FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1956
1956 - 1121.PDF
17 August 1956 267 TABLE 1 TURBINE ORDER BOOK OF 12 MAIN U.S. DOMESTIC AIRLINESAugust 13, 1956 American Broniff... Capital ContinentalDelta ... Eastern National Northeast NorthwestT.W.A. United Western Long-haul Jets 707 30 5 4 27* DCS 6 18 6 30 Medium-haul Jets GoldenArrow 10 30 Comet 14 Medium-haul Turboprops Electro 35 9 4D 23 9 Viscount 75 15 •Of which 9 are of the domestic (120) version. Comet 4s and ten 4As; while United—who last spring had,with T.W.A., been about to buy Electras—continued to waver. Although T.W.A.'s and Delta's decision caused the turbopropairlines to look to their medium-haul defences, there was no rush to buy medium-jets. But, it might be asked, will Capital'spurchase of the Comet—with its attractions of early delivery, experience, favourable contract-terms, etc.—have a more pro-nounced effect? Perhaps an answer to this fascinating question, which airlinesin Europe and elsewhere as well as in the U.S.A. are asking, may become apparent very soon. If we examine the order-books ofthe U.S. airlines (Table 1), we see that, excluding Northeast and Northwest, United is the only operator still to make up itsmedium-haul mind. If it orders jets—and we can be sure that D.H., Douglas and Convair are all in very close touch withMr. Patterson—this could not be taken as a sign of any significant general trend toward medium-jets. It would, however, be moresignificant were they to choose turboprops, and no doubt Bristol, who are at this moment demonstrating a Britannia in the U.S., arekeenly aware of this. But especially worthy of attention are American, Eastern,National, Western and Braniff. All five have settled for the Electra, but they could all be said to be "threatened" by Capital,T.W.A. and Delta medium-jet competition—two of them, Ameri- can and Eastern, particularly by Capital's Comets, which will bein service at about the same time as the Electra. Capital com- petes with American—its first rival—on the strong trade-routesin and out of New York to Washington, Chicago, Detroit and Pittsburg, and between Washington and Chicago. American mightbide their time until delivery of their first 707-120s, even though the above routes (averaging about 600 miles) are reallytoo short for the essentially coast-to-coast 707. According to the Boeing and American programme, the first 707 will be withAmerican only six months after delivery of Capital's first Comet 4, the first American 707 service being scheduled forJune 15, 1959 (Capital's first Comet service, between Washington and Chicago, is scheduled for January 1, 1959). So far as com-petition with T.W.A. and Delta is concerned, American have to look to a possible Golden Arrow challenge (albeit later than theComet's) on routes into and out of New York, i.e. to Washington, Chicago, Detroit and Pittsburg, as well as from New York toTulsa and Houston, Chicago to San Francisco, Washington to Houston and Tulsa to Los Angeles. These last three routes,in length between 1,300 and 1,900 miles, will probably be handled by the big jets anyway, so that the question ofmedium-jet competition may not arise. It is thus on the rich northern routes into and out of New York that American seemfaced with a medium-jet (particularly Comet 4) challenge, and any American move to buy medium jets would, it appears—in viewof their large stock of Electras—be most significant. How about Eastern? They will, it may be assumed, be pittingElectras against Capital's Comets on such routes to the south as New York and Washington to Atlanta and New Orleans aswell as on the hotly contested New York to Washington run. They could, as American might, wait until they could put theirbig jets (DC-8s) on the southern routes, bearing in mind that Capital will probably concentrate their Comets on the northernroutes at first. The Cornet may perhaps not prove as much a challenge to Eastern as it might to American—except on theNew York to Washington run—though Eastern may well be worried if Capital, under the Capital-National interchange, putComets on to Eastern's prized Washington to Miami route. So far as T.W.A. and Delta Golden Arrow competition isconcerned, Eastern may have to look in addition to such sectors as Washington and New York to Houston. The latter, however,are longer hauls which may be primarily fought out by the big jets. It would, it seems, be even more significant if Eastern wereto buy medium-jets than if American were to do so. However, National, Western and Braniff are especially worthyof attention when trying to assess what orders from whom would amount to a swing in favour of the jet for medium-hauls. AlthoughNational operate interchange services with Capital between Washington and Miami, they may have to compete with Cometson the New York to Philadelphia and Washington routes. T.W.A. or Delta Golden Arrow competition may be felt on these routesalso; but National's main service is to the south, for which route TABLE 2 Aerodromes Atlanta ; Chicago (O'Hare) Dallas Denver Los Angeles MiamiMinneapolis New OrleansNew York (Idlewi PittsburghSt. Louis ... Salt Lake City San Francisco Seattle Tulsa Washington id) Runway length (ft) 7.860 8,000 7,750 10,050 8,560 9,4006.500 7,0009,420 7,50010,015 8.300 8,870 8,500 10,000 6,740 Altitude (ft) 1,024 657 483 5,331 125 S.L. 840 S.L.S.L. 1,168 558 4,220 S.L. 416 674 S.L. Temp. (deg C) 30 27 32 29 28 31 27 31 28 27 32 33 21 23 32 30 MaximumPermissible Take-off wt (Ib) 152,000 152,500 152,500 145,500 152,500 152,500140,500 148,000152,500 149,400152.500 136,500 152,500 152,500 152,500 146,000 Landing wt (Ib) 113,000 113,000 113,000 113,000 113.000 113.000105.500 113,000113,000 113,000113,000 113,000 113,000 113,000 113,000 113,000 TABLE J N' York to Chicago Chicago to Los Angs. Chicago to S. Fr'isco. N' York to Dallas Dallas to S. Fr'isco. Wsh'ton to Chicago N' York to Pittsburgh Chicago to Minn. N' York to Miami N' York to Wsh'ton Sector distance, st. miles Diversion aerodrome Diversion distance, st. miles 730 Detroit 220 1,746 Fresno 202 1,863 Fresno 170 1.380Houston 240 1,474 Fresno 170 600 Detroit 220 319 Washington 180 350 Milwaukee 300 1,091 Tampa 205 213 Philadelphia 130 85 per cent sector wind (-ve = head wind) m.p.h. Diversion wind (-ve = headwind) m.p.h. Maximum permissible take-off weight Ib Maximum permissible landing weight Ib Take-off weight required Ib Landing weight required b Payload (limited by capacity) Ib Fuel on arrival over destination Cruising altitude Operation against "85 per cent Annual Wind" Ib ft m.p.h.-t.a.s. -72 152,500 113,000 125 600104,200 19 100 12,900 23,500 533 -54 152,500 113,000 151,500 105,000 19,100 13,700 23,500 533 -54 152,500 113,000 152,500104,400 19,100 13,10024,600 533 -77 152,500 113,000 143,900105,000 19,100 14,00023,500 533 -53 152,500 113,000 143,500104,000 19,100 12,70023,500 533 -72 146,000 113,000 122,400104,000 19,100 12,80023,500 533 -76 152,500 113,000 114,100 103,000 19,100 11,700 23,500 533 -49 152,500 105,500 116,700 105,200 19,100 13,900 23,500 533 -52 152,500 113,000 134.100 104,300 19,100 13,000 23,500 533 -77 152,500 113.000 110.300 101,900 19,100 10,600 23,500 533 Operation against 50 per cent sector wind (-ve = headwind) m.p.h. Take-off weight required Ib Total fuel load before starting engines Ib Total fuel consumed Ib Block time. I.S.A. + 10 deg C. hr-min Block speed m.p.h. "50 per cent Annual Wind" with 70 per cent Capacity Payload (t3,350 Ib) -49 118,500 32,400 21,400 1-52 391 -39 143,200 57.100 45,400 3-56 -39 145.800 59,700 48,400 4-16 447 48 135,300 49,200 37,200 3-14 426 -33 135,200 49,100 38.300 3-20 443 -49 115,100 29,000 18,200 1-37 371 -47 107,400 21,300 11,5001-01 314 -36 110,200 24,100 12,100 1-05 323 -25 125.900 39,800 28,800 2-31 434 -48 103.800 17,700 8,900 0-47 272
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
