 |
 |
Yet another aviation thread.
| October 13th, 2016 at 11:28:00 AM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 | The A330-800neo and the A330-900neo are two new members of the Airbus Widebody Family with first deliveries scheduled to start in Q4 2017. I don't know if it is a weight requirement or if they are just concerned about the freight cracking open the Lexan polycarbonate or acrylic plastics. While this material isrelatively strong against a crazed passenger who is beating on the window with his shoe, I don't think it will handle the full weight of freight that has come unhinged. |
| October 13th, 2016 at 12:39:42 PM permalink | |
| Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
I had no idea they were that far along...
Maybe they're worried more about the cost of replacing windows. A broken window in a compartment without passengers is no big deal. Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
| October 13th, 2016 at 1:00:05 PM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
I don't know that is necessarily true. A lot of freight may be climate controlled. It might make the plane much harder to steer the plane, or at the very least it would almost certainly cost you in fuel to have that much resistance. I've ridden in the back of freight aircraft in a couple of seats, so I think it might be fairly common to mix in a few seats. Even if there are no seats, you are also talking about a lot of pressure at 30,000 feet, so the internal walls might not be able to take that kind of force. |
| October 13th, 2016 at 4:01:37 PM permalink | |
| Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
So are the pilots. They get dead when the environment isn't just right :)
A cousin of mine worked at El Al, and he often caught free passage on El AL 747 cargo planes. According to him, it was strictly in the cockpit jump seat. But also according to him there's a working galley and restroom right off the cockpit, and the bulkhead separating them from the cargo cabin is not airtight. So decompression in the cabin means decompression in the cockpit, just like in passenger planes. I can see you wouldn't want that. But the risk of shifting cargo goes beyond decompression. Like in having an uncontrollable plane, since if the center of gravity shits forward, no amount of aerodynamic controls will get you back level. And civilian jets are notoriously short on parachutes (cargo planes should have them, IMO, but that's a different story). Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
| October 13th, 2016 at 4:32:09 PM permalink | |
| DRich Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 51 Posts: 4969 |
About 25 years ago I was offered the opportunity to fly jumpseat from San Francisco to Tokyo (via Anchorage) on a United 747 cargo plane that my friend was the captain of. Sadly, I couldn't do it because I would have had to miss a couple days of work. At my age a Life In Prison sentence is not much of a detrrent. |
| October 13th, 2016 at 4:40:26 PM permalink | |
| Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
According to Patrick Smith, it's a rather uncomfortable seat. Plus you can't talk much to the pilots on duty. But you can't beat the view! What I never asked my cousin, is how the upper deck was set up. I don't suppose much cargo was kept there. And on long haul cargo flights, there ought to be a crew rest area. Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
| October 18th, 2016 at 10:10:46 AM permalink | |
| Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 | I wonder what will happen if one of the outfits currently developing supersonic passenger jets succeeds. That manes building and placing at least one SST in service with at least one airline. Here's what I mean: SSTs would be aimed at first class passengers, because the fares will likely be that high. But will the people willing and able to pay such prices want an SST? Consider what are likely to be the first routes: NYC-London and NYC-Paris. Currently for the price of a first class ticket you get a lie-flat seat, seatback entertainment, a gourmet meal and, depending on airline, inflight WiFi. Concorde was often described as being all-first class, but the seats were narrow, they didn't lie flat, they had no seatback screens, no WiFi, but the food was said to be the best AF and BA had to offer. Essentially they were economy seats, with a gourmet meal. The thing is back then the option was a 2.5-3 hour flight under not ideal comfort, vs a 6-7 hour flight in great comfort. My thinking is many people, after the novelty wears off, might prefer a longer flight, especially in the evening, on which they can sleep. If you eat dinner at the lounge prior to your evening flight, and use an eye mask and earplugs, and can sleep in planes (turbulence is not conductive to sleep), you can get 5+ hours sleep easily. Or you might want to have a leisurely meal while you watch a movie, and then sleep for 3.5-4 hours. No question of putting lie-flat seats on an SST with a max flight time of 4 hours, right? Though they'd make sense on longer flights, if the new supersonic planes can manage them (Concorde couldn't). Supersonic or not, a 6+ hour flight requires a bed for people paying premium fares. What say you? Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
