27 ms·
Easter egg in flight path of last 747 delivery flight
- ssgodderidge 4y agoAny flight buffs know the estimated cost of doing something like that? I’m all for having fun, and I love that they spent the money to do it
- peteradio 4y agoThere's cost and opportunity cost and marketing, so who knows? But it looks like it doubled the leg length, I'd guess cost and opportunity cost into the 100k+.
- topher515 4y agoNot a flight buff, but... - Jet fuel from NYC to LAX seems to cost ~$10k.[1] - You pay a pilot $50 / hour salary. (+100% more with benefits?)[2] - Double all of that for a bunch of random things I can't think of (airport fees?) My napkin math seems to indicate this couldn't possibly cost Boeing more than $10-20k? Pretty small potatoes to such a large company. [1] https://simpleflying.com/commercial-airliner-fuel-cost/ https://simpleflying.com/commercial-airliner-fuel-cost/ [2] https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Commercial-Pilot-Salary-per-Hour https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Commercial-Pilot-Salar...
- unglaublich 4y agoThen count the fame you get for it... and it actually _increases_ value!
- londons_explore 4y ago[flagged]
- rootusrootus 4y agoThat is a textbook case of buzzkill.
- jehb 4y agoBeing a buzzkill doesn't make it less true, though. I'm disappointed to see the parent comment being downvoted.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- goostavos 4y agoIt's pedantic buzz killery, which is boring and lame. Are we going to... not fly planes any more? Drive cars? Deliver cargo? Take trips to visit family in another town/state/country? "Hey Tim, how was the weekend?" "Great. I drove down to Portland to see my mom after her surgery, she's doing gr--" "You decided to spend your weekend destroying the environment?!"
- kelnos 4y agoIt may be true, but I would expect this sort of waste is a drop in the bucket -- drop in the swimming pool, even -- compared to all the waste going on over the rest of the planet during the same time period. That's not to say we shouldn't avoid waste, but this flight was a pretty momentous occasion (final delivery flight of a 747), and I think it's appropriate to mark that occasion in some unique manner. Burning a bunch of extra jet fuel doesn't seem all that inappropriate, especially considering the total amount of jet fuel burned in a given day. There's just really no need for such buzzkillery.
- rootusrootus 4y ago> drop in the swimming pool That's pretty close. It could be a good chance to educate people, perhaps, without turning it into a buzzkill. "This plane burned 27 tons of fuel for that pretty pattern in the sky, but if that sounds like a lot of fuel just wait until you find out that planes burn a million tons every day!"
- sofixa 4y ago> My napkin math seems to indicate this couldn't possibly cost Boeing more than $10-20k? Pretty small potatoes to such a large company. Yeah they were losing billions through criminal negligence and delayed deliveries of the 737 Max, so a couple of tens of thousands for some well needed good PR is nothing. This is probably the first bit of it for multiple years now, with all the delays in the 777X, assembly quality issues of 787, etc.
- throwanem 4y agoIt feels to me like a final swan song for the era, both corporate and economic, in which a project like the 747 was possible.
- samstave 4y agoYeah but they are also a major contributor to our breakaway UAP program with Lockheed - and also, the Horse fucking industry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumclaw_horse_sex_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumclaw_horse_sex_case
- sofixa 4y agoThat link was... an interesting read. I'd say it merits a NSFW tag but it's kind of obvious from the title. > Pinyan had previously lost the ability to experience certain sensations after a motorcycle accident, and he had begun to seek out increasingly extreme sexual acts Almost feel bad for the guy if it weren't for the animal cruelty.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- repiret 4y agoYou pay a 747 pilot way more than $50/hour. https://www.aviationinterviews.com/pilot/payrates/united-parcel-service-62.html https://www.aviationinterviews.com/pilot/payrates/united-par...
- spiderice 4y agoSeems weird.. you get payed $39/hour in your first year.. then jump all the way up to $239/hour in your second year and never really get a raise beyond that?
- maxerickson 4y agoThe link there is specifically UPS, which is union. I guess it is probably the case that guys with a couple years experience are doing about the same work as guys with 10 years (plane smoothly and safely goes from A to B).
- repiret 4y agoI had assumed it was an error.
- eYrKEC2 4y agoThey more than $20k's worth of publicity from the stunt. Totally worth it.
