|Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 44):|
If you're sayiing that on a route with demand for only 130 seats, it was more cost effective to fly a 747 with only 130 passengers and 250 or so empty seats, I would disagree. Unfortunately for many carriers, that's exactly what happened on many 747 routes during the early years of service.
No, that's not it I was suggesting that with the explosion of air travel in the 60's, airlines saw the need for a bigger more capable airplane and the 747 had a cost per seat that was far lower than the 707/DC8. Funny enough it's the same exact scenario that we have right now with the A380. I wonder how many people will be claiming 40 years from now, that the majority of A380 customers ordered it for prestige only
|Quoting yyz717 (Reply 45):|
The 742 was on offer before the 741 entered service. Indeed, the initial 742's entered service in late 1970, months after the initial 741. All the aforementioned carriers ordered their 2 (each) 741 or 742 aircraft before the 747 entered service.
My point is that if they really just wanted to be like the "Jones's" they would have ordered the first available. They ordered the more capable 200, my guess because they really beleived that there was a need for it. It's very difficult for me to believe that a carrier that continued to operate the 747 right up to the 90's and 2000's, and in some cases still do, odered the early 747's for prestige only. That may or may not have been the case for a few but I do believe that for the majority they did think that they could use it given the aviation context of the late 60's.
|Quoting yyz717 (Reply 47):|
But still ordered before the 741 service entry, proving my point that many carriers ordered (token) 2 747's, not just EI.
Most carriers only had a couple of routes with enough demand for the 747. why would they order more?