Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
dmstorm22
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:49 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:34 pm

JannEejit wrote:
Thirty six years after taking my first jetliner flight, I've yet to fly aboard 747 of any type. I need to rectify that situation soon, even if I just go somewhere and come straight back again !


What are BA's plans in regards to the B744? They still use a lot of them for JFK-LHR, and given the near shuttle nature of that route it would be tough to switch out given how J heavy those configs are on B744.

That route may have B744 service for quite a while.

As a whole JFK has 3x 748i as well from CA, LH, KE. But the B744 is reduced to just BA and LY now I believe.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13437
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:34 pm

Phoenix9 wrote:
Them's fighting words :box: :stirthepot:

Ya know, I probably SHOULD'VE just asked this point-blank, sooner:

WHAT, IN YOUR (ANYONE'S) OPINION MAKES THE 747 "BEAUTIFUL?"

That seems to be the common sentiment. I've always just assumed that it was the hump, seeing as that's the only thing that generally stands out from any other airliner-- and so I've always vehemently disagreed with "everyone" as I find that the hump completely destroys the aircraft's lines, and just looks so ungainly.

So on that point, we can always agree to disagree.
But then again, I've never really considered that it might be something else, or maybe even a combo of things.

So figured I'd ask.
What say you all?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:36 pm

No idea. It just has a look......
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:41 pm

Its sad such a wonderful aircraft will be gone in the future, the big twins killed the mighty 747. Hope I can get LH flight from MEX-FRA on the 748 before its too late.
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27359
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:41 pm

I like it from a rear three-quarter view when it is rotating on take-off.
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:44 pm

The 747 not really dead until they stop offering it for sale and close out orders for long lead components. No doubt soon, but not yet.

Clearly Boeing does not believe it is worth treating as it owns forecast category in the market outlook distinct from other large widebodies.

And it seems like they've become officially pessimistic about the chances of the upturn in orders they've previously insisted was right around the corner.

I'm sad the end is near. I'm also sad some folks seem to be unimpressed by an aircraft that, despite being twice the size of any of the airliners that preceded it, was able to be designed, tested, and enter service in just 4-1/2 years, yet remain in production for close to 50 years now.

I also have no difficulty appreciating the regal look of her crowned fuselage and the elevated thrown from which her crew surveys airports arrayed before her, and adore her graceful 37.5 degree wing sweep. And although the 747-8 may be the technological culmination of the series, nothing conveys to me such an earnest desire to leap into the sky or gracefully touch her feet to the ground again like a full set of triple slotted flaps spread wide to carry the earlier variants through the air.
 
Phoenix9
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:25 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:44 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
WHAT, IN YOUR (ANYONE'S) OPINION MAKES THE 747 "BEAUTIFUL?"


Its uniqueness. And, personally, it was the first airplane that I had ever been on and there's something 'regal' (for the lack of better word) about its look.
Last edited by Phoenix9 on Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Life only makes sense when you look at it backwards.
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:48 pm

Oh, what happened to those 10-15 airlines they've been in constant talks with for the better part of 7 years, didn't pan out?
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:51 pm

I was just browsing half a dozen pages deep into the database looking for angles where I don't like the 747's looks. I didn't find one.

 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:51 pm

crimsonchin wrote:
Oh, what happened to those 10-15 airlines they've been in constant talks with for the better part of 7 years, didn't pan out?


Apparently they all decided to take the A380 instead.

.....oh wait.....
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 1099
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:54 pm

crimsonchin wrote:
Oh, what happened to those 10-15 airlines they've been in constant talks with for the better part of 7 years, didn't pan out?


LOL! I may be completely wrong but I will go out on a limb and say that I don't think it panned out...
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2252
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:54 pm

Cult strategy: 748F SkyDivers Club. All us Queen lovers join the club and fly LH and other 748Fs as cargo, JFK/MUC, to pick up our beemers. Those who recently sold nickel mines in Australia can return with their cars as freight... sitting in the car. The OP is invited as a beemer-lover, and, dare I say, Queen-agnostic.
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:56 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
crimsonchin wrote:
Oh, what happened to those 10-15 airlines they've been in constant talks with for the better part of 7 years, didn't pan out?


