ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ต.ค. 2024
- ➡️Patreon: / airspace_yt
The last 747 is about to me manufactured and delivered to cargo airline Atlas Air later this year. After this, the 747 will not be manufactured anymore. An era of 53 years is coming to the end. Why is this magnificient aircraft that revolutionized air travel when it was first introduced suddenly obsolete?
Let's find out! We'll take a close look at ETOPS and why all planes today only have two, not four engines.
✈️ Support the channel here! ✈️
➡️Patreon: / airspace_yt
➡️TH-cam Membership: www.youtube.co....
☕Or just buy me a coffee! www.buymeacoff... ☕
Discord: / discord
_________________________________________
Why Airlines DON'T use the 747 Anymore [ETOPS]
Credits
Music:
Epidemic Sounds
Visuals:
MSFS2020
Storyblocks
✈ Support the channel here! ✈
➡Patreon: www.patreon.com/airspace_yt
➡TH-cam Membership: th-cam.com/channels/IFp.html...
☕Or just buy me a coffee! www.buymeacoffee.com/airspace ☕
It was considered a real experience to fly on a 747 in the 60/70s, with free champagne and decent food even in economy (KLM the epitome). She is my all time favorite plane for long haul (I've never flown Airbus). Very smooth plane, (those huge wings).
I want to make 747 again. It is the most important plane. I am writing a novel to inspire people to bring back the 747. It turned out to be the "Best Thing Every tourist Never Had." I will also make a new 787 variant too as well.
I always choose the Boing 747 when given the chance. I just love the way she handles bad weather and that roar when she takes off. I know this means little to most: I think the 747 with the upstairs lounge was the king of travel. It did not last long but, it was great. Happy Trails
4 engines over 2 especially enroute to la.rog.ps records.
The roar of the 4 engines on the 747 while landing still makes me smile. The sound of the huge amount of power is amazing.
The sound Scotch makes rolling into my rock glass in the upstairs lounge of the B-747 makes me smile. And that my friends is Flying!
The A380 is a magnificent aircraft to fly in as a passenger. It is smooth, quiet and spacious. I was lucky enough to be invited into the cockpit with my 3 boys, after landing. Despite the size of the aircraft, the cockpit seemed quite tight and small. A photo of my young boys sitting at the controls, wearing the captain's hat, is a treasured memory.
Wow. How did you get invited into the cockpit with your kids?
“Joey, do you like Gladiator movies?”
@@stephenprice5882we knew the pilot. 😜
@@lordjim1933 Ever been in a Turkish prison?
I have flown in both the Airbus and the 747...both were magnificent!
"Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim" 😁
😁
Hey, its not exactly wrong. I mean air transat 236 was an absolute fluke, and it very nearly ended in the ocean, even after touching down in the Azores (plane used up 2.3 km of the 3 km runway, and at the end of the runway was a cliff)
Quite sure I heard that from Sam (Wendover Productions) :P
@@DsYkX Me too! I think that's where I first heard it. Quite an old video of his now.
LMAO 🤣
The plane that pretty much ended the age of the 747 was actually another Boeing model, the 777-300ER. Originally designed with a range of just over 7,000 nautical miles, the 777-300ER actually got a range boost to 7,700 nautical miles, and that made it possible for airlines to phase out even 747-400's. By the end of 2019, 777-300ER's were often flying routes that used to be flown by the 747.
true, the 777-300ER was definitely a factor
I completely agree with that statement that the 777-300ER replaced the 747-400 on most routes as I worked on the 747 line at Everett, Washington from early 1988 to 1993 and then transferred to the 777 line for my final 25 years at Boeing. The first time saw the completed and fitted out 777-300ER for Air France I knew that the 747 days were numbered for the passenger market.
The 777 stated killing the 747s and 380s.
The A350s put the final nails
I’m sure one day we’ll miss the 777 as much as the 747 now 😅😢
The reason why the A380 was built, despite the increased fuel costs, was because airports were reaching their capacity of landings and take offs. With the spacing between aircraft, there is a limit to the amount of aircraft that one runway can handle per day. The A380 was designed to carry two or three times the number of passengers so one landing transported more people, reducing the amount of aircraft using the airport. Unfortunately, it didn't work out the way that Airbus had hoped.
pilot scarcity brings the concept back into consideration
it took 4 times as long to board or disembark.
