I remember in 1999 I was on a flight that had a brief stop over in Calgary, Alberta. We were on a taxiway waiting to hit the runway but we were stopped. The captain came over the PA and told us to look out the left windows to see the world's largest aircraft take off. It was the Antonov. Even from a distance it looked huge - too big to fly. It just seemed to stroll down the runway without picking up any speed then, suddenly and amazingly, it was flying. Shortly after it left there was a bunch of airport service vehicles following its path along the runway. Later learned they were lookinng for FOD, as the Antonov was so big it could blow chunks of sod from the grass beside the runway onto the runway. Once a lifetime experience, like that time a Martin Mars water bomber flew over my house at low altitude after dropping its load. But that's another story.
@@NicolaW72 Dirty war? No. Predictable? Yes. "The West is leading Ukraine down the primrose path, and the end result is that Ukraine is going to get wrecked.” - John Mearsheimer, Professor University of Chicago, September 2014
@@NicolaW72 I heard they will be repairing it despite it earlier not being the plan. I hope this info is reliable. And what an absolute twat this Russian troll down here is. Let's hope they can get it running again as it's a glorious machine.
That's a win-win situation for airlines and passengers, airline can arrange such prestige first class seats and passengers who can afford that can enjoy the more comfortable seats
Not to forget the 747 has also carried the Space Shuttle piggyback. "The Queen" is a majestic bird. She will be missed. Amazing how the 55-year old 737 is still rolling off the assembly line.
@@HNBGamer I really hope Boeing gets off their behinds and at least starts developing a replacement for the 737. As it is now, more modern designs are going to eat its lunch more and more, e.g. the Airbus 200 series (ex Bombardier C-Series). I think Airbus is going to develop that series into a mid-term replacement for the A320 series that is becoming kinda long in the tooth as well, just much less so than the 737. Petter's latest video is talking about the troubles the 737 has in more detail - that thing is slowly turning into a disaster (IMHO).
I have a feeling 747 freighters will be flying for another 50 years. Meanwhile as you point out it has become easier to hinge the cockpit because there are no hydraulic or cable connections to the cockpit on modern designs. Wiring harnesses are easy to connect/disconnect, or just flex as needed.
Definitely. I see the 747 ending up being in service for decades to come like the B-52s have been, the youngest of those are 60 years old and they're still going strong.
The B-52s that are still in service (and the KC-135s, for that matter) are still well with their airframe flight-hours lifespan. Surely commercial (cargo included) aircraft burn through many more of those per year, right?
@@jull1234 The later models of B-52 (Only H models still in service) had a strengthened frame, originally for durability with large payloads and battle damage, but the actual use was almost all normal service so they benefited from greatly extended fatigue life.
Redundancy is an issue. They can't run all of the control cables through a limited area on the hinge side. For example the DC-10 of UA232 had all three hydraulic systems routed into the tail and they were all severed by a single engine failure. Electrical plugs on the other sides are an option but they are also points of wear, inspection, and potential failure. Even if not a crash hazard it can mean a costly delay while maintenance is called out to asses fix and test the issue, which could be as basic as some dirt or an insect.
End of an era. Couple of years ago I visited the construction hall of the 747 in Everett, the biggest building on earth. There are no words for the size of it and the complexity of that building. As a technician it was a profound experience.
I toured it about 20 years ago as part of Boeing's "Friends and family" open house event, that they used to do once a year. I think it's been suspended. That was a fascinating event.
Thanks for the great videos. My dad (he turns a 95 in Dec), an aerospace engineer, took me and my brothers to watch the first 747 takeoff from LAX. We parked at the east end of the runway in the parking lot of some air freight company. We stood at the chain link fence with the taxiway on the other side. We were so close and it was giant. My dad kept telling us to listen to the engines. Unforgettable. Thanks again.
As someone who remembers the first 747, I hope to see her beautiful silhouette for a long time yet. Thankfully, I got the full 60s/70s 747 "experience", second only to the Concorde.
So did I! Saw the rollout of the C-5A, saw the second flight. I was in school for the first flight. My Dad worked at Lockheed, we went to Atlanta Airport on a Sunday morning to watch Delta 747 training flights. Great time to be a kid!!
My first transatlantic flight was on a BA 747 in 1998. I was allowed to visit the flight deck mid Atlantic and spend around 20 mins sat with the 3 man crew on this 1976 built machine - was a great view from up there and a fantastic first long haul flight experience - I have loved the 747 ever since.
I remember, as a very young sailor at Naval Air Station Barbers Point (now Kalaeloa Airport), looking up in awe with other sailors in early 1970 as a 747 flew overhead after having taken off from Honolulu International Airport. It dwarfed anything any of us had ever seen, making the transport aircraft in our squadron -- old C-118 Liftmasters (DC-6s in civilian nomenclature) and a few C-130 Hercules aircraft -- look like toys. The 747 looked as if it was barely moving, it was so large. Very interesting video and a salute from a retired U.S. Navy chief petty officer.👍
Lufthansa got their first Jumbo in 1970, there was a family day in Hamburg where we had the opportunity to walk through this gigantic plane, I was 10 years old and never forgot this experience. It took 40 years for my first flight with a jumbo, to Hong Kong, amasing, Business Class ;-) top speed was above 1000 km/h.
The withdrawals begin. I remember when the 747 came out and it will forever be a favorite, as I will never forget seeing one the first time, or flying on her. The "experience" was only 2nd to Concorde. It was the size, as he said, that was so amazing, as it was a first, but also the beauty, for such a huge aircraft. But I understand Boeing's side, although you'd think that they've made enough corporate welfare to... Oh, nvm, just sob!
Jeez. I saw a giant C-5 all the way across town. Crazy how slow they appear to go and how big they are. 75th anniversary of the US Air Force is this weekend here at Nellis AFB in Vegas. Gonna be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks as always. I am so thankful that I flew this magnificent Queen of the skies during my career- (flew the 100, 200, 300, SP, and my favourite the 400). It is just an absolutely fabulous aeroplane which will be flying for a VERY long time. I’m so sad to see the assembly line finally closed now. The 747 will always be my favourite aeroplane and arguably the easiest that I have flown. Even though I finished my nearly 30k hour career on the 737-800, my heart will always be with the Queen. ❤ I describe the 737 as a somewhat twitchy sports car, where the 747 is a gentleman’s limousine.
@@DaveMiller2 100% this. As I said- a twitchy sports car compared to a gentleman’s limo. The 737 was fun to fly, and I always enjoyed flying it, (but much harder than the Queen). I don’t recall ever doing even a remotely “ordinary” landing in the Jumbo. I can’t quite say the same for the 737 LOL :-) 😂🤣
The 747 was also developed in part because Juan Trippe of Pan Am wanted a giant plane that could lower seat-per-mile costs and open flying to the masses. You might want to do a story on Pan Am one of these days.
In 2020 there was a proposal to replace the An-124s with a clean sheet design called the "Slon", other solution might be to simply sell C-17s to civilian cargo airlines (there is one painted with the Qatar Airways livery, for reference, but for larger sizes a new design might be needed)
Love your videos. I appreciate the time you must take to create them. I might shed a little tear when the last 747 rolls out. I remember when they were fairly common. They were glorious to see up close. Trips to the airport weren't really frequent when I was a kid.
On your point about the necessity of quick transportation of large cargo: a few years back Ford had a supplier fire requiring they find a new supplier for diecast components. The only supplier capable of handling the tools they needed were in Europe instead of the US so they had to book the massive An-225 to ship the tooling over and keep their production of vehicles going.
I remember flying on a 747 in the 70s. It was a real experience. I still marvel at how some of these planes can get off the ground. I just last night saw a jumbo jet from the airline Emirates. It looked like a double decker. It was massive. Some of the cargo jets you showed almost look cartoonish.
@@louissanderson719 I remember only one from Pennsylvania to Hawaii. That was at LAX, but I could be remembering wrong. That was a long time ago and I was about 8.
@@kittytrail unfortunately they can’t remove the center floor which is an integral part of the structure, du to the ovoid shape of the fuselage of the A380
I just watched this again (for I don't know how manyeth time :-) and OMG it's so goodddd! Fantastic explanation. I'm one of the many people who are obsessed with the Queen and anything having to do with her 😊I live near Dulles and go out to watch her on a regular basis. As a kid I remember when she was introduced! I also remember when Dulles was new and all the talk about it; they were very forward-thinking with it.
Another informative video. It has much food for thought. I am looking forward to what is ahead for air freight as well. Also looking forward to your history of the 747. I partisipated in reassembling one after a D check, very roomy baggage pits as well as the main deck.
I am officially an avgeek 4 years ago. Yes I am love the Boeing 747 and i wish i could fly the Jumbo Jet but sadly many 747s are retired as passenger plane. However, at least 100 747 are still in passenger service. I saw a Cathay Pacific 747F took off from Jakarta while exploring the PIK Avenue near west Jakarta and i was amazed
Truly a joy to fly around the world, in all types of weather, such a prestigious, comfortable, and safe machine. The plane will forever be 'the Queen's of the skies 👍👍
The 747 is such a beautiful aircraft! My best friend flies freight 74’s… It’s just a phenomenal bird. Thanks for another great video, Petter! I always appreciate the time, effort, energy and passion that you put in! 👊🏻✈️
Thanks for another great video Petter. Wow the image of that train being loaded onto the aircraft was just amazing. Technology is just amazing to be able the make that work! Fantastic engineering.
You had me going for a while there. I was thinking from the first moment - the contract bidding on the C-5A. I remember it well. My father worked at Lockheed at the Marietta facility. The Boeing would never have won. The C-5 could lower the nose to truckbed level.
ANOTHER GREAT VIDEO... I WAS WONDERING ABOUT HOW THE FREIGHT WAS GOING TO HANDLE THIS AS THE GREAT 747 HAS VERY FEW .. IM HAPPY TO SEE THAT ITS STILL FLYING AS AT LEAST FREIGHT.....
Assuming the freighters delivered this year keep flying for a good 40 years, we may have a long time to wait to see a replacement ! And what about something like the beautiful C-17 Globemaster III being converted to civilian use ?
@@spencerjones841 c-17 is also out of production. It makes no sense to use them as civilian freighters since the military needs what they got left and they are extra rugged which makes them costly. But since they are out of production, the defense dept. should buy some 747 freighters.
It will be sad to see the 747 go away. I remember flying in them in early 70's when they first came out and when the upper floor had a bar in it. Later flew in them in the very long overseas flights when upper deck was all revenue seats, the cool bar gone.
The lovely old Bristol Freighter with it's 14 cylinder sleeve valve radials had a high cockpit and two hinged front access doors just after ww2. They lifted large and unwieldy loads for years.
When I was a little girl, about 6 years old, my dad took me to Tullamarine Airport in Melbourne, Australia, as a surprise. He had a friend who was a pilot for BOAC at the time, and we were given a tour of a 747. I remember the spiral staircase up to the top deck, the movie screen, and I was even allowed to look (not touch!) in the cockpit. We were the only people on the plane apart from a couple of cabin crew and the pilots. It was so huge inside! This was around 1970 or 71, and after that, I always had an interest in aircraft. I love flying ( have flown across Australia and to the USA)but never tried for a pilots licence myself because of cost and my fear of heights. I have no problems in a 747, 777, 767, etc, but a little Cesna or similar??? Nope!
The DC-3 lived well past its theoretical use-by date, just because it was a really good plane and it's a lot cheaper than buying a brand-new one. The cheapest plane you can have is the one you've already got, provided it's not junk. This aviation "bangernomics" will also apply to the 747-F because like the old DC-3, it's a good solid plane and spare parts are still plentiful.
I finally started my PPL training and had my first flight today. Unfortunately, i got motion sick at some point during the flight and we had to discontinue so that it doesn't get worse. Can you make a video regarding tips for student pilots and nausea? Thanks!
I have recently seen such a beauty taking off above my head from Paris Charles de Gaulle airport..... What a majestic splendor and ellegance... today with Concorde long time gone, it's only the 747 the instantly recognisable plane... a true icon.... I have seen Airbus A380's too , impressive as well but far from the beauty of the queen of the skies😇
Another well done Video, TYVM. I read in mid October '22 that Cargolux, Europe’s largest all-cargo airline operating a combined fleet of 30 Boeing 747-8s and 747-400 Freighters, have finalized the order for 10- 777-8 Freighters with options for six additional aircraft, completing the signing at Cargolux headquarters in Luxembourg. Apparently the Boeing Y-3 is stalled, therefore we'll have to wait and see the evolution of the 777-8's as they attempt to satisfy customers needs.
I just can’t imagine that different aircraft types look the same for most people. Like in movies when they take off in a 747 but land in a DC-10… I always thought „how can they make such a mistake? Everyone will instantly see that something is wrong“ 😂
I see two possible solutions 1 as a car guy we see companies doing major custamation this can be the time for aftermarket conversions to happen as they can do this a few times and have it make sense financially and the other is new wide bodys having the option as with fly by wire the flight deck can potentially tilt or swing
Anyone see all those Cargolux aircraft and wonder where Captain Joe was? Also, there are places where you cannot get to by road, rail or cargo ship - many mining operations in Canada's northern region is only accessible by air so air freight is the only way. Granted the cargo usually arrives by road/rail/ship to a staging area in southern Canada and then it's flown the last bit to the north, but that's what you need to do - it's not always you need a part immediately. Sometimes the only way to transport is by plane.
There's always the animal pulled carts and animal backs as options for inaccessible ground locations. Plus the also expensive option of building roads to overcome terrain limitations. Very few locations have never been reached by land or sea.
I clearly remember my first t sights of a 747. We were flying into SEA and the captain got permission to fly over Boeing Field as the 747 was parked outside. All the other aircraft looked sooo tiny. The second was during a long layover at SEA and my mum would let me walk the concourses. I saw a PanAm 747 heading apparently straight for me and it looked enormous. The only jumbo I’ve been on are the 747 and the DC 10 and the 747 was the winner by a mile.
Excellent discussion as always. Clearly the Antonov 225 (Mya) is sorely missed aftern being wrecked early in Putin's War. There are discussions on whether she can be repaired, or a new aeroplane built to the original plans. I hope so, although it will be very expensive.
The An-225 is overkill for the vast majority of loads. Smaller aircraft can handle most other loads. Antonov only cobbled one together out of their post Soviet scrap heap because there was occasional demand from some of their customers.
Hi Petter, thanks for another great and informative video! I think, like a lot of aviation “geeks” I am saddened by the fact Boeing have discontinued the beautiful 747. Like many people, especially those from Australia as I am, my first big overseas/international holiday was on board a 747, I believe it was a 200 by Cathay Pacific and a 400 for the trip home again. It’s a very pretty and iconic design that is also highly functional. Not meaning to divert too far from the subject but I am in the process of restoring a 47 year old Renault. Over time I have stripped it, re-trimmed it, removed rust and strengthened the body, re-sprayed it, re-built the engine and gearbox, brakes, suspension etc…Now she is fully registered and drives like a brand new car, albeit a new car in 1975. It’s cost me thousands and many hours on the tools in my garage but point is, it’s essentially new again, probably better than new. I recently watched a documentary about a B747 by British Airways that was flown into Cardiff for a major service. She was stripped, all interior out, seats, carpets, bulk heads, WCs…everything. Highly trained men and women went over every component with a fine tooth comb looking for any signs of metal fatigue, corrosion, anything that would render the aircraft unsafe and any faults found were rectified or components replaced before she could be put back in the air. It was mind blowing to see just how much work was involved. With that in mind, my question is, why do these aircraft have a lifespan? Why can they not be retro fitted with the more modern, more efficient wing designs, quieter, more efficient engines etc to keep these magnificent aircraft in service? Do they literally get to the point that they are no longer financially viable, the maintenance will cost too much or does the airframe get to the point that there are too many weak spots to be worth fixing?
I remember being on a British Airways 747 - 400 Maiden commercial flight heded for New Zealand back in the late '90's. Once we were at cruising altitude the captain, an ex RAF pilot, came over the PA and welcomed us all to the flights maiden voyage ending the announcement with'...now let's open her up and see what this baby can do'. I recall we pushed through 900km/h what a thrill.
The last B-52 airframes were produced sixty years ago. Not only are B52s still in service, they will be for decades to come. If there is no replacement for the 747, I see the same thing happening there (assuming Boeing still supports them).
I didn't fly on many 747s, but my first time was on KLM.. Turns out the plane I flew on was 1 reg. letter removed from the 747 that crashed at Tenerife (glad I didn't know that in 1990!). My most recent and presumably last flight was Air France.. exit row of the upper deck. Leg room for miles!
The Boeing 474 has always been my favorite Aircraft! I love big things and when it came out, it was the biggest thing in the air! Also of note, I love Elephants, Dinosaurs and Blue Whales!
2 ปีที่แล้ว +1
Maybe for the history episode, it would worth to involve Kelsey again from 74Gears. Like that guy!
Sad to see the 747 go out of production. It was sad for me personally when Delta stopped flying a 747 to MSP years ago, but at least I could see them at other airports (or the occasional times a sultan flies their 747 to MSP to visit the Mayo Clinic in Rochester). But as time goes on there will be less and less. Glad I got to see the Atinov-225 here at MSP once before it was destroyed.
Perhaps the solution could be on the production side. Rather than stopping production of the 747, come up with a flexible production line which spends most of its time building a 'modern' design, but which is capable of flexibly producing more copies of the 747.
This is another challenge for manufacturers to have a good understanding of, "what the available air transporter" in this and or next decade. It will have a significant impact on their module of assembly and its transportability
13:17 B787 with hinged front section is not possible, as the forward landing gear is mounted forward of the split. Even if you could do it, the forward fuselage section (#41) is quite long (ends just forward of door 2 on the B788), so you would lose a lot of cargo space. Perhaps a rear swing like the Dreamlifter may be possible (split between sections 47 and 48, immediately aft of the rear cargo door). BTW, you can tell where the fuselage joins are on the 787 due to a missing window where you would expect one.
Interesting... but the Super Guppy's split was also behind the nose gear. The plane simply incorporated a pair of legs aft of the split, to keep it level. Kinda like what the An-124s have, when they squat the nosegear.
There was actually 3 aircraft built in the same style (or 4 depending on how you count). And the other was actually built to decent volumes. 747 was originally designed for a military contract. It lossed the contract, the winner, the C5 is still around. There was 131 C5 built and there are quite a few of them around still. The Russians was... well... sort of "inspired" by the C5 and built there An124 that is slightly larger. Its really very similar. And then the AN225 was built that was even larger. (Technically the 747-8F is larger than both the C5 and An124, but the two later have much larger front loading size). Then there are the C17 while significantly smaller than the 747, still can carry larger loads and also can carry fairly heavy loads. So there is actually quite a number of aircraft that can carry larger loads than the 747 volume vice. And most of those aircraft can also carry loads as heavy as the 747. The C17 for example is designed to carry anything from very heavy tanks, to very tall helicopters. In reality the load size of the 747 is actually not that big. The real benefit of the 747F is that its used in line service. What he kind of missed in the video is the core benefit of the 747F compare to say a An124 is not that its much more economical to fly. While, yes, it is 30-35% more economical, this is not the core benefit. The core benefit is that the 747F is in line service. Then the diffrance is no longer 30-35% but rather a order of magnitude or two. Still i would like to claim that loads that narrow and long that would fit into a 747F but not a 777F is very rare. in the video trains loaded on a aircraft is shown several times. You can´t load a train into a 747F. The loading deck is to low. Either component like a gas-turbine housing is either to high or to wide... or not so long that it would be impossible to load in a 777F. The 777F side door is actually higher than the 747F front door is wide.
Boeing has a lot of experience refurbishing old aircraft to keep them flying. Look at the B52; Those are so old I think they were mentioned in the Bible, and yet they're still in front line service. So I doubt there will ever be any shortage of 747s.
I would had made a 200km long plane with front and back doors. That way you could load the plane front in Stuttgart for example and unload the same cargo in the back in Munich. Also the plane would not had to take off and one would not need wings for takeoffs. Also it saves a lot of kerosine, which could be invested into a conveyor belt inside the craft.
You have just described a train and I love it. And makes me wonder if you're a fan of the podcast "Well There's Your Problem"? If not, you should give it a listen. ✌️🍍
Seen the Airbus Beluga taking off and landing at Broughton north-east Wales, shipping out the wings they build there, take to Toulouse for final aircraft construction.
with cockpit moving away (hinged) they need ensure no mistake of weak locks (Turkish DC 9 crash) is repeated. Also cables needs to be protected against damage (accidental hit by loaded cargo and flexing - broken individual cores due to frequent opening/closing). these cable problems are hard to find because they produce intermittent errors - ones which never show when service looks for the problem;-)
Rear opening combined with reversing the cargo in or out would eliminate the need for front opening in most cases. Giant side opening is a simpler rebuild as there are few structural components there. Bottom opening could be reused strategic bombers, as they have those giant doors already.
I know the demand isn’t there anymore, but man I wish Boeing could outfit the 747 with modern engines and updates. I always thought it was beautiful bird
@@cruisinguy6024 basically, but they can design it for the upcoming new generation tech and keep it in service. Demand just simply isn’t there anymore. It’s such a shame
@@shrimpflea I’m kinda wondering (and I know airlines were somewhat doing this during the pandemic) if perhaps a hybrid approach would work. The demand for the A380 and 747 for high passenger numbers just isn’t there anymore, and cargo is too small a niche for Boeing to keep building them for that, but what about cargo carriers that could also carry a limited number of passengers, plus the cargo? Seems that would be a good approach to solving some issues, and justifying the cost of continuing to build these things (or newer planes with similar capacities).
No mention of the 777F? While it doesn't have the visor like the 747F, it is capable of handling a LOT of weight. Also, I like how you mentioned the C-5. You should do some videos on it. C-5 guys such as myself would love to see it!
The C-5 is a remarkable aircraft, and there were a number of them at the boneyard at Davis-Monthan when I visited in 2019. I wonder if some could be fixed up for commercial use?
@@SkyhawkSteve FedEx approached USAF about the retired A model fleet. USAF declined. A legacy C-5 would not be economical to operate, as these aircraft are now over 50 years old. It is sad though. I've worked on C-5's since 2005 and it pains me to see them sitting in the desert.
@@remodrums33 I could see that they might need to be re-engined, new avionics, and possibly new wing spars and skin. Converting a new design to a cargo version could indeed be cheaper. Still, it hurts to see your birds in the boneyard.. I had the same thoughts when I saw the A-4M Skyhawks at AMARG.
@@SkyhawkSteve 29 of the retired A models have newer avionics but still the original engines. The remaining 52 C-5's (49 B's, 3 A's) had new avionics and CF-6-80C2 engines installed to the sum of $138 million per aircraft (C-5M designation). It has become a significantly more reliable aircraft, but parts obsolescence due to the aircraft's design age has taken a toll on it.
@@remodrums33 with c-17 going out of production, the US doesn’t have a heavy cargo plane in production anymore. They should just buy 747’s. Cheaper to operate.
I know what stats you are looking at but in my humble opinion we should be looking at the 777 as the next gen freighter! That's what will keep that plane alive & flying till the end of this century!!
777s are flown as freighters quite frequently, but don't currently have the capability of opening the front as far as I'm aware. Despite there not being any more 747s built, they will be sticking around for quite a while .
Your speculation about a modern hinged nose section aircraft seems very reasonable. Electrical connectors could be made very robust and include check circuits and redundant wires or wireless back-ups. There would be a weight penalty for the separation point of the pressurized fuselage, but modern high strength composites, though expensive, can be very strong and light.
Thanks for this video! As for the A380 cargo conversion, even though a FBW aircraft it might be impossible to have the front opening option, merely because the floor structure between the two levels is structurally needed to maintain the ovoid fuselage integrity. So even with a front opening, you couldn’t have a wide open fuselage. Too bad, the A380 would have been a cargo badass!
They could develope a plane with a top cargo door. Like the Spaceshuttle. This would work with the standard planedesign. The only downside i could think of is, that its only loadable by crane.
![F.HERO Ft. JSPKK x ลำไย ไหทองคำ x M-PEE - ไม่สนิทบิดหมด (Thai Riders Anthem) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kPJZ0UihBfk/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks again to Noom for sponsoring this video! Click here noom.com/mentournow to take your free Noom Evaluation.
00:00 ah yes the airbus 747
@@Toast_Mcgee listen again..
Ah its ever lmao
Like I've said before, take your sponsor and shove it you no hope youtuber!
Swinging the tail would be easier than the cockpit. The nose gear would not have to be supplemented. The original Guppy did it as did the CL-44.
I remember in 1999 I was on a flight that had a brief stop over in Calgary, Alberta. We were on a taxiway waiting to hit the runway but we were stopped. The captain came over the PA and told us to look out the left windows to see the world's largest aircraft take off. It was the Antonov. Even from a distance it looked huge - too big to fly. It just seemed to stroll down the runway without picking up any speed then, suddenly and amazingly, it was flying. Shortly after it left there was a bunch of airport service vehicles following its path along the runway. Later learned they were lookinng for FOD, as the Antonov was so big it could blow chunks of sod from the grass beside the runway onto the runway. Once a lifetime experience, like that time a Martin Mars water bomber flew over my house at low altitude after dropping its load. But that's another story.
Very sadly she has gone forever in this dirty war.😥 Thank you very much for your remembering.
@@NicolaW72 Dirty war? No. Predictable? Yes.
"The West is leading Ukraine down the primrose path, and the end result is that Ukraine is going to get wrecked.” - John Mearsheimer, Professor University of Chicago, September 2014
@@derek20la No need to write to me Russian Troll BS. P.ss o..!
@@NicolaW72 Turn off the TV, go outside, and try to smile because you seem miserable.
@@NicolaW72 I heard they will be repairing it despite it earlier not being the plan. I hope this info is reliable.
And what an absolute twat this Russian troll down here is.
Let's hope they can get it running again as it's a glorious machine.
Having a seat assignment on the upper deck on a long flight was fantastic. It was so much quieter and passenger traffic was greatly reduced.
That's a win-win situation for airlines and passengers, airline can arrange such prestige first class seats and passengers who can afford that can enjoy the more comfortable seats
@@vinching926 On the airlines on which I flew (Delta, PanAm) they were not First Class; they were Business Class.
Not to forget the 747 has also carried the Space Shuttle piggyback. "The Queen" is a majestic bird. She will be missed. Amazing how the 55-year old 737 is still rolling off the assembly line.
Similarly, the An-225 was designed to carry the Buran shuttle for the Soviets.
Until Hugo drax stole it! Bad security on the 747!
I saw the 747/shuttle flying above Lancaster, CA.
Impressive!
To be fair 737 is facing quite a few troubles in the recent years, difficult to know if 737 can keep being developed in the future.
@@HNBGamer I really hope Boeing gets off their behinds and at least starts developing a replacement for the 737. As it is now, more modern designs are going to eat its lunch more and more, e.g. the Airbus 200 series (ex Bombardier C-Series). I think Airbus is going to develop that series into a mid-term replacement for the A320 series that is becoming kinda long in the tooth as well, just much less so than the 737.
Petter's latest video is talking about the troubles the 737 has in more detail - that thing is slowly turning into a disaster (IMHO).
I have a feeling 747 freighters will be flying for another 50 years. Meanwhile as you point out it has become easier to hinge the cockpit because there are no hydraulic or cable connections to the cockpit on modern designs. Wiring harnesses are easy to connect/disconnect, or just flex as needed.
Definitely. I see the 747 ending up being in service for decades to come like the B-52s have been, the youngest of those are 60 years old and they're still going strong.
The B-52s that are still in service (and the KC-135s, for that matter) are still well with their airframe flight-hours lifespan. Surely commercial (cargo included) aircraft burn through many more of those per year, right?
@@jull1234 The later models of B-52 (Only H models still in service) had a strengthened frame, originally for durability with large payloads and battle damage, but the actual use was almost all normal service so they benefited from greatly extended fatigue life.
Redundancy is an issue. They can't run all of the control cables through a limited area on the hinge side. For example the DC-10 of UA232 had all three hydraulic systems routed into the tail and they were all severed by a single engine failure. Electrical plugs on the other sides are an option but they are also points of wear, inspection, and potential failure. Even if not a crash hazard it can mean a costly delay while maintenance is called out to asses fix and test the issue, which could be as basic as some dirt or an insect.
Just need to make sure Boeing keeps making spares and the support infrastructure for that long. Will it be in their interest?
End of an era. Couple of years ago I visited the construction hall of the 747 in Everett, the biggest building on earth. There are no words for the size of it and the complexity of that building. As a technician it was a profound experience.
I've always wanted to visit that building. Is it still open for tours, do you know?
I have been on the Boeing tour 5 times. It makes you proud to be American.
@@franzatsea Thank you for letting us know it is still open. On my list.
I toured it about 20 years ago as part of Boeing's "Friends and family" open house event, that they used to do once a year. I think it's been suspended. That was a fascinating event.
Everett Massachusetts or Washington
Thanks for the great videos. My dad (he turns a 95 in Dec), an aerospace engineer, took me and my brothers to watch the first 747 takeoff from LAX. We parked at the east end of the runway in the parking lot of some air freight company. We stood at the chain link fence with the taxiway on the other side. We were so close and it was giant. My dad kept telling us to listen to the engines. Unforgettable. Thanks again.
As someone who remembers the first 747, I hope to see her beautiful silhouette for a long time yet. Thankfully, I got the full 60s/70s 747 "experience", second only to the Concorde.
So did I! Saw the rollout of the C-5A, saw the second flight. I was in school for the first flight. My Dad worked at Lockheed, we went to Atlanta Airport on a Sunday morning to watch Delta 747 training flights.
Great time to be a kid!!
My first transatlantic flight was on a BA 747 in 1998. I was allowed to visit the flight deck mid Atlantic and spend around 20 mins sat with the 3 man crew on this 1976 built machine - was a great view from up there and a fantastic first long haul flight experience - I have loved the 747 ever since.
I remember, as a very young sailor at Naval Air Station Barbers Point (now Kalaeloa Airport), looking up in awe with other sailors in early 1970 as a 747 flew overhead after having taken off from Honolulu International Airport. It dwarfed anything any of us had ever seen, making the transport aircraft in our squadron -- old C-118 Liftmasters (DC-6s in civilian nomenclature) and a few C-130 Hercules aircraft -- look like toys. The 747 looked as if it was barely moving, it was so large. Very interesting video and a salute from a retired U.S. Navy chief petty officer.👍
Lufthansa got their first Jumbo in 1970, there was a family day in Hamburg where we had the opportunity to walk through this gigantic plane, I was 10 years old and never forgot this experience. It took 40 years for my first flight with a jumbo, to Hong Kong, amasing, Business Class ;-) top speed was above 1000 km/h.
I love the 747. Thank you for putting this series together.
The withdrawals begin. I remember when the 747 came out and it will forever be a favorite, as I will never forget seeing one the first time, or flying on her. The "experience" was only 2nd to Concorde. It was the size, as he said, that was so amazing, as it was a first, but also the beauty, for such a huge aircraft. But I understand Boeing's side, although you'd think that they've made enough corporate welfare to... Oh, nvm, just sob!
Jeez. I saw a giant C-5 all the way across town.
Crazy how slow they appear to go and how big they are.
75th anniversary of the US Air Force is this weekend here at Nellis AFB in Vegas. Gonna be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks as always.
I am so thankful that I flew this magnificent Queen of the skies during my career- (flew the 100, 200, 300, SP, and my favourite the 400). It is just an absolutely fabulous aeroplane which will be flying for a VERY long time.
I’m so sad to see the assembly line finally closed now.
The 747 will always be my favourite aeroplane and arguably the easiest that I have flown. Even though I finished my nearly 30k hour career on the 737-800, my heart will always be with the Queen. ❤
I describe the 737 as a somewhat twitchy sports car, where the 747 is a gentleman’s limousine.
Oh, my... you rulz!
I've heard that the 747 is very easy to fly. A lot easier than the 737 is.
@@DaveMiller2 100% this.
As I said- a twitchy sports car compared to a gentleman’s limo.
The 737 was fun to fly, and I always enjoyed flying it, (but much harder than the Queen). I don’t recall ever doing even a remotely “ordinary” landing in the Jumbo. I can’t quite say the same for the 737 LOL :-) 😂🤣
The 747 was also developed in part because Juan Trippe of Pan Am wanted a giant plane that could lower seat-per-mile costs and open flying to the masses. You might want to do a story on Pan Am one of these days.
Pan Am stories have been done to death. You can find least 50 of them on TH-cam.
In 2020 there was a proposal to replace the An-124s with a clean sheet design called the "Slon", other solution might be to simply sell C-17s to civilian cargo airlines (there is one painted with the Qatar Airways livery, for reference, but for larger sizes a new design might be needed)
Love your videos. I appreciate the time you must take to create them. I might shed a little tear when the last 747 rolls out.
I remember when they were fairly common. They were glorious to see up close. Trips to the airport weren't really frequent when I was a kid.
On your point about the necessity of quick transportation of large cargo: a few years back Ford had a supplier fire requiring they find a new supplier for diecast components. The only supplier capable of handling the tools they needed were in Europe instead of the US so they had to book the massive An-225 to ship the tooling over and keep their production of vehicles going.
I remember flying on a 747 in the 70s. It was a real experience. I still marvel at how some of these planes can get off the ground. I just last night saw a jumbo jet from the airline Emirates. It looked like a double decker. It was massive. Some of the cargo jets you showed almost look cartoonish.
If it was Emirates, then I guess it wasn't a jumbo jet (Boeing 747), but a super jumbo (Airbus A380). It is massive.
Airbus A380. Emirates has the largest fleet of them in service.
An older bloke at work took a 747 to Australia from the UK in the 70’s. He told me there were like 2/3 stop’s on the way!?
@@louissanderson719 I remember only one from Pennsylvania to Hawaii. That was at LAX, but I could be remembering wrong. That was a long time ago and I was about 8.
Another fascinating deep dive into a topic I didn't realize I was so intrigued by!
Glad you liked it!
Holy crap those Belugas look exactly like real Belugas. They’re adorable! 😂
They come with a beluga smile. I was expecting it to start porpoising through the air.
They are hideous.
now airbus needs to get the A380 a front door and here we go again! 😋
@@kittytrail unfortunately they can’t remove the center floor which is an integral part of the structure, du to the ovoid shape of the fuselage of the A380
@@JacquesZahar you kind of missed the "😋" at the end you know... 😏
Hey Petter,
Could you discuss step climbs in a future episode and why they are important to increase fuel economy?
I just watched this again (for I don't know how manyeth time :-) and OMG it's so goodddd! Fantastic explanation. I'm one of the many people who are obsessed with the Queen and anything having to do with her 😊I live near Dulles and go out to watch her on a regular basis. As a kid I remember when she was introduced! I also remember when Dulles was new and all the talk about it; they were very forward-thinking with it.
Another informative video. It has much food for thought. I am looking forward to what is ahead for air freight as well. Also looking forward to your history of the 747. I partisipated in reassembling one after a D check, very roomy baggage pits as well as the main deck.
Another great history lesson. Interesting to hear your thoughts on how the 747 might be replaced for cargo in the future.
I am officially an avgeek 4 years ago. Yes I am love the Boeing 747 and i wish i could fly the Jumbo Jet but sadly many 747s are retired as passenger plane. However, at least 100 747 are still in passenger service. I saw a Cathay Pacific 747F took off from Jakarta while exploring the PIK Avenue near west Jakarta and i was amazed
Thanks for this video, Petter and crew! Awesome!
Truly a joy to fly around the world, in all types of weather, such a prestigious, comfortable, and safe machine. The plane will forever be 'the Queen's of the skies 👍👍
The 747 is such a beautiful aircraft! My best friend flies freight 74’s… It’s just a phenomenal bird. Thanks for another great video, Petter! I always appreciate the time, effort, energy and passion that you put in! 👊🏻✈️
I learned several new things in this video. Thanks!
Thanks for another great video Petter.
Wow the image of that train being loaded onto the aircraft was just amazing. Technology is just amazing to be able the make that work! Fantastic engineering.
You had me going for a while there. I was thinking from the first moment - the contract bidding on the C-5A.
I remember it well. My father worked at Lockheed at the Marietta facility. The Boeing would never have won. The C-5 could lower the nose to truckbed level.
Thanks Mentour !
Looking forward to future info on the 747 !
ANOTHER GREAT VIDEO... I WAS WONDERING ABOUT HOW THE FREIGHT WAS GOING TO HANDLE THIS AS THE GREAT 747 HAS VERY FEW .. IM HAPPY TO SEE THAT ITS STILL FLYING AS AT LEAST FREIGHT.....
Makes a lot of sense. Great job as always explaining options and reasons
Assuming the freighters delivered this year keep flying for a good 40 years, we may have a long time to wait to see a replacement !
And what about something like the beautiful C-17 Globemaster III being converted to civilian use ?
the globemaster is also out of production and the plant sold off to company making rockets of all things
@@spencerjones841 it makes sense that a rocket company would want a building suitable for manufacturing giant metal cylinders lol.
@@spencerjones841 c-17 is also out of production. It makes no sense to use them as civilian freighters since the military needs what they got left and they are extra rugged which makes them costly.
But since they are out of production, the defense dept. should buy some 747 freighters.
The 747 will stay for a long time to come in the air - especially as Freighter. Thank you very much for the video!👍
I would suggest the answer is a production restart civilian version of the C17, like the Lockheed L-100 is for the C-130
It will be sad to see the 747 go away. I remember flying in them in early 70's when they first came out and when the upper floor had a bar in it. Later flew in them in the very long overseas flights when upper deck was all revenue seats, the cool bar gone.
Fascinating video! Can't wait to see your upcoming videos on the Queen.
There are more awesome roles to be covered.
The lovely old Bristol Freighter with it's 14 cylinder sleeve valve radials had a high cockpit and two hinged front access doors just after ww2. They lifted large and unwieldy loads for years.
When I was a little girl, about 6 years old, my dad took me to Tullamarine Airport in Melbourne, Australia, as a surprise. He had a friend who was a pilot for BOAC at the time, and we were given a tour of a 747. I remember the spiral staircase up to the top deck, the movie screen, and I was even allowed to look (not touch!) in the cockpit.
We were the only people on the plane apart from a couple of cabin crew and the pilots. It was so huge inside!
This was around 1970 or 71, and after that, I always had an interest in aircraft. I love flying ( have flown across Australia and to the USA)but never tried for a pilots licence myself because of cost and my fear of heights. I have no problems in a 747, 777, 767, etc, but a little Cesna or similar??? Nope!
thx for the video about this fantastic airplane- i like a lot your enthusiastic presentation
Starship point-to-point :)
What about the lighter than air designs that are being proposed? Many of those are specifically for cargo. Would love to see a video on the topic.
Any of those going above Mach 0.5 ?
The DC-3 lived well past its theoretical use-by date, just because it was a really good plane and it's a lot cheaper than buying a brand-new one. The cheapest plane you can have is the one you've already got, provided it's not junk. This aviation "bangernomics" will also apply to the 747-F because like the old DC-3, it's a good solid plane and spare parts are still plentiful.
Very interesting! A few weeks ago, I got to go inside the Mini-Guppy at the Tillamook Air Museum, it was quite a unique experience.
I finally started my PPL training and had my first flight today. Unfortunately, i got motion sick at some point during the flight and we had to discontinue so that it doesn't get worse. Can you make a video regarding tips for student pilots and nausea? Thanks!
I have recently seen such a beauty taking off above my head from Paris Charles de Gaulle airport..... What a majestic splendor and ellegance... today with Concorde long time gone, it's only the 747 the instantly recognisable plane... a true icon....
I have seen Airbus A380's too , impressive as well but far from the beauty of the queen of the skies😇
Another well done Video, TYVM. I read in mid October '22 that Cargolux, Europe’s largest all-cargo airline operating a combined fleet of 30 Boeing 747-8s and 747-400 Freighters, have finalized the order for 10- 777-8 Freighters with options for six additional aircraft, completing the signing at Cargolux headquarters in Luxembourg. Apparently the Boeing Y-3 is stalled, therefore we'll have to wait and see the evolution of the 777-8's as they attempt to satisfy customers needs.
Beautiful aircraft thank you for posting this great video
I just can’t imagine that different aircraft types look the same for most people. Like in movies when they take off in a 747 but land in a DC-10… I always thought „how can they make such a mistake? Everyone will instantly see that something is wrong“ 😂
I see two possible solutions 1 as a car guy we see companies doing major custamation this can be the time for aftermarket conversions to happen as they can do this a few times and have it make sense financially and the other is new wide bodys having the option as with fly by wire the flight deck can potentially tilt or swing
Anyone see all those Cargolux aircraft and wonder where Captain Joe was? Also, there are places where you cannot get to by road, rail or cargo ship - many mining operations in Canada's northern region is only accessible by air so air freight is the only way. Granted the cargo usually arrives by road/rail/ship to a staging area in southern Canada and then it's flown the last bit to the north, but that's what you need to do - it's not always you need a part immediately. Sometimes the only way to transport is by plane.
There's always the animal pulled carts and animal backs as options for inaccessible ground locations. Plus the also expensive option of building roads to overcome terrain limitations. Very few locations have never been reached by land or sea.
I clearly remember my first t sights of a 747. We were flying into SEA and the captain got permission to fly over Boeing Field as the 747 was parked outside. All the other aircraft looked sooo tiny. The second was during a long layover at SEA and my mum would let me walk the concourses. I saw a PanAm 747 heading apparently straight for me and it looked enormous. The only jumbo I’ve been on are the 747 and the DC 10 and the 747 was the winner by a mile.
Excellent discussion as always. Clearly the Antonov 225 (Mya) is sorely missed aftern being wrecked early in Putin's War. There are discussions on whether she can be repaired, or a new aeroplane built to the original plans. I hope so, although it will be very expensive.
Nah, it was old. Just say RIP and move on.
I don't think it'll ever come back unfortunately.
The An-225 is overkill for the vast majority of loads. Smaller aircraft can handle most other loads. Antonov only cobbled one together out of their post Soviet scrap heap because there was occasional demand from some of their customers.
@@AlTheEngineer Unfortunately and sadly - yes.😪
You can stop waiting, I am subscribed to both of your channels! Have an absolutely fantastic day! 😊
Lovely Video Peter🔥❤️
Hi Petter, thanks for another great and informative video!
I think, like a lot of aviation “geeks” I am saddened by the fact Boeing have discontinued the beautiful 747. Like many people, especially those from Australia as I am, my first big overseas/international holiday was on board a 747, I believe it was a 200 by Cathay Pacific and a 400 for the trip home again. It’s a very pretty and iconic design that is also highly functional.
Not meaning to divert too far from the subject but I am in the process of restoring a 47 year old Renault. Over time I have stripped it, re-trimmed it, removed rust and strengthened the body, re-sprayed it, re-built the engine and gearbox, brakes, suspension etc…Now she is fully registered and drives like a brand new car, albeit a new car in 1975. It’s cost me thousands and many hours on the tools in my garage but point is, it’s essentially new again, probably better than new.
I recently watched a documentary about a B747 by British Airways that was flown into Cardiff for a major service. She was stripped, all interior out, seats, carpets, bulk heads, WCs…everything. Highly trained men and women went over every component with a fine tooth comb looking for any signs of metal fatigue, corrosion, anything that would render the aircraft unsafe and any faults found were rectified or components replaced before she could be put back in the air. It was mind blowing to see just how much work was involved.
With that in mind, my question is, why do these aircraft have a lifespan? Why can they not be retro fitted with the more modern, more efficient wing designs, quieter, more efficient engines etc to keep these magnificent aircraft in service?
Do they literally get to the point that they are no longer financially viable, the maintenance will cost too much or does the airframe get to the point that there are too many weak spots to be worth fixing?
Those bulugea's are so hilarous looking to me, looks like some cartoon character with a giant brain
I remember being on a British Airways 747 - 400 Maiden commercial flight heded for New Zealand back in the late '90's. Once we were at cruising altitude the captain, an ex RAF pilot, came over the PA and welcomed us all to the flights maiden voyage ending the announcement with'...now let's open her up and see what this baby can do'. I recall we pushed through 900km/h what a thrill.
The last B-52 airframes were produced sixty years ago. Not only are B52s still in service, they will be for decades to come.
If there is no replacement for the 747, I see the same thing happening there (assuming Boeing still supports them).
Superb Petter.
Takk så mycket
I didn't fly on many 747s, but my first time was on KLM.. Turns out the plane I flew on was 1 reg. letter removed from the 747 that crashed at Tenerife (glad I didn't know that in 1990!). My most recent and presumably last flight was Air France.. exit row of the upper deck. Leg room for miles!
Sad to see the 747 come to an end. Up until recently I've made some parts for the 747 in the machine shop I work at.
The Boeing 474 has always been my favorite Aircraft!
I love big things and when it came out, it was the biggest thing in the air!
Also of note, I love Elephants, Dinosaurs and Blue Whales!
Maybe for the history episode, it would worth to involve Kelsey again from 74Gears. Like that guy!
Cost and demand is always,well said Sir
Sad to see the 747 go out of production. It was sad for me personally when Delta stopped flying a 747 to MSP years ago, but at least I could see them at other airports (or the occasional times a sultan flies their 747 to MSP to visit the Mayo Clinic in Rochester). But as time goes on there will be less and less. Glad I got to see the Atinov-225 here at MSP once before it was destroyed.
Thanks, Petter 😁
Perhaps the solution could be on the production side. Rather than stopping production of the 747, come up with a flexible production line which spends most of its time building a 'modern' design, but which is capable of flexibly producing more copies of the 747.
4:15 - That is *NOT* an Antonov-124. That’s Mriya, the destroyed Antonov 225.
This is another challenge for manufacturers to have a good understanding of, "what the available air transporter" in this and or next decade. It will have a significant impact on their module of assembly and its transportability
The Yumbo Yet, that took me back, Norwegians in my family.
First queen elizabeth and now the queen of the skies... damn
13:17 B787 with hinged front section is not possible, as the forward landing gear is mounted forward of the split. Even if you could do it, the forward fuselage section (#41) is quite long (ends just forward of door 2 on the B788), so you would lose a lot of cargo space. Perhaps a rear swing like the Dreamlifter may be possible (split between sections 47 and 48, immediately aft of the rear cargo door). BTW, you can tell where the fuselage joins are on the 787 due to a missing window where you would expect one.
Interesting... but the Super Guppy's split was also behind the nose gear. The plane simply incorporated a pair of legs aft of the split, to keep it level. Kinda like what the An-124s have, when they squat the nosegear.
I'm joining some of the others in thinking the way forward maybe a joint military/civilian large cargo aircraft.
The 747 is beautiful.
Loved this video, different but very interesting.
When mentioning the Antonov AN124 at 4:17 you showed a picture of it's big brother the AN225.
I showed pictures of both throughout the video
@@MentourNow I made that comment before watching the full video, which was why I added the timestamp.
747 is just so unique its almost unimaginable to see it go...
There was actually 3 aircraft built in the same style (or 4 depending on how you count). And the other was actually built to decent volumes.
747 was originally designed for a military contract. It lossed the contract, the winner, the C5 is still around. There was 131 C5 built and there are quite a few of them around still.
The Russians was... well... sort of "inspired" by the C5 and built there An124 that is slightly larger. Its really very similar. And then the AN225 was built that was even larger. (Technically the 747-8F is larger than both the C5 and An124, but the two later have much larger front loading size).
Then there are the C17 while significantly smaller than the 747, still can carry larger loads and also can carry fairly heavy loads.
So there is actually quite a number of aircraft that can carry larger loads than the 747 volume vice. And most of those aircraft can also carry loads as heavy as the 747. The C17 for example is designed to carry anything from very heavy tanks, to very tall helicopters.
In reality the load size of the 747 is actually not that big. The real benefit of the 747F is that its used in line service.
What he kind of missed in the video is the core benefit of the 747F compare to say a An124 is not that its much more economical to fly. While, yes, it is 30-35% more economical, this is not the core benefit. The core benefit is that the 747F is in line service. Then the diffrance is no longer 30-35% but rather a order of magnitude or two.
Still i would like to claim that loads that narrow and long that would fit into a 747F but not a 777F is very rare. in the video trains loaded on a aircraft is shown several times. You can´t load a train into a 747F. The loading deck is to low. Either component like a gas-turbine housing is either to high or to wide... or not so long that it would be impossible to load in a 777F.
The 777F side door is actually higher than the 747F front door is wide.
Insane to see trains being moved by the Antonov. Anyway, it’s truly sad to see the 747s disappearing from passenger service.
I always think of the Carvair dc4 conversions by Freddy Laker at Southend.
Boeing has a lot of experience refurbishing old aircraft to keep them flying. Look at the B52; Those are so old I think they were mentioned in the Bible, and yet they're still in front line service. So I doubt there will ever be any shortage of 747s.
I would had made a 200km long plane with front and back doors. That way you could load the plane front in Stuttgart for example and unload the same cargo in the back in Munich. Also the plane would not had to take off and one would not need wings for takeoffs. Also it saves a lot of kerosine, which could be invested into a conveyor belt inside the craft.
You have just described a train and I love it. And makes me wonder if you're a fan of the podcast "Well There's Your Problem"? If not, you should give it a listen. ✌️🍍
Seen the Airbus Beluga taking off and landing at Broughton north-east Wales, shipping out the wings they build there, take to Toulouse for final aircraft construction.
with cockpit moving away (hinged) they need ensure no mistake of weak locks (Turkish DC 9 crash) is repeated. Also cables needs to be protected against damage (accidental hit by loaded cargo and flexing - broken individual cores due to frequent opening/closing). these cable problems are hard to find because they produce intermittent errors - ones which never show when service looks for the problem;-)
Rear opening combined with reversing the cargo in or out would eliminate the need for front opening in most cases. Giant side opening is a simpler rebuild as there are few structural components there. Bottom opening could be reused strategic bombers, as they have those giant doors already.
Nice one 👍!
I know the demand isn’t there anymore, but man I wish Boeing could outfit the 747 with modern engines and updates. I always thought it was beautiful bird
So….the 747-8?
@@cruisinguy6024 basically, but they can design it for the upcoming new generation tech and keep it in service. Demand just simply isn’t there anymore. It’s such a shame
The demand is there. Air cargo has been getting more popular. There are still many 747-400 freighters flying that could be upgraded.
That latest version already had the modern engines also found on the 787 from GE
@@shrimpflea I’m kinda wondering (and I know airlines were somewhat doing this during the pandemic) if perhaps a hybrid approach would work. The demand for the A380 and 747 for high passenger numbers just isn’t there anymore, and cargo is too small a niche for Boeing to keep building them for that, but what about cargo carriers that could also carry a limited number of passengers, plus the cargo? Seems that would be a good approach to solving some issues, and justifying the cost of continuing to build these things (or newer planes with similar capacities).
No mention of the 777F? While it doesn't have the visor like the 747F, it is capable of handling a LOT of weight. Also, I like how you mentioned the C-5. You should do some videos on it. C-5 guys such as myself would love to see it!
The C-5 is a remarkable aircraft, and there were a number of them at the boneyard at Davis-Monthan when I visited in 2019. I wonder if some could be fixed up for commercial use?
@@SkyhawkSteve FedEx approached USAF about the retired A model fleet. USAF declined. A legacy C-5 would not be economical to operate, as these aircraft are now over 50 years old. It is sad though. I've worked on C-5's since 2005 and it pains me to see them sitting in the desert.
@@remodrums33 I could see that they might need to be re-engined, new avionics, and possibly new wing spars and skin. Converting a new design to a cargo version could indeed be cheaper. Still, it hurts to see your birds in the boneyard.. I had the same thoughts when I saw the A-4M Skyhawks at AMARG.
@@SkyhawkSteve 29 of the retired A models have newer avionics but still the original engines. The remaining 52 C-5's (49 B's, 3 A's) had new avionics and CF-6-80C2 engines installed to the sum of $138 million per aircraft (C-5M designation). It has become a significantly more reliable aircraft, but parts obsolescence due to the aircraft's design age has taken a toll on it.
@@remodrums33 with c-17 going out of production, the US doesn’t have a heavy cargo plane in production anymore. They should just buy 747’s. Cheaper to operate.
Lucky for me I've flown on an Air China B747-400M back in 2010 from Beijing to Los Angeles. What an unique and incredible experience that was.
I know what stats you are looking at but in my humble opinion we should be looking at the 777 as the next gen freighter! That's what will keep that plane alive & flying till the end of this century!!
777s are flown as freighters quite frequently, but don't currently have the capability of opening the front as far as I'm aware. Despite there not being any more 747s built, they will be sticking around for quite a while .
Your speculation about a modern hinged nose section aircraft seems very reasonable. Electrical connectors could be made very robust and include check circuits and redundant wires or wireless back-ups. There would be a weight penalty for the separation point of the pressurized fuselage, but modern high strength composites, though expensive, can be very strong and light.
Thanks for this video! As for the A380 cargo conversion, even though a FBW aircraft it might be impossible to have the front opening option, merely because the floor structure between the two levels is structurally needed to maintain the ovoid fuselage integrity. So even with a front opening, you couldn’t have a wide open fuselage. Too bad, the A380 would have been a cargo badass!
They could develope a plane with a top cargo door. Like the Spaceshuttle. This would work with the standard planedesign. The only downside i could think of is, that its only loadable by crane.
I'm loving this series really
So happy to hear that
First flight on the "Queen of the Skies" was on United from HON to LAX in 1972...
More information and history of the BOEING 747 (that hasn't already been regurgitated by other channels) would be awesome!
747s are still used by ups, several of them take off and land in worldport, those queens are massive up close.