Actually, the production of a single Boeing 747 takes about 43 days.

🥁🥁... Wouldn't you know it? There's no cymbal or gong.

Fine, that's all you get.

🥁🥁🐍

[removed]

[deleted]

What if it's married?

eli5 why?.

r/technicallythetruth

Newer models being produced?

Widebody twin jets are more cost effective for airlines than quad jets.

It's because engine's are crazy expensive in maintenance. So having 50% of engine's and taking 70% of the load is pretty good deal for airlines

A 747 is a damn big gadget.

I remember the excitement of my first 747 flight in the 70's. I had the unexpected pleasure of being being bumped into first class a couple of times in the 80's on trans-Atlantic flights, that was particularly awesome.

This is honestly the end of an era, and kind of sad. Gotta give props to the designers, the 747 has been a great success.

hub and spoke approach is getting replaced by more direct routes that carry less passenger each

Did a tour of the Boeing plant several years ago, really cool.

Boeing…ehhhh

Only flew on the one with the bar once.

Only flew on the one with the bar once. Flew on the bar mod once

Nice 😊

If the definition of gadget is "technological object that we find interesting regardless of size" I guess it fits the bill.

But that does mean they are reducing redundancy the same way they reduce maintenance cost.

Remember how Boeing put a bunch of important features behind a pay wall in their new jets and a whole bunch of jets crashed due to that and no one went to jail for that…well Pepperidge Farms remembers and still won’t fly because of that

I’m surprised that they were still being newly manufactured TBH.

They don't allow engagements until much later than 43 days in Seattle.

"Boeing. Where safety has value ... we can charge for"

I treated myself to a flight on a Lufthansa 747 upper deck, just so I could have the life experience. Having a widebody-style business-class seat with only a single aisle, with no other seats behind our section, almost made it feel like I was on a small private jet.

Yes. But also less chances of failure. I think airplanes are required to be able to fly with one engine out, regardless of how many they have. Maybe some here can confirm.

Yep. Google ETOPS if you’re curious what the requirements are.

Petrifarm. Do you mean Pepperidge farm?

So for passenger planes this thing has been on the way out for a while, but what will replace it for cargo?

Yeah that what I said

But it still has 30 years behind the leader when it comes to longevity in regular passenger service.

That edit ain’t sly lmao

777X likely.

A lot of shipping companies and also been buying 757/767s as they retire from passenger service since used aircraft are cheaper than new. But the 777X is easily more efficient than the 747 so I’d wager that’s where the orders will go.

🥁🥁📡

Flew the upper deck on a cargolux flight, but I was too young to really appreciate it.

747 COMIN OUT THE SKY, OH WONT YOU TAKE ME DOWN TO MEMPHIS ON A MIDNIGHT RIDE, I WANNA MOVE…

Lucky! I wish I would have been around to see one

No. No props, this is a jet.

Best “passenger” plane ever. Passenger is in quotes because I’ll assume all the recent builds are cargo planes.

More efficient wide bodies are already in common use and many air freight services have gone from shipping major hub to major hub with large wide bodied aircraft and then servicing minor hubs with smaller aircraft to more direct flights with medium sized narrow bodied air craft such as the 737.

Who has the leading spot. Is it DC-3 or MD-80?

I have no clue of what you’re talking about and I will not have such salacious accusations against me

DC-3

So did I. Watched a movie and then went to a mezzanine that overlooked a small area of the plant. After about 10 minutes, we were ushered out and it was over. Never really got close to a plane. Kinda sucky if you ask me.

Lucky you. I only got to fly on them in cattle class from Miami to Cape Town and back. Descending the stairs after a 12 or 14 hour flight was a bit scary.

That's why you have to *give* it props, duh!

Manufacturers making cheaper planes with less redundancy. How did they know that's exactly what I wanted to fly in?

Heartbreaking.