Apparently they all decided to take the A380 instead.

.....oh wait.....

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what that has to do with the 747, since the thread was solely about the 747 and not 747 v A380 orders, but for you to deviate and bring another not discussed plane into it, the post must have stung, huh? Take some aloe.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:58 pm

LAX772LR, you hold the distinction of being among my favorite A.netters.

But this is where I disagree with you, Good Sir. Good Sir, the 747 is so beautiful that I became desperate to get just a tiny piece of G-AWNH when they scrapped her. I stop everything I'm doing just to see one take off.

I just got a 1:200 JC Wings 747-8i in the Sunrise Orange livery. I'm literally crying my eyes out at how utterly majestic that thing looks! You cannot, with a straight face, tell me the 747 is ugly :cry2:

Now, on topic, the news is saddening. When even Boeing says it, its true. I do hope a few more freighter sales happens. UPS was a nice surprise to say the least.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13437
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:16 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
I'm literally crying my eyes out at how utterly majestic that thing looks!

Only machine I could ever say that about is Concorde... and that's not even a plane anymore, just a museum piece.


Boeing778X wrote:
You cannot, with a straight face, tell me the 747 is ugly :cry2:

Sorry luv, but I could even tell ya like this:

Image
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13437
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:21 pm

dmstorm22 wrote:
As a whole JFK has 3x 748i as well from CA, LH, KE. But the B744 is reduced to just BA and LY now I believe.

Pretty sure QF still flies the 744 into JFK
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
dmstorm22
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:49 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:28 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
dmstorm22 wrote:
As a whole JFK has 3x 748i as well from CA, LH, KE. But the B744 is reduced to just BA and LY now I believe.

Pretty sure QF still flies the 744 into JFK


Ah, good catch.
 
User avatar
JannEejit
Posts: 1708
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:32 pm

dmstorm22 wrote:
JannEejit wrote:
Thirty six years after taking my first jetliner flight, I've yet to fly aboard 747 of any type. I need to rectify that situation soon, even if I just go somewhere and come straight back again !


What are BA's plans in regards to the B744? They still use a lot of them for JFK-LHR, and given the near shuttle nature of that route it would be tough to switch out given how J heavy those configs are on B744.

That route may have B744 service for quite a while.

As a whole JFK has 3x 748i as well from CA, LH, KE. But the B744 is reduced to just BA and LY now I believe.


Yeah I think an LHR-JFK-LHR flight is on the cards sometime soon,
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2540
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:44 pm

Just as well I snagged me another 747 flight this year with BA. Smoothest taxiing plane I've been on yet. Did not know we were moving until I looked out the window!
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
CWizard
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:45 pm

na wrote:
No surprise here.

But so sad.
For me the 747 is and will remain the most attractive airliner ever, its design has a character and uniqueness no modern airliner will ever reach. Its sad to see that boring, generic twinjets take over. Aviation is loosing a lot of appeal with this uniformity creeping forward. I never understood how someone can be enthusiastic about something generic like that fat sausage 777 or the slick A350. Technically they might be brilliant, but look at them: they are just like grey suits - yawn.


Hear, hear!
Very well said!
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:48 pm

For me, no other plane screams "I'm getting ready to go on an grand trans oceanic adventure" like a 747. Not sure why. Just something I've felt since I first saw one. When I see one parked at the gate, with the huge nose pointed right at your and seeing the flight deck windows above, it just has this timeless, iconic, graceful look to it. Can't really explain further, but it resonates an emotional connection that I'm sure planes like Concorde and others have done for many others over the years.
Spread hope like fire.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:51 pm

What makes the 747 beautiful?

The 742 is the most beautiful variant. Subsequent models the hump was too big and I agree with LAX772LR; it destroyed the lines. But not enough to stop me loving it for:

- the long swept wings
- P&W and GE engines look fantastic. And there are FOUR of them
- it's sheer size
- what a kick-ass, futuristic machine it looks on final approach with full flap and gear down
- awesome interior, with its towering sidewalls giving an incredible feeling of spaciousness
- macho look of the cockpit glass in profile view

........ and I'm sure several other things I can't think of
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 19473
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:01 pm

I read the surprising numbers of posters telling this is "sad" - yet no one explains why it is especially sad.

Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15544
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:01 pm

Revelation wrote:
He's pronouncing the A380 as dead too:

“We don’t see much demand for really big airplanes,” Tinseth said. Furthermore, he added, “we find it hard to believe Airbus will be able to deliver the rest of their A380s in backlog.”


While I can understand his need to deflect the marketing failure as being nothing more than the market does not need any sort of aircraft that size, both the Boeing and Airbus market forecasts show demand for very large aircraft. What I see is more of an admission that that market demand cannot sustain two different VLA, which many people have been saying for years.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13437
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:04 pm

mariner wrote:
I read the surprising numbers of posters telling this is "sad" - yet no one explains why it is especially sad.

Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

Exactly!
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
fallap
Posts: 1025
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:36 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:04 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Phoenix9 wrote:
Them's fighting words :box: :stirthepot:

Ya know, I probably SHOULD'VE just asked this point-blank, sooner:

WHAT, IN YOUR (ANYONE'S) OPINION MAKES THE 747 "BEAUTIFUL?"

That seems to be the common sentiment. I've always just assumed that it was the hump, seeing as that's the only thing that generally stands out from any other airliner-- and so I've always vehemently disagreed with "everyone" as I find that the hump completely destroys the aircraft's lines, and just looks so ungainly.

So on that point, we can always agree to disagree.
But then again, I've never really considered that it might be something else, or maybe even a combo of things.

So figured I'd ask.
What say you all?


Just like a woman (or a queen in this case): It got the right curves at the right places. It is noisy, expensive to operate and maintain. It can give you the most wonderful bumpy ride of your life, leaving you asking for seconds - and take you places where the air is thin.
Ex grease monkey buried head to toe inside an F-16M
Now studying Political Science
 
pallvidar
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:08 pm

georgiaame wrote:
Mark my words, and there is historic precedent, in about 15 years, there will be hewing and hawing about the need to reopen the 747 line because no other aircraft on the market can fit the flight profile. It's gonna happen. God rest the Queen.


Quite like the 757 ;)
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:18 pm

crimsonchin wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
crimsonchin wrote:
Oh, what happened to those 10-15 airlines they've been in constant talks with for the better part of 7 years, didn't pan out?


Apparently they all decided to take the A380 instead.

.....oh wait.....

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what that has to do with the 747, since the thread was solely about the 747 and not 747 v A380 orders, but for you to deviate and bring another not discussed plane into it, the post must have stung, huh? Take some aloe.


Instead of getting butthurt over a light comment, try:

1. Lightening up
2. Saving your sarcasm
3. Visiting the MAX 10 launch thread and chastising the A guys for doing similar
4. Understanding that negativity breeds negativity.

But anyhow, I guess you only want people to clap at your sarcasm, so <insert slow clap here>.

mariner wrote:
I read the surprising numbers of posters telling this is "sad" - yet no one explains why it is especially sad.

Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

mariner


Well, to some, mergers are progress, but you'd likely ask why we'd want to see less carriers? I'd agree. As with that, why do we want to see less four-holers? The reality is that most of us get it - it's over - but we will still miss this airliner. Doesn't mean I don't enjoy seeing the 787/A350s out there. :-)
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
panampreflight
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:12 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:20 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks


I think that might be treason.


YUP!, I think your right.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:20 pm

mariner wrote:
I read the surprising numbers of posters telling this is "sad" - yet no one explains why it is especially sad.

Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

mariner

Sad, because with "progress" (which equals increase in share price per passenger flown) comes boring twinjets which are cramped, uninteresting to look at and completely uniform. If progress gave us the DC-10, I'd be all for it.
 
panampreflight
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:12 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:24 pm

dmstorm22 wrote:
JannEejit wrote:
Thirty six years after taking my first jetliner flight, I've yet to fly aboard 747 of any type. I need to rectify that situation soon, even if I just go somewhere and come straight back again !


What are BA's plans in regards to the B744? They still use a lot of them for JFK-LHR, and given the near shuttle nature of that route it would be tough to switch out given how J heavy those configs are on B744.

That route may have B744 service for quite a while.

As a whole JFK has 3x 748i as well from CA, LH, KE. But the B744 is reduced to just BA and LY now I believe.


