re: Flew a in 747 this week

Does business class still have that weird backwards facing layout? So basically you are looking dead at the other guy the whole flight?

Or did you fly economy like a poor?

quote:

---

back then they didn’t care a whole lot about gas, my company had a few of those

---

Well airlines actually have their cost index they use where they will fly the plane faster if gas is cheap so optimizing the cost of the fuel and crew. If gas is more expensive let’s fly a little slower and conserve gas and pay the crew more for the extra flight time... or vice versa if gas is cheaper, fly the bird faster burning more fuel, but paying the flight crew less.

Interesting.

Something that struck me in Sutter's book was the emphasis on the supersonic jet at the time; Boeing had a supersonic transporter (SST) program running concurrently with the 747 program (which dwarfed the 747 program...the 747 was almost an insurance policy in case the supersonics didn't pan out and was thought of as a "well, at least we can use it for cargo" airplane). Everyone at the time thought supersonic transport was the way of the future. Congress ended up pulling the plug on assisting the funding on Boeing's project (the Boeing 2707), and the rest is history.

quote:

---

In March 1971, despite the project's strong support by the administration of President Richard Nixon, the U.S. Senate rejected further funding. A counterattack was organized under the banner of the "National Committee for an American SST", which urged supporters to send in $1 to keep the program alive. Afterward, letters of support from aviation buffs, containing nearly $1 million worth of contributions, poured in. Labor unions also supported the SST project, worried that the winding down of both the Vietnam War and Apollo program would lead to mass unemployment in the aerospace sector. AFL-CIO President George Meany suggested that the race to develop a first-generation SST was already lost, but the US should "enter the competition for the second generation —the SSTs of the 1980s and 1990s."

In spite of this newfound support, the House of Representatives also voted to end SST funding on 20 May 1971. The vote was highly contentious. Gerald Ford, then Republican Leader, shouted Meany's claims that "If you vote for the SST, you are ensuring 13,000 jobs today plus 50,000 jobs in the second tier and 150,000 jobs each year over the next ten years." Sidney Yates, leading the "no" camp, demanded a public vote (at that time a newly introduced procedure) and eventually won the vote against further funding, 215 to 204.

At the time, there were 115 unfilled orders by 25 airlines, while Concorde had 74 orders from 16 customers. The two prototypes were never completed. Due to the loss of several government contracts and a downturn in the civilian aviation market, Boeing reduced its number of employees by more than 60,000. The SST became known as "the airplane that almost ate Seattle." As a result of the mass layoffs and so many people moving away from the city in search of work, a billboard was erected near Sea-Tac airport in 1971 that read, "Will the last person leaving Seattle - turn out the lights".

---

Womp.

This is the 2707 design:

Most of this has to do with winds and priority.

Most airline contacts are paid off of scheduled block, duty, trip rig, or a minimum. So even if the flight is 3:30 hours and was scheduled for 4:00, the crew still gets 4 hours of pay or the minimum, which generally is around 6 hours per day.

quote:

---

did anyone in here ever get to fly on a Concorde?

---

Never any chance of that one.

Has anyone here ever flown on a commercial Constellation? That was my first flight (TWA) and I still remember seeing them in the sky.

My friend, you've haven't flown until you fly in one of Air Koryo's beautifully refurbished Soviet-built Ilyushin Il-18 aircraft. Only the finest linoleum flooring, lawn chairs, plywood, and Styrofoam for a high roller like me.

I did get to fly in a DC-3 in Australia:

quote:

---

Currently looking to book business upstairs in one to Europe next year, just not having much luck finding the perfect flight right now. Backup option is upstairs business on an A380, and if that doesn’t work I’ll slum it on business with Air Canada or Swiss Airlines on a 777.

---

Subtle “I work for a business” brag

quote:

---

Square windows - nope, nope, nope. I believe it was a British aircraft - a Comet, maybe (?) that had several accidents in the late 50's, early 60's due to airframe cracks caused by stresses around the square windows?

---

The DC-3 isn’t pressurized so it won’t have have fatigue and wear and tear on its airframe, particularly around stress points like windows, like a pressurized aircraft would.