I wish Boeing could have created something 747 fuel efficiency solution type thing. Make it perfect for another 50 years

ahem

No, you are saying assembling. Production of it starts when whichever component started to be made. It could be the engine or radar system, which can be much longer.

Gonna miss these. Along with the a380. Lucky to have been able to fly both a few times intercontinental.

Also Moden jets are much much more fuel efficient.

Higher complexity doesn't generally improve your reliability aspects though and whereas I don't know much about the 747 it's entirely possible the 4 engines aren't entirely independent.

They might share fuel-pumps per-wing, so if say something happened to fuel pump 1 out of 2 you might not have engines 1 & 2 while engines 3 & 4 are calmy doing their thing.

Less moving parts is generally always a good thing, and if it weren't a passenger aircraft potentially eliminating down to a single engine "might" be acceptable if the gliding capabilities were very good (much like some turbo-prop planes) and the risk of losing life was overall lower.

If I remember right the wing skins were last made in the 1990’s, so ~30 years lead time?

the props are in the jet engine, right?

All twin-engines need to be able to fly on a single engine regardless of ETOPS status.

That’s how the 737MAX happened. Trying to extend the lifespan of a design long past when it should have been retired.

As in the 737 was designed during a time when many airports had no baggage handling equipment for loading, so it sits lower to the ground than every other extant Boeing design, which then forced them to move the engine nacelles up when they slapped in the truly massive high-bypass turbofan jets. Moving the nacelles changed flight characteristics of the plane but they put a flight control system from the military side (MCAS) on to bring the planes flight characteristics back in line with the OG 737. The MCAS system got faulty data from sensors on some flights and severely contributed to the downing of those flights. There were specific trim levels on the 737MAX that had/have more advanced troubleshooting features (that’s the safety systems locked behind a paywall of earlier posts), that the airlines of the flights that went down didn’t spring for (new cockpit setup would require that airline to send its pilots in for retraining on the new features).

This is what I pieced together working in Boeing’s fabrication division deburring and hand-finishing wing ribs and spar chords (ribs hold the upper and lower wing skins apart and the spar chords hold the wing skins to the fuselage.) Chances are if you’ve flown on any of the new 777X aircraft parts of the wings I fixed up with angle grinders and hand tools.

It's actually mostly because airlines are unable to fill these jumbos as regularly so they have lower utilization.

The narrowbodies/modern widebodys do have slightly lower maintenance costs, but also actually have a higher load factor since they can be filled regularly and flown more often.

I remember going to Hawaii in the early 80’s and having a whole middle row of 4 seats to myself. The flight was probably 20% full

Look at the brain on this one.

We were there for several hours. Saw three different assembly lines including 777 and 787.

How about gizmo? Would it qualify as that?

What, were you expecting free samples?

The 747 series has 4 engines and a wing form optimized for higher cruise speed. You can't easily engineer your way around those without redesigning the whole plane. They already have the 787 and 777, which meet customers needs.

I flew on a BA A380 two weeks ago from London. The big jets are a fantastic passenger experience (so much less turbulence, a much quieter plane) but the plane was like you mentioned only 80% full. They let me sneak up to premium from coach for most of the flight since they had empty seats

[deleted]

You missed the bit where the Boeing sales people deliberately miss informed the airlines that no type conversation training was necessar, in order to increase sales. The pilots of the crashed jets had no idea that this system existed let alone how to deal with a failure of it.

Ford pinto levels of corporate competence.

It might actually be a cagigger.

It was cutting edge in the 60’s and 70’s but new technology has made it fade out.

Are you a box?

I always wanted to fly in a 747 never did. I did manage a 767 once so at least I got to experience a true double aisle wife body but not the same. The only time I got to go in one was the prototype I think it is at Museum of Flight in Seattle.

I did it in 2019 at Everett and I confirm it was several hours worth of tour, even with snowmageddon occurring in Seattle.

Do you remember when carriers ignored emergency ADs and did not train their flight crew properly?