I also know they have a 744 into PHX daily from the mothership [LHR].
 
User avatar
HighBypass
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon May 22, 2017 3:03 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:28 pm

SeaDoo wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks...


I have not heard to the queen of the skies referred to as the hunchback of Puget Sound.


Most likely due to the fact that he made up that pejorative term for the Queen of the Skies all by himself.

EDIT: Meanwhile, OP, do share with fellow thread readers and contributors your idea of a beautiful commercial aircraft (other than the bleedingly obvious choice of Concorde)?
 
NichCage
Posts: 916
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:51 pm

Honestly, the 747-8 shouldn't have even been built. Cargo operators may love the plane, but very few passengers operators like it. Only Air China, Korean Air, and Lufthansa operate the 747-8.

The A380 is basically the same. It is too large for most airlines and now Emirates is the only customer who actually wants new models, not replacement models.
 
User avatar
BN727227Ultra
Posts: 703
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:15 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:57 pm

SunsetLimited wrote:
For me, no other plane screams "I'm getting ready to go on an grand trans oceanic adventure" like a 747.


I know what you mean--if you were getting on a 747, you were going someplace....HNL...SXM...the capitals of Europe and Asia...and in early days, Las Vegas....Northwest to Florida, etc.

I wonder if our Japanese friends who flew hundreds of times on 747SRs felt the same.
 
User avatar
DrPaul
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 7:21 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:09 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Never was a fan of the Hunchback of Puget Sound, and will never in a trillion years understand why it's maintained the cult of personality that it has among AvGeeks... but all that aside, at least Boeing has finally come to grips with reality... I get that the model popular for what it once did for aviation.... four decades ago. But now it's just an obsolete relic of a bygone era; I can't believe it's taken them this long to see what just about everyone else has already long-since known.


Each to his own... I remember seeing some of the first 747s coming into Heathrow (not the very first one, as this came in from the west, although some of my pals cycled up to Heathrow to see it land) over 45 years back and being very impressed with the appearance of this giant aeroplane, both flying overhead and on the ground. Aesthetically, I think that the later extended upper deck made them look nose-heavy, especially with the 800i series, and I wasn't that keen on the 400 series' winglets (the 800 series wing-tips are much better looking), but the cargo version of the 800 series is to me an exceptionally elegant aeroplane, and hopefully that will remain in production and be seen around the world for some time to come.

I do agree with the posters here who regret the passing of older types of aeroplanes and the ubiquity of twin-engine ones today. I remember DC-4s, DC-6s, DC-7s, Constellations, Airspeed Ambassadors and Viscounts going into Heathrow when I was a little kid (just too young to have seen Stratocruisers), not to mention the occasional Avro York and the weird Breguet Deux-Ponts, and the classic jet airliners such as the Comet, Caravelle, 707 and the DC-8. I've seen many other types come and go, and, other than the evergreen 737, the 747 must be the longest-serving one, coming up to 50 years of service. Nonetheless, all things must pass, and I guess that one day I'll be saying to myself about the 747 as I have about other types of aeroplane: 'I haven't seen one of them for some time.'
 
SkyVoice
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:34 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:10 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
mariner wrote:
I read the surprising numbers of posters telling this is "sad" - yet no one explains why it is especially sad.

Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

Exactly!


Look, I think that a good number of us on A.net know that business is business, and if your airline can make money while keeping costs in check by replacing 747s with 777-300s, then buy (or lease) & fly the newer planes! But nearly all of us are here because aviation is our passion, and it is that part of us that makes us feel sad that the Jumbos are headed for the desert. We all remember how thrilled we were when we saw, heard & FELT our first 747 up close! I sure do! I remember working gates for Comair/Delta Connection back in the late 90s when SABENA flew a 747-300 BRU-CVG, and how I had to be on top of my game as the PAXs came from Customs & moved, en masse, to Concourse C to connect with our flights (and how it didn't hurt me to brush up on my French, either!). Those were high times, but they came in for a landing.

