John Fedup
The Bunker Group
No hump so the 747 would still have won out.
General Aviation Thread
- Thread starter gf0012-aust
- Start date
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Between WW2 until early 60's, I believe British aviation industry still can provide some competitions toward US ones. However the size of domestic market is matter to provide volume base. That's why Euro zone has to combine their effort with Airbus to provide genuine chances for competition.
In some way, the situation I do believe can shown on how China and Russia co-op in civilian market will end up. Russia has more experience, but China has bigger market. In the end to survive Russia has to become second tier player or combining themselves with other partners. In the sense the Russian fate can be just like the British ending up. Either become suppliers on some system or team up with others to survive.
Yes, 747 lay out in the end provide edges against full double deckers like A380 on secondary purpose in cargo industry. However just like USSR AN-418 double decker concept, it's destined to be just as concept as the time not provide enough market for full double decker.
In the end even A380 has to bow down to market realities.
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The one way big jets could make a comeback is with ultra efficient powerful engines. The design would feature super passenger comfort over capacity. This would only be economical with ultra efficient engines compensating for reduced passenger capacity. Sadly, we are likely stuck with increasingly uncomfortable single aisle jets with greater range m.
Terran
Well-Known Member
Someone want to stop @John Fedup before in his claustrophobia he tries to force a door open in flight and decompress the cabin…
I think it’s a little to soon to accept a fate of long haul aviation being doomed to sardine caned In Long haul Spirit styled stripped down narrow bodies for an eternity.
Farnborough just closed though Airbus took mostly A220 orders and A321s. Boeing whom many were betting were about to put on a fire sale, instead got a sweep of order announcements. Of particular interest indications that the Airlines are confident in the 787 wide body returning to delivery. This is along side 777 orders. This indicates a strong commitment to wide body twin jets. Though Narrow body long haul as returned from the days of the 707. It’s selective. Favoring direct flights from point of origin to lesser destination.
Though the Boom Supersonic should be watched.
I think it’s a little to soon to accept a fate of long haul aviation being doomed to sardine caned In Long haul Spirit styled stripped down narrow bodies for an eternity.
Farnborough just closed though Airbus took mostly A220 orders and A321s. Boeing whom many were betting were about to put on a fire sale, instead got a sweep of order announcements. Of particular interest indications that the Airlines are confident in the 787 wide body returning to delivery. This is along side 777 orders. This indicates a strong commitment to wide body twin jets. Though Narrow body long haul as returned from the days of the 707. It’s selective. Favoring direct flights from point of origin to lesser destination.
Though the Boom Supersonic should be watched.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Time will tell. Commercial aviation has been totally obsessed with maximizing cost of operation over passenger comfort. I think it has reached the point where many customers, where possible, will seek alternative transportation. Add in cancelled flights and telling passengers the overhead bins are full , please check your carry-on, that is a GFY moment as far as I am concerned!
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
I believe that one of the biggest setbacks for the British aviation industry were the series of accidents with the de Havilland Comet in the first period of its operational life . At that time the British aviation industry was undoubtly one of the world leaders and the Comet with its revolutionary aerodynamically clean design with four wingroot engines and quiet, comfortable pressurised passenger cabin, was very promising.
The disastrous beginning devastated the image of the British aviation industry, but other (american) aircraft manufacturers learned a lot from the design errors and weak points of the Comet.
And then we have the Vickers V1000.
The design bears many similarities to the Vickers Valiant, one of the V-bombers, but also featured substantial changes. In addition to its military application, both the Ministry of Supply and Vickers also intended to use the same basic design as the VC7, a six-abreast trans-Atlantic jet airliner for British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC).
In 1955, by which point the prototype was already largely complete, the Ministry of Supply decided to terminate the V-1000 project in mid-development. By that time, the design had garnered interest from airlines, and it seems that it had led to re-designs being conducted by competing US manufacturers, influencing the design of the Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8.
The expensive BAC TSR-2 project development followed by the cancellation of it, also put some pressure (financially and morally) on the British aviation industry.
Last edited:
Terran
Well-Known Member
During the Air show Airbus announced that they will be offering a 10 seat across configuration for A350, some 777X will have that too. So you don’t need to get sardined in a narrow body. You can be sardine canned in a wide body!
From 2007-2013 I worked an intercity bus line, So I can say this with substantial experience. When it’s an option. Coach in an aircraft for a couple hours is heaven compared to the equivalent multi day bus or train seat. The Price of a Coach seat on your average domestic flight is roughly equivalent in cost to most intercity bus or Coach seat on Amtrak. With the later superior in ability to stretch your legs, room and access to refreshments and more importantly rest rooms, yet both bus or rail are significantly slower in long haul with the same complaints of limitations. You don’t get the luxury on rail of a private room with bed and meals without easily triple the tickets price.
Coach rail and Bus sell as when you come to them you are either making a short hop city to city or having a situation where You have no other choice.
Commercial aviation is a thin profit margin buisness. The open secret of the industry is when you have multiple classes on an aircraft coach is just ballast for business and First class passengers. Coach isn’t profitable. It barely pays the fuel bill. It’s the last minute trip to sign the deal, my time is money, Oscar/Grammy nominated passengers who pay the profit. Southwest style regional, no frills they are the ones who operate by trimming the fat.
Coach seats bank on the destination being the experience. The flight is just a moving waiting room. Long haul passengers in Coach often have pre planned vacations on the end. They are often thrift buyers planning months in advance.
Business class banks on the fact the passengers are last minute flights, paid for by the Expense account. Going over documents as they fly. They are pampered because of the money they are paying and that they potentially have dozens more flights this year.
First class gets pampered as the passenger could easily afford to charter a business jet flight.
Last edited:
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
Translation and text editing will follow later.
www.upinthesky.nl
In short:
- The Vueling A320, with registratie EC-KRH, was ready for departure at Barcelona El Prat for leaving to Birmingham Airport (UK).
- Suddenly a loud bang could be heard, followed by a burning smell coming from the aft of the aeroplane. All cabin lights went off and the emergency lights switched on.
- The cabin crew gave initially the instruction to the passengers to stay seated and to keep the safety belts strapped.
- One of the flight attendants went to the cockpit for instructions, but the captain/pilot in command was already gone, he was the first one who left the aircraft.
- Later the other crewmembers followed him, leaving behind all the passengers and one single flight attendant.
- The last flight attendant evacuated the passengers, and after that the tail of the aircraft was extinguished by the fire department.
- There was no any information from Vueling Air and they just simply refused to give any explanation to the stranded passengers.
www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl
Together with CFMI Airbus will perform tests on a A380 with a new type of engine. An open fan gasturbine, so without and engine inlet cowling.
Gezagvoerder rent A320 uit met achterlating passagiers
Een luide knal in het vliegtuig was voor de gezagvoerder reden zich snel uit de voeten te maken van een Airbus A320 van Vueling. Het incident deed zich
www.upinthesky.nl
- The Vueling A320, with registratie EC-KRH, was ready for departure at Barcelona El Prat for leaving to Birmingham Airport (UK).
- Suddenly a loud bang could be heard, followed by a burning smell coming from the aft of the aeroplane. All cabin lights went off and the emergency lights switched on.
- The cabin crew gave initially the instruction to the passengers to stay seated and to keep the safety belts strapped.
- One of the flight attendants went to the cockpit for instructions, but the captain/pilot in command was already gone, he was the first one who left the aircraft.
- Later the other crewmembers followed him, leaving behind all the passengers and one single flight attendant.
- The last flight attendant evacuated the passengers, and after that the tail of the aircraft was extinguished by the fire department.
- There was no any information from Vueling Air and they just simply refused to give any explanation to the stranded passengers.
Airbus A380 gaat testvliegen met 'open' motor
FARNBOROUGH - Airbus gaat samen met motorproducent CFM International testen uitvoeren met een straalmotor zonder kap. Dit meldden beide partijen tijdens de Farnborough Airshow. De tests worden tussen 2025 en 2030 uitgevoerd met de Airbus A380 en hebben als doel om in de toekomst duurzamer te...
Last edited:
Ananda
The Bunker Group
The model for Long Haul actually already shown before COVID by some Asians and Middle East airlines. More Business, More Premium Economy and more decent Coach. Many people willing to add 10%-15% for more decent coach class in lomg haul. This will help thin margin the coach class give for long haul.
First class can only be profitable for Long haul something more than 10 hrs, which is farther range then most business jets. Like you say, they can afford chartering business jets. That's why most Asian and Middle East regionals routes (something below 9 hrs) already cutting First Class.
