jumbo and widebody thread 3: pacific boogaloo
>>1468809Looks similar to Air China
Lufthansa is retiring 6 A380s early.https://www.flightglobal.com/strategy/lufthansa-retires-six-a380s-early-for-reduced-post-crisis-fleet/137800.articleThey are also retiring 7 A340-600s, 5 747-400s, and 11 A320s.
>>1469000At least their 748s are gonna keep flying
>>1469011There's no way they were going to retire them. They're too new and have greater flexibility for use than the A380s.
>>1469059i was kind of hoping that the A380 being cancelled would lead to a bump in -8i orders for any airline still wanting A380s. but even then i knew it was pretty unlikely. seems there isnt anything to give jumbos like the 747 and -8i a new lease on life. how sad.
>>1469092There's no way to overcome the inefficiency of 4 engines vs 2. There were already very, very few airport pairs that were so slot and capacity restricted that they justified using either, especially the A380. But now, there are no pairs that justify it, and even once air travel resumes mostly unrestricted, there will be less demand than before. The air travel market is going to take years to recover.
>>1469094there was some good conversation about that last thread, but it was mostly just speculation. i wouldnt say anything is certain right now, but im not gonna hold my breath for a jumbo comeback. it seems the only way out for the 747 is that one budget airline that was being talked about a while ago, but thats not exactly likely.
>>1469092the way it seemed when the program launched, Boeing was banking on a few airlines to buy the 748 over the a380, but by the time the aircraft came out most of those airlines had either merged or went bankrupt. then after that no one wanted either aircraft.
>>1469139america west had 747s? i didnt know that.
kinda wish UA never merged. them and NW were the only ones i could have seen maybe buying -8is
From the last thread because I love the way it looks:Unpainted metal 747-200 with experimental blended winglets by Aviation Partners Inc.
Best 747SP livery?
>>1469233for me its either gotta be the old Qantas livery or the US Saul bass livery.
>>1469221Interestingly, this same airframe was on service for MK airlines until 2009, still unpainted. Apprently it's rented out for parties and events now (pic from July 2019).
throwback to the time Air New Zealand landed a 747 at Wellington Airport just to see if they could
>>1469271Short girls are best girls
Will A380 be retired just as fast as MD11?
Since the virus started, there have been a lot more 744F, 748F, and even MD11F flying over my house. Usually those MD11 wouldn't fly over my settlement due to noise issue (although 744 is the noiser one...)
>>1469139>>1469188Whoa. And it looks good too
>>1469324How many years did it take to fully retire passenger MD-11s?
>>1469324>Will A380 be retired just as fast as MD11?Faster, because the A380 can't be used as a freighter.
>>14693681990 First revenue service2009 Last retired
>>1469373Wrong : https://www.usatoday.com/story/todayinthesky/2014/10/26/the-md-11-makes-its-final-scheduled-passenger-flight/17959763/
>>1469296i kinda wish they chose this. the blue cheatline looks good
>>1469188It's always fun to find obscure things
>>1469092>>1469094>>1469097Thoughts?I know it's extremely unlikely for anything like this to ever be made, but would it at least be technically feasible?
>>1469633Original photo of General Electric's 747-400 Test Bed with a GE9X engine.
>>1469633honestly? i wouldn't be unhappy with it, so long as it kept the 747 flying. i remember a while ago Boeing started something called project Ozark with the 747 to try and appeal to some of the gulf carriers. while they haven't said much on it, they've yet to announce it being cancelled so its presumably still going. it could be anything from a new 747 variant with better aerodynamics, engines, and seat flexibility to an -8i nigger rigged with GE 90s
>>1469636is that a -400D?
>>1469662-446Can't find info on both types, being the same, but seeing how it's a -400 type with no winglets that flew for JAL they very well might be.
why are the 747 FE stations so comfy?
>>1469633We already know it's technically possible.
>>1469480I think that was one of their last liveries and it did look good>>1469747The 747 looks better with large engines imo
>>1469773it was a concept livery, iirc. they had another version where the name interrupted the cheat line and the bottom was white, and i think that was their best one. ill see if i can find it.
>>1469773Everything looks better with large engines.
>>1470064>Not posting the superior liverySad!
>>1469094>There's no way to overcome the inefficiency of 4 engines vs 2.A343 showed you otherwise
>>1470229In what way? It's literally less efficient to operate than any of it's competitors from Airbus or Boeing.
>>1470497You understand that's dependent on seating configuration, right? And it's not backed up by the fact that airlines overwhelmingly chose the A330 over the A343 and the latter is being retired rapidly, while the former (even the ceo variants) are going strong.
>>1470503Yeah. I don't see how you can say the A340 competes with twins now. Maybe it did when it debuted.
>>1470543The A343 specifically, and only in certain co figurations, had better fuel consumption per seat mile than the A330 but only over a long enough range and with the A330 also in a specific configuration. So it was on rare occasion more efficient, but that doesn't mean shit.
Tribute to the best friendship between two airlines
>>1470565god i wish NW was still around. we might have 747s still flying in the US if they were.
>>1470577granted, i know thats probably wishful thinking but still.
>>1470503>Seating configurationDiscussed more than necessary there>Airlines overwhelmingly chose A330 over the 343Because many of them fly the shorter stage length more frequently>Lattter being retired rapidlyNo, A343 is not A342 nor A346>>1470531Maybe a Twin Engine version of 747SP?>>1470543>Yeah. I don't see how you can say the A340 competes with twins now.Of course you can't, A340 is a 25+ years old product
Why other proposed alternative desogn to A380, like MD12X or IL96-550, all have a relatively short body?
>>1470615>Twin Engine SPNow that would be pretty sweet.
>>1469633It's technically feasible but you would not just need new engines but also new wings and a new wingbox. Given the costs, it's extremely unlikely to happen under current market conditions.
>>1470615You are extremely wrong. There are well under 100 A343s left in service. There are over a thousand A332/A333s left in service. The A343 fleet is being drawn down as we speak.And the A330 entered service only 1.year after the A343.
>>1470707We are already 15 years after the last A343 being built and still there are half of the fleet in service. The early end of A343 line was a result of Airbis's incorrect decision to build A345/6 instead.
>>1470893Is it not a clue in your mind that they are being replaced and that there's no secondary market for them?
>>1470903I think you're dealing with the turbosperg who's insisting seaplanes are practical in that other thread
>>1470903They are replaced by A345/A346 before Airbus thought they need a renewal. They end up being wirse than the original generation.As for secondary market, that is small but not non existence. There are airlines that acquire sevond hands A343 for different purposes from time to time.>>1470910What seaplane?
>>1470913The replacement is being replaced. There is no market for them. They are rapidly being retired, especially with the global grounding going on now. This really is t hard to understand. You just make it seem difficult.
>>1470914Them.being replaced 15 years after their last last delovery doesn't really mean the design weren't competitive when they're still on the market together with other planes of similar age
>>1470927You're either illiterate or willfully ignorant. The A330, which came out at the same time and in a partially overlapping role vastly outsold it. So did the 777, which it was its contemporary and most direct competitor.There are far, far, far more A330s and 777s still in service. It was a niche plane that didn't end up selling well because it was outclassed and economically uncompetitive in the majority of cases.
>>1470932I am not trying to argue against A330 being more suitable for mass market application. That is irrelevant to the argument I was making.As for 777, as far as I can tell the 777-200 series weren't too far off from A340 series. 777-300ER is its own class however.That there are still far more A330 and B777 in servive now in the year 2020 due to the current commercial environment is unrelated to the efficiency comparison of the aircraft when they're made. New aircraft being produced including 777 and 787 and A350 and A330neo being on the mid to high capacity side of widebody range also helped the continual survival and growth of the A330ceo line.
>>1470939Not the guy you're replying to but you seem a bit slow
>>1470932>>1470973Nothing some wishful thinking and mental gymnastics can't do. The guy just likes his 4 engined birds a bit too much.
>>1470939Nothing you said there counters any point you think you're refuting.
The Airbus Industrie A340: One plane to rule every airline
Didn't attach pic, I guess
>>1471149I can't disagree. There are thousands of them flying and every major airline has a fleet of them.
>>1471148I have repeatedly mentioned in my post that I was mot refuting the previous post, instead the point is that the previous post did not discredit the original poibt I was making regarding the 4 enginge aircraft efficiency
>>1471154Why are you openly admitting that you never had a point or an argument?
>>1471151The A340 only came out in the 1990s, it hasn't had a chance to bloom yet. It's just a baby.
>>1471173Shame it doesn't have much reason to exist nowadays compared to the A350 and 787.
too much talking about stuff that isnt jumbospost jumbos
>>1471349Nice, big D.
>>1471296This Either post pics of jumbos when you're debating, or post only pics, otherwise just stfu
I miss this lively like you guys have no idea. Wish we would have seen it on the passenger version some day.
>>1471547Here on an A340-300.
>>1471547Indeed, today's LATAM livery is awful and dullEven the previous liveries were better
>not a single l1011 in this thread yetI'm disappointed
>>1471585Nice.CURSED IMAGE INCOMING
>>1471654>The DC-10 responsible for the crash of Concorde>Pic took at Paris CDG airportNice, have another cursed DC-10 pic
>>1471585eastern's last livery was probobly its best.
>>1471585Was 1011 a jumbo?
>>1472007It was a widebody.
>>1472009Tristar interiors were aesthethic AF.
>>1472123>wereDon't make me any more sad than I have to be that I never got to ride on one.
>>1472124>>1472126What airlines were these? Bottom might have been Pan Am
>>1472009I think this was a BA L-1011
>>1472123the lack of overheads were a pain.