- godot 4y agoDoes that napkin math subtract the cost of the same delivery flight but without the stunt? I didn't read about the flight but I assume that delivery was happening anyway, with or without the stunt. I am guessing it took an hour or two extra, so the fuel and pilot salary cost should only be what was extra in addition to the regular flight amount?
- stevehawk 4y agoThere isn't a 747 pilot on the planet making only $50/hr
- Baxxter 4y agoBack of envelope ... 1 gallon of fuel per second [0], 2.5 hrs, $2.5 per gallon = $22,500 That's uh...pretty rough and I'm not a flight buff, but wanted to do the bare minimum for the exercise. [0] https://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/question192.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/qu... * edited the ppg
- CraigJPerry 4y agoWisdom of crowds and all that, i’m guessing around $30k ? My working was: +2 hours (a path that should take 0.5 hours took 2.5h according to flight radar) According to a random aviation site, an unspecified 747 revision at unspecified altitude with unspecified engines burns 4 litres per second, so take that with a bag of salt! Jet A1 fuel at $1/litre-ish $30k-ish ?
- somat 4y agoI don't know anything about flight deliveries. But, including a set of basic flight maneuvers makes sense to me. In which case they would be maneuvering anyway and they decided to go out in style. Big salutes to them who set it up.
- jaywalk 4y agoBy the time the plane is delivered, it has already been fully flight tested.
- drjasonharrison 4y agoYeah, you don't want to find the problems on the delivery flight.
- dylan604 4y agoBetter then than on the first passenger filled flight. Don't think of it as the delivery flight. Think of it is final test flight
- rootusrootus 4y agoThis is a cargo plane, though, I don't think a passenger 747 has been built in a while.
- dylan604 4y agosame difference
- dylan604 4y agoYou can tell nobody from Nascar was involved as there are both left AND right turns.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
- tyincdyon 4y agoFormer pilot here: $3-4 million easy. FAA regulations alone require $500k per sky-number drawn by any aircraft [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKOFTEN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKOFTEN
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- horsawlarway 4y agoYou might have the wrong link there.
- beckingz 4y agoCitation needed? Your link is for an old covert drug research program?
- gwill 4y agoi think you either linked to the wrong article or i misunderstood a joke
- ryanisnan 4y agoI think the link you are looking for is https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/PEBCAK https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/PEBCAK.
- almostnormal 4y agoI'm guessing it is in the range of 50..60k. The sibling posts come up with lower values, including only fuel, ignoring the cost of the required regular (flight hours in this case) maintenance.
- paxys 4y agoCosts them $0 if they just bill the customer who the delivery was for.
- quickthrower2 4y agoOnly if the customer wants to pay extra for the stunt
- lxgr 4y agoDo it as part of a flight that needs to happen anyway (such as this one, which was a delivery)? Probably not much more than the fuel and overtime the pilots needed to fly a few extra turns.
- culi 4y agoSomeone in a different thread estimated 2.4 tons of fuel, equating to 16.8 tons of CO2 emissions For comparison the average US household produces ~7.5 tons of CO2 emissions every year so that's ~2.24 years of the average household's emissions
- Teamteam16 4y ago[dead]
- fsagx 4y agoScroll back to central WA to see the interesting part.
- jacquesm 4y agoThe world's largest vector plotter. Good thing they didn't have to do PU/PD.
- tpmx 4y agoWas just thinking of HPGL when I saw this. Would be neat to have an AutoCAD driver for the 747 navigation system.
- daveslash 4y agoVector Display you say? Now... the next logical step is to make it play Doom (or Quake)..... with an extremely low framerate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMli33ornEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMli33ornEU
- jacquesm 4y agoThe CO2 impact of one level would be astronomical :)
- vyrotek 4y agoSee the design here. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/map/GTI747/history/20230201/1600Z/KPAE/KCVG https://flightaware.com/live/flight/map/GTI747/history/20230...
- juliand 4y agoIt took them 2 hours and 40 minutes to complete the easter egg
- alexose 4y agoMore cynically: Roughly 2.4 tons of fuel, equating to 16.8 tons of CO2 emissions.
- slyrus 4y agoOr the average annual carbon footprint for one person in the US.
- culi 4y ago> The average US household produces 7.5 tons of CO2 equivalents per year. https://www.ccfpd.org/Portals/0/Assets/PDF/Facts_Chart.pdf https://www.ccfpd.org/Portals/0/Assets/PDF/Facts_Chart.pdf
- slyrus 4y agoOr 15.52 tons according to worldometer. Not sure who's right here. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/us-co2-emissions/ https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/us-co2-emissions...