Singapore Airlines choose more extreme approach for Ultra Long Haul, by cutting Coach altogther and focusing more to Business and Premium Economy. Something personally I like to see if this trend will be catch on for Ultra Long Haul (routes more than 14hrs). Will passengers that use to go with coach willing to pay more premium for price of direct routes ?
Canned people in coaches with less then 30 inch leg room and thinning seats width can work with less then 6 hrs routes at most. Jet Blue taking more coach passangers in US with more decent coach class then what you got in Southwest or AA for example. However for less then 6 hrs flights (which still make largest portion on domestic routes), I'm still see most airlines will cramp the coaches to make over the thin margin those economy class provide.
So, seems no reprive for most inter cities commuters, especially those using company's accounts. The bean counters on each company will ask you to toughen up for inter cities routes.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The cost of air travel within Canada is expensive and bus travel would be less, train service not so much. Like our cell phone costs (higher than other G7 countries), the reason is limited competition. WRT to business travel, yes higher revenues from last minute and expense account type travel. It would be interesting to see data on current level of business travel. Business travel versus Zoom meetings, you can bet the bean counters are pointing out to senior management in many companies on the bottom line improvement of using Zoom.
Terran
Well-Known Member
Zoom has a place but it doesn’t outright replace or eliminate the Buisness class flight. Studies have shown again and again the WFH doesn’t replace the office for team coordination. It can take the daily grind project okay but when it comes to invocation or on the fly changes it just isn’t as effective. Zoom is basically a video phone conference. There remains large portions of the business conference that are only possible with a at the table meeting and a physical person. I mean it’s the same reason we still have State visits by politicians and ambassadors. Some times you need some “boots on the ground” or in this case Oxfords.
@Amanda,
I am not going to disagree. Domestic flights and long haul flights are different things and we seem to agree on that. The original post I was quoting was the trend to long haul narrows where in aircraft like the A321XLR and B757 have been used in longer range intercontinental flights. The longest scheduled flights in the world are still only 21 hours. Which are flights where the airline have basically said they will not do class if coach seats but premium economy.
which is logical as you said an I can attest people are willing to put up with 6 hours of coach seating in most cases. After about 10 hours they want more.
All mass transit banks on this. Shorter the trip more the customers are willing to put up with. Longer the trip more they want comfort. Because of the relatively high availability and short flight times aviation passengers on domestic can get away with this. Domestic first and Buisness class can also trim down to a less luxury experience. Yet the ticket price point doesn’t need to fill the first class cabin. I mean that coach seat NYC to LA Jet blue is about $300. The premium (blue extra) is $375 the first class (Mint) is running at $1500. That single first class seat is worth roughly 4 premium economy seats. Yes coach has more seats but by volume yet when one first class is worth 5x coach yet has less weight and less needs that 5 people. That’s a really profit padding seat.
That’s not to say that domestic coach can’t be used to keep an airline operating AA and SW, Spirit and Norwegian, Ryan are all successful budget lines. During the dark days of Covid the budget lines were better off as the Buisness seats weren’t being bought. The international flights were not flying. Yet in those days restrictions in flights still slaughtered the schedules schedules that are still a mess.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Talking to some market analyst specialise in Airline Industry, they make definition on each segment routes, in which determine how Airline business model:
- Short Haul (up to 6 hrs): This is where most domestics or short international belong. This is also the main trunk of most airlines business.
- Medium Haul (6-10 hrs): This is the increasing slot as improve efficiency on latest gen narrow bodies (single aisle), shown potential direct thiner routes between secondary cities.
- Long Haul (10-14 hrs): Traditional intercontinental routes,
- Ultra Long Haul (above 14-15 hrs): As new routes possible with the advance of A350, 787-9 and 777X. Very selective routes only for certain geographic areas. However open potential for future more direct flights.
Agree not only those airlines, but some of the Airlines in China, India and Indonesia with large domestics routes, depends on that routes for their bottom lines, and even using those routes to subsidise some of their International routes. Infact from definition that I put above, market analyst shown Short Haul and Medium Haul will be more and more dominated by narrow bodies/singgle aisle types. That's why they are so far mostly discounted Boeing future as #2 on duopoly competition as they still not see Max can provide/match all capabilities from A320/321 NG families.