>>1472124This looks like it may be inside PSA L-1011
>>1472470Happy Tri Star is happy
>>1472989L1011 is pure sex
>>1473007>>1473227Newfag here.I feel it should be painfully obvious why you dislike this, but I don't get it. Is it the quality of the model? The choice of livery?
>>1472989considering how old their fleet is id say this fits right in.
>>1473276Goodness gracious those looked so good in that livery. I remember seeing them at KDFW all the time back in the 90s. I WANT TO GO BACK.
>>1473493aviation took a wrong turn after the 90s.
>>1473873MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHAT IS THE BLUE BEAUTY BEHIND THE DEATH CRUISER????
>>1473884Looks like a Braniff 707
>>1473899nah, thats a DC-8. windows are larger and further apart and the tail is different. also different engines.
>>1473910DC-8-62 to be more precise
>>1473884DC 8 from Braniff
>>1474252>That British airtours 707 with the Rolls Royce enginesKino
>>1474671>>1474813This is now a canadian Airlines 747 thread
>>1475035I like Canadi>>>/n/
>>1474883Hiding this thread now
OIL PRICE HAS CRASHED LETS GET THE BIG BOYS BACK OUT THE HANGAR
>>1475742That blended nozzle is sexy.
>>1475742>>1475814Why cover up "Bolivian Airlines" though?
>>1475820>"Bolivian Airlines" I didn't understand that. This other shot didn't have it. Was it on a wet lease or something?
>>1475814It looks a lot sturdier than the DC10 tail.
>>1475844No idea but I found the same exxact pic on Airliners.net with that writing on it, clearly removed with a white square on the version posted here.https://www.airliners.net/photo/Northeast-Bolivian-Airlines/Lockheed-L-1011-385-1-TriStar-50/372297
>>1475844Oh so here's the explanation. From an (outdated) article on Spanish Wikipedia (translation of my own):Northeast Bolivian Airways (NEBA) is (was) an airline based on the city of Cochabamba, Bolivia. It is (was) funded by TriStar Capital, from which they lease(d) a Lockheed L-1011 "Tristar" plane. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Bolivian_Airways
>>1469373I flew with one in 2012 by klm
>>1475863>>1475913Thanks for the info.
>>1480327I'm sorry guys I was bored
>>1480391>I was bored I know that feel.
>>1480485HHHHNGH MUH DIK
>>1480485why were older liveries so good?
>>1480699IDK, but you're right, they were much better
>>1480699>>1480776In the era after deregulation, an airline's identity has lost much of its meaning to fliers
>>1480782the 90s were the peak of aviation.
>>1480391End yourself now
>>1481136I guess I'm hopelessly old school, but I preferred prefer the 60's livery.
>>1481505TWA never really had a bad livery.
>>1481505Based old soul. Same here, bro
>>1481505Not a big fan of regular cheat lines, but I love the way they're implamented here.
>>1480485>>1480699>>1481505>ywnb a 747 captain in the 60's Why even be a pilot in the 21st centry?
>>1481505the last one was my favorite for TWA.
>>1481766Why don't any of those seats have headrests
>>1481773im guessing they were detachable like on a car or something.
>>1481773They do have them though.
>>1471545What's goin on here? Tenerife Part 2?
post the insides of jumbos.
I wish the classic 747's weren't all but dead now.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4aTd78_M5s
It's interesting for me to see old liveries that at one point coexisted with new liveries, such as in this picture.
>>1483699Tristars should have worn the new livery IMHO
>>1471544My favourite part about Fedex planes is that they all have names. That one is named Corrine. It makes them unbearably cute to me.Pic related. This is Jeffrey Wellington.
>>1484377sometimes i look up the tail numbers of older aircraft and see who owned them. that aircraft used to belong to AA. another interesting one is the USAF's 757 they use for air force two used to belong to TWA.
>>1472989Here's my Landor -400. It's essentially a children's toy but I've owned it for ages and still love it.
>>1486417Is it wrong that I kinda wanna lick it?
>>1481546The 747‘s first flight was in 1969 and it only entered service in 1970.
>>1469685I hate the tatty furry seats you get in Boeing planes
>>1488445AF had widebodies?
>>1488528Yes. I was surprised also.
>>1490303NGL, the Dreamliner is one sexi plane.
>>1490563itd look better if it wasnt stubby like the 767.
>>1490563Airlines should replace the Boeing 737 max with the Dreamliners, if they prefer to stay with Boeing
>>1490812Why bother if you don’t need the range?
>>1490812why? explain your thought process.
>>1490812>the smallest capacity of a 787 is larger than the highest capacity of a MaxYou ain't very smart, are you?
>>1490855>>1490863>>1491546I was just trowing this out to get some general feedback, on what others thought of the idea.
>>1491555fair enough i guess. although i think if the 757 lived it would be likely that you would see a few airlines use derivatives of that exclusively.
>>1491982The 757 has always been one of my favorites.
>>1491989aviation would be a lot better if it were kept around.