- culi 4y agoYeah good question. To add to the confusion, this paper published PNAS says "2.83 ± 1.0 t of CO2-equivalents per capita". Per capita is different from per household but might be a better metric It also states that using just national energy statistics (this study actually analyzed 93 million households instead) you'd arrive at 3.19 t CO2 per capita which falls in line with their results https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1922205117 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1922205117
- snickerbockers 4y ago[flagged]
- oliveshell 4y agoIt's okay, we'll always have this: https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2019/05/14/the-navys-probe-into-sky-penis/ https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2019/05/14/the-navy...
- fsagx 4y agoand this: https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1587858072021921793 https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/15878580720219217...
- blantonl 4y agospeaking from experience, I would tell you the sky penis is one of the easiest things to "draw" by flying an airplane. It's two turns around a point and a quick run out to maybe to a training maneuver or two, them a 180 and head back to where your turns were, and then head home.
- bcatanzaro 4y agoQueen of the skies. :hugging_face:
- cale- 4y agoReminds me of Qantas's final 747 route. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-53509361 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-53509361
- davidw 4y agoAs someone who does not like flying (I don't like heights), I will miss those planes. The large size makes me more comfortable in one.
- dheera 4y agoInteresting. I often feel safer in smaller (but not too small planes), where I don't see the wings visibly flapping. Something like a A320 or a 737. With 747s the wings flap up and down quite visibly in turbulence, and you can even see the fuselage twisting if the curtains aren't closed between the sections. There's also just the wall thickness to mass ratio. You ever notice that you can crash toy RC cars all you want and they never break, but if you crash a real car even mildly it's rather easily totaled?
- projektfu 4y agoNow you have me imagining an articulated-bus version of the 747....
- kortilla 4y agoAny plane at 500mph is tissue paper if it hits something. If you haven’t seen the wing flex in a 737 or A320 you aren’t paying close enough attention. It’s very obvious during the takeoff roll as load is applied or during any moderate+ turbulence.
- dheera 4y ago> Any plane at 500mph is tissue paper if it hits something. Sure, but a commercially-sold 1:500 plastic model of the same plane crashing into a wall at 1mph won't be tissue paper. Similarly, ants can lift 100 times their own weight and survive having 5000 times their own weight placed on top of them, but it's quite impossible to for a human-sized mammal to do the same.
- kortilla 4y agoYou don’t fly in a 1:500 plastic model and the model isn’t built to scale for wall thickness. What’s your point?
- aeturnum 4y agoMakes me think of the famous "707 Barrel Roll" story from its initial testing: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/60-years-ago-the-famous-boeing-707-barrel-roll-over-lake-washington/ https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/60-years-ago-the-f... “You know that. Now we know that. But just don’t do it anymore.” Edit: forgot the barrel roll was on a 707 - not a 747
- isaacdl 4y agoShould note that's a 707 that Tex Johnston rolled, not a 747. I'm not aware of any barrel rolls performed in a 747.
- aeturnum 4y agoOh good note lol! I misremembered
- turnsout 4y agoFTA: "In his Boeing office, he [Tex] hung a sign that proclaimed, 'One test is worth a thousand opinions.'" I need that sign. ha
- kloch 4y agoIt wasn't even a 707, it was a prototype model 367-80. There were some unusually significant structural differences between the prototype dash 80 and production 707's, for example: > The 132 in (3,400 mm) wide fuselage of the Dash 80 was large enough for four-abreast (two-plus-two) seating like the Stratocruiser. Answering customers' demands and under Douglas competition, Boeing soon realized this would not provide a viable payload, so it widened the fuselage to 144 in (3,660 mm) to allow five-abreast seating and use of the KC-135's tooling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_367-80 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_367-80 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_707 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_707
- jefftk 4y agoThose two pages disagree. Your quote is from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_707 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_707, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_367-80 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_367-80 has "The Dash 80 fuselage was wide enough at 132 inches (335 cm) for five-abreast seating; two on one side of the aisle and three on the other. The fuselage diameter for the production KC-135 was widened to 144 inches (366 cm) and Boeing originally hoped to build the 707 fuselage with that width. By the time the Boeing company committed to production, the decision had been made to design the production model 707 as a six-abreast design"
- ceejayoz 4y agoMy dad drew my kids' names (and a Minecraft pickaxe) over Indiana a few years back. They were delighted.
- c7DJTLrn 4y agoAre jumbo jets being retired because of fuel economy? If so, is there a chance demand for them will return if there's a spike in passenger numbers? I would've thought a larger fleet of smaller planes would be less efficient because it increases operational cost and you have more overhead weight to move around.
- sofixa 4y ago> I would've thought a larger fleet of smaller planes would be less efficient because it increases operational cost and you have more overhead weight to move around. You'd be wrong. Airline bosses (Willie Walsh? Almost sure it was him) have said it literally costs less to have two 787 fly one after the other than a single A380. The fuel efficiency of twin engine planes compared to 3 or 4 older engines compensates for the lower capacity.
- wkat4242 4y agoBut the 4-engined models can fly more direct routes over oceans and uninhabited areas right? Because of ETOPS. Of course this is not a problem on many routes.
- mulmen 4y agoETOPS is what allows twins to fly routes that would otherwise require trijets or four engines. I'm not sure what the limits are but flights to Hawaii for example are routinely done with twins.
- wkat4242 4y agoI know, but as far as I know it requires them to stay with 200nm or so of an airport. So they can't take the most direct route. Also for flights over the poles. I think four engines still have a benefit there. But I guess you don't run a whole airplane model just because it's not economical on 2 or 3 routes.
- 4y ago
- Philip-J-Fry 4y agoSo, how does this work? Do you plot this via the Auto Pilot? Like, inserting a list of waypoints?
- mrguyorama 4y agoYou can literally just give the flight computer a list of lat-lons and have it fly arbitrary routes in the sky in 3D.
- sokoloff 4y agoIf I was going to do it with my avionics, I'd do it with GPS user-defined-waypoints driving the auto-pilot.
- jdiez17 4y agoSome of the turns are way too tight to be done by the autopilot. But it looks very regular, so I would suspect some custom control system was used. Would also be interested to know how they did this!
- jaywalk 4y ago> Some of the turns are way too tight to be done by the autopilot. Not sure what you're looking at, but this is absolutely incorrect. > I would suspect some custom control system was used. Not a chance in hell.
- blantonl 4y agocustom control system This would be the very last explanation in aviation for sure. Like, dead last in terms of speculation.
- blantonl 4y agoGiven that they flew this below 15k feet, not requiring the full IFR flight plan which would be required above that altitude, I suspect they might have hand flown this out by Moses lake by following a magenta line on a map. They could have also just programmed the FMS with the waypoints and the plane flew itself.
- NotYourLawyer 4y agoWhat a shitty website. Throws up a modal dialog that says: This site uses cookies By clicking “Accept all cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. No option to decline some or all cookies. No option to keep using the website without clicking accept. I hope some European sues them and wins under GDPR.
- voakbasda 4y agoDoes the GPDR even apply here? If it does, maybe I should start blocking all of Europe’s netblocks….
- seszett 4y agoWhy would they put such a message if they didn't have the GDPR in mind? I think like many other (mainly US) sites it's partly to make a statement, and partly misguided belief that they have to put some kind of message. In reality it would be safer to ignore GDPR if you believe it shouldn't apply to you because you're not EU based. If you're doing something specifically for EU visitors then it becomes clear you're also targeting them as visitors and then you have to comply with GDPR (this popup isn't compliant).
- Fauntleroy 4y agoY'all stop downvoting this, it's a legitimate complaint.
- dpifke 4y agoIt's being downvoted because comments like these are against the guidelines[0]: Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- addandsubtract 4y agoNot sure what device you're on, but on desktop Firefox, I see a "Show Purposes" button and have the option to configure which cookies I want and don't.
- adenozine 4y agoThat’s badass. A proper send off.
- Sunspark 4y agoOn a trip home a few years ago, I went ahead and booked a 747, partially intentionally. It was very nostalgic knowing that it was probably the last time I would ever fly in a 747 again. That was a good plane.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jbandela1 4y agoThe 747 IMO is the most beautiful aircraft ever, certainly the most beautiful civilian aircraft. A couple of years ago, I made it a point on an international trip with my kids to book seats for us on the upper deck. It was really awesome, and I am sure they will look back on it as a great memory. If you are able to, before it is too late, I would encourage doing it. The most iconic seats on the most iconic civilian airplane!
