![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Does it really take a travel agent to inform you guys that the 747
will be the aircraft long remembered in aviation history? The 747 revolutionized air travel and has moved billions of people around the earth, making flight obtainable to everyone for a reasonable price without the need to become a pilot or join the AF. The 747 has established air routes that link the entire world and moved cargo at a pace that transformed not only the delivery business but the nations that rely on those resources to advance their own industries. Who cares about some old rusting hunk of military hardware? Even the sleek SR-71 is nothing compared to the Jumbo. You guys need to get your heads out of your ass**, um... the clouds... and think about the revolution the 747 has caused and the accessability of flight to the average Joe. Even when that monster Airbus slugs its way into the air it will be a long time before that aerial doubledecker ever truly rivals the Jumbo. The 747 will never be forgotten while Concorde fades away like the Russian SST. JS |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think that is more an opinion than anything else. I certainly agree with
you that the 747 did revolutionize aviation, but you could make that statement for many aircraft. There are tons of aircraft that are just as important to flight as the 747. The Wright Flyer, the DC3, Me262, Concorde, and the list could just keep on going. -Jonathan "Jason Strong" wrote in message om... Does it really take a travel agent to inform you guys that the 747 will be the aircraft long remembered in aviation history? The 747 revolutionized air travel and has moved billions of people around the earth, making flight obtainable to everyone for a reasonable price without the need to become a pilot or join the AF. The 747 has established air routes that link the entire world and moved cargo at a pace that transformed not only the delivery business but the nations that rely on those resources to advance their own industries. Who cares about some old rusting hunk of military hardware? Even the sleek SR-71 is nothing compared to the Jumbo. You guys need to get your heads out of your ass**, um... the clouds... and think about the revolution the 747 has caused and the accessability of flight to the average Joe. Even when that monster Airbus slugs its way into the air it will be a long time before that aerial doubledecker ever truly rivals the Jumbo. The 747 will never be forgotten while Concorde fades away like the Russian SST. JS |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes, the 747 will be remembered. However, I think its place in history is
more evolutionary than revolutionary. The 707 more closely meets the criteria that you presented. Its entry into service was truly revolutionary. The 747 revolutionized air travel and has moved billions of people around the earth, making flight obtainable to everyone for a reasonable price without the need to become a pilot or join the AF. When the 747 entered service, prices did not drop. In many cases, fares increased, as passengers were willing to pay a premium for non-stop service. It took awhile before passengers benefitted from reduced operating costs. Likewise, load factors limited the routes on which the 747 could be operated. Although you don't address it, the "average Joe" has never been an international traveller. For the "average Joe", affordable domestic and continental air service was revolutionary. For the "average Joe", the 727 and 737 were probably more revolutionary. The 747 has established air routes that link the entire world and moved cargo at a pace that transformed not only the delivery business but the nations that rely on those resources to advance their own industries. Having worked extensivley in air cargo operations, we are in some agreement here, but maybe not for reasons that you intended. If you were thinking about 747 freighters, I would argue that the tremendous cargo capacity of passenger 747's has played a bigger role in cargo transport, over the life of the 747. The economics of operating a 747 freighter has always been a bit problematic. You guys need to get your heads out of your ass**, um... the clouds... and think about the revolution the 747 has caused and the accessability of flight to the average Joe. It sounds like you need to pull your head out of your ass and learn more about civil aviation |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 03:13:33 GMT, "damron"
wrote: The Comet lead the way, the metal fatigue issue lead to changes in the following designs on both sides of the atlantic. Cheers John Cook Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them. Email Address :- Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "John Cook" wrote in message ... The Comet lead the way, the metal fatigue issue lead to changes in the following designs on both sides of the atlantic. I'll put that in the category of, "what might have been." |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:28:53 +0100, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On 29 Nov 2003 18:01:22 -0800, (Jason Strong) wrote: The 747 revolutionized air travel and has moved billions of people around the earth, making flight obtainable to everyone for a reasonable price without the need to become a pilot or join the AF. Go a couple of years ahead and take a look at the Junkers 52... Bye Andreas The JU-52 was a contemporary of the DC-3, which was clearly a far more advanced and noteworthy aircraft. Al Minyard |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Alan Minyard" wrote in message ... The JU-52 was a contemporary of the DC-3, which was clearly a far more advanced and noteworthy aircraft. Contemporary? The Ju-52 first flew in October 1930, more than five years before the DC-3. That's a fairly long time in a period where aviation technology was advancing rather rapidly. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message k.net...
"Alan Minyard" wrote in message ... The JU-52 was a contemporary of the DC-3, which was clearly a far more advanced and noteworthy aircraft. Contemporary? The Ju-52 first flew in October 1930, more than five years before the DC-3. That's a fairly long time in a period where aviation technology was advancing rather rapidly. Yeah, but the DC-3's *very* close direct ancestor, the DC-2, flew in 1933, and was quite a bit advanced over the Ju-52 (more than one would probably expect from a three year period in the early 1930's). I don't think 1930 versus 1933 is that much of a difference, do you? Brooks |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Light Sport Aircraft | Willard | Home Built | 25 | January 8th 05 04:11 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 1st 04 02:31 PM |
Who's At Fault in UAV/Part91 MAC? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 24 | April 29th 04 03:08 PM |
PC flight simulators | Bjørnar Bolsøy | Military Aviation | 178 | December 14th 03 12:14 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | July 4th 03 04:50 PM |