We are going more and more flying on Narrow bodies in future. Talking to those Industry Specialist, I believe it is inevitable trend.
A NASA WB-57F Canberra is sniffing around South Korea at the moment. It's sampling the upper atmosphere around 60,000ft for air pollution materials that may have been uplifted during a monsoon and has to be done during a monsoon. Looks like interesting research.
This Is Why A NASA WB-57F Canberra Jet Is In South Korea | The Drive
This Is Why A NASA WB-57F Canberra Jet Is In South Korea | The Drive
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
Amazing that these oldtimers are still flying, the last B-57 was built in 1957.
It is also remarkable that for many years only two WB-57F Canberras (NASA 926 and NASA 928) were flown and maintained by NASA for 'scientific high altitude atmospheric research'. In 2011 it was determined that a third aircraft was needed to satisfy mission requirements and an additional WB-57 was removed from the 309th AMARG after over 40 years at Davis-Monthan AFB and returned to flight status in August 2013 as NASA 927.
Aviation News – NASA’s new WB-57F, N927NA, flies for the first time in 41 years
NASA currently operates a pair of WB-57F high-altitude research aircraft based out of Ellington Field in Texas, but very soon a third airframe will join the fleet. Paul Filmer reports on NASA 927&#…
www.globalaviationresource.com
But it is actually obvious that these WB-47Fs operated by NASA are not only doing 'scientific high altitude atmospheric research' in areas like Afghanistan and South-Korea.
=============================================
Something else.
Here another example of a remarkable aircraft which deserves more fame and a more successful sales.
The Bréguet 941 was a four engine turboprop aircraft with amazing STOL-capabilities. Besides the prototypes only four production aircrafts were built for the Armee de l'Air, but it was in fact much more "STOL-ler" than later aircraft like the Transall C-160, which had it first flight in 1963, five years after the Bréguet 941.
Last edited:
Quite like the Canberra and there's one parked undercover in a museum about 10 km from where I live. The Bréguet 941 looks like an interesting aircraft. I will have to go and look into it. Bréguet did design and build some interesting and unusual aircraft.Amazing that these oldtimers are still flying, the last B-57 was built in 1957.
It is also remarkable that for many years only two WB-57F Canberras (NASA 926 and NASA 928) were flown and maintained by NASA for 'scientific high altitude atmospheric research'. In 2011 it was determined that a third aircraft was needed to satisfy mission requirements and an additional WB-57 was removed from the 309th AMARG after over 40 years at Davis-Monthan AFB and returned to flight status in August 2013 as NASA 927.
Aviation News – NASA’s new WB-57F, N927NA, flies for the first time in 41 years
NASA currently operates a pair of WB-57F high-altitude research aircraft based out of Ellington Field in Texas, but very soon a third airframe will join the fleet. Paul Filmer reports on NASA 927&#…
But it is actually obvious that these WB-47Fs operated by NASA are not only doing 'scientific high altitude atmospheric research' in areas like Afghanistan and South-Korea.
=============================================
Something else.
Here another example of a remarkable aircraft which deserves more fame and a more successful sales.
The Bréguet 941 was a four engine turboprop aircraft with amazing STOL-capabilities. Besides the prototypes only four production aircrafts were built for the Armee de l'Air, but it was in fact much more "STOL-ler" than later aircraft like the Transall C-160, which had it first flight in 1963, five years after the Bréguet 941.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
There are 2 sitting in a field next to the Pacific Highway about 3-4ks before the turn off to RAAF Amberley just south of Brisbane, sort of setup as a welcome for Amberley.
Canberra's that is.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
The Shorts Belfast was also a formidable transport aircraft for that time: larger, much more payload and much more range than others like the An-12 or C-130. Comparable performance and capacity as the A400M.
Sadly only 10 production aeroplanes were built.
Big and formidable it may have been but god it was slow, so much so the squadron who had to service and fly them quickly dubbed it the
BELSLOW
FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but I have to fault your comparison and praise for the Belfast. While the AN-12 and C-130 were/are designed as tactical airlifters the Belfast was a heavy lifter. more comparable to the C-124 Globemaster II (including it's removable upper floor) and C-133 Cargomaster. Both which began production nearly a decade earlier. And the AN-22 which began production shortly after the Belfast. Frankly, as Shorts was beginning production of it's practically archaic design Lockheed was putting the C-141 into service.
Last edited: