The Transition.....
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: The Transition.....

  1. #1

    The Transition.....

    Today, we take the jet powered air liner for granted. You see them in just about every commercial field in the world. You see the big jumbo jets, the smaller jets, and even the turbo props (yes grasshopper, the turbo prop is considered to be a jet powered aircraft). As we wind down this first decade of the 21st Century we have planes like the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 787 Dreamliner being able to left their bulk up in strips of 8,000 ft or less.

    We take for granted that you can be anywhere in the US or Europe in the mater of just a few short hours. Man we have really come far since those fledgelings days of commercial aviation.

    But lets say thank you to those who have made that posible and now lets turn the clock back and look at the struggle of the transition to this jet age.......

    POST WORLD WAR II

    This was the golden era of Commercial Aviation. The old Airlines came back to the air with a vengeance. Airlines like Pan American, TWA, Lufthansa and BOAC picked right up where they had left off. They connected the world via the air. Aircraft types like the Boeing 377, Douglas DC-4, Douglas, DC-6, the Lockheed Constellation, and the Avro York crossed the Atlantic on a daily basis and in most cases they did it with luxury, especially the operators of the Boeing 377.

    All the war built airfields across the world served well as airports for these grand prop-liners.

    As the 1950's approached some commercial airlines begun to wonder....was it possible to bring the jet engine to civilian use. In 1949 De Haveland answered the question. They introduced the world to the DH.106 Comet. The plane was presented and marketed to fill the role of medium range flights . They were hoping the Comet would capture the market for the Douglas DC-4 and Lockheed L079 Constellation replacements as these planes wore out. The Comet entered service in 1951 with initial success, but by 1954, the Comet's future was in doubt. A series of crashes lead to an end of the initial start of the jet age in civil transport. Airlines canceled orders, grounded and scrapped the initial models of the Comet. The Comet did emerge from this disaster in 1959, but it was to late for De Haviland to compete against the US based manufacturers. With England's failure to kick start the jet into civil transport, the eyes turned to the New World.

    In the United States the four major companies building airlines at this time were Lockheed, Convair, Martin, and Douglas. At this time Boeing only had a minor share in the market with its 377 Stratocruiser (which this was just a side production to the work being done on the C-97 and KC-97 for the USAF). All four of the companies looked at the use of jet power in the future as being limited to Turbo-prop aircraft, and they felt that this was still years down the line. They concentrated on producing piston engine aircraft that had the posibility to be converted to turbo props on down the line. As the 50's wore on planes like the Douglas DC-6 and DC-7, Lockheed L1069 Super Constellaton and the small twins produced by Martin and Convair all still relied on the radial engine.

    Following Boeing usual business model of the times, they looked at what they had in the shops and asked what can we do with it. This line of thinking had produced both the B.307 and B.377. These aircraft were civil transports developed from military aircraft. What they had in the shop was the Boeing B-47 Stratobomber and the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress. Both these airplanes forced Boeing and the US Air Force to realize that the KB-50 and the KC-97 were not able to really do the job needed. This led Boeing down the path of destany and a golden egg. The bird hatched from that egg would change the world of commercial aviation. The hatch-ling was the Boeing 367-80 of 1954. The Dash 80 capitalized on the advances developed on the B-47 and B-52. Its swept wings and its engines hung under the wings were all features found on the bombers. The Dash-80 eventually led to the the Boeing C\KC-135 family of military transports. As produduction ramped up for the USAF, Boeing took the plane in hand and studied it, redesigned it and then announced what would become the prototype Boeing 707-120. Boeing took its first orders for the aircraft in 1957.

    The Dash-80 and the 707, came as a major shock to the other four companies. Both Douglas and Convair (that had just become a division og General Dynamics) found themselves scrambling to catch up. Both companies found themselves a year behind in production to Boeing. Lockheed buried its head in the sand and continued to produce the Constellatons and its Turbo prop L188 Electra. They didn't offer their first pure jet until the 1960s when they offered the L101 Tri-Star.

    By 1959, the US companies had pretty much captured the line share of the world market for large jet aircraft. In the sky, you could see the Boeing 707, the Douglas DC-8 and the Convair 880. They were covering the routes of the world twice as fast, but wait, not all was good. These monsters of their day had a problem........a big problem......only a hand full of airports could support them. These early jets required around 10,000 ft of heavy runway to take-off and land on. Most airports of the day, just didn't have these. So they were limited on where they could be used. So, once again the prop-liners and the few turbo-props that had made it into production were still the primary aircraft of the air carriers.

    As the 1960s dawned, the airlines had their jets, but they were limited to where they could go; the solution was to improve the airports. So, in the US and Europe a major rebuild of the infrastructure of aviation was begun. Runways were lengthened, new terminals built, and even new fields constructed. This took time. It really wasn't until the mid 60's that the problems of where to land the beasts were solved, but by 1967, most airports were able to handle them, and traffic increased. The prop-liners were pushed to the side, closing the door on the golden age. Even the small planes like the DC-3 and Martin 2-2-0 were on the way out. They were being replaced by turbo props and small medium jets like the B.727 and the DC-9.

    With this increase in jet traffic, a whole new problem appeared....the skies were getting crowded. This problem had been identified in the 1950's and dealt with by establishing local air space and control, but the problem compounded in the 1960's. In the US the FAA fully established a National Air Control System to direct traffic. Similar systems were put in place around the world.

    It took us nearly 25 years to transition into what we have today. Isn't aviation great?
    "Thats some of the best flying I have ever seen, upto the point that your dead, Never ever leave your wingman!"......Jester, Top Gun

  2. #2
    Thanks Cowboy; that's a great read.
    Milton Shupe
    FS9/FSX Modeler Hack

    My Uploads at SOH - Here
    Video Tutorials - Gmax for Beginners

  3. #3
    I made some mistakes in my first post here that i have to clear up.....it goes to model numbers on some aircraft. Mainly Lockheed Connies:

    L049 Constellation (war built and initial post war model of the Constellation)
    L749 Constellation (this is the definitive model of the Constellation. It had several improvements on airframe and engines)
    L1049 Super Constellation (as the mane says. This is a Connie all grown up to take on the DC-6 and early DC-7 medels)
    L1649 Starliner (A rose by any other name is still a rose, and this can be said for the Starliner, she still is a Connie. A Connie on steroids. This girl was built to face down the DC-7C and offer a lower priced alternative to those new big jets)
    "Thats some of the best flying I have ever seen, upto the point that your dead, Never ever leave your wingman!"......Jester, Top Gun

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Cowboy1968 View Post
    L1649 Starliner (A rose by any other name is still a rose, and this can be said for the Starliner, she still is a Connie. A Connie on steroids. This girl was built to face down the DC-7C and offer a lower priced alternative to those new big jets)
    Not quite. My sources say that at the Lockheed on first were skeptic about a new Constellation version, as they could see the future of liners was in the jets but, after continuous request from TWA for a plane that could keep up with the range of the DC7C, prepared two versions of the last of the Constellations. The L-1549 and the L-1649. Only difference between the two were the engines. The never produced L-1549 was engined with Allison turboprops and the L-1649 with R-3350.

    The two projects were given to TWA for choosing in 1955 and, showing an incredible foresight, they decided to have the R-3350 engined project confining the more advanced L-1549 onto the pages of the project. So great a foresight that was, that in fact the L-1649 (that took the following letter A for reasons unknown to me) was one of the versions that fell in disuse with less hours of flight of all the Connies. Being expensive to maintain because of the complex and delicate turbo compound engines, some of them were sold off from the same TWA with 3 years of life and remained in force for longer only in airlines with need of range, like the South African ones, and of those that could not choose, like Lufthansa.

    A curiosity. It seems that even the Starliner was able, if needed, to mount a kind of additional external tip-wing fuel tanks like the L-1049, for extended flight operations, but the more than 6000nm of range of the plane in itself was enough for every civil operator and the option was never used.

  5. #5
    Thanks Cowboy for the nice review of airline development post WW II. When growing up, we flew in DC 4 and DC 6 aircraft. I always wanted to fly on a Constellation, but I never got the chance.

    I was quite excited when my brother and I flew by ourselves in a Boeing 707 airliner to visit our grandparents. I was a little disappointed though when the stewardesses didn't hand out Chicklets gum like they did on the DC 4 and 6 as the big jet was pressurized. Contrary to today's ordeal of flight, the aircrew was courteous, there was lots of leg room and the in flight meal was pretty tasty.

    Tis a shame that the only Dash 80 derivative airplanes still flying with regularity are the US Air Force KC 135s. They are projected to fly for another 20 or more years so the old linage will be with us for some time yet. To my mind, it was the pettiest of all the jet airliners (particulary with Pan Am's livery) with the possible exception of the old French Caravel.
    Keep your airspeed up,



    Jagdflieger

    http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...me=Jagdflieger

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]



    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty
    to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
    deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    Benjamin Franklin

  6. #6
    I agree about the 707, She was one of the prettiest jet liners ever built. you look at her you think speed. When I was a kid growing up in the 70's we lived about two miles from Will Rogers World Airport in Oklahoma City. Will Rogers was a major hub for Branniff International Airlines. Our house was inside the glide slope for the runway. the Branniff 707s and 720s would shack the house and rattle the windows. On occasion a Branniff DC-8 would fly in.

    Will Rogers World started life as an Army Air Field and was turned over to Oklahoma City when the Air Force pulled away from the field. Given the fact that Douglas built aircraft in Oklahoma the state government payed for major renovations to both Will Rogers and Tulsa International. Both fields were fully made jet capable by 1963.

    I would love setting on my front steps and just watching those big birds fly over.

    That is just one of the many catalysts that got me into the study of aviation.
    "Thats some of the best flying I have ever seen, upto the point that your dead, Never ever leave your wingman!"......Jester, Top Gun

  7. #7
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    The Starliner wasn't the only propliner equipped with the compound turbo engines. They were also on the Super Constellations as well as the DC-7s.

  8. #8
    Which super radial engine had the best reputation, the Wright Turbocompound R3350 or the Pratt & Whitney R4360 Wasp Major of the Boeing 377? Both were used by civilian aircraft as well as military aircraft of the 40s and 50s and well into the 60s.

    From what I can see, the P&W was favored by the military, while the big Wright seemed to get the nod from civilian users. As the last of their breed, they were technological marvels.
    Keep your airspeed up,



    Jagdflieger

    http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...me=Jagdflieger

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]



    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty
    to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
    deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    Benjamin Franklin

  9. #9
    I think it came down to what was more available. The Air Force was buying the R4360 for the B-36, C-124 and other projects.
    "Thats some of the best flying I have ever seen, upto the point that your dead, Never ever leave your wingman!"......Jester, Top Gun

  10. #10
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    I think the Wright had a somewhat better reputation for reliability than the Wasp Major. But that's not saying much for either of them. Both were prone to packing it in. The R-2800 Double Wasp proved to be the more reliable radial of the period and why the DC-6 outlasted the the Connies, Stratocruisers and DC-7s in service.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Willy View Post
    The Starliner wasn't the only propliner equipped with the compound turbo engines. They were also on the Super Constellations as well as the DC-7s.
    In fact I never really got why, always by the sources I can call upon, the Starliner was, after the advent of the jets, priced less than a L-1049H, having those two the same engines and the first one a lot less hours of flight.

    It isn't logical than the 3400hp R-3350 of the Starliner were less complex to keep than the L-1049H's, them being the same.

    Mystery.

  12. #12
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    The main difference between the Starliner and the Super Connies was the new wing that the Starliner had. It was supposed to be a lot better design than that of the earlier Connies. The Constellation wing was the P-38 wing scaled up and dates back to the late 30s. The Starliner's wing was a total new design.

  13. #13
    First off a great writeup of aviation history ... one wonders how different things might have gone if WWII had never happened.
    On of the reasons why we ended up with working jet engines and long range land planes was the armed conflict and the increased rate of invention that it always does seem to drive.

    Would the Seaplanes have lived a longer life without the war ??? Would the piston engined propliner have lived an even longer life ???

    As for the discussion on the R-3350s especially in the Connies of all types one must not forget that this was brand new technology when the L-049/C69 was developed. The initial teething problems sorted out the engines were actually quite reliable when used conservatively.

    But there was catch number two...especially in the DC7C and L-1049G since they were in a very tight race on the trans con market. Ticket price control was still in effect and the only argument the airlines had to get people to spend their money with them and not the competition was better and faster service.

    So the poor birds got pushed to the limits of the engines endurance. The DC7 initially actually fared worse than the Connies at least at American because the FE had much less equipment to monitor the engines and adjust as needed to keep them healty.
    Add the fact that both airplanes just barely managed to make the westbound flights under the crews duty time limits and short TBO times were pre-programmed (400-700 hours on AAs DC7)

    The DC6 could never come close to either one of those R3350 equipped airplanes under these conditions. Fly the DC-7 or L-1049G in formation with the 6 and I doubt the equation would look so favourable for the R-2800.
    My friend Joe who had to endure many Q&A sessions for the Connie project flew almost his entire career for AA including the DC-7 and he said that once the TransCon race was no longer driving the speed and they could fly the airplane in a healthier fashion TBO went to 1400-1700 hours.

    The real weak point on the R3350 was initially the PRT installation...these three Power Recovery Turbines were actually driving the crankshaft through a viscous coupling and if their lubrication failed made for a great light show as bits and pieces were ejected through the exhaust manifold.
    In that period they were commonly refered to as Parts Recycling Turbines.

    I for one am truly sad that I was not around during the heyday of the big piston airliners....especially the most beautiful of them all.
    No tubeliner will ever have the grace of Lockheed's Constellation.

    But I do appreciate being able to hop on a LH 747-400 in Los Angeles and be back in Frankfurt in sometimes less than 10 hours :ernae:
    Stefan

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Sunny9850 View Post
    The DC6 could never come close to either one of those R3350 equipped airplanes under these conditions. Fly the DC-7 or L-1049G in formation with the 6 and I doubt the equation would look so favourable for the R-2800
    Now, don't be so hard on the R-2800. It was for starters al older engine than the R-3350 and, AFAIK at least, its power for civilian use in the DC6 never went above 2000hp apiece (2400hp with ADI). You can maybe compare them against the 2200hp of the L-049 or the 2500hp of the L-749, but comparing them against the more powerful later R-3350 is a case of bad press. After all the R-2800 never had a system of PRT to enhance its power (and lessen the reliability for super-complication of the mechanical complexity).


    Quote Originally Posted by Sunny9850 View Post
    I for one am truly sad that I was not around during the heyday of the big piston airliners....especially the most beautiful of them all.
    No tubeliner will ever have the grace of Lockheed's Constellation.
    I'll drink with you to that. :ernae:

  15. #15
    i feel in love with prop liners when i was a kid. There use to be a small freight business that operated out of Enid, Okla. They had two Dc-3s and a C-46. Right before the oil boom went bad here in Oklahoma they had purchased an old C-97 from the USAF and they were using it hall well heads to various parts of the country. They actually operated the C-97 out of Wichita, Ks. But it would fly into OKC a lot. and I knew the guy who owned the company. He was an old navy pilot that had flown with my Grandpa in Korea. I was 12 years old when i got to go on "Old Blue" for my first flight. I got to ride in the flight engineers seat on the cabin.

    You just don't believe the sound of those engines.....and you can feel them vibrate the whole aircraft. This made a hell of an impression on my 12 year old mind.....I have never forgotten that flight into Austin, Tx. Those R-4360s were noisy even in the cockpit, but it opened my mind to a new world.

    I am visually impaired so there was no way i could ever get a license to fly, but i have studied aviation. Every chance i got to touch on of these relics from the golden era i do. Jets don't have the personality of those old girls.

    I got to fly in "Old Blue" two times. Mr. Hickes operated her from 1980 to 1987, but she just became to much of a drain on his company finance so he parked her in a hanger. She was sold for scrape by his widow in 1990. I was able to get a piece of her. I have her altimeter and her artificial horizon in glass boxes on my bookshelf. When she was sold to the scrap heap....i cried for like i did Mr. Hickes at his service. In my mind.....two legends were gone.
    "Thats some of the best flying I have ever seen, upto the point that your dead, Never ever leave your wingman!"......Jester, Top Gun

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Ashaman View Post
    Now, don't be so hard on the R-2800. It was for starters al older engine than the R-3350 and, AFAIK at least, its power for civilian use in the DC6 never went above 2000hp apiece (2400hp with ADI). You can maybe compare them against the 2200hp of the L-049 or the 2500hp of the L-749, but comparing them against the more powerful later R-3350 is a case of bad press. After all the R-2800 never had a system of PRT to enhance its power (and lessen the reliability for super-complication of the mechanical complexity).




    I'll drink with you to that. :ernae:
    Hi Ash I did not really intend to compare the engines since as you pointed out they were quite different. I simply replied to the earlier comments that slewed the picture a little too far toward the R-2800 in my opinion simply based on early problems with the R-3350 vs the much more well "known" and simpler R-2800.

    Sure the R-3350s had a much higher maintenance requirement but they also delivered much more than the R-2800 ever could.
    Once the tables turned on the radials of course the simpler and therefor more reliable R-2800 was a better choice.
    Neither one could compete with the Jets in terms of speed, so the slower but "cheaper" engine/airplane combination won out.

    Both of them are big radials...so I love them. I had a chance to work on China Doll (C-46) a while back to get her ready for the airshow season.
    Including replacing all the plugs, pre-oiling the R-2800s and then fire them up for the first time in a little more than a year.
    There is no way to describe the satisfaction of hearing that roar up close and personal.

    We also had for a long time the B25J "In the Mood" on my home base with her R-2600s usually providing beautiful music on Saturday mornings when the boys took her out.

    Stefan

  17. #17
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    Here's what noted airline pilot and author Ernest Gann had to say about the Boeing Stratocruiser:

    http://www.ovi.ch/b377/articles/lady/index.html


    The reason the DC-6 with it's R-2800s outlasted the Connies and DC-7s is that it was cheaper to operate and more reliable. There's an outfit in Alaska that still uses DC-6s in commercial service (as well as C-46s and DC-3s)

    There's a DC-7 down in Florida that's being restored for the airshow circuit in old Eastern Airlines paint and a Starliner in Maine that Lufthansa is restoring to airworthy status.

  18. #18
    Hi,

    Nice thread.

    I'm not sure how much of a shock the Dash-80 was to Convair and Douglas, but it was a shock (to Boeing too) how fast the public accepted, and then started demanding, jets on their flights. United, which decided to wait for the wider (at the time) DC-8, found itself flying empty DC-7's across the country in competition with American's jets, even if the tickets were cheaper. United had also developed a marketing campaign called "Jetarama" (as I remember) that was designed to convince people that jet flight was safe and reliable. It turned out that the public needed very little convincing. To give you an idea how slowly the jet transition was expected to be by most people, Eastern ordered 50 DC-7B's and 40 L-188 Electras *after* they had ordered DC-8's. Luckily they had the Shuttle to use them on for several years after 727's and DC-9's had bumped them from normal flights.

    An equally unexpected increase in jet engine power, efficiency, reliability, and noise reduction allowed airlines to dump the propliners much faster than anyone expected, and give the public what it wanted - even on short flights.

    That said, if you want to relive the propliner era, I invite you over to my place.

    Take care,

    Tom Gibson
    CalClassic Propliners
    www.calclassic.com

  19. #19
    Tim I spend a great deal of time over there..........
    "Thats some of the best flying I have ever seen, upto the point that your dead, Never ever leave your wingman!"......Jester, Top Gun

  20. #20
    Senior Administrator Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    West Tennessee, near KTGC
    Age
    67
    Posts
    11,622
    Me too!

  21. #21
    Yep, my FS 9 is piston powered and is mostly WW II through 1970 thanks to Calclassics, Ian and Cees for the airfields and numerous different plane makers, too many to name.
    Keep your airspeed up,



    Jagdflieger

    http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...me=Jagdflieger

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]



    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty
    to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
    deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    Benjamin Franklin

Similar Threads

  1. Transition getting closer to???
    By aeromed202 in forum Ickie's NewsHawks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 3rd, 2012, 12:32
  2. GAF F-4F '37+35' of JG 71, 1984 transition scheme
    By Wild Bill Kelso in forum Warbirds Library
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 25th, 2011, 04:54
  3. The Transition
    By rich12545 in forum FS 2002/2004 General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: October 26th, 2010, 00:32
  4. A little advice, please! Transition to Windows 7.
    By grunau_baby in forum FSX Tweaks
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 1st, 2010, 07:38
  5. The terrafugia transition.
    By tigisfat in forum Ickie's NewsHawks
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: May 1st, 2009, 10:31

Members who have read this thread: 0

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •