Originally Posted by
Hadrian35
^^^^^^^Uh huh. So instead of making a truly new fuel efficient aircraft. We'll just milk the old one cause it's easier. That's what the american auto industry does!^^^^^^
Yeah, it is. And so are people that use a Ford Fairlane to get to work... you've got something wrong with your brain if you think that's a suitable vehicle to commute in. Buff it with a fine cloth and drag it out for a show. Preserving the past doesn't mean living in it.
No offence, but I don't think you fully understand the difference between the auto and aviation industry.
Like i said, it is wrong to make 1 for 1 comparison between the auto industry and the aviation industry. The economies of scale factor works much stronger in the aviation sector. This is the reason why they have such long production. Drive down fixed cost and unit cost. In addition, the amount of investment and long lead times required to build a plane from scratch means it is in the interest of the manufacturer to extend the life of the aircraft model as much as possible. If the 747 was a dinosaur, it would not have lasted for so long until now. It is not, and I repeat, it is NOT a Ford Fairlane. If the fuel cost were lower than what it is now, it is quite likely the 747 will find more buyers.
These factors also work in the auto industry, but not to the extent as the aviation industry. There is also the factor regarding fashion and taste that is not really a relevant factor for planes. Car models may go "out of style" due to changing trends in consumer tastes. In comparsion, "taste" has little to do with airline preferences, but efficiency is the top factor to consider.