Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by ABursell
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
I have heard that even way back when Boeing first started penning the 747, they designed it to be a cargo plane from the get-go. In case the passenger program failed, they would still have the cargo market. Not sure if this is true, but sounds like the kind of shrewd decision they would make.
If true, then Airbus made a gamble that even Boeing was unwilling to fully commit to 50 years ago. That's a bad sign.
If I recall correctly, the 747 was originally part of the competition for a large military cargo plane, which ended up with the C-5 being the winner, however Boeing decided to move forward anyway.
That leads to one of the interesting features of the 747F (and C-5), the nose cargo door. I have long thought the lack of possibility for a nose door in the A380 would be a limiting factor, wonder how much of a part that might have played in the lack of freighter program.
Yes. The 747 was designed to compete for the USAF Large Cargo Aircraft. Boeing lost to Lockheed. The USAF thought Boeing's design was better, but Lockheed had the lower cost proposal, which then had huge cost overruns...leading to Congressional hearings...
Joe Sutter (lead engineer on the project) was told that if he could make it into a passenger airplane, and they could sell just 50 of them, Boeing could recoup the R&D cost of the LCA competition. Boeing didn't get any money from the USAF for their work on LCA, despite all the rhetoric to the contrary. It was a bid for a contract, plain and simple. They had lost money, and were looking to get some of that cost back.
They kept the high cockpit design of their LCA competitor, because they really didn't know if the 747 would make it in the passenger world, and wanted to be able to resell it as a cargo plane.
Pan-Am ordered 25 of them in 1966. They were delivered in 1969, about 27 months later. A very short development time, and manufacturing facilities had to be built to handle the jumbo. It was a huge financial risk for Boeing - to build something that was more than twice the size of the 707, without knowing if there was a market, or not, beyond Pan-Am's initial order.
The airplane that Boeing wasn't sure about ended up revolutionizing air travel, and 50 years later is still flying, having sold over 1,500 airplanes.
If you want to read a great book on engineering and aircraft manufacturing, read "747" by Joe Sutter.
Read Sutter's book and found it very interesting.
Boeing assigned him to the 747 program because they considered him a second stringer.
The varsity guys got assigned to the stillborn 2707 program.
The 747 very nearly killed Boeing, but over the years the type proved very profitable as many carriers bought it, or at least the -400 model.
Boeing bet the company on the 707 and then again a few years later on the 727.
The 737 was not such a gamble and is still paying off in developments built fifty years later.
The 757/767 program was and remains a triumph of engineering expertise while the 777 is that plus.
The 787 has matured into a really fine airliner but whether Boeing can actually make any money on it remains to be seen.
Nobody designs and develops airliners as well as Boeing does.
