Boeing 747 "WHALE" -- a.k.a. The Whale's Tails (sic)

[A4sForever]

use to take them to Paris when I was young (flight benefits rock) on Pan Am, even got first class on a trip

first class on a Pan Am international flight in a 747 was the way commercial aviation used to be, sophisiticated, romantic, etc, not the cheap, cookie cutter way all the airlines do it now

times have changed unfortunately

Sometimes I wonder whether "times have changed", or have our expectations and priorities been allowed to go south? Do we not demand as much today or are we too cheap to pay for it? People used to expect "luxury" from an airline "experience" --- something above the norm --- and some were willing to pay for it. With the CAB setting fares, there was no "competition" and you knew what the going rate was for "the experience".

My first "low cost" shock was with PSA (Poor Sailor Airline) in 1977. A true cattle car mode of transportation --- guess who was the first airline that offered me a job?

Freakin' PSA, that's who .... I was there four (4) days and went to Braniff.

I worked four years for Braniff International (BI --- now fondly remembered as "Big Idiot" or "Basic Idiot"). The First Class "experience" on domestic BI routes was like most other airlines offered ONLY on their international flights. I.E., leather seats, carved ChateauBriand (restaurant quality !) w/fresh vegetables at your seat, primo wine selection, really, really attentive service --- AND, good 'looking BI flight attendants in their Halston outfits.

Braniff was a good place to work and EVERYONE wanted to fly for Braniff or Delta in the 1978 time-frame. Although both were homeported in the South, they had radically different cultures. BI was a true Southern airline, a Southern experience, run by Southern gentlemen with Southern attitudes. It was also the first time I learned there was a difference between a "good Yankee" --- one from west of the Mississippi, and just an old, garden variety "Damn Yankee" --- one from east of the Big Muddy and north of the Mason-Dixon line.

Forunately for me, I was considered a member of the former ....

 

[A4sForever]

I've never had the pleasure of flying on a 747. I hope one day I will.

I encourage you to do it sooner rather than later. Unfortunately for 747 lovers, management(s) and airplane manufacturers have convinced themselves and most of the great unwashed that two (2) vice four (4) engines are the way to go...... at least until one fails. They don't fly them long distance and in rough weather too much, I guess.

Flying high & fast is the best way to TransPac ... and the two engine birds can't do it as well --- they just do it just cheaper. And that seems to be the primary benchmark of commercial aircraft performance today.

 

[palatinexc]

A4sForever, how much longer do you think the 747 will remain. I have never flown on one but that is one thing I wish to do in my lifetime. As far a flight benefits, flying on a 777 is awesome. Each seat, even in coach, has a video screen with various video and music channels. Plus a flight map for those that are interested.

 

[webmaster]

To even take this thread farther afield... I like the airlines that let you listen to ATC via the headphone jacks, so you know what the heck is taking so long on the tarmac... nothing worse than being a pilot having to sit at the back of the bus and NOT knowing what is going on, lol! Just waiting for chance to save the day when the flight station is served some bad latte's or something. jk

 

[A4sForever]

To even take this thread farther afield... I like the airlines that let you listen to ATC via the headphone jacks, so you know what the heck is taking so long on the tarmac... nothing worse than being a pilot having to sit at the back of the bus and NOT knowing what is going on, lol! Just waiting for chance to save the day when the flight station is served some bad latte's or something. jk

Web-san: I believe Karen Black (an actress for the more youthful amongst us) has a lock on "saving" the 747 with the flight crew disabled ....

Just so you can't hear any "open" conversations within the cockpit confines (ooops, sorry, forgot my PC venacular: change that to "flight deck" --- always thought flight deck was the roof on the boat). So you want to listen to ATC, huh? I actually had to ask for a discrete frequency on deck in LAX on one occasion so I could "ream" a controller with her supervisor in electonic attendance for, well --- just for being herself, I guess. I am not sure you would have wanted to listen to that particular conversation .... unless you are a masochist. Or a sadist.