Boeing isn't blameless, but it wasn't just them. Ultimately it is a failing of the entire industry

Ironically, the 747 actually lasted a lot longer than they expected it to. The whole reason for the raised cockpit was to allow a hinged nose with direct cargo loading under the cockpit - the idea being that all the passenger 747s could be quickly and easily converted to cargo once supersonic airliners like Concorde made them obsolete. Except that never happened, and the 747 passenger role lingered much longer.

What about the new airforce 1 ? I thought that was going to be a brand new 747-8

From a quick google search, a 747 can’t really maintain altitude with one engine, unlike twin jets. So, 50% of engines to maintain altitude in either case, but the 747 will cost more. That said, one engine providing thrust (to exclude APUs) is better than none. Also, the loss of an engine will probably just lead to an early landing anyway. The pilot just has more options when they started with 4 engines

What’s that have to do with this post?

What a majestic airplane.

I’ve been fascinated with the 747 since I can remember. These days I fly very frequently - nothing glamours, just regional flights on Wizz Air or its Irish competition - but I felt honored to travel on a recently-built 747 on a transatlantic flight.

Nothing of its type - past or present - can complete with its elegance. The A380 is a bloated albatross in comparison and I can’t imagine it being eulogized with reverence like the 747.

No they will deadhead crews, mechanics, and some other staff in the 8-16 seats (going off 20-year old memory) on the upper deck.

Yeah, but they call them "Turbines" because it sounds cooler.

Where are you getting the reduced redundancy from?

Source.

Edit: If you want 747s, there's always Joni Mitchell:

>I pulled into the Cactus Tree Motel to shower off the dust
And I slept on the strange pillows of my wanderlust
I dreamed of 747s over geometric farms
Dreams Amelia, dreams and false alarms

Technically the 737MAX was on paper the exact same flight characteristics of an non-MAX model at the time of sale, so per regulators there was no need to have the pilots go through it. The Lion Air flight 610 and Ethiopian Air flight 302 tragedies were monumental fuckups from many sources, not just Boeing.

4 engines down to 2. The article also literally states they cheaper to make and references the reduction in engines.

I got to design one repair for a DC-3 that one of the airlines runs for charity now. That was cool. Also very easy because fatigue isn't much of a concern without a pressurized cabin. If they had actually decided to re-engine MD-80s I think they could have operated practically forever. They are built like tanks. Also seems like the military will run B-52s until the end of time.

[deleted]

As long as it's not a widget.

Everyone should experience a wife body. Did the husband sit in the cuck chair ^jumpseat ?

Those technically rolled off the line two years ago, and are currently in the process of being modified to the specs of the contract.

The newer planes can fly on 50% engine capacity just as the 747 could. Having 4 isn't necessarily better redundancy if you still need two working to fly.

50 years of keeping the people of the world moving around as needed. With a pretty clean track record for safety. End of an era 🫡

I’m always configured for economy. I must have that kind of look.

i love that plane 😢

That would have been nice. Like maybe a free marker light or an extra wheel nut. But no, we were herded through the gift shop on the way out.

I must have gotten the 10¢ tour instead of the $1 tour. 😡

Checks B-52’s payload

You are correct.

That longer takeoff roll with the quad engines. Will miss them!

Yeah that’s not a reduction. The number of engines has nothing to do with redundancy or safety.

I thought I recalled the 747 only needing 1 engine to fly and land in an emergency. If I am remembering wrong and you're correct that it requires two, then I'd agree with you.

Meanwhile the Airbus A380 was only in production for 15 years.

Technically they call them fans. Props can have a turbine behind them too.

No, but I have a lot of emotional baggage.

Spent quite a bit of time in the cockpit, too. Good memories.

I'll allow it.