- dylan604 4y agoWhen you have been away from them for a while and you're used to just spending time in terminals with nothing but 737s everywhere, when you come back to a terminal with a 747 at the gate, it is a bit awe inspiring to see just how big these are. Similar to the first time walking up to a 777, A380, etc. They are just huge (or the 737 is tiny).
- themadturk 4y agoBoth.
- quickthrower2 4y agoI got excited just seeing one on flightradar and then looking up :-). They are quite rare compared to 737 and various Airbuses
- jbandela1 4y ago> (or the 737 is tiny) A 737 is roughly that length and weight of a Blue Whale (North Pacific).
- sib 4y agoI flew on the upper deck a few times between Seattle and London - great way to travel! Even got to see the Northern Lights more than once...
- z303 4y agoLike most people a 747 was my first long haul flight. I've not been lucky enough to fly the upper deck but a few years ago, I did get to fly in the nose, seat 1A. A great experience, strange being in front of the pilots and surprisingly noisy when the nose gear is moving up or down As for being the most beautiful civilian aircraft. I see your 747 and raise you a Concorde
- supernova87a 4y agoI find it just really endearing that at companies, regardless of how many other issues they have or the dysfunctions and bland corporate culture, there are people who keep the pride of purpose and "olden days / traditions" in their memory and do things like this. Or are able to call on institutional memory of something bygone, that reappears once in a while. (whether it's a big gesture like this or small cultural day-to-day manifestations). You wonder how pockets of this survive when top management comes and goes, who sometimes only know the company as just some logo or another corporation to be managed, and when workforces go through rounds and rounds of potential layoffs where such knowledge and initiative is generally lost. Maybe it also helps to be a company that has at least something to do with hardware that leaves a physical history :)
- SQueeeeeL 4y ago> You wonder how pockets of this survive when top management comes and goes, who sometimes only know the company as just some logo or another corporation to be managed This makes me so sad, all of our traditions which make companies unique will actually be eroded away by market forces. No wonder no one stays at a workplace anymore.
- dleslie 4y agoThe market force putting a stop to this is legal liability that can arise from undocumented or unauthorized behaviour. That's more an issue of an overly-litigious society.
- cj 4y agoI’m sure culture/traditions play a role in employee retention, but it feels like “the 20-year tenure company man/woman” of the 90’s was likely driven by less optionality in the job market compared to today, and also fewer benefits to staying with a company long-term (e.g. no more pensions, unlimited vacation for both new and old employees, etc).
- mulmen 4y agoBoeing still needs pilots. They're a sentimental, capable, and stubborn bunch.
- mulmen 4y agoBoeing does a lot of this actually. Here's another 747-8F drawing a massive "12" over the state of Washington to celebrate the Seahawks reaching the Super Bowl. https://www.travelcodex.com/seattle-seahawks-boeing-747-800/ https://www.travelcodex.com/seattle-seahawks-boeing-747-800/
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- malkia 4y agoI see two planes now flying very close to each other... https://imgur.com/a/QcZohkC https://imgur.com/a/QcZohkC
- pilsetnieks 4y agoVery unlikely the same height. They could be kilometers apart. It's a 3D space.
- jaywalk 4y agoWithout knowing how far you're zoomed in on the map or the altitude of the two planes, I can assure you that they're nowhere near each other.
- malkia 4y agoyup - just layman (me) being scared not understanding what's going on :) - then I saw earlier what the plane did (took me a while to figure out what was this about)
- mulmen 4y agoThe planes are not drawn to scale. Looks like your screenshot is over South Dakota. Looking at the scale on the map those planes are around 6km apart, not considering altitude differences.
- dividuum 4y agoThat seems neither close nor something special. There are different flight levels, so planes can cross each other safely.
- malkia 4y agoyup - it just shows how little I know about the subject... agh! - It was bit spooky looking at these, and I thought I zoomed in but by the time I took the screenshot it was way oof
- jabroni_salad 4y ago
- thedrake 4y agoHere is the story behind the flight and drawing in the sky via flight path https://aviationsourcenews.com/breaking/atlas-air-to-fly-special-747-flight-plan-on-final-boeing-747-delivery-flight/ https://aviationsourcenews.com/breaking/atlas-air-to-fly-spe...
- thrownaway561 4y agothank you... i was wondering why they did this.