And, although the following happened when I was a boy, I'm still a wee bit sad when I remember that TWA flew their last Super Constellation from Louisville to St. Louis back in 1967, even though that route was replaced with 707s, 727s & Convair 880s. At least we will always have our memories!
"Tough times never last. Tough people do." - Dr. Robert H. Schuller
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2740
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:17 pm

I have not heard to the queen of the skies referred to as the hunchback of Puget Sound.




I'll bet if you Googled the term "queef chief", you probably won't see a picture of my old wife, but I still call her that from time to time. An expression doesn't have to be popular to work. In any case...


A bit off topic, but what the hell is up with all these "twins/big twins are so boring; the world sucks now" postings? I get that a lot of us like the 747's lines*, but there is a tremendous amount of variety among the modern aircraft featured at today's airfields. It's really not that bad, folks.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
User avatar
BN727227Ultra
Posts: 703
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:15 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:32 pm

Gasman wrote:

The 742 is the most beautiful variant.


For me, it was the 744. The 741 and 2, they represented 'how much money can we lose' based on the world economy and oil shock. When the 744 made the scene, everyone used it to make money and lots of it. The 744 was the 'Queen of the Skies' in a business suit.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2419
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:45 pm

Always annoys me when people call it the "Queen of the skies".

The original Queen of the Skies was the Vickers VC-10 family. That got the nickname first; the 747 just stole it.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:49 pm

Channex757 wrote:
Always annoys me when people call it the "Queen of the skies".

The original Queen of the Skies was the Vickers VC-10 family. That got the nickname first; the 747 just stole it.

Agreed. The 747 is reminiscent neither of Freddie Mercury nor Betty Windsor.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7412
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:51 pm

Gasman wrote:
What makes the 747 beautiful?

The 742 is the most beautiful variant. Subsequent models the hump was too big and I agree with LAX772LR; it destroyed the lines. But not enough to stop me loving it for:

Agree on the hump, disagree on the variant.

Livery makes it better ;)
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:03 am

LAX772LR wrote:
mariner wrote:
I read the surprising numbers of posters telling this is "sad" - yet no one explains why it is especially sad.

Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

Exactly!

You're making somewhat of a false dichotomy there. It is possible to believe in progress, while still feeling a sense of sadness about the end of an era. For instance I think the progress civil aviation has made in the past 60 years is truly amazing, and there is even greater to come. That doesn't mean I can't feel sad that I can no longer see a Caravelle or a Solent or a Tristar flying, or that an aircraft which has been associated with so many good memories for me (the 747) is coming to the end of its life. It also doesn't mean that I think we should go back to having Caravelles, Solents, Tristars and 747s as the mainstays of fleets. They all had their time, and they all served ably.

For me as someone growing up in New Zealand in the 1980s and 90s, the 747 was more or less the symbol of international flying. In fact I believe my first flight as a 3 year old was on a Qantas 747-200 AKL-SYD-AKL (followed by a flights AKL-NOU-AKL on an Air Caledonie International Sud Caravelle, and a on a UTA DC-10-30, all of which I sadly only have the vaguest of memories of, but they were sufficient to have me hooked on aviation). So the 747 holds a special place in my heart. I'm not an especially frequent long haul flyer, but over the years I have flown on: QF 747-200/-300/-400, NZ 747-200/-400, SQ 747-400, MH 747-400, TG 747-300/-400, and LH 747-8. The 747 took me on my first trip to Europe, and part way (along with a 777 and 787 respectively) on my second and third. The 747 took me to places in the Pacific sometimes, and even just between Auckland and Sydney/Melbourne/Brisbane or between Sydney and Brisbane on occasion. From a pessenger perspective the aircraft is interesting, with its size, and its unique areas like the Zone A in the nose and the upper deck. In terms of aesthetics, I personally find the highly swept wing to be a thing of beauty. I think the original and stretched upper decks both have their distinct looks, and I enjoy them both. Viewed from front on with the curving windows and pointed nose, it just looks awesome to me. But obviously all that is subjective, and everyone is going to have their own opinions on it. It seems somewhat bizarre to me that some people feel the need to denigrate and deride other people's opinions on subjective matters.

