Goodbye SEA 777 base
11-16-2013, 11:49 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2012
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Regularguy
Of course Jeff S. said the B747-400 was like a typewriter, "it had its day!" at a recent Standards Meeting. I wish the guy would stop talking, he's a national embarrassment.
Oh wait.....back on topic. Closing Seattle, those bastards!
11-16-2013, 04:08 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by Regularguy
Of course Jeff S. said the B747-400 was like a typewriter...
11-16-2013, 06:38 PM
#33
Moderate Moderator
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Originally Posted by APC225
And as such, never had to be rebooted, the ink ribbon lasted practically forever, and if a key jammed the typist just reached in and unjammed it.
11-17-2013, 06:22 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Posts: 341
Originally Posted by APC225
And as such, never had to be rebooted, the ink ribbon lasted practically forever, and if a key jammed the typist just reached in and unjammed it.
11-17-2013, 07:04 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by Really
Sounds Great! You should buy tons of new typewriters and open up a typewriter chain!! I think you could make millions off your new business!!
11-17-2013, 11:08 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
"Then why aren't all the other carriers buying the new 747? There is rumors they are closing the line down. Do you have specific #'s to back up your post that the 787 isn't making the #'s? I heard 787 #'s are ahead of projection! (No proof, just articles I've read) Or is it more of an emotional post? "
Answer to #1 - The 747 - 800 is not the airplane for the future because of two simple facts; two extra engines.
Boeing's real replacement for the 747-400 is the 777X, which has all the range and the weight capability.
Question 2 - Are you serious! The 787 was over two years behind schedule, it was supposed to be able to fly IAH - AUK without a fuel stop but can't until the next version is delivered. It has been pulled from ETOPS status twice since it began flying service, multiple on-board fires during testing and service and more.
And production woes are still being figured out. Let's see the wing failed in testing, the tail structure failed...
Really? You actually are proud of the job Boeing has done?
The concept of the 787 is a good one, but Boeing's crack management team not only chose new technology they outsourced their engineering control which has been at the heart of the problems. Will the 787 succeed eventually? Sure it will, just look at the 737, same basic airplane with a lot of improvements since 1968.
Answer to #1 - The 747 - 800 is not the airplane for the future because of two simple facts; two extra engines.
Boeing's real replacement for the 747-400 is the 777X, which has all the range and the weight capability.
Question 2 - Are you serious! The 787 was over two years behind schedule, it was supposed to be able to fly IAH - AUK without a fuel stop but can't until the next version is delivered. It has been pulled from ETOPS status twice since it began flying service, multiple on-board fires during testing and service and more.
And production woes are still being figured out. Let's see the wing failed in testing, the tail structure failed...
Really? You actually are proud of the job Boeing has done?
The concept of the 787 is a good one, but Boeing's crack management team not only chose new technology they outsourced their engineering control which has been at the heart of the problems. Will the 787 succeed eventually? Sure it will, just look at the 737, same basic airplane with a lot of improvements since 1968.
11-17-2013, 11:56 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Originally Posted by Regularguy
The 787 was over two years behind schedule, it was supposed to be able to fly IAH - AUK without a fuel stop but can't until the next version is delivered. It has been pulled from ETOPS status twice since it began flying service, multiple on-board fires during testing and service and more.
It was kinda slick (not in a good way) how Smisek blamed the city of Houston's decision to support SWA's international expansion at HOU as the reason why IAH-AKL would not be UAL's 787 inaugural route when the 787 really couldn't fly it anyway.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
