40 years of the 747

[fizzwheel]

Seems nuts doesnt it, 747 has been flying for 40 years, I'm still amazed by the shear size of the thing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7880808.stm

[Mr Speirs]

It does seem nuts how there has been little improvements in aviation in 40 years. Surely 40 years ago the 747 was built to meet the demands of a world wanting to travel and so needed big carriers to take them all.
That number must have increased massively now yet there isn't anything yet to replace it so that there are less plane in the sky.

Yeah theres that Airbus A380 but that isn't being used by everyone yet.

It just seems weird to me, why is it that aviation development effectively stopped after just 60 years?

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by Mr Speirs

It just seems weird to me, why is it that aviation development effectively stopped after just 60 years?

You could argue that with Concorde out of service, its effectively gone backwards...

[Viney]

I surprised it had enough fuel!

[Luckypants]

Originally Posted by Mr Speirs

Yeah theres that Airbus A380 but that isn't being used by everyone yet.

Well they only started delivering A380 planes last year, it will take a while to get a significant number into service.

Plus the big battle ground since the 60's has not been transatlantic hub-hub routes carrying large numbers of passengers, but the more frequent short and medium haul flights. We expect flights when we want them and to have a choice of departure time.

Aviation has not gone backwards, just in a different direction from the 747.

[SoulKiss]

Having made 2 flights on an A380 I can say the 747 is beaten

London to Singapore in both directions, with 777-200's for the Singapore to Auckland legs.

The A380 made the 777 seem VERY shabby (which it wasn't, but by comparison.....)

Originally Posted by Mr Speirs

It does seem nuts how there has been little improvements in aviation in 40 years. Surely 40 years ago the 747 was built to meet the demands of a world wanting to travel and so needed big carriers to take them all.
That number must have increased massively now yet there isn't anything yet to replace it so that there are less plane in the sky.

Yeah theres that Airbus A380 but that isn't being used by everyone yet.

It just seems weird to me, why is it that aviation development effectively stopped after just 60 years?

Boeing just cracked the perfect design early on, and airports were built to accommodate aircraft of that size. Any further improvements wouldn't be economically viable as the airline's profit margins are so tiny.

Boeing are shying away from large aircraft now, and are pinning their hopes on the dreamliner. Their strategy is more flights on quicker, more efficient planes flying direct, rather than massive planes flying through hubs.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

You could argue that with Concorde out of service, its effectively gone backwards...

Yep. Really sad

The Japs are building a super-sonic plane though

Originally Posted by Mr Speirs

It does seem nuts how there has been little improvements in aviation in 40 years.

It's true that in terms of the introduction of new airframes the aviation industry does move relatively slowly, but if you compare the specs of the planes from decades ago to their specs now you can see much improvement.

Engine improvements in terms of thrust, efficiency etc. are up. Generally planes are enlarged and can carry more passengers, or in the case of the A319, shrunk to fill a different market gap than the A320. And modern glass cockpits would be unrecognisable to the pilots of yesteryear.

[ogden]

It's not as if the 747 hasn't gone through some degree of evolution over the last 40 years either:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747#Variants