- swyx 4y ago> "She’s a darn good-looking airplane… An incredible honor for me" don't all 747's look the same by definition? lol
- blantonl 4y agoThis was almost certainly drawn out by hand, waypoints (lat/lon) and turns were plotted and then inputed into the flight management computer, and there is a good chance the plane just flew itself as told. Although given it was flown at such a lower altitude below 15k feed near Moses Lake (which is where Boeing does a ton of testing at that airport) it's possible the pilots hand flew this by following a pre-plotted magenta line already plotted on a map for them.
- bryanbraun 4y agoYeah, just look at how balanced the design looks. Either they programmed that flight path or the pilot spent a lot of time on an etch-a-sketch growing up.
- px43 4y agoThey could also just spoof the ADS-B data right?
- schoen 4y agoI doubt their normal on-board systems have a feature to do that, or that the pilots would feel confident in doing so in terms of the FAA's possible reaction.
- phendrenad2 4y agoIf Boeing wants to draw a 747 logo in the sky for the last 747 ever made, the 747, the symbol of american design, and they don't want to actually drive the plane around in loops, I'm sure the FAA would sign off on some foolery. But kudos to them for doing it live.
- blantonl 4y agothat didn't happen. They flew this.
- jaywalk 4y agoFrom a technical perspective, probably. In reality, absolutely not.
- cbfrench 4y agoWe’re in the flight path, and I told my wife to go up to her office roof to see if she can see it, but she’s stuck in a meeting, and I’m too far north to catch a glimpse. I guess I’ll have to settle for spotting it on my ADS-B receiver, which is still pretty cool.
- petecooper 4y agoPosterity screenshot (work safe): https://i.imgur.com/jPIlUJQ.png https://i.imgur.com/jPIlUJQ.png
- nickdothutton 4y agoOne of the all time greatest products ever produced.
- RobRivera 4y agolittle more creative than marine aviators thats for sure
- classified 4y agoDarned cool. 747 rules!
- anonymous_sorry 4y agoI'm sure it's insignificant in the scheme of things, but I don't think it justifies the unnecessary carbon emissions
- tomcam 4y agoI am grateful I don’t live in the world you live in
- anonymous_sorry 4y agoBut you do, I fear.
- sho_hn 4y agoI'm sad you are getting downvoted for this. This was my first thought as well. You are not a party pooper and you live in reality. I like the atmosphere/branding of aviation and prefer flights over train travel as an experience, but after my wife recently wrote an article about the handling of emission information by the sector and I read many of the more science- and engineering-focused studies she is referencing in her work I am now officially horrified by flying. It's just so damned inefficient and the industry is so disingenuous about it (layers of fraud related to carbon offset schemes, lobbying, etc.) and tries so hard to talk customers out of caring that stunts like this do not read as the heartwarming celebration of the engineering crafts it once would have. Instead being this wasteful and callous makes a mockery of trying to engineer a better world. It's a misuse of a magnificent tool we should respect more surgically for its utility and risks.
- anonymous_sorry 4y agoIf I'd expressed it this eloquently I suspect I'd have been less downvoted! I would totally think this cool if there were no climate emergency. But the needless and frivolous extravagance feels so tone deaf to me.
- userbinator 4y ago
- walrus01 4y agoAlso in eastern washington weird things drawn in the sky, google "eastern washington sky dicks" for a somewhat more phallic image representation. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=eastern+washington+sky+dicks https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=eastern+w... The Whidbey NAS pilots who did it got in trouble, as I recall. https://nationalpost.com/news/world/the-u-s-navy-released-transcript-of-the-conversation-between-the-two-pilots-who-drew-a-sky-penis-and-its-hilarious https://nationalpost.com/news/world/the-u-s-navy-released-tr...
- petilon 4y agoThe question in my mind is, what replaces the 747, and is it safe? Looks like 777X is going to replace 747. Does the 777X have the same design flaws as the 737 MAX, namely larger engine, positioned forward in way that destabilizes the airframe?
- themadturk 4y agoI can't answer your question directly, but the modern 737 is a 2010s aircraft forced into a 1965 design. Many, many problematic design decisions have been visited upon the low-rise airframe, and many critics of the plane think the 737s should have been retired long ago in favor of a new narrow-body aircraft. I don't think those kinds of design problems are present in the 777, which was a new design from the ground up.
- mulmen 4y ago> The question in my mind is, what replaces the 747, and is it safe? Looks like 777X is going to replace 747. The 747 has been replaced for passenger service for decades. This isn't the first time production has been halted. The 777 has been around since the 1990s. With the 767, 777, and 787 there's really no need for the 747 anymore, especially for passenger service. > Does the 777X have the same design flaws as the 737 MAX, namely larger engine, positioned forward in way that destabilizes the airframe? In a word, no. The 777X looks more like the 737NG vs the 737 Classic. It's stretched and has new wings, but the engines on the 777 were already massive. The 777 started with 330cm diameter engines and the new ones are 335cm. Given the gear arrangement on the 777 I doubt they had to move the engines forward. Further, the 737 MAX crashes weren't directly caused by moving the engines, it was more caused by MCAS and a lack of training and explanation. Boeing tried to make the 737 MAX feel like a 737NG, but the plane itself wasn't inherently unstable. The 777X does not have MCAS: > Boeing stated that the 777X does not have an equivalent of the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) that is installed on the 737 MAX and that played a role in two crashes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777X
- aendruk 4y agoScreenshot: https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmcjrYXR934QZqBuMHioRdcZEmorRVA7psWCyEckB7UP4C https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmcjrYXR934QZqBuMHioRdcZEmo... On small displays this is otherwise obstructed by a cookie popup that offers only an “accept all” button. What’s even the point of the popup then?
- lostlogin 4y agoThank you, I couldn’t see the interesting part due to zoom/number of other planes etc.
- knodi123 4y ago> What’s even the point of the popup then? Complying with idiotic bureaucratic regulations. Nobody wants to be popping that thing up, but if they don't, they can get reamed by the EU.
- AlexandrB 4y agoThey could just... not use tracking cookies. Then no banner is required. The real idiocy is every website wanting to hoover up data.
- gtirloni 4y agoThe popup is about any cookies, right? Cookies are a basic building blocks of websites. If you login to a legit website, there's a cookie in your browser for that.
- dspillett 4y ago> The popup is about any cookies, right? The popup is, yes. But the legislation they are pretending to be compliant with isn't. For basic session-level cookies that are essential to the operation of some sites, no legislation requires consent. The issues are third party tracking, long term use stalking, etc. But those that want to stalk you want you to believe that the legislation is against even session maintenance & similar cookies as well so you'll be against the legislation and not them. And that is apparently working on you and some others commenting in this thread.
- ece 4y agoAfter the 777 gained enough market share, it just seemed like less and less flights (especially the long range ones) were on the 747. End of an era. I flew on the top deck of a 747 once, I was sweating the whole time, but the views were worth it.
- goldfingeroo7 4y agoI wonder if the pilots were giggling the whole time they were flying this pattern.
- DarmokJalad1701 4y agoThe actual GPS points filed in the flight plan can be seen here: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI747/history/20230201/1600Z/KPAE/KCVG https://flightaware.com/live/flight/GTI747/history/20230201/... There's probably a similar function for flightradar24 as well but I don't know how to find it there.
- dingosity 4y agoHmm. I thought all new Boeings flew out over the pacific so at the moment the customer signs the paperwork receiving the airplane, it was someplace where there would be no state or local sales tax. I'm not in the aero business myself, just repeating what I heard other, more knowledgable-sounding people said. Maybe that's not true or there's an exception for this one.
- ceejayoz 4y ago> I thought all new Boeings flew out over the pacific so at the moment the customer signs the paperwork receiving the airplane, it was someplace where there would be no state or local sales tax. I'm pretty sure that's an urban legend; I've seen the same story, but never evidence for it.
- mulmen 4y agoAnd I suppose Boeing put down $1.00 on the bill of sale? Give me a break. It's not a handshake deal on an El Camino. Give the IRS some credit here please. If this was feasible every bank and e-commerce site in the world would be hosted in international water.
- dingosity 4y agoThe IRS does not collect state or local sales tax.
- dingosity 4y agoReally? You're going to downvote me because I'm reporting something I heard, not even trying to pass it off as fact. Okaaaay.
- M3L0NM4N 4y agoRight when I clicked this the plane started taking off again.
- ribs 4y agoMy friend notes that the logo covers Grand County Int’l Airport, containing the 2nd-longest runway in the US, where JAL and FedEx both have 747 pilot training facilities.