The massive jumbos were built to service the largest airports, when most long haul service operated on a "Hub and spoke" model. This is when the big international airports serve as a "hub" for the vast majority of incoming flights, where people would then connect on to another flight which would fly a shorter distance to the final destination. However airlines, for a number of reasons, have shifted more towards using smaller, more efficient aircraft that serve more direct routes. Larger aircraft also require bigger runways, which means they are not as flexible as smaller craft.

I mostly built ULDs, processed customs docs and accepted DGR back in those days. :D

all commercial flights go under the single engine rule no?

[removed]

Epic typo on my part but no by that time the husband had an ex to the front

My grandfather did avionics maintenance at Boeing for like 60 years, contracted out to airlines all over the place. Kuwait, Saudi, Beijing... the man had some wild stories.

Been on an A380 as well. Looks the same from the inside but still cool somehow flying with one.

But wasn't there a version proposed that was going to use propellers?

Edit: Apparently the never built 747-500 was indeed meant to be propllers

Snake Jazz

When the fuck did a Boeing 747 become a "gadget"?

Here we go again on a 747 Looking at the clouds from the other side of Heaven Smoking and drinking, never gonna stop Reading magazines stop me looking at the clock

I flew on a condor airlines 767 to Germany. That aircraft was so old that it had separate RGB filters on 3 different projectors to make a single image on the bulkheads of the aircraft. Somehow it managed to have headphone jacks in each seat but that was your only luxury.

The last wide body I’ve flown in was a DC-10 almost 30 years ago. Kinda sad really.

So what's the new big boy?

[deleted]

Or a gremlin.

Regarding the last 747, I too love the aircraft. My uncle, a lifelong
Pan Am employee rose to cargo operations manager at PTY before retiring in the mid-90s. PTY is Panama City, Panama for those not versed in airport designators.
As such, when we flew (I was born in Panama), we did it under his
aegis, which on a Pan Am flight was a big deal. I also remember –
vividly – meeting Mr. Juan Trippe, Pan Am CEO. This was in 1968 when I
was ten years old. He gave me a model of a 747 jet in Pan Am livery, one
of those which was destined for travel agencies as part of the
promotion for the upcoming ‘world largest passenger jet’ promotion.
Anyway, in 1969 we moved to live in Birmingham (when my stepfather
retired as Command Sergeant Major of the 193rd Infantry Brigade). This,
to continue serving in the reserves at a backwater Army depot (viewed as
a plum assignment used as reward for long service because it meant
certain perks of Army life, remained).
Point being, we traveled back to Panama twice a year. Of course,
always on Pan Am (after an Eastern flight through Atlanta to Miami).
Heck, I still remember my excitement as if it were yesterday when in
1971 we flew on the 747 for the first time! Travel with my uncle’s
imprimatur on our tickets meant the stewardesses treated 11-y/o me like
royalty.
And for those unaware, the aircraft has a circular staircase to the
upper deck, through which the crew access the flight deck. I was puffed
with importance at being in 1A at the very front. Honestly, I felt like I
was king of the world because I was even welcomed onto the flight deck
itself where they let me sit in a jump seat for about 15 minutes. Small
wonder model aviation followed and I use a Bonanza to this day for
personal and business travel, eh?
I maintain a fond part of my heart for the 747 to this day.

If they made this decision, it was not a recent one. Someone did the math months or years ago showing when it would no longer be profitable to continue producing these things.

I also believe there are newer plane innovations are in process of being implemented. Here is a video by Real Engineering that explains some of these ideas and their pros and cons.

The Queen of the Skies

They're too expensive to fly because they are hard to fill with passengers for even the most popular long haul routes. This was the original purpose of the aircraft. Many airports do not support them limiting their market. They being outclassed by significantly more efficient aircraft.

Boeing not producing them doesn't mean companies will stop flying them today. It just means that they will not fill and complete anymore orders. They are still popular aircraft for cargo, military, and some smaller roles.

Weren't the flight characteristics different due to the new position of the engines? Unless you're talking about the inclusion of the MCAS.

