British Airways 747 just set subsonic speed record for Atlantic crossing:
Here's a good piece of trivia for you: what's the fastest commercial airliner in operation? As of Sunday, the answer might be "the Boeing 747"—not bad for an airliner that first entered service 50 years ago. On Saturday evening at 6:47pm ET, British Airways 747-400, tail number G-CIVP, took off from John F Kennedy (JFK) airport in New York. It landed at London's Heathrow Airport (LHR) at 4:43am local time—a crossing time of just 4 hours and 56 minutes, and a new record for subsonic aircraft.
Of course, the venerable jumbo had some help. Neither Boeing nor BA have rolled out a surprise engine upgrade, but Storm Ciara[*]—a weather disturbance currently rearranging British landscapes—gave the plane a helping hand with 200mph+ (320km/h+) tailwinds. G-CIVP set a peak ground speed of 825mph (1,327km/h), although its peak airspeed remained subsonic at around Mach 0.85.
That's a huge improvement over the prior record for a commercial, non-supersonic aircraft of 5 hours and 3 minutes!
The all-time record for any aircraft was managed in comfortably under 2 hours!
I was actually quite surprised to learn they were still in use as passenger aircraft. I'd taken a vacation 40 some-odd years ago to a Caribbean Island. I don't recall what the exact model plane it was that brought me there. But I do recall that all two dozen or so of us who were returning on a red-eye at the end of the week found ourselves as the sole passengers on a 747! Never mind trying to catch a nap with your seat in the reclined position... We just tipped up all the armrests in a center row of five seats and had plenty of space to sprawl out and sleep! If you ever get a chance to fly one before they are all retired, highly recommended to add to one's "bucket list."
*Ciara; pronuounced /ˈkɪərə/ KEER-ə
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday February 11 2020, @04:42AM (5 children)
I suppose they resurrect one when they know it's gonna have strong tail-winds to help with fuel economy.
The fact that they are from an era when Boeing knew how to build safe planes helps too.
(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 11 2020, @05:54AM
What, you think they will sell it off in a garage sale?
B777, the only way to fly safe, TSA not withstanding.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 11 2020, @07:18AM (2 children)
That and commercial planes are expensive as hell, as is recertifying people who work with them and buying spare parts. I'd expect them to use a plane until it is falling apart and then use the good parts off of that one on your ones that aren't falling apart. Anything short of that is wasting money until you get to the point where you are replacing all the planes out of your hub or P2P/circuit and the scale can payoff.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday February 12 2020, @02:23AM (1 child)
No, it doesn't work that way. Fuel is one of the largest costs of operating a passenger aircraft, so fuel efficiency is very important. Airlines will happily retire a jet long before its airframe is really worn out just so they can buy newer, more fuel-efficient models. Of course, passengers also prefer flying on nicer, newer jets. Generally, the older jets then get sold off to cargo operators who don't care as much about fuel efficiency (I guess that market isn't as price-sensitive as passenger travel, because people paying for air shipping are willing to pay more; if they weren't, they'd ship it by boat or truck).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 12 2020, @07:43AM
Engines and a total interior are a quarter to half of the price of a new airliner, depending on how fancy you want the inside. You can take your old 747 air frame and put on new engines in less than 30 days, 40 if you do the interior at the same time. Much cheaper, spares can be used on older planes still in the retro queue, and not having to pay your pilots to get a new type rating on their license. For example, they could retro a 20 year old Boeing 777-200ER and get the exact same fuel consumption per passenger-mile as a brand new Boeing 787-9 and avoid all the additional costs of changing changing planes while also saving the cost of the new plane.
However, if they already had plans to downsize planes and are already in the wait queue, then you might as well get a brand new one, since all of those costs come with it anyway. But barring a change in flight size, the economics aren't there because the real savings are coming from increasing the number of passenger-miles with more passengers per flight or increasing aerodynamics by using smaller planes with the ability to faster turn around with business class balancing out some loss in fuel savings in terms of passenger-miles. Most major airlines have already made major transitions from the spoke-hub model anyway, so those needs for smaller jets are slowly petering out.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by richtopia on Tuesday February 11 2020, @03:28PM
The 747 isn't going anywhere soon. Their orders are decreasing due to a number of factors such as a move away from the hub-and-spoke model and smaller aircraft improving fuel efficency per passenger, but even last year 155 orders were placed. The 747-8 was announced in 2005 and is in production now, which leverages modern advances keeping the large aircraft competitive.
Now you stated flying on one, and that is definitely being phased out. Modern orders for the 747 is dominated by freight operators; for example of the 154 orders of the 747-8 107 were in the freight configuration and 47 were for passengers.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Coward, Anonymous on Tuesday February 11 2020, @05:04AM
This page [flightradar24.com] has some cool maps that show airplanes following and avoiding the jet stream.
(Score: 2) by fadrian on Tuesday February 11 2020, @05:59AM (3 children)
Is this really a good thing? If the jet stream is increasing in speed, when does it move fast enough that east to west air travel in the Northern Hemisphere becomes impossible?
That is all.
(Score: 3, Touché) by khallow on Tuesday February 11 2020, @06:22AM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 11 2020, @06:54AM
And a 747 is a jet too! You're not making any sense at all [youtube.com]
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Barenflimski on Tuesday February 11 2020, @06:41AM
When East to West travel becomes impossible you go east. Until then the entire norther hemisphere will shake under a never ending sonic boom under a super-sonic jet stream.
I found these links.
"Booming from God" - Jerusalem Post [jpost.com]
"The Almight Wind" - Israeli Daily [timesofisrael.com]
"Another Safe Flight" - Boeing News [boeing.com]
(Score: 2) by dltaylor on Tuesday February 11 2020, @12:14PM (1 child)
Red-eye from Kennedy to LAX. Spent the trip playing cards with the cabin crew (politely, not hitting on them), snacking on the first class hors d'oeuvres, while many of the other passengers slept, just as you did.
The 747 is definitely one of the greatest commercial planes of all time. It broke ground like the DC-3 and 707. The Concorde tried, but it was just too early (the NASA research on "quiet" supersonic will bring back that type of thing, plus they should be more fuel-efficient after decades of research). Who knows, we may yet get an electric "ion drive".
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 11 2020, @01:16PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 11 2020, @03:02PM
if you got a keel you can sail faster then the wind is blowing.
now THAT is mindblowing.
it's probably also why einstein liked to sail: pretending the wind was absolute speed but going faster anyway ^_^
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 11 2020, @03:13PM
suppose noone was allowed to say a word on the flight else a sonic boom would ring out...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday February 11 2020, @03:21PM (1 child)
No, I've not been on any flights that flew through bad storms. No hair raising almost-hit-the mountain, nor even almost-hit-another-plane. My most memorable flight was a miserable one, on a 747, from Anchorage to Chicago. Something in the air gave me the worst headache that I think I have ever experienced.
Probably not toxic, because I didn't see other people complaining, or holding their heads. Something, though. The headache started soon after boarding, and got worse when we sealed up and took off. And, just kept getting worse, until they unsealed in Chicago. Seriously, five minutes after they opened the door, the headache was gone.
Maybe it was just some woman's perfume, or some guy's cheap aftershave. Maybe it was sinus pressure, made worse by the flight. I never figured it out, but that was the single worst flight of my life.
I never flew on a 747 again, so I have no other flights to compare to that one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 11 2020, @09:59PM
Might have been some crap from the engines leaking into the cabin. You frequently smell that, though.
Once you are at altitude (not your case) the cabin pressure is lowered and they recycle the stale, high CO2, low O2 air. It is very dry too. That can give you a headache.