Yes I was going to add the rush to twin engine planes assumes infinite air space and airport availability and unlimited supply of air crews. It has been a joke that since exiting Covid restrictions London Heathrow is operating at half of its normal capacity due to staff shortages. I do accept that a bigger plane also requires more ground handlers. In ten years time will there be the capacity for all these twin jets?
A380 has more wake turbulence than other planes. Many airports are not even slot controlled. You are just wrong.
I worked on the manufacture of the 747 for over 10-years. It is sad to see it go!
It was sad, but 747 had an amazingly long journey. Happy retirement
I did fly the Queen for 3000 hrs or 5 years, it was the best years of my 32 years in aviation, flying A300-600, MD90, B777-200, A320 family
The 747-400 was
Built well,
Redundant,
Range,
Easy to fly,
6 electric generators,
4 hydraulic systems,
A crew of 4 pilots and 23 flight attendants,
Had a lavatory and a 2 bunk beads inside the flight deck,
and it had a mystique effect on all airline staff when interacting with me, more respect from staff and passengers,
Don’t get me wrong, but it was a privilege that I thankfully enjoined.
I can only imagine! It's an amazing piece of engineering and aviation's history.
More respect 😅🤣😂
The video was fascinating. The 747 was a workhorse iconic airplane. Like 10 AM, TWA, Ozark, Eastern, PSA it’s sad to see them gone. Thanks for the video
thank you!
Anyone else heard the story of when a Boeing exec was asked why he only flew on quad engine aircraft and he responded to the effect "because no one makes one with five" 😆 Can't find anything online to substantiate that quote but always made me smile
haha
I heard that was the chairman of Avro.
One true story. A B-52 was returning to base after losing an engine. Some smart ass in a fighter came over the radio. "Oh, the horror of flying with only seven engines!!"
An explanation out of the common, let me congratulate you for the ease of understanding, wonderful !!
Wish had this knowledge when tried to convey the ETOPS message .. back then ..
thank you :))
You got me at 7:00. I was like “What!. That’s not what it means.” 😂😂
Also., every video of yours, I’m reminded about your comment, a long time ago, about your English and that you weren’t exactly happy with it. My original thought still stands. It’s perfect bud. Do not be embarrassed about it. No doubt it’s not your first language. But it’s impressive how perfect English is as your second. Be proud about it and don’t ever give it a second though. There’s a lot of people out there that would be jealous if their second language sounded half as good as yours does. 👍
Same here! Your videos ROCK! Today I watched you before the Mayday and 3 greens channels.
Keep up the good work!
awww thank you so much you two!
I agree. I really like your voice and I am an American, English speaker. You are pleasing to listen to, better than most!
I had 14 years on the 747 Classic and -400, and 26 years on the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar. I used to tell the copilots on the 747s that they would tell their grandchildren they flew the airplane.
Wonderful machines. I’m glad I retired off of the 747. 777, A350, etc.,…they’re all cool and beautiful airplanes, but never really had a huge desire to fly them. The 747 is probably the last true “stick-and-rudder” airplane. No fly-by-wire, no auto trim, etc. A pilot’s airplane. The -400 had a lot of the “magic” if you wanted it, but you could also turn all that junk off, look at a runway and land on it.
Great video. Sure brought back some memories. Thank you for uploading it.
I would like to hear your about you experiance flying the TriStar. We are told it was the best of the triple engine planes and little else.
The Lockheed TriStar was a beautiful nd safe aircraft.
Sadly, QANTAS here in Australia never had them.....
@@danharold3087 I wrote one little story about it. Search “Tristar and Me”. It’s on the World Airline Historical Society website under Captain’s Log.
Mark
@@georgiathai4961
Thanks for the link it was much enjoyed. Sounds like a very enjoyable career. Kudos
@@danharold3087 Oh man…more fun than a human being should be allowed to have!
