|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on May 23, 2018 4:13:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Herman on May 23, 2018 14:48:34 GMT
Interesting video. Thanks for sharing the link Mark.
Herman
|
|
|
|
Post by alex94 on May 23, 2018 18:01:07 GMT
Saw this too, great little video. Enough info without going into it too much. His other videos are great too
|
|
|
|
Post by christrott on May 23, 2018 19:03:00 GMT
It is a good video overall, but I don't like that he ignored the biggest reason the CV-990 failed - the Oil Embargo. Yes, it mainly affected the US, but that was who Convair was aggressively selling to. When the embargo hit, airlines cancelled the orders for the CV-990 wholesale because fuel was no longer the smallest part of the operating cost, so the speed advantage of the CV-880 and CV-990 was lost since even though at more "normal" speeds it was more fuel efficient than its competitors, the fact it was overall smaller than them resulted in them not making as much money as the DC-8 and 707.
In fact, he never mentioned that both the CV-880 and CV-990 had significantly better fuel efficiency than the 707 and DC-8 when operated at the slower cruise speeds (~0.82 mach), a point that probably added an additional 10 years of operating life to the airplanes, with the last primary passenger operator (Spantax) not retiring the 990 until the late 1980s, and the last 880s being retired in the early 1980s, around the same time as the 707s and non-Super 70 DC-8s were mostly retired from passenger service.
|
|
|
|
Post by cgw444 on May 23, 2018 20:11:22 GMT
My understanding is that sales were low or non existent on the late 60's which is why the 990 production ended.
The oil embargo started in 1973 - a few years after American got rid of their 990s - but even during the 60's cheap gas era
I think they still weren't happy with the fuel consumption.
|
|
|
|
Post by cgw444 on May 23, 2018 20:15:36 GMT
I just read this and did not know this! Always assumed that the 880 - 990s were more of a gas hog then the 707 - dc8's at all speeds.
|
|
|
|
Post by christrott on May 24, 2018 0:45:53 GMT
My understanding is that sales were low or non existent on the late 60's which is why the 990 production ended. The oil embargo started in 1973 - a few years after American got rid of their 990s - but even during the 60's cheap gas era I think they still weren't happy with the fuel consumption. Sorry, when I said "the Oil Embargo", I was speaking in more general terms. The first Oil Embargos issued (that started driving oil prices up) were in the late 1950s but were short lived affairs that lasted days or maybe weeks. By 1963, embargoes by Arab nations against Western countries who supported Israel began to really cause problems and domestic fuel prices in the US and UK began to rise. The rise escalated quickly in 1967 with the first of the major Oil Embargos, although it didn't last long enough to have any major spikes in price or rationing of fuel due to shortages. However, it was the 1967 embargo that led to the formation of OPEC and eventually the well known 1973 "Oil Crisis". Also, American was attempting to "streamline" their fleet as much as anything. Between 1963 (when the DC-7 was retired) and 1973 (when the BAC 1-11 was retired) American Airlines went from 7 types in the fleet to just 4, with most of those retirements happening between 1969 and 1973. Of the remaining fleet, only 1 was "short range" - the 727. The others were the DC-10, 747, and 707/720B; all long-haul aircraft. The 720B sort-of replaced the 990As, but they still had more seats (150 versus 120) and were used more on thin, long routes like SFO - HNL than on the domestic cross country routes the 990s were used on. American would operate with only 4 types for over a decade until the late 1980's when they introduced the 737, BAe-146, A300, and 757 in quick succession, increasing fleet types to 9. |
|
|
|
Post by cgw444 on May 24, 2018 20:17:59 GMT
Thanks for the detailed info. Fleet rationalization make sense. I was unaware of some of the smaller oil embargos.
|
|
|
|
Post by George Carty - HJG on May 25, 2018 13:32:29 GMT
Another omission was that the Convair jetliners were critically disadvantaged because their fuselage only supported five-abreast seating while their Boeing and Douglas rivals could take six-abreast. Note also that Boeing very expensively re-designed the 707 for this reason (the original 367-80 could only take five-abreast): perhaps if they hadn't done this then Douglas would have remained the dominant American airliner manufacturer?
George
|
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on May 25, 2018 15:47:33 GMT
Hi friends: As the CV 990 was designed with better creature comfort in mind than other airliners (size of seats and distance between them, internal noise level) it was easy for Spantax to convert its birds to a six abreast configuration the beefy structure of the Coronado allowed that easily. Spantax and Modern Air converted their speed-birds to transatlantic airliners by flying Mach 0,75 and their Paxes loved the silent gliding along. So one can see, the design was not the primary reason for the economic failure. Had more to do with coming late and assuming and pushing a marketing niche not liked by the airlines. Swissair flew 13 years with its Coronados and with good reason HB-ICC got an eye catching place at the entrance of the Swiss Transport Museum "Verkehrshaus Luzern". www.verkehrshaus.ch/sites/default/files/styles/zoom/public/subpage_gallery/STE_1792.JPG?itok=fx9gciXJKind regards Walter |
|
|
|
Post by Herman on May 26, 2018 15:27:51 GMT
A great display of the Swissair Convair Coronado.  Herman |
|