| October 18th, 2016 at 11:28:21 AM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
Well the 5 hour difference between London and New York means that even if you take off at 7 AM and get there in 3.5 hours it's already late afternoon in the business day (3:30 PM). If you fly at 1AM you can be there at the office by first thing in the morning, but once you've given up your night, you may simply want to take 7 hours for the flight and get a decent nights sleep in a flat bed for the same money. In 1978 they figured that some executives from London would like to fly to JFK for 4 hours and return to Heathrow only 11.5 hours after they left (3:45 each way + 4 hours). So the special executive meeting suit was made available for rent at JFK BAW173 LHR-JFK /Monday-Tuesday-Thursday-Saturday-Sunday/ DEP:9:30 ARR:8:25 BAW170 JFK-LHR /Daily/ DEP:12:15 ARR:21:00 If they can control the sonic boom, there will always be that market in different cities, especially if they stretch it so that you have 5 hours in the USA. But if you can control the sonic boom, I am sure that there will be a healthy New York to Los Angeles market (2.4 hours). Look at it this way, there are 50,000 people travelling each direction from LA to NYC on every day. You should keep a 40 seat plane busy with 4-5 flights a day. United States (September 2014 - August 2015) 1 Chicago, IL (Metro Area) - New York City, NY (Metro Area) 4,020,000 (740 mi) 2 Los Angeles, CA (Metro Area) - San Francisco, CA (Metro Area) 3,660,000 (337 miles) 3 Los Angeles, CA (Metro Area) - New York City, NY (Metro Area) 3,420,000 (2475 miles) 4 Chicago, IL (Metro Area) - Los Angeles, CA (Metro Area) 3,010,000 (1744 miles) JFK LHR 3,451 mi If you are always trying to take advantage of the clocks so that each flight lands roughly at the time it takes off then perhaps the plane could circle the globe. LHR JFK 3,451 mi JFK LAX 2,475 mi LAX HNL 2,556 mi HNL NRT 3,819 mi NRT HKG 1,842 mi HKG DXB 3,684 mi DXB LHR 3,421 mi The presumption is those 40 passengers would take subsonic planes to return home when they don't have the clocks working with them. |
| October 18th, 2016 at 11:50:05 AM permalink | |
| Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
My point exactly.
Oh yes! But I'm assuming the first generation, at least, won't be able to fly over land due to the boom. 1) Because their promo material says nothing about it and 2) because regulations die shard. Even if they can fly without making a bad sonic boom (no question of eliminating it entirely in the near future), it'll be years before the bureaucracy catches up.
Not only that, the time difference westward works for you. Essentially you arrive half an hour before you leave, all times local. If you leave NYC at 10, you arrive at LAX around 9:30. But then you pay it back going home. If you leave LAX at 4 pm, you arrive at NYC at 9:30 pm. You'd also have aged about an infinitesimal fraction of a second less than people taking subsonic flights ;) Now, how about longer routes, like IAH-LHR (about ten+ hours subsonic) or MEX-LHR (about 12 hours subsonic)? At 2.5+X the speed, let's say 2.65X for argument's sake, this gives you almost 4 hours from IAH and 4 1/2 from MEX. Not bad, but edging into territory where premium passengers won't be satisfied with a coach seat, no matter how good the food or how much time they save. Also rather long for a day trip (i.e. returning the same day). Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
| October 18th, 2016 at 2:20:55 PM permalink | |
| Pacomartin Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 1068 Posts: 12569 |
I always thought the holy grail of any future supersonic commercial aircraft was two round trips from LAX to Tokyo in one 24 hour day. I was a little surprised at the Boom specifications which were about 10%-15% faster than Concorde and a similar range. As I understand it, after a while the charter business was a big part of the Concorde business. I had a friend who won a one way flight on the Concorde with a business promotion (she sold TV advertising time) and had the return via subsonic. The following article describes one guy who rented the plane for $2500 a seat for one way from London to Omaha in 1986. Although inflation calculations indicate that is about $5500 in today's dollars, my guess is the Concorde was probably renting for a million dollars one way for the entire plane ($10K per seat). One group is trying to revive the Concorde for charter flights by 2019. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3239952/Concorde-set-return-skies-Supersonic-jet-used-charter-flights-2019.html If you can charter the 40 seat Boom plane for less than half a million dollars, that may be attractive to a reasonable group of rich people or for business promotions.
|