I find the phasing out of the 747 very sad. I have flown transatlantic on a few of them. Quite close to my home in the UK, there is an airfield with a long line of 747s ready for parting out, some are not very old. Its good to see Lufthansa is still operating a fleet of them. Would I be happy flying transatlantic on a twin, heck no!
The passenger version of the 747 might be gone but the freighter 747s will be flying for a while yet.
@@autodidact537 That's true, I believe the final pair are currently in production at the moment.
@@robinoconnor1203 came from the future that it did finally came to an end
The 787 and the A350 are truly incredible feats of engineering. I’ve only been an aviation enthusiast for about a year but it is incredible to see what planes are now since the very first times I travelled overseas
Very fascinating! Definitely makes me feel safer flying knowing there are such strict and redundant qualifications, especially the two separate maintenance personnel part. Amazing that planes like the A350 can practically cover the entire globe and even smaller ones can hop greater distances over water (like some B737 variants that go to Hawaii). Aviation has come a long way.
I’ll miss seeing the trijets, though. Those are/were my favorites.
Really love the acronym joke 🤣🤣
I don't have a problem with twins. What I do have a problem with is narrow body long haul flights, because you can't easily move about the cabin during flight as you can on wide body twin aisles. Thus can lead to emboli and other health issues, especially as flights get longer and airlines pack more passengers into less space to maximize profit, such as the move to ten across on the A-350 series, and ever shortening seat pitches in economy. So planes like the 321XLR may be cheered by airline execs, but passengers should avoid them like the plague!
I've never flown longhaul on a narrowbody, but I too expect it must be dreadful...
Airbus leads and Boeing will follow. The mental picture of stretching a 737 for long haul flights and packing more humans in - with the longer trek to the loo down insufficient aisle space - gives one nightmares. Great idea for everyone but the passengers.
Back in the Ol' days United Stretch DC-8's flew Denver to Honolulu, and let me tell you, that was a long ride in a narrow tube. Still better than changing planes in SFO or LAX. I'd do it again!
As a kid raised in a Pan AM family it's sad to see no more 747 flying. My dad was with the original group of staff that did all the necessary shake outs in Roswell, NM.
I extra sad because I never got to fly in a 747.
@@AirspaceVideos Well, you could have been like in the "good old days", if you were in the military like I was, pay $10.00 on a Space A seat across the Atlantic, Pacific and whatnot in the back of a C-141B. Relatively noisy, troop style seats on the sides, sometimes they had airline style seats, facing aft. A friendly loadmaster serving your boxed meal or on occasion if there was a comfort pallet onboard a hot TV dinner type meal. The current C-17 has better seats on the side if there are no airline seats on that particular mission and there is the C-5 with if I recall 88 seats upstairs in the rear, that long, long ladder to get you upstairs. Don't even get me started on the C-130, as in the good old days, a honey bucket with a toilet seat and or a urinal on the side. Have well over 8,000 hrs in the C-141B and C-17 combined. A cramped single aisle commercial jet will seem like heaven.
9:40 Aren't the routes curved because of the 2d projection of a 3d sphere? I believe the flight routes are pretty much straight when viewed on a 3d globe
You are correct.
Rhumb line
@@blakebrown2125 ?
Yes, on any map where the latitude lines are parallel, e.g. Mercator, the great circle (shortest) path will be shown as a curve that bends toward the nearest pole, unless the path is exactly on the equator
@@blakebrown2125 A great circle!
As needs change and technologies evolve, economics rule business, including transportation. Harsh, but true. Nice job today, thank you. Loved the alternate for ETOPS. 👍
You had me on the first description of ETOPS. Excellent video as well as comforting.
Thanks Airspace !
Always interesting & informative.
Actually , the 747/8 will continue as a speciality production product. It has 53 years of history, engineering, and their are parts for these aircraft all over the globe. This was announced several months ago. I think it will mainly be cargo air craft, and very rich people who customized their aircraft
Also, for several years now, the executive branch of the U.S. government's been wanting to replace its fleet of "Air Force One" aircraft, and I think they want those shiny new 747-8 aircraft.
@@bagnome U.S has already selected 747-8 as a replacement its under going modifications
EXCELLENT video. I'm a Private Pilot and I found the info very informative. Great graphics.
I’ve only flown a quad jet over the Atlantic. It was either an A340, an A380 or a 747. A340 was the one I always liked the most. And I never put any thought to the number of engines.
A340 has 4 engines mate
@@andyturbo Yes, all of them do.
@@andrzejostrowski5579 Exactly. Oh i misread your comment didn't see the first line 'quad jet' - my mistake
All those 3 planes are amazing to fly! The 3 fantastics I called it!
As a seasoned passenger, B747 or A380 and previous A340 are the most comfy bird. B787 is like travelling on a skateboard as operators skim and save on comfort and claw back with inflight Internet and $5 for a bottle of water. I love the 747, So many trips London -Sydney or NY.
Main reason is that is all airlines have put the 787 the wrong use. This plane is just a new generation a330 supposed also to be 2-4-2, but (besides Japan airlines) all have it in 3-3-3 as it carries more passenger, profitable..... The sad thing is that things are like that these Days
Even though it brings a Tear to my eye seeing the Big Girl go… But I will always remember the 777 being the First 2 Engine Aircraft to fly over the Ocean with 2 Engines… Which was why I love the 777 but I have to admit the A350 which is Airbus equal to the 777 is a much better Ride… Not too bad… I do feel safe Crossing the Ocean with 2 Engines. Its more along the lines of How much sleep my Pilots got. Is one of them going to Lock the other one out and crash the Aircraft. Did someone forget to Double check Engine repairs etc… Its not the Plane itself its the people Running them!
ETOPS...I must say that really made my day! 😆
Very interesting. I never knew about the flight time rules.
Very nice to have those rules explained
in the summer of 1974 I boarded a 747 from Paris to San Francisco. As the plane was almost empty and came from Israel, it had a large load of strawberries. Remarkably on takeoff the tips of the wings vibrated slowly up and down, as in a bird. Due to unfavorable winds it flew over Uranium City and had to land in Las Vegas for fuel and the cabin became hot waiting under the Sun.
When I was stationed at DM Tucson Az. They were doing touch & go learning to land the new 747. They were not in use at that time, still testing. Then 2 years later I came back from Nam in a 747.
The "Queen of the Skies" day has pretty much been eclipsed by these newer, completely computerized "fly by wire", dual-powerplant, long range jetliners and their fuel efficient GE90 modular engines that allow carriers to cut their operating and maintenance costs... However, there's still the 747s that were either originally built or modified for cargo service... _They're_ not going anywhere - not too soon, anyway!
Most interesting. Learned something new today. Thanks. However, the 747 is the most beautiful commercial jet in the world.
show many other youtube channels follow the pattern of only making the video on accidents of the planes , I like these types of videos where someone take about the ins and out of aircraft
Interesting video. Very good job explaining the history, and reasoning behind the flight decisions. Kudos
I've flown the 747 and other 4 engine and 3 engine jets also the newer 2 engine jets. all were very nice. However the best flight I ever had was on a DC3 from Anchorage to Goodnews on the Bering sea and back. The plane was 81 years old 2 engine prop.
oh wow 😁
why did you like the DC3 flight so much?
The Queen of the Skies!
Like a petulant child i was angry when i heard that Her production was to be cancelled. i have been in a bit of a funk about it ever since. Your video helped me to accept the inevitable and be at peace with the end of Her production. After all She will be flying awhile yet!
You were very kind in your treatment of both of the great rivals. i knew modern twins were light years ahead of the old four engine gas guzzlers. Your historical look (i like things that are grounded in history) really left me feeling like i was at a memorial service or tribute to Her. As i said, i am peaceful now about it. Thank you Chris!!! !:-)
💜🙏⚡️
Thanks for your comment ;) The name's chris though, peter is the guy with a million subscribers 🙃
@@AirspaceVideos i am so EXTREMELY sorry Chris!!! i KNOW that You are not that other guy!!!! The sensitive treatment of both Boeing and Airbus makes more sense now! i through in the name as an afterthought... and it turned out to be a wet brain fart!:-(
Please forgive me Swiss Chris. i was truly touched and put at peace by You !:-)
💜🙏⚡️
@@AirspaceVideos i changed my most egregious error to reflect proper credit!
Mea culpa! Maxima mea culpa !:-)
💜🙏⚡️
A good, long time as a package hauler, from what I understand!
The A321Neo can also now do transatlantic crossings. I will be taking one from JFK to LHR in a few months.
I really like these explainer style videos, keep them up!
thanks, I will!
I'd say: "why PASSENGER airlines won't use the Boeing 747 anymore", I think the cargo versions of the 747 will remain airborne until 2050. as "air lorries", the 747 will remain to be of use still for a long long time.
good point
And remember the 747 was designed to be converted for cargo. That's why the flight deck is upstairs, to allow straight through cargo loading through the nose. Boeing had expected the type to become obsolete with the advent of supersonic flight.
It is a beautiful plane. Growing up, my family and I would do transatlantic flights every year and it always felt special to fly on one. If I got to the gate and it wasn’t a 747, I’d feel a bit nervous, like only a 747 could make it across. I dont know why, there were plenty of 747 accidents, but to me they always seemed so sturdy and strong. I really miss them.
I always loved the 747. If I could buy a plane, it would be a 747.
They are great fun in the flight sim MS FSX, the recent pretty MSFS20 bloatware has godaweful pretend flight physics, pretty but not very functional cockpit.
I liked this explanatory video
No matter how reliable the two engines are, flying over atlantic would feel safer for me in four engine aircrafts. May be the two engines are reliable but accidents happen, and when it does, I would not like to be in that aircraft, having some extra safety counts.
A very intersting video and well told.
The queen of the skies❣️
I'm in my 60s and have never flown in a 747. There's still time for me, but
I won't hold my breath. I've always associated the 747 with Pan American Airlines. I think when I first saw a 747 it was in a movie with the Pan Am livery. Now they're almost both gone. I thought it was a beautiful plane then and now think, it will never be surpassed in it's looks.
It makes sense and I feel very safe flying over the Artic or the Oceans.
The alternative definition of ETOPS is great.
How about the problem we are now experiencing of an acute lack of pilots? Doesn't that make the 747 and 380 viable again?
Sorry but I don’t see the connection. What does the number of engines on an aircraft have to do with a pilot shortage?
Fewer big planes need fewer pilots than more small planes; carry same number of passengers with fewer planes using available pilots.
@@mtkoslowski I think he is implying that the Boeing 747 can carry far more passengers, requiring fewer aircraft. We'll see. I still don't fly. I had enough of that in the U.S. Air Force.
Very good presentation
Etops- 2 engine flights can fly further from airports... thatswhat went against quadjets being phased out slowly as engines have become sooo reliable
06:10 I like how the Murican synonym for 'bribing' is 'lobbying ' and by using alternate terms like 'softened' (instead of "bribed") makes it look a bit decent.
TBH, I've never paid much mind to how many engines any plane I flew in had. As long as they keep the plane safely in the sky, I'm cool!
True
I recently retired from being a flight attendant for 33 years and I flew on many 747 planes ✈️ on the 100 to the 800 planes ✈️ they were all a beautiful aircraft ever built
Loved the etops joke . Happy landings mate
She may not have passengers, but she will be around for many more years bearing cargo company livery. I hope she is still taking to the skies 50 years from now.
I watched the last Air NZ 747 depart Auckland for the last time. Sad day as they were still the most comfortable plane they, and many others, operated. All my early international travel was also on Qantas and BA 747’s. The last time I flew one was Thai Airways from BKK to SIN, like getting on an old comfortable sofa. I think they still operated 747’s so will try to fly them once again if I can.
Thai used to be great to fly with, sadly those days are long gone. Poor customer support, rude/untrained cabin crew, aging planes with poor maintanence. I was a fequent flyer with Thai and new many cabin crew and a few flight crew.
Question: Not all planes of a particular model are ETOPS rated. Some 737s are ETOPS rated and other's aren't. And I think there was an incident a few years ago when a non-ETOPS plane was accidentally used to fly to Hawai'i. What additional equipment does an ETOPS 737 have?
A functioning APU is a requirement. I'm sure there are others, but that's just one I know of.
Yes, three generators is a requirement, among several other technical requirements that exceed the limitations of the classic minimum equipment list.
In layman's terms, less stuff is allowed to be non-functional; you need a plane in pretty perfect condition to fly ETOPS routes (whereas some defects are allowable on routes that keep you within those 60 minutes)
@@AirspaceVideos they also have larger life rafts and also additional ELTs
@@windanthonystream LOL.
Thank you, a very informative video.
I flew non stop direct from Atlanta to Honolulu in a Delta 747 flight n 2014. That was an awesome trip. First and last time I’ll ever fly in a 747😢
A great video, a great channel, thanks 👍
One has to wonder as to the ETOPS on Alcock & Brown's Vimy . . . "You see the far end of the runway? - about there." : )
That's an intelligent, discourse. over the last 15 years I have been working on the SNECMA CFM, and now the Safran LEAP both co-manufactured with GE. We get -15% econonomy with the LEAP. You can't ignore that. However, what you do not mention is that witth 9/11 and covid we spend more time checking in ques, security quues, getting on the plane. Getting off the plane, passing immigration, baggage customs. They are all long and difficult for one big plane. Two Two engine planes do it better. That doesn't mean I don't love the 747. Best commecial fllight in my life. By hazard I was upgraded to first class on Cathay Pacific 747. There were only two of us in the 1st class hump 747. There were 3 stewardesse's for two of us, Seriously TOP MODEL and so so attentive.
Give me 747
380, have passengered it ( I only fly small planes) Beutiful, comfortable. but with the wing length you get a certain harmonic that gives vibration at certain height/speed .
All of the above notwithstanding, there have never been more 4-engine aircraft in the sky. Lufthansa is flying 747s extensively, and ordering -800 versions until Boeing closes the door - British Airways have brought back all the A-380s they thought they had seen the last of pre-Covid, and would order more if they could, and the same goes for Emirates! This will start to ease off when Boeing finally gets their 777-X of the ground (in about another hundred years, with current labor shortages) and Airbus brings on larger capacities in the 350 ecosystem. For right now, it may be sunset, but a glorious sunset it is for the Queen of the skies pundits had prematurely writting the obituaries to a few years ago.
Yup, it's being used a lot right now, but I guess that's only to serve the huge surge in demand right now. Once deliveries of newer planes will take place, I doubt that we'll be seeing a lot of quad jets.
Yes and it's still nice to see Lufthansa and Swissair flying the A340 quads.
Many airlines around the world have been switching to twin engine aircraft as it more economical and today's models can now fly at longer ranges for example from Singapore to New York non stop in 19 hours.
really enjoyed the vid! nice bud
it is now even more nostalgic and sad as I drove (back n 2001) past the B-747 PROTOTYPE which stands permanently on the BOEING works alongside the road up north to Canada
Very interesting!
A good explanation. I've flown trans Pacific for many years both in B767 and B747 and from a pilots point of view I second the more engine the better, they aid the depth of sleep during the rest periods and the bunks are way better. Never had an engine problem on any of the flights so have to agree economics win.
Isn't the B747 can not stand a 2-engine failure? Or at least some systems may fail?
@@TheViettan28 A B747 can fly on only two engines at a lower altitude and reduced speed. Systems have multiple levels of redundancy. eg 4 hydraulic systems and electrical supply systems plus battery backup.
@@ralphzoombeenie2330 I expect more in depth discussion. This is way too shallow. I have watched some videos of how some subsystem depends on each of the engines
.
@@TheViettan28 Many are dependent on other systems and one reason for a QRH Wish I had more time. My B747 course was 4 weeks ground school and 10x 4hr sim sessions despite having years of B767 experience with many similar systems
I Love your videos!!! Very funny joke ETOPS :)))
First 11 minutes: aviation history. Last 1m30s: what the video title is about.
I do like the idea of limiting long-haul flights only to aircraft that have proven fault-free performance.
Been flying for a long time, no such thing as fault free flying, anything that can go wrong, will go wrong...just sayin
@@KrasherJack ‘Failure is not an option. Failure is mandatory.’ In the fullness of time, everything fails.
Still, I’d rather cross the ocean in a plane that hasn’t had engine failures in the last 1000 flight hours, than I would in a plane that has had multiple failures in the last week - ‘fixed’ or not.
This limit on long haul flights also puts extra value on well maintained aircraft - which encourages better maintenance - which is why I like the limit. Not for it’s direct effect, but it’s indirect effect.
Both the Boeing and Airbus are magnificent aircrafts. It's something majestic about them.
Thanks again for a excellent and informative video. 👍
The red box on the thumbnail first made me think I already watched this video. Didn't recognise the title
What Federal Air Regulation states that I cannot work on both engines?
You made that one up!
rule 14 CFR 121.374 (c) reads:
“(c) Limitations on dual maintenance.
(1) Except as specified in paragraph (c)(2), the certificate holder may not perform scheduled or unscheduled maintenance during the same maintenance visit on more than one ETOPS Significant System listed in the ETOPS maintenance document, if the improper maintenance could result in the failure of an ETOPS Significant System.
I'll see myself out 🙃
No, I don't feel safe with a two engines air plane. But obviously I don't have a choice anymore do I. Thank You for the video 📹.
Although the title wasn't encouraging like your other videos but still I liked it the most, it was really informative & enjoyable. Thank you✈.
Thanks :) What title would be more fitting?
@@AirspaceVideos Disclaimer: English is not my native language, so please forgive my sloppy grammar. I am sorry if my comment came off as criticism because that's wasn't what I intended to do, I have been enjoying your videos for more than a year & I really appreciate the quality of your cotenant.
As usual I was waiting for your next (breaking down an accident) video, instead you post this video, so I answered myself before watching it : FUEL! & I wasn't wrong but I know you wouldn't make a 12 minuets video to say: FUEL! So I watched it & I wasn't wrong ( for the second time🧐🧐) because I didn't know that the first successful cross the Atlantic flight took place 16 years after the Wright brothers 120 feet flight, I thought people start crossing the Atlantic in the 1930s-50s, I also learned about ETOPS for the first time.
At the end I think what I meant by my first comment is that the content of video was far more richer than I thought & it deserves more (clicky baity title) to get the views that's suits your effort.
Yes I know, I sometimes struggle to find a good title, so I'm genuinely interested: What would you have put there as a title?
@@AirspaceVideos 1-We retired the fastest airplane, now the biggest, why we are regressing?
2- 747, the demise of the flying ark.
3-747 & 380 too big to make sense?
Good content and explanation.
you can bet that every pilot will tell you that ETOPS is indeed "engines turn or passengers swim"
I feel safer flying over the ocean in a 777 than in an A380
Oh I remember when the configuration was 2 3 2 seats, could swing a service trolley completely around .
I once flew non stop in a 777 from Delhi to Chicago. It was a 14 hour flight on a twin engine aircraft
It’s only been in the past few years that transpacific flights started flying directly across instead of following the coastline around
On the other hand the 747 and A380 carry more passengers. So what is the calculus? Maintenance time v/s revenue time?
Very sad for the Boeing 747 but aviation is changing. In my early days of aviation plane spotter I always enjoyed watch Boeing 747 take off and land. Boeing 707 where common in 60s to the 80s you don’t see them know. Excellent documentary thanks for sharing 😀
I am lucky enough to at least once onboarded an A380. It is massive and very smooth.
Probably the best looking passenger plane ever designed. I miss seeing these magnificent Jumbo Jets grace our skies
Honestly I still would prefer the 747. I don't think the new airplanes compare in terms of comfort, room. And the double decker was truly awesome. As a aviation enthusiast I would still prefer the 747. Tried and true, I don't trust modern technology
Plus easy to move around in
I've flown business class at the upstairs level on a British Airways B747 years ago. Very comfy. Nowadays, I ride long flights on a A350 or Boeing 777, and usually economy class. Never been on and Airbus A380.
Yes, I DO feel safe flying from Boston to SouthAfrica
I've often looked out the window of the airplane while over the Atlantic and thought about ending up in the cold water.
Oct,1988, rode back to SFO from Honolulu in a DC 8 , very comfortable airplane,
To make it clear, the 747 707 DC10 etc were not designed with 3, 4 engines for Etops reason. They have the number of engines because they need the power from all the engines to take off and climb.Part of the Etops standard , the FAA wanted minimum climb rate, the engines became much larger than what they would have used before Etops to meet that requirement. When a twin lose an engine, they do not lose 50% power as commonly assumed, the effect is more like 60% +, for not only one engine is not working, it is dead weight and drag. In the former era, if there were any trouble with an engine, especially after it been in the air a while , burning off fuel, the captains would not hesitate to just shut down the engine as a precaution and sometimes not even telling anyone, why spook them for nothing, they do not need the power. They can afford the 30% loss. But to pass Etops, they cannot do that, for that is a shut down and have to be logged as such and the FAA were watching. So captains were told , unless the damned thing is on fire, do NOT shut it down, just reduce power, and it will not go on the engine log as a shut down.
The argument is that engine design and maintenance have improved to the point that we seldom have engine failures, so we can safely get by without the redundancy of a third or even fourth engine. I see that argument making sense for failures that are caused by design flaws or bad maintenance practices, but what about failures due to external damage causes (say, a bird strike) or other plane components besides the engines themselves? I think it still makes sense to have more engine redundancy for those issues.
I'm willing to fly a long flight on a plane with only two engines, but I feel better if more than two are available. I'm also curious to see the math on exactly how much cost savings we get by having only two engines instead of three or four. For example, for a flight from New York to Rome, if we use a plane with four engines instead of two, does that make everyone's ticket price go up $10, $100, or $1000?
Fascinating indeed. It’s a bit of an irony that when the 747 was officially lunched and presented to the press & public for the first time, the displayed plane didn’t actually have engines in the pods, simply because of enormous development problems. As a consequence, during the first couple of years of operation, engine failures were almost commonplace and in some cases more than one at a time. So some 747s in the early years would have been way to far from alternate airports and operating on as little as 2 dodgy engines .
As an aside, I have flown on a BA 747 from London to Mumbai which had 5 engines ! That’s how they used to ferry spares around when needed for a crippled aircraft somewhere. It’s was strung up inboard from the inner engine and I assume just freewheeled. The only noticeable effect was a vibration, oh and no doubt a whopping big jump in fuel use. I assume spare engines are just put on cargo planes in the hold these days.
Thanks as always for a great video, up to the usual standard.
Engine development often lags the planes that will use them. Some planes were canceled when the engines don't arrive or arrive in time. Boom is now facing a plane with no engines as RR has bailed on the project. So I don't see the irony but maybe it is just a different point of view.
I don't think quad passenger flights will last very long. On the other hand 747 freighters will be with us for a while. No crystal ball just my thinking. Very subjective. Making 2 flights instead of 3 requiring less crew and on less bill at the airport help offset operating cost. Obviously there are variables here so not an all size fits all.
The fan blades are removed from the engine before it is fifth-podded and a large, dome-shaped fairing is installed in the air intake covering the core engine inlet so there is no windmilling. Allowing the engine to windmill would increase the drag to unacceptable levels because the energy needed to spin the fifth engine would have to come from the four ‘real’ engines.
The Titanic was a super safe way to cross the ocean too. An engine is an engine and people will be people in the end. I’ll take four of them please and keep the odds in my favor.
I still love to fly on a Four Engined Wide body Aircraft, And the redundancy is a great asset, Even if 2 engines of the four are throttled back for long-haul flights