

Interesting story.

Back in '70, the 747 was a fairly rare and awesome sight. It was just entering service. My parents house was on approach/take-off to SeaTac airport back in the early '70's. I would be riding my stingray bike around the neighborhood and suddenly hear that unmistakable sound of those four big engines...I'd look up and see that GIANT of an aircraft and dream of what it would be like flying on one. I'd see them fly over in the colors of JAL, Braniff, Qantas, United, Northwest Orient, and of course, Pan Am.

Boeing used to test them all the time as well and I'd see them in that odd green/shiny finish before they painted them.

Fun memories.

 

[Win]

"queen of the skies" .... my first thought was the Lockheed Constellation .... not a double ***** like the 747 ....

 

[Inspecktor]

When they first entered service, my best friend's sister flew on one from MSP to Arizona for a fan charter for a football team playing in a Bowl game. The upper deck was a bar equipped with pinball games.

 

[Mr Nice]

The 747 had a good run, but times have changed and companies would rather have a 777 or 777F.

Boeing should shut down 747 factory and retool for 737 production.

 

[CT8]

The lowest cost to operate is of such importance to keep the doors open so to say.

 

[ls1mike]

Where I live on the Kitsap pennnisula is right under the flight path of when jets take off from Sea-tac headed west. (that is, of course, when the wind is coming from the north to the south).

At this point they are still pretty low. I am still amazed at amount of 747s I see flying over.

The boy and I will sit outside in the summertime and watch them all as they fly over.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Always wanted to fly in one, preferably on the top deck.


Me too!

 

[aquariuscsm]

The Concorde was another plane I'd always wanted to fly in.

 

[tcp71]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike


The boy and I will sit outside in the summertime and watch them all as they fly over.


Enjoy those times.
When my boys were a bit younger and one or the other would have a tendency to wake up early (5-6am), I would take the early riser out of the house so my wife and other boy could "sleep in" after being up a couple of times that night. We would secretly dress, hop in the car, grab (me) a coffee from tim hortons and him a bagel and we would drive out to the airport and watch the planes come and go. Magic memories for both of us. They could also identify a lot of planes on sight at a very early age.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
The 747 had a good run, but times have changed and companies would rather have a 777 or 777F.

Boeing should shut down 747 factory and retool for 737 production.


Per the article, the 747-8 freighter is the only large capacity cargo jet that can load from the hinged front that opens up.
I do not believe the 777 does this. Either way the 747 is a proven freighter and has decades of valuable service in this capacity. The -8 version is even more capable than ever. Airbus has zilch and has no plans to make the A380 a freighter...too expensive to convert and not designed to be a freighter.

As for the Everett factory retooling for 737 production? Different factories many miles apart and one is for wide bodies...the other is single isle (Renton factory).

Also, per the article, 2019 will be a decisive year for world freighter fleets. Most will have 20 plus years on the aircraft and will need to get new freighters. The 747-8 is the perfect choice. Hopefully, Boeing can keep the 747 line functioning until then.

 

[Astro14]

The 737 is a 1964 design that first flew in 1967. It was a short range economy jet...that miraculously is still with us...with its original narrow fuselage, noisy, cramped cockpit, and stubby landing gear that limits takeoff and landing performance.

It's like a car being sold today, based on the Chevy Vega...except that the Vega is a newer design than the 737. You simply can't make a silk purse out of that sow's ear...

The A320 is a better airplane; wider, faster, quieter, more fuel efficient.

The 747 is like no other airplane. It is fast (faster than the 777 or 787, almost 100 MPH faster than the Vega, I mean 737) long range, and good handling. It's a pilot's airplane and it is still the Queen of the skies. It has no equal in cargo. Pretty is as pretty does. I hope to see Boeing succeed in keeping it around.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
The 737 is a 1964 design that first flew in 1967. It was a short range economy jet...that miraculously is still with us...with its original narrow fuselage, noisy, cramped cockpit, and stubby landing gear that limits takeoff and landing performance.

It's like a car being sold today, based on the Chevy Vega...except that the Vega is a newer design than the 737. You simply can't make a silk purse out of that sow's ear...

The A320 is a better airplane; wider, faster, quieter, more fuel efficient.

The 747 is like no other airplane. It is fast (faster than the 777 or 787, almost 100 MPH faster than the Vega, I mean 737) long range, and good handling. It's a pilot's airplane and it is still the Queen of the skies. It has no equal in cargo. Pretty is as pretty does. I hope to see Boeing succeed in keeping it around.


To be fair, the A320 isn't a new aircraft either. Wasn't it designed in the early '80's?
How much different in width is the cabin fuselage between the two? Inches? I really don't know.
And when comparing the A320NEO to the new 737MAX...will the differences be huge in performance and fuel burn?
As for the landing gear of the old 737...didn't one pilot land one safely on a grass field one time and the aircraft did very well....so well in fact that it then took off from the same field? I wonder if the A320 could do that...? I really don't know since I am not a pilot or engineer.
I've heard pilots say they love both aircraft for various reasons...one being that the 737 is very well built.
Anyway....what do I know?!

 

[Astro14]

No, the 320 isn't new, but it's a lot newer. It benefits from a wider fuselage (more passenger room, bigger overhead bins), fly by wire, better short field and high altitude performance, faster speed, lower fuel consumption.

The landing gear on the 737 is its Achilles heel - short to save weight and money, it can't be easily lengthened. Ever wonder why the engine nacelles on a 737 look squished and not round? They are. Because the gear was so short that turbofans, when they came out in the 70s wouldn't fit under the 737 wing wit ou squishing the intake.

Short landing gear, on the stretch version of the 737, severely limits the body angle for takeoff and landing, leading to ridiculous rotation and landing speeds, and severely degraded performance.

That's why 737s going to Hawaii take off with empty seats, the 12,000 foot runways at places like LAX don't allow the 737 to get going fast enough to carry their full weight into the air with the restricted angle of attack created by the geometry of that stubby gear. They just can't make enough lift.

So, in Mexico City, where an A 320 can take off at full gross weight, the 737 is weigh restricted and has to take off with less than a full passenger load, and only with enough gas to go short range. In Houston, where a 320 with the same number of passengers is landing at 125 knots, and can easily turn off the runway after landing, the longer 737s are landing at 165 knots, scorching their brakes, barely able to stop in 10,000 feet. That 40 knot increase in approach speed is a 70% increase in kinetic energy and stopping distance. That's a huge performance limitation.

United has had three airplanes slide off the runway/taxiway in the past two months.

Care to guess what aircraft type all three of them were?

Southwest has, famously, slid a few airplanes off the end of the runway...what airplane type do they fly?

Guys love the airplane if they never knew anything different. Take a kid that's never driven a car, and the Vega would be totally awesome...but compare it to something decades newer and the Vega (and the 737) don't compare well. Updates to the 737 are like adding Bluetooth and cool rims, it's still the same clunky, limited, economy car design underneath. Can't change the limitations of the chassis.

 

[Mr Nice]

I know the 757 is out of production for a long time, but why didn't airlines buy more 757 back then verses buying 737 if it had performance and weight limitations / restrictions ?
That way the 757 would be always packed and no empty seats. The thrust reverse on 737 can't slow it down in adequate runway length ?

Last flight I took was in 2003 was a 757 from Charlotte (USAir) and every seat was taken. We took off in heavy rain and it was a very bumpy ride as we were climbing out from CTL.

The last 747-8's produced will be for Air Force One.