How do you make an apple pie from scratch?

First invent the universe.

Yep. With MCAS the MAX had the same flight characteristics as the OG 737, so by adding it Boeing was able to manufacture them under the original 737 production certificate, which is/was a MASSIVE loophole that hopefully the FAA has closed (I have not checked as I got the hell out of Boeing earlier this year due to culture issues when I got called back from a layoff).

It turns out that people who survived [in upper management] the Boeing/McDonnell-Douglas merger in the 90’s were the scum-sucking corporate raider types who would take a league if you give them an inch who would exploit things like vague regulations/legislation for a payday and set up someone who actually kinda sorta gave a crap about longevity of the company as a fall guy. [James McNerney was the President, CEO, and Chairman of Boeing’s Board of Directors while the 737MAX was developed and certified, then resigned before the first deliveries for Muilenberg to take the heat, then Calhoun has taken over once an executive was used as a scapegoat. McNerney and Calhoun are MBA types while Muilenberg was an engineer…]

Upper deck is really nice

Won’t be on the 747, but the efficiency of the open rotor turbine engine is making a comeback: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/ge-and-safran-tout-new-open-rotor-engine-future-for-sustainable-aviation/

On 16 December 2021, Emirates received its 123rd A380, which was the 251st and last delivered by Airbus. The $25 billion investment was not recouped.

The economics of very large planes just isn't really viable anymore. It is more profitable now to get smaller, very efficient planes to fly direct rather than having a hub model where small planes feed 1 big plane at a major airport which then flies to another big airport to feed a bunch of small planes.

Awww boxie :( pats

[removed]

I got to fly on two 747's on my trip to America in 2018 and was so sad to see those Qantas 747's were both retired not long after.

I was absolutely ecstatic when I booked a flight to europe next year and the flight from Singapore to Frankfurt is on a Lufthansa 747. It's going to be awesome.

[removed]

[removed]

Yep the passenger version of the 747 has been out of production for years except for one-offs like the new versions of AF1.

It's not the same plane as the first one anyway. They only look similar and share the same name. They will bring back a new version soon enough.

Snazz?

Do you miss them because the newer planes are not as good?

I’ve flown 747 a few times. It’s alright. The seating class matters way more. I’d prefer lay down seats in business class on any aircraft that has them.

The B-52, C-130, and CH-47 are all currently projected to have over a century in service by the time they retire the platforms.

What do you mean you lost the baby?

Go find it.

You and all of us boxie

I’ve been on the newer ones now over 10 times in intercontinental flights as well. They’re pretty nice, but I feel like they’re more cramped. The double decker was always cool, and they had more space in seats in all classes it felt like. And I know this doesn’t matter much but it was always nice knowing there were 4 engines when being hours over the ocean lol

Really a true engineering marvel. Somehow I always get the feeling that things made in the past were just much better designed.

I had the pleasure of flying Asiana Airlines to Europe in Business class in the early 90’s. It was in the upper deck. It was fantastic. I will miss the 747s as they retire.

[removed]

The blades in the jet engine don’t propel the plane. The exhaust jet does. The jet engine blade assemblies are compressors up front and turbines in the back.

End of an era, that was my first thought. Mom was a gate agent and I spent hours in the airport, every time one rolled up it was all “ooh, look at the big 747!” Good memories <3

[removed]

Damn, with no other double decker aircraft, the next Air Force One will have to be a typical 777.

Doesn’t project the same level of power.

RIP Legend

> If they had actually decided to re-engine MD-80s I think they could have operated practically forever.

They did, and then called it the Boeing 717.

They did, the 747-8i had new, more efficient engines and new, more efficient wings. It wasn't enough to save the program and compete with the large twin engine planes.

They actually did give it new wings and engines: the 747-8i

Seems to me like they would still be the best for shipping.

Why are they getting rid of it and what will replace it?