I always keep the huddled masses informed to the extent I deem practicable --- which means I have my S/O's make nearly ALL P/A's to the back when on passenger ships. To date, I do not "get off" by saying: "This is Captain so-and-so" (using my best radio announcer Hollywood voice-over). I just like the paycheck.

About the only time I make announcements these days is "on the freighter" :sleep_125 :sleep_125 ......

Always the exceptions, of course: if we are passing over Midway or Iwo Jima with a full boatload of Japanese, I like to make an "historical" P/A announcement to remind all in attendance of ...... well, you get the picture.

 

[bch]

To even take this thread farther afield... I like the airlines that let you listen to ATC via the headphone jacks, so you know what the heck is taking so long on the tarmac... nothing worse than being a pilot having to sit at the back of the bus and NOT knowing what is going on, lol! Just waiting for chance to save the day when the flight station is served some bad latte's or something. jk

You are not lying! I have not been on an airline that has had this for years.

 

[H20man]

ive been lucky enough to fly on 747s several times when i was younger, when my dad was stationed in Japan.

One thing that stuck out was how friggin long the flight was and also the fact that you got to chose what kind of meal you wanted. Me being the kid it was the McDonalds Happy meal with toy (which happened to be a little plastic 747 that when you pulled it back along the ground and let it go it would go speeding along)

So many seats on the plane, plus the fact taht it wasnt full so as a little kid you went all over the place, or the seats taht were in the nose of the plane.

As a little kid i was always curious to see the first class deck of the bird but never got to.

*continuation of headfone threadjack

i like what AA is doing now with headphones, its a regular jack so you can bring your own on the plane and not have to buy those disgusting and uncomfortable things they used to force you to buy. US Air almost did the same thing but theirs requires 2 jacks so you have to buy their 5 dollar headset or get sound only in 1 ear.

 

[kmac]

Headphones:
From my memory, United Airlines has always had ATC on one of the channels so passengers can listen to it. I was maybe 11 years old flying from Washington DC to California when the whole United flt 232 incident occurred over the midwest. I don't remember what was said, but at the time I was puzzled by it. They stopped letting passengers hear during that time and it wasn't until we landed that I discovered what happened.

 

[palatinexc]

*continuation of headfone threadjack

i like what AA is doing now with headphones, its a regular jack so you can bring your own on the plane and not have to buy those disgusting and uncomfortable things they used to force you to buy.

If they even have a headfone jack. I was on a flight to Washington DC on United and there were no headfones at all. But usually United has a normal headfone jack with normal headfones you are not afraid to where.

Even a short time before 9/11 you were able to hear the ATC conversations. I always laughed when the pilot would say something like "anyone know the score of the cubs game" and get a promp answer. I don't think that will ever come back again.

 

[A4sForever]

Can You Hear Me Now ?????

Guys:
All this "to headphone or not to headphone" stuff has been going through fits and starts ever since AA Flight 191 rolled upside down and crashed after take-off in Chicago @ May 1979. They had a camera in the cockpit -- that was the "hot" new deal then. The passengers were able to see AND HEAR the crew -- and themselves, by extension (!!!) DIE on live camera as the plane rolled over when engine #1 came loose and ripped off the wing taking out flight controls and hydraulics. Not good ..... for them or for their surviving families to contemplate.

Prior to that, it was thought to be a marketing tool aimed at bringing the passenger into the "experience" of flying the respective airline. Ever since, the airlines and ALPA and sometimes the FAA have been reluctant to give the PAX a "real-time" look-see into the cockpit. Now the FAA wants to look over our shoulder to see what we are doing "wrong" to hang us if the need arises.

Ask yourself this: How would you like the C.O. or CAG to have a camera-eyeball and microphone in your NAVY/USMC airborne "office"?? They could check in to see how and when and where you might "screw up"? I don't think so ......