- katamarimambo 4y agothe carbon cost of this crap
- eiiot 4y agoFlightaware link: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N863GT https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N863GT (FR24 makes it difficult to see on mobile & in general)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- leaving 4y agoI like Boeing and the 747 is a great aircraft and a fantastic technical achievement, but, really, this is pretty atrocious. Couldn't they have just paid FlightAware to add some data to the track? Until we get our population down to a sustainable level, this is unconscionable. Get it under a billion and we can probably afford this. Until then, definitely not.
- mulmen 4y ago> Couldn't they have just paid FlightAware to add some data to the track? Huh? Why would FlightAware agree to this? What would the point even be? By that logic Boeing could just pay to have their carbon numbers falsified too. May as well falsify the population numbers too while they are at it. You can criticize the carbon emissions but why advocate for falsifying data? They could have just... not done the flight.
- pdabbadabba 4y agoI hate to be that guy but...anyone able to compute the total C02 emissions from this stunt? I guess when you manufacture planes for a living, this sort of thing doesn't seem like a big deal.
- sva_ 4y agoFlight not found for me. Does someone have a screenshot?
- matt-by-nature 4y agoI wonder what font that is..
- noobermin 4y agoJust a thought, the article has 747 points, and I do not want to upvote it further.
- drpixie 4y agoToo late - it's gone past 747 points :(
- fatih-erikli 4y agoGreat, another proof showing they don't provide real data
- RektBoy 4y agohttps://samchui.com/2023/02/01/the-last-boeing-747-delivery/ https://samchui.com/2023/02/01/the-last-boeing-747-delivery/
- notac 4y agoMy grandfather was a mechanic on the first 747 to roll off the assembly line. Quite a majestic career the 747 had.
- BXLE_1-1-BitIs1 4y agoSomebody spent a few hours programming the FMS with lat-longs as few, if any, of the waypoints would be in the directory, likely offline. Then there's a long phone call to, likely Seattle, Center to get the flight route accepted into the system. There's a possibility the ATC computers couldn't take all the way points, in which case they would need an airspace reservation where they could do the pattern.
- FabHK 4y agoQuestion: On the western side, the top-left side of the crown, it looks like two curves were flown, both more than 90 degrees. Wouldn’t it have been possible, instead, to fly straight (and then fly the „crown“ the other way around)? Wouldn’t that have been marginally prettier?
- k_sze 4y agoFor those curious: you can see that they drew the top part of the crown first, if you zoom in enough.
- poopsmithe 4y agoZooming in isn't even necessary because you can use the flight playback scrollbar to see the little plane move along the route.
- xs83 4y agoOk but the dev in me needs to know if this was done manually or programmed into the flight computer, I am assuming the latter as it looks meticulously done!
- kefka_p 4y agoI’m rarely impressed anymore for whatever reasons, but even in the midst of a miserable bout of viral induced malady, I have to stand in awe of this. I can’t even fathom the skill required to move a piece of equipment that large in a straight line let alone produce precise graphics with its flight path. Sometimes people are pretty cool.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- orenak 4y agoare you sure its not a greek fig? :D
- amai 4y agoNot the first „easter egg“ on flight radar: https://www.sfgate.com/national/article/Pilot-draws-penis-on-FlightRadar-with-his-plane-6132682.php https://www.sfgate.com/national/article/Pilot-draws-penis-on...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- scallaway 4y agoAnd what looks to be a touch-and-go at the end of the journey as well just to round off the flight. Very nice.
- ho_schi 4y agoIf you want fly with 747: Book a flight from/to Germany with Lufthansa or from/to South Korea with Korean Air. They use the 747-8i and Lufthansa even the older 747-400 (delivery issues with B787 and B777). It is a nice plane and efficient between high demand routes of major destinations (e.g. JFK<-->FRA). If you want spend more money, I recommend the upper-deck which is provides a private atmosphere. Question: But I'm not wealthy? Answer: Me neither. I had a nice talk with a complete stranger in the middle row in the Economy during the last intercontinental flight. No Champagne but nice memories. If business: Lufthansa business-class seats allow for lay-flat but with older screens. I like them because use an open interior without the closed "office-cubicle" interior of other airlines. Look out of the window, drink champagne, eat a nice meal (or two...) or sleep. PS: Booking the 747 keeps her flying.
- drno123 4y agoGreta is not impressed
- Someone 4y agoI wouldn’t call that an Easter egg. It’s not hidden. Also, if I’m not mistaken that flight started at 7:50 local time. Was that 3 minutes later than intended?