quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
Interesting and quite surprising. I can't imagine designing a new plane without having an engine in mind first! What were they thinking?

Every market study Boeing ever did found there would never be a large enough market for this plane. The aviation business was changing from hub and spoke to more direct routes which called for a twin isle aircraft with excellent range but smaller passenger capacity then the A380. Add to that few airports can accommodate an airplane that big. Only eleven in the USA for instance have ramp space wide enough currently.

What many people don't appreciate is that any airport has to be able to move passengers off and on in the same amount of time regardless of its size. So the infrastructure that must be available just to handle passengers and their luggage efficiently for this one aircraft type immediately quadruples.

Boeing was quite sly the way they coaxed Airbus into building the A380. First they never really commited on the idea, then said they would just build a 747 with an upper deck all the way to the back with a new wing and engines. This caused Airbus then to commit. Immediately after they put out the idea of the Sonic Cruiser which Airbus had no response for.

The Sonic Cruiser was to be a twin isle aircraft about the size of a 767. To demonstrate development on it we built an all composite body section prototype supposedly for this aircraft, painted it with the Sonic Cruiser livery and let the industry folks see it. Then Boeing did something they would never normally do. They put it out in the parking lot uncovered knowing any rivals would see it. But instead of being for the Sonic Cruiser it was in reality destined for what became the 787 which Boeing announced after Airbus committed to the A380. This caused Airbus to have to develop two new aircraft simultaneously the A380 and rush a design for the the A350.

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
Well the 747 did have some early engine problems but the JT9T roll out engines were quite real. This was the beginning of the large diameter high bypass turbofan engines so hiccups were to be expected.

The only potentially dangerous episode I can think of was when one test bird landed short in Renton and tore off one of the main landing gears but it still had three others so all ended without serious danger. I didn't work there then, I was still a kid so I'm going by what I heard.

If you want to see an interesting video go on YouTube and look up one of the aborted takeoff tests done without thrust reversers. The brakes and rims catch fire and melt the tires off. No fire suppression is allowed for a couple minutes.

The 747 is quite an amazing airplane, even today. For being so large it can take off in a surprisingly short distance. Our office at the time was on Boeing field when the 747-400 was in flight test. Early in the morning several business jets left the ground after going by our building but the 747 left the ground before getting that far. Test flights aren't passenger flights. They pull the nose up to get altitude as soon as possible - no passengers to scare.

The Sonic Cruiser was indeed real. It wasn't intended to be a supersonic aircraft, but instead cruise at high subsonic (.98 Mach) speeds. Later there was a design study for a four engine supersonic variant. In the end the market at the time cared less about speed (which wasn't that much more than conventional airliners) and more about fuel economy so development went toward the 7E7 which later became the 787.

quote:

Originally posted by DCS Member:

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
Well the 747 did have some early engine problems but the JT9T roll out engines were quite real. This was the beginning of the large diameter high bypass turbofan engines so hiccups were to be expected.

The only potentially dangerous episode I can think of was when one test bird landed short in Renton and tore off one of the main landing gears but it still had three others so all ended without serious danger. I didn't work there then, I was still a kid so I'm going by what I heard.

If you want to see an interesting video go on YouTube and look up one of the aborted takeoff tests done without thrust reversers. The brakes and rims catch fire and melt the tires off. No fire suppression is allowed for a couple minutes.

The 747 is quite an amazing airplane, even today. For being so large it can take off in a surprisingly short distance. Our office at the time was on Boeing field when the 747-400 was in flight test. Early in the morning several business jets left the ground after going by our building but the 747 left the ground before getting that far. Test flights aren't passenger flights. They pull the nose up to get altitude as soon as possible - no passengers to scare.

The Sonic Cruiser was indeed real. It wasn't intended to be a supersonic aircraft, but instead cruise at high subsonic (.98 Mach) speeds. Later there was a design study for a four engine supersonic variant. In the end the market at the time cared less about speed (which wasn't that much more than conventional airliners) and more about fuel economy so development went toward the 7E7 which later became the 787.

I will not doubt you, as what I saw was on TV. The had rolled/tugged out the shell outfitted like a fancy limo with stewardesses from all the majors which had contracts to buy.

Yes, the actual test flights were crammed with electronics such as a space ship would.

The “Queen of the Skies”!