Neat 747-8 documentary

[JD396 38]

I love the NIMBY stuff. It's always cracked me up. I grew up under the approaches at MSP... I went through a little phase where despite being two thousand miles from the nearest fault line I was terrified of volcanoes (I went through a similar thing after Jurassic Park came out.) and I'd lay in bed terrified thinking a volcano was erupting in my backyard when the NWA 747s and DC-10s would come by. Planes got a lot quieter, since then, though, and I was far enough away that in the area now you really can't hear anything anymore.

[Cann0nF0dd3r 21]

Living near NAS Whidbey Island we have a LOT of that here. NIMBYs are a minority here but a VERY vocal one! They have been caught lying so many times!

[jmdriskell 178]

Ah!  NSA Whidbey, "The Sound of Freedom!"  Nothing like an the sound of an EA-6B Prowler taking off to get your attention.  :o)

[Cann0nF0dd3r 21]

We don't have them anymore, been replaced with EA-18Gs but those J52s would sure rattle a window or two! Starting to get P-8As now which are cool to see on the flight line and flying around.

[downscc 1,327]

I was near Ramstein AB (W. Germany near Kaiserslautern) in the 70's, in the day of the F-104 and F-4's..., and there is nothing subtle about a Phantom launching in a Zulu Alert.  Most of the locals understood exactly why and they endured the "sound of freedom."  Times have changed.

 

In comparison, the E-4 NEACP (a highly modified B742) at Offutt AFB NE (near Omaha) was almost silent compared to the KC-135's in the day their turbojets still burned water on takeoff.. they were called water wagons.  Not only loud but for a long time because it seemed like it took full minuets for the heavily loaded beasts to get up to 80 kts and then they finally started to accelerate.  The local residents in Bellevue just shrugged and enjoyed a vibrant economy that the base brought to South Omaha.

[Jimm 437]

 

 

I live right under the east side downwind for IAD, so I get a decent amount of traffic. I spent my high school years right under IAD's final approach courses to the 1s, and my parents live down on that side, too. I love it. Some people hate it. I get that...but...you know...don't put your house there...haha.

 

Oddly enough, I live beneath 19R's approach at IAD and really, the only time air traffic can get annoying is on a Sunday evening when the heavies leave and you're trying to hear the TV.  Great for planespotting though.

[Cann0nF0dd3r 21]

My first deployment to Japan the JASDF was still flying their F-4EJs out of Misawa. Those were bad @$$ to watch. Defiantly a satisfying sound to hear!

[ViperPilot 81]

Oddly enough, I live beneath 19R's approach at IAD and really, the only time air traffic can get annoying is on a Sunday evening when the heavies leave and you're trying to hear the TV.  Great for planespotting though.

I lived on the 08/26 Approach/Departure path to Stapleton in the 70's, and it was a planespotter's paradise! Sitting on the little hill in front of our house, I used to watch 747's, DC-10's, L-1011's and the like all take off and come in for Landings. The 747 looked like it would just hang there in the air, its 4 engines and their unmistakable whine...

 

Alan   :smile:

[captainsazzman 83]

With crowded skys, the last thing we need is for more a/c with smaller capacity on long haul. While the 747 and A380 are very large, they do move large numbers of people in less aircraft movements, which I am sure the ATC people prefer.

I suppose there has to be some trade off where pax numbers do not economically fill a 747/A380.

 

Maybe airports need to remove curfews so that aircraft movements are better spread out 

 

 

I'm curious!

 

 

In simple terms, the airline industry economics nowadays is such that it's more economical to fly 767/777/787/A330/A350 between destinations using 2-3 flights a day as opposed to one fully loaded 747/A380 trip a day or couple times a week. The demand for air travel prefers flexibility and likes having several flights for a particular destination available in one day. A half full 777 doesn't cost the airline as much as a half full A380.

 

With that said, the next big hit on the commercial jet market is the 787 and A350, whose shorter and extended variants offer that flexibility the industry sorely needs. 747and A380 sized jets are more suited to cargo. Hope this simplified explanation helps

[Usmcmba 4]

In talking to sales and marketing guys at my work, it seems the "hub and spoke" model is a thing of the past as travelers would rather fly non stop rather than having to stop somewhere just to catch another flight to their ultimate destination. This along with the challenges of having a high load factor on large capacity jets is the reason why the B747 and A380 will face many challenges in securing more sales especially when the fuel prices start rising. The model that many more airlines are pursuing is "long and skinny" where you carry less passengers on longer route flights. What the airlines found is now with an aircraft like the 787, they can be profitable on routes such as nonstop Shenyang to San Jose (China Southern) or non New Orleans to London (British Airways), routes which no one could have imagined with the large capacity, four engine guzzlers.

[por930 51]

In simple terms, the airline industry economics nowadays is such that it's more economical to fly 767/777/787/A330/A350 between destinations using 2-3 flights a day as opposed to one fully loaded 747/A380 trip a day or couple times a week. The demand for air travel prefers flexibility and likes having several flights for a particular destination available in one day. A half full 777 doesn't cost the airline as much as a half full A380.

 

With that said, the next big hit on the commercial jet market is the 787 and A350, whose shorter and extended variants offer that flexibility the industry sorely needs. 747and A380 sized jets are more suited to cargo. Hope this simplified explanation helps

Which gets back to the original 'problem', airports are struggling to handle the number of A/C during peaks times. I was recently in Zurich when we missed our take off slot due to a late pax. We waiting almost 90 minutes for push back. I had a similar experience in Budapest 3 months ago. I landed recently in Dubai, and could not dock due to no available A380 gates and had to wait almost an hour. I guess this points to another issue for the very big birds; they need bigger gates, which there are not that many at an airport(other than Dubai, though when many of its A380's are home, again, a shortage for remaining family)

 

The ATC guys have a lot of issues trying to accommodate all the A/C in and around airports during these peak times. It is common to always expect to be in one or more holding periods on an approach. There is only so many take off/ landings per hour ATC can cope with even when they squeeze the following distance. With the use of 'smaller' A/C, you can depart/approach them closer, as less turbulence, but you still need a lot more gates.

 

If airports charged less for landing outside these peak times, or extended their operation hours maybe that would help? Anyway, not to keep getting off topic...

 

The 747-8 series is a continuation of the series. Sadly, when I was in Seattle a few months ago, the factory said, the 747 was build on demand now...sort of one every few months. The Presidential A/c will be collectors items indeed. It will be interesting to see if the freight guys take up the A380, as soon, Emirates will be off loading a few oldies.