The pendulum was swinging back, and the momentum was moving toward giving the PAX a look-see or at least an ATC-linked headphone --- when lawyers decided to start using pilots and airlines as a reason to sue for large damages in crashes. The cockpit tapes would be a cornerstone of their cases --- big controversy, and again, not in my cockpit.

The final nail in the coffin was probably put in place on 9/11. Now it is all about security .......

 

[palatinexc]

I see your point a4sforever about the lawyers and the "looking over the shoulder" of pilots. Being an aviation buff I just enjoyed listening to the conversations but can understand why the pilots and ATC might not want their voices brodcasted to all the passengers.

I watched a documentary about the flight 191 disaster. Poor maintenance techniques were said to have contributed to damaging the engine pylon which caused the engine to fall off and sever the control lines in the process. Following the crash every DC-10 was grounded pending inspections, which almost put some airlines out of business.

 

[A4sForever]

I watched a documentary about the flight 191 disaster. Poor maintenance techniques were said to have contributed to damaging the engine pylon which caused the engine to fall off and sever the control lines in the process. Following the crash every DC-10 was grounded pending inspections, which almost put some airlines out of business.

Yes, and AA was R&R'ing the wing engines on the DC-10 with a freak'in FORK LIFT !!! That was their unofficial SOP.

Is it little wonder that they were developing "cracking" on the pylons, fittings, engine mountings? Expediency and ingenuity are both great, and I am all in favor of "getting the job done". Sometimes you need a little more finesse than hitting the problem with a "hammer", however.

 

[A4sForever]

A4sForever, how much longer do you think the 747 will remain.......

It's hard to predict other than to say the 747 will fly as long as it is financially viable. There are many, many of them parked in the desert(s) right now alongside other jets sporting the colors of familiar airlines from several countries. I saw some of them in Arizona in May and it was truly a sad sight.

Fuel hit a high of $55.17/bbl in the most recent quarter and fuel costs industry-wide are up more than 60% year-over-year. This has got to stop or losses among the airlines will just continue to mount --- and who will survive?

The best thing the 747 (all models) has going for it right now is: FREIGHT. The freighter operations are doing well overall and the market size (relative to all revenue flying) doubles every 10 years. I used to hate flying freighters; now I love 'em. It may not be "glamorous", but it does pay the bills .....

 

[Flash]

Flash, the video works. I don't think I will ever fly Korea Air now, lol.

I was talking to one of the reserve RAG instructors who is a simulator instructor for an airline in real life who described Korean Air as the worst example of ORM in the aviation industry. He said the Captain was king in the cockpit and rarely if ever questioned. It has speculated that this may have been a factor in the KAL 007 disaster. The Captain or the crew may have realized they were off course but did nothing about it.

 

[A4sForever]

........described Korean Air as the worst example of ORM in the aviation industry. He said the Captain was king in the cockpit and rarely if ever questioned. It has speculated that this may have been a factor in the KAL 007 disaster.

Yeah, I believe poor CRM was a contributing factor in KAL 007. There was also speculation that this "tendency" at KAL might have been a factor in KAL 801's August 1997 crash while executing the Instrument Landing System (ILS) approach to runway 6L @ Agana.

I do not have the approach plate in front of me, but I remember the accident well, its subsequent investigation, and I have a theory as to a possible scenario. I have shot this approach many times, day and night, in and out of weather. Suffice it to say that after this tragic accident and with a building list of incidents, KAL was subjected to strict check-ride and line-check inspections performed by contractors from outside the company.

But talk is cheap. On any given day, any one of us can be a Blue Angel or be a plumber and buy the farm --- sometimes it's as simple as what side of the bed you got out of that day ... (?)

It is always instructive to understand the "culture" of some of the foreign pilots when assessing incidents or accidents. I have trained South Americans, Middle East-types, Asians, etc. They all bring their own baggage to the equation, as do we. KAL has had some real problems --- as have other Pacific Rim airlines. Some are excellent; but others? Fly those "others" at your own risk ...