As I've already hinted above, for me the sadness of seeing the demise of the 747 is less about the aesthetics, enjoyable for me as they are, and more about the memories associated with the aircraft. To carry the thought further, I am also sad to see the demise of the 767. Like the 747, the 767 was somewhat of a workhorse in my part of the world, and so I associate it with many memories of the Pacific Islands, Australia, and Japan. Unlike the 747, I can't say I found the 767 particularly interesting to look at; compared to a 777 or an A330 (and now to a 787 or an A350), it just seemed fairly bland aesthetically to me. But the aircraft served well, and now they're gone. So yes I am sad to see the 767 go. That doesn't mean I want them to keep going on; they have had their time, and now there are new aircraft to enjoy too - I already have good memories from A330s, 777s and 787s, and no doubt will have more from them and from A350s in the future. In time those types too will come to the end of their lives, and likewise I will be sad to see them go, and will be excited to see what comes next.



V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13437
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:15 am

Gasman wrote:
mariner wrote:
Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

Sad, because with "progress" (which equals increase in share price per passenger flown) comes boring twinjets which are cramped, uninteresting to look at and completely uniform. If progress gave us the DC-10, I'd be all for it.

Your idea of "progress" is something that's comparatively inefficient, relatively polluting, and (worst of all) riddled with at least three different known-defects in design that cost hundreds upon hundreds of people their lives?

....odd. :?


HighBypass wrote:
Most likely due to the fact that he made up that pejorative term for the Queen of the Skies all by himself.

Indeed. I used my massive chrono-telepathic powers to go back in time and have Lightsaber use the term 12yrs ago:
viewtopic.php?t=306851&start=100#p3437225

And here's where I did it to someone else 10yrs ago, just because I'm good like that:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=447779

Image


HighBypass wrote:
do share with fellow thread readers and contributors your idea of a beautiful commercial aircraft (other than the bleedingly obvious choice of Concorde)?

You could probably look to my screenname and figure that out.

Though to be honest, I find judging an aircraft based on its physical appearance to be rather daft, as it doesn't affect what they are, nor what they can do, in any way. To me, "beauty" is in efficiency, modernity, and above all else: CAPABILITY.

Which is why I gravitate to aircraft capable of performing in ways few/no other can:
Concorde for its speed, 77L for its range/payload, A350 for its efficiency.

Ironically, the 747 once possessed all the above, in terms of airliner superlatives. But that was then-- now, it's so woefully outclassed that it's hardly worth a comparison. Apparently, Boeing has reached the point where they won't even publicly deny that anymore.
Last edited by LAX772LR on Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:28 am, edited 3 times in total.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
FlyUSAir
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:26 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:15 am

Oh boy, can't wait for the skies to be littered with 737-15000's that are the same 737 design but the length of New York to Philadelphia. Innovation is dead.

That being said Boeing is my favorite aircraft manufacturer and they have earned their place in history but the lack of innovative ideas/designs since the 787 is disgusting. Stretching the 737 to the point it snaps and adding some new wings/engines onto the 777 is not innovation or progress, it's laziness. I really do hope behind the scenes they are working on the 797/MOM.
A319/A320/A321/A333 712/732/733/734/735/737/738/752/753/762/763 C172 CR2/CR7/CR9 E145/E170/E175/E190
MD82/MD83/MD88/MD90 Q100/Q400
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4523
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:29 am

cschleic wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
The best ever 747 flights I was on were the EVA passenger/freighter trips. 200 people in a 747, easy to board, relaxed, and great service. More than made up for the horrible boarding time of 2AM.


We're you flying SEA - TPE? I recall boarding one of their combi 744s for that route in the middle of the night. Also rode a KLM 747 SUD (aka 300) combi once.


It was. And there were quite a few US military personnel on the flight
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13437
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:31 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
A bit off topic, but what the hell is up with all these "twins/big twins are so boring; the world sucks now" postings? I get that a lot of us like the 747's lines*, but there is a tremendous amount of variety among the modern aircraft featured at today's airfields. It's really not that bad, folks.

^This. A thousand times this!

Besides, I sorta like being among the (compared to the general populace) few people educated enough to tell a 77W from an A35K, or a 788 from a 764ER.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
iamlucky13
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2007 12:35 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:37 am

Channex757 wrote:
Always annoys me when people call it the "Queen of the skies".

The original Queen of the Skies was the Vickers VC-10 family. That got the nickname first; the 747 just stole it.


Monarchs pass along their titles according to succession, and so do airliners. When the VC-10 ended production in 1970, another royal figure was already gracing the skies, ready to assume the title.
 
Gasman
Posts: 2203
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:06 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:39 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Gasman wrote:
mariner wrote:
Don't any of you blokes believe in progress?

Sad, because with "progress" (which equals increase in share price per passenger flown) comes boring twinjets which are cramped, uninteresting to look at and completely uniform. If progress gave us the DC-10, I'd be all for it.

Your idea of "progress" is something that's comparatively inefficient, relatively polluting, and (worst of all) riddled with at least three different known-defects in design that cost hundreds upon hundreds of people their lives?

....odd. :?


HighBypass wrote:
Most likely due to the fact that he made up that pejorative term for the Queen of the Skies all by himself.

Indeed. I used my massive chrono-telepathic powers to go back in time and have Lightsaber use the term 12yrs ago:
viewtopic.php?t=306851&start=100#p3437225

And here's where I did it to someone else 10yrs ago, just because I'm good like that:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=447779

Image


HighBypass wrote:
do share with fellow thread readers and contributors your idea of a beautiful commercial aircraft (other than the bleedingly obvious choice of Concorde)?

You could probably look to my screenname and figure that out.

Though to be honest, I find judging an aircraft based on its physical appearance to be rather daft, as it doesn't affect what they are, nor what they can do, in any way. To me, "beauty" is in efficiency, modernity, and above all else: CAPABILITY.

Which is why I gravitate to aircraft capable of performing in ways few/no other can:
Concorde for its speed, 77L for its range/payload, A350 for its efficiency.

Ironically, the 747 once possessed all the above, in terms of airliner superlatives. But that was then-- now, it's so woefully outclassed that it's hardly worth a comparison. Apparently, Boeing has reached the point where they won't even publicly deny that anymore.


You gravitate to the Concorde for its (and I quote) "efficiency, modernity, and above all else: CAPABILITY"?? Seriously?? The aircraft that
- nearly crippled an entire economy to get the 15 or so frames built
- Had to be purchased by respective governments and then basically donated to two airlines
- was a disaster waiting to happen - until it happened
- was noisy and uncomfortable inside
- woefully inefficient and exhorbitantly expensive to run
- barely had the range to cross the Atlantic
- was based on 1960's technology

odd.........

Could it be that beauty is in the eye of the beholder - and for a lot of us here, the 747 qualifies?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24994
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:34 am

DrPaul wrote:
Each to his own... I remember seeing some of the first 747s coming into Heathrow (not the very first one, as this came in from the west, although some of my pals cycled up to Heathrow to see it land) over 45 years back and being very impressed with the appearance of this giant aeroplane, both flying overhead and on the ground. Aesthetically, I think that the later extended upper deck made them look nose-heavy, especially with the 800i series, and I wasn't that keen on the 400 series' winglets (the 800 series wing-tips are much better looking), but the cargo version of the 800 series is to me an exceptionally elegant aeroplane, and hopefully that will remain in production and be seen around the world for some time to come.

I do agree with the posters here who regret the passing of older types of aeroplanes and the ubiquity of twin-engine ones today. I remember DC-4s, DC-6s, DC-7s, Constellations, Airspeed Ambassadors and Viscounts going into Heathrow when I was a little kid (just too young to have seen Stratocruisers), not to mention the occasional Avro York and the weird Breguet Deux-Ponts, and the classic jet airliners such as the Comet, Caravelle, 707 and the DC-8. I've seen many other types come and go, and, other than the evergreen 737, the 747 must be the longest-serving one, coming up to 50 years of service. Nonetheless, all things must pass, and I guess that one day I'll be saying to myself about the 747 as I have about other types of aeroplane: 'I haven't seen one of them for some time.'

Thanks for the charming post!

I wonder if I'll live long enough to see the day when people miss the 737's odd dorsal fin and spikey winglets because most of the 737s have retired.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

Re: Boeing admits 747 has no future as a pax model

Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:47 am

CAPABILITY is why the 747SP is my favorite commercial airliner, similar in concept to the 777-200LR (although a 777-8 at 772 length would be more comparable, and have even better performance)

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos