Today I found this Time Magazine story.  From 1966, it describes Harding Lawrence’s 1st year of tenure as CEO of Braniff International.  Now, I know I have put quite a bit of Braniff into this blog so far but that should wind down soon.

 

Harding Lawrence is often reviled as a man who “wrecked” Braniff.  Fact says differently and this story gives a great hint or two as to his genius in operating an airline.  For one, Lawrence took his experiences operating jets at Continental and severely raised the utilization rate at Braniff.   Even in modern days that would be sharp.

 

He also introduced color and life into flying.  He brought a hint of romance and a dash of allure to flying that, until that time, had not been expressed his way. 

 

I’m in possession of annual financial reports on Braniff from 1968 to 1980. If profit is the best metric for measuring Braniff’s decisions and choices, let’s look at the facts. Since the 1968 report has a 5 year review in it going back to 1964. Harding Lawrence and his changes began in 1965.
 

Net income:
1965: $9.5 Million
1966: $17.8 Million
1967: $4.7 Million
1968: $10.4 Million
1969: $6.2 Million
1970: ($2.6 Million) Loss
1971: $0.46 Million
1972: $17.1 Million
1973: $23.1 Million
1974: $26.1 Million
1975: $16.0 Million
1976: $26.3 Million
1977: $36.4 Million
1978: $45.2 Million
1979: ($.04 Million) Loss
1980: ($.13 Million) Loss

 

I would point out that some of those numbers would be a credit to many airlines today.

 

Some other interesting facts are:
 

1) Going from #8 in ontime peformance in 1965 to #1 in 1969.
 

 

2) When Braniff (by Harding Lawrence’s decision) originally ordered the 747, they ordered 2. However, in light of the economic downturn as delivery neared, Braniff (Lawrence) took delivery of one (N601BN) and sold the second (originally N602BN and painted green). That one 747’s utilization was a highly profitable 15 hours per day.

3) Fleet composition in 1964 was 52 planes of which there were 6 different types and of which only 2 types were jets. In 1969, there were 72 airplanes of which there were 6 different types and all were jets. In 1975, There were 81 planes of which 69 were B727’s, 1 a 747 and 11 were DC-8’s.

4) The Braniff route system in 1965 was largely a north-south system with some extensions east-west. In 1975, the route system was balanced with routes traveling from east coast to west coast and from the south to the northeast, northern midwest and even the northwest.

 

5) In 1974 and 1975, Braniff experienced domestic traffic growth rates of 10.9% and 6.6% respectively compared to industry metrics of 2.4% and 1.5% percent. In those same years, Braniff’s fleet utilization rate exceeded the industry standard by a full hour / day.

 

6) Some examples of routes applied for and received by Braniff post 1978 deregulation: DFW–LAX, ATL–MIA, DFW–LAS, DFW–LGW.

 

7) 1979 Trans-Pac routes were instituted with some examples being Los Angeles to Guam and Seoul with follow on services to Hong Kong and Singapore.

 

8. 1979 Trans-Atlantic routes were instituted with some examples being DFW to London, Amsterdam, Brussels, Frankfurt and Paris and similar Boston routes to Amsterdam, Brussels, Frankfort and Paris.

 

Now, I realize that, unlike many opinions on Braniff decisions, I’m actually encumbered with facts. The facts I’ve given do not portray an orgy of poor decision making and egotistical fluff. They actually portray a profitable, growth oriented airline focused on service, right sized fleets and a route system that even today would be enviable.

Further, just the net income figures for Braniff serve to paint a much more fair picture of Harding Lawrence. It certainly disabuses a person of the idea that Braniff management was a bunch of huckleberries flailing around. In fact, it paints of picture of profit, growth and sound financial management for most of Lawrence’s tenure (almost 15 years) and it certainly is a credit to management and their decisions
 

That said, he gambled on deregulation (no more so than many others) and he lost.  The odds were probably in his favor but odds aren’t a guarantee.  He was definitely a man of contradictions at times and definitely was possessed of some idiosyncracies too.  All told, though, I consider him the forgotten titan of the airline industry.

Filed under: Airline Fleets by ajax
4 Comments »

John Travolta owns a Boeing 707-138B.  It’s a gorgeous airplane painted in QANTAS colors, the airline that ordered and operated the very airplane he owns. 

 

What’s more interesting, to me, is that this airplane also was owned by Braniff International.  Braniff bought it and used it to operate US Armed Forces MAC flights to Southeast Asia.    The Boeing 707-138 was one of the many semi-custom airplanes Boeing built for special needs customers.  In QANTAS’ case, they needed range above anything else and Boeing shortened the fuselage of their standard 707 by 10 feet thereby reducing the weight and increasing the range.

 

Braniff also was a Boeing “special needs” customer.  They were the only airline to operate the Boeing 707-227 which basically combined the more powerful engines of a the 707-320 “Intercontinental” with the fuselage and wing of the 707-120.   Braniff operated flights to several high altitude airports in South America and used these “custom” jets to start jet service there.  They were the fastest of all the 707 jets and only 5 were ever built with only 4 being delivered (the first one crashed while on an acceptance flight.) 

 

 

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
8 Comments »

During World War II, the US Government was terrified that Boeing and its factories would be bombed. When the B-29 bomber began to be manufactured, the government could no longer stand the perceived risk and insisted that Boeing Plant Two be covered in netting. Boeing took the orders a bit farther and created an entire neighborhood on top of their plant made of canvas, netting and paint. You can see it here.

 

 

It’s actually difficult at first glance to spot the plant but then you realize there is a neighborhood with roads terminating at odd angles to other roads and it is right on top of the airport.

 

 

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

This story is on the Aviation Blog of the Dallas Morning News.  In short, Delta has decided to charge $50 for the 2nd checked bag on their flights starting shortly.  Many airlines are now charging fees for the first checked bag as well.

 

This is just bad, bad form.  While I certainly agree that an airline can, and perhaps should, charge fees for various services, those fees should be charged on amenities not basic services.  Carrying baggage on a flight is, in the US, a basic service.  This just makes them more vulnerable to LCC superstars such as Southwest Airlines.  Southwest has been using a great “No Fees” ad campaign in their strong markets with great success and I suspect that these fees for basic services will be the issues that drive fliers away from their chosen legacy carriers. 

 

Let’s see . . . my choice is to fly AA and pay fees for a checked bag and enjoy a high probability of a delayed flight or I can fly SWA and expect reasonable comfort (often on the same type of airplane), 2 bags checked for free, generally lower prices and friendly service.   Yeah, hard choice isn’t it?

 

Starting this year, I made a decision that I would no longer buy air travel using frequent flier miles as a decision point.  It’s too hard to redeem the points and now legacy airlines are charging ever increasing fees to redeem them.   Why bother?  I think you now get more value by shopping for the low price and schedule that fits.

Filed under: Airline Service by ajax
No Comments »

The Runway Girl blog just posted this report on SAAB, Embaer and China with respect to the growing demand for turboprops. 

 

It’s *very* interesting to me that Embraer has begun studies on a new family of turboprop aircraft.  This is an industry they cut their teeth on and many may still remember their small commuter aircraft from the 80’s and early 90’s. 

 

The report takes note that most demand for turboprop aircraft is currently in Europe and Asia.  However, it seems like there will be rising demand here in the US over the next 2 years.  Horizon Airlines, the commuter feeder for Alaska Airlines is phasing out its older DH-8-200 aircraft in favor of an all Q400 (really a DH-8-400 Quiet) fleet.   Also, Continental now owns several Q400 aircraft (and has orders for more) that are operating out of Newark with great success. 

 

The real demand will begin when legacy airlines who contract with regionals (Mesa, Pinnacle, ASA, ExpressJet, Air Wisconsin, etc) ask for turboprops and better revenue.  My guess is that Delta/Northwest will lead here but it might be Continental.  American Airlines and United will be followers, not leaders in this if I’m guessing right.

 

The economics of operating these aircraft on short hops and commuter routes is just too good to ignore and even if oil does drop below $100, it will never be $30 a barrel again. 

 

Filed under: Airline Fleets by ajax
No Comments »

If you are worried about losing your luggage on a trip, here is a travel hint that virtually everyone can do easily.

 

Got a digital camera?  Take a photo of your suitcase (front and side view) in the sunlight.  Make a note of the brand and, if available, model of your suitcase.  (You’d be surprised at how few people know this stuff.)  Then print out your luggage photos on a piece of paper with your luggage make and model.  Put something that will help identify it visually on the outside of the bag.  An odd coloured strap or tag would do.  Put a copy of your travel itinerary in a plastic sleeve INSIDE your luggage.

 

Buy a TSA luggage lock.  Almost everyone thinks you can’t lock your luggage anymore.  Wrong.  Many stores such as Brookstone, The Container Store, etc sell a TSA Lock.  The TSA luggage lock can be opened by TSA personnel only with a special key.  This makes your luggage less of a target for dishonest baggage handlers.   I own 3 of these locks and I’ve noticed that when I use them, it seems like the TSA very rarely goes through my luggage as well. 

 

Carry your luggage info with you on the airplane.  When you land, particularly in a foreign country, if your luggage is lost, a baggage agent will kiss you and praise you for having  photos, description and identifying marks for him to go by as well as a tag sd airport transport.  Make their job easy and they’ll find your bag quickly.

 

Tens of thousands of pieces of luggage that were separated from their owners at London Heathrow Airport last spring have been either sold or burned beause there was NO WAY OF IDENTIFYING THE BAG AND RETURNING IT TO THE CUSTOMER.  This luggage had no bag tags and nothing inside the luggage to tell anyone who it belonged to. 

 

 

Filed under: Travel Hints by ajax
No Comments »

Another piece of trivia.   The B-52 bomber, conceived of and built in the 1950’s by Boeing as the biggest bomber ever in the US Air Force, has 8 engines producing a total max thrust of 136,000lbs.  The Boeing 777-300ER has 2 engines producing 230,000lbs of thrust or about twice as much as the B-52.   One GE90-115 engine on the 777 can move enough air to fill the New Orleans SuperDome in just 1 minute and its outer diameter is roughly the same size as that of the DC-9 fuselage.

 

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
2 Comments »

I got asked today what airline(s) I thought might be in real trouble.  Thinking about it for a few hours, I’ve come up with a sort of “death watch” list.

 

First on my list is Midwest.  They just announced they’re grounding their MD-80 aircraft and, as a result, cutting several important routes while expanding their codeshare with Northwest Airlines (who now owns a “passive” 47% stake in Midwest.)

 

Giving up routes such as Milwaukee – Los Angeles does not bode well.  With only Boeing 717 aircraft, they have limited themselves to routes that are “heartland” oriented.  For instance, the 717 can’t make it from MKE to LAX.  It can fly from Kansas City to Los Angeles (that route stays for now) but who wants to fly from MKE to LAX via MCI (MCI stands for Mid Continent International by the way)?  The airline business is, first and foremost, a network game and Midwest just cut 40% of its network putting itself below the critical mass in my opinion.

 

The proposed merger with Airtran would have saved them but they made a deal with the devil (Northwest) and Northwest has no interest in Midwest surviving really. 

 

Next up is Frontier.  Their hub is Denver and they have already cut back their focus cities.  While their fleet is new and fuel efficient, part of their business model counted on being the only LCC (Low Cost Carrier) game in town.  Not so true anymore. 

 

They have United Airlines above them as a legacy carrier operating a substantial hub in Denver and offering a nicely segmented set of seat choices and a global frequent flier program.  Below them is Southwest Airlines.  Southwest has entered that market with a vengeance and contrary to denials on te part of Southwest, it is crystal clear they intend to put Frontier out of business.  Much of Southwest’s growth has been focused on Denver and their CEO has already stated their intention to put more capacity into that city.  Denver can support two airlines, not one.  Since Frontier is already in bankruptcy, they’re my pick for going away. 

 

The only saviour is an airline that fits into their network and I can’t identify one that really meshes well with both their route network and their fleet. 

 

My third pick is Virgin America.  This is an airline that doesn’t quite know what it wants to be.  On the one hand, they want to be a trans-continental, high value, high service airline.  On the other hand, they want to be perceived as the west coast version of Jet Blue.   Trans-continental flights can’t make money using the equipment they have (Airbus A319/320) and their base, SFO (San Francisco) can’t support a real hub operation with good traffic given the competition they have from both legacy carriers and established LCC’s.

 

 

Filed under: Death Watch by ajax
No Comments »

Read this blog entry first.

 

This press release from Virgin America came out this morning:

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/080728/clm051.html?.v=101

 

It says:

SAN FRANCISCO, July 28 /PRNewswire/ — Virgin America, the California-based airline that is on a mission to make flying good again, today announced that guests now have a new option called “Main Cabin Select” (MCS), in addition to First Class and Main Cabin service currently available on every Virgin America flight. The new service is taking Main Cabin to the next level by offering guests the greatest available legroom within the existing Main Cabin configuration, at 38-inches of seat pitch in the exit row and in the bulkhead, as well as a host of perks that every traveler loves.
(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20080123/LAW179LOGO-b )

“Our guests expect an upscale experience for less and they’ve been very enthusiastic about features like our on-demand menu and in-flight entertainment platform. We’ve responded by offering a new service option that combines many popular elements of our Main Cabin experience with the other premium services all travelers want,” said Virgin America President and CEO David Cush.

Main Cabin Select service will offer:

— Complimentary food, cocktails, and beverages from the full in-flight menu, via the airline’s unique touch-screen food ordering system

— All-access pass to the Red In-flight Entertainment(TM) system’s countless on-demand entertainment options, including premium TV and films (currently live TV, videogames, Google Maps, MP3s and music videos are complimentary for every class of service)

— 38-inches of seat pitch
  — A dedicated overhead bin space for luggage

In addition to special features in the air, MCS also offers guests premium services before leaving the ground:

— Priority check-in at airports
  — Priority security screening
  — Priority aircraft boarding

“MCS is for the business or leisure traveler who wants a more streamlined boarding process, a spacious, custom-designed leather seat, an unlimited all-access pass to the most extensive in-flight entertainment library in the skies, and the ability to order cocktails, food and snacks right from their seatback video touch-screen or remote control,” added Cush. “In short, this is for the traveler who wants an upscale experience for far less than what they would pay for business class on someone else.”

Virgin America’s premium entertainment options includes a 25-film library with latest releases like “Ironman,” “Hancock,” and “Smart People,” as well as premium TV like Showtime’s “The Tudors” and NBC Universal’s “The Office.”

MCS will be available for purchase starting Sept. 15, 2008, for flights from mid-October 2008 on.

Virgin America’s brand new planes offer guests mood lighting, custom-designed leather seats and the Red In-flight Entertainment(TM) system which allows guests to control their on-board travel experience. Guests can order food, watch one of 25 movies, satellite TV, play a videogame, create a personal play list from over 3,000 MP3 music tracks onboard or instant message with other guests – all from a 9-inch video touch-screen and qwerty keyboard/remote control at every seat.

 

While I have other issues with Virgin America and their business model, it’s interesting that this came out at the time it did.

 

One other item of note: David Cush, Virgin America’s CEO, used to work for American Airlines as CFO until recently.

Filed under: Airline Seating by ajax
No Comments »

In the late 1920’s, a small airline named Pacific Air Transport decided to sell itself to another airline.  One advisor talked them into selling to Boeing Air Transport.  The Boeing Aircraft Company owned its own airline at the time (Boeing Air Transport) which later became a little enterprise named United Airlines.  When Bill Boeing agreed to buy Pacific Air Transport, he did the right thing in buying *all* the stock as opposed to just buying a controlling interest and forcing the sale.  The last 2 shares purchased were owned by an Oregon prostitute who asked for and got over $550 / share for them. 

 

Here is a photo of the first Boeing Air Transport airplane model:  Click Here.

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

Not you, the consumer. Oh, we know your type these days. You buy on price and frequency. Next is loyalty to your frequent flyer plan (and some of you even buy based upon gathering your FF miles ahead of price.) You aren’t going to change. You never really have and you never really will. You are the girlfriend/boyfriend who promised to change and never did.

 

It’s time for airlines to fly smart. No, really, it is.

 

Southwest Airlines pioneered the modern strategy that most airlines try to emulate in one form or another. They have a single type of aircraft (Boeing 737) and trade high load factors for high utilization of aircraft and crews. It’s a model that works for them and even for some others. Legacy airlines have adopted a modified model that included narrowing the fleet types which allows not only fewer costs in equipment but also permits airlines to use their staff across a broader range of aircraft.

 

But it appears (to me at least) that that strategy in the current economic climate is going to prove flawed. The truth is, the airline industry tends to have to re-invent itself every 30 years or so. That reinvention has taken the form of a revolutionary change in aircraft or, in the case of the 70’s, a new regulatory climate. Traditionally, it’s aircraft.

 

One of the criticisms of the proposed Delta / Northwest merger is the mish-mash of fleet types they’ll have. The CEO’s of both Delta and Northwest have responded that it in fact appears to be a big advantage in the merger because it will permit them to “right-size” each city pair with the proper aircraft. What this means is that with different fleet types comprimised of aircraft capable of varying efficiencies and loads allows them to fit the right aircraft to the right flight.

 

For example, a flight from Atlanta to Nashville might typically carry an average of 90 passengers per flight and Delta might be using a Boeing 737 for the flight segment that carries about 130 passengers. That means their using a new (high capitol costs but more fuel efficient) airplane to fly the route with an average load factor of 69%. It’s a short flight segment so the fuel efficient engines of the 737 don’t play as big a role in savings as they would on a longer flight. Post Merger, Delta may put a Northwest DC-9-40 on the segment that carries about 110 passengers. Suddenly the capital costs are extremely low (the airplanes were paid for years and years ago and the costs to operate it are maintenance and periodic refurbishment), the load factor is now 81% and flight has about similar fuel and labor costs. What’s more, that 737 can now fly on flight segments with average loads that are much closer to its capacity and which provide greater revenue yields as well.

 

More airlines in the US need to re-examine their fleet strategies. Almost all flights being flown by regional jets of 50 seats or less *lose* money now. Particularly when they are used for “long and thin” routes such as DFW / CLE (Cleveland). An airline of real size (US Legacy carriers but also LCC carriers such as SWA, Jet Blue and Airtran) can benefit from a diversified fleet.

 

There are countless “shuttle” type routes that could yield far more profit by using new, advanced turbo-prop aircraft such as the Bombardier Q400 and ATR-72. There is no rational justification to use regional jets on short segment routes when compared to these advanced turbo-props for instance.

 

An airline could, for instance, fly a Q400 on flights between Dallas and Austin offering 70 seats per flight and make money by filling only half of them per flight. Time flying between cities would be virtually the same as Southwest Airlines’ Boeing 737 and seating would be about as comfortable. The capital costs, maintenance, fuel and labor costs for that aircraft are all significiantly less than the 737 but offer about the same comfort and convenience.

 

Reduced fleet types made sense in the 80’s and 90’s because airlines were focused on the hub and spoke model. It allowed an airline to use aircraft interchangeably and since fuel costs were extraordinarily low, load factors could be as low as 60% and an airline could still make money.

 

Today, airlines need aircraft that are more pin-point appropriate for their routes. Short segment shuttles should be flown by Q400’s while longer segments with greater density should be handled by 737s and A320s. Large trunk routes should be served by Boeing 757s, Airbus A320/321s and even smaller widebody aircraft such as the Boeing 767 and Airbus A330. Longer, thin routes should be served by the upcoming Boeing 787 and A350-900 aircraft while long, high density routes will be better served by the Boeing 777, Airbus A350-1000, Boeing 747-800 and Airbus A380.

 

There will be increased demand for a new kind of aircraft. One that is a re-birth of the original DC-9 and Boeing 737. A 100 to 120 seat aircraft that can fly 25% more efficiently over route segments of 500 to 1000 nautical miles. Bombardier (Canada), Embraer (Brazil), Mitsubishi (Japan), AVIC (China) and Sukhoi (Russia) are all working on such aircraft or already have such aircraft available for order. Boeing and Airbus don’t.

 

The days of flying a regional jet such as an Embraer ERJ-145 or Bombardier CRJ-200 are over. They cannot fly profitably short or long, thin routes anymore as they offer, at best, only 50 seats and a product that is quite unpleasant for trip durations over 1 hour.

 

Legacy airlines no longer can afford to “sit” on routes to protect them for use at later date. All of the capacity cuts made so far are squarely aimed at routes that do not generate sufficient revenue to justify their existence. To serve those routes in the future, they’ll require an aircraft whose economics ENSURE profit.

 

That means airlines will seek to merge and become bigger because size permits greater fleet diversity and fleet diversity means more revenue per passenger. Even airlines such as Southwest, Airtran and Frontier will have to begin considering the value of “right sizing” their fleet to their customers. To some degree, Airtran does that with their mixed fleet of Boeing 717/737 aircraft.

 

Greg

Filed under: Airline Fleets by ajax
No Comments »

Not first class.  Not really.  To misquote the movie Jerry McGuire, today’s first class is really a whole different lifestyle, not just a more comfortable seat.

 

It’s a whole different show in coach, however.  Just for kicks, I looked up the seat pitch on a Braniff 727 for coach in the 70’s.  Today’s seat pitch on a legacy carrier is about 32″ with an inch variance.  For a 6’2″, 260lbs man, like myself, that means a pretty uncomfortable ride.  Braniff’s seat pitch was 38″.  (in the future, I’ll provide some cites for such information but I looked that up 3 or 4 months ago and I can’t remember where I found it now.) That missing 6″ drives me crazy. 

 

The truth is, a 32″ seat pitch makes sense economically.  The average flight sector here in the US is less than 2 hours (Why do I always seem to be on 3+ hour flights?) and 32″ is plenty tolerable for 99% of us for the price and time spent in the seat.  There are even some airlines who are adopting better seats for once.  Not harder, thinner, flatter seats.  Seats that are a bit more ergonomic, better contoured and, best of all, designed in a way that a 32″ seat pitch offers just a touch more space.  Airtran’s Recaro seats on their Boeing 737-700 fleet are a great example of this. 

 

For a time, American Airlines *increased* their seat pitch from 1 to 2 inches in the late 90’s / early 00’s.  (Later reduced again post September 11, 2001 to provide a greater potential load density) I’d rate that current Airtran seat the equivalent and that means a lot coming from me.  I should also mention that Airtran offers affordable upgrades to their Business Class product priced about $40 to $80 per segment and I’ve found them quite easy to get even at the gate.

 

Delta is about to install a new seating product from Thompson that is a kind of herringone pattern that offers greater legroom, an armrest for both arms and even greater privacy.  Still more surprising is that this new seating configuration actually allows them to *increase* the seat count on an airplane.  Look for this in their international 767 airplanes first although I suspect favorable customer acceptance will cause it to show up on other airplanes in the future too.

 

I think that one day we’ll see  a greater number of choices for seating on many airlines.  It’s already starting now to some degree.  Airlines such as United Airlines and Jet Blue and US Airways have started selling seat locations that have greater seat pitch and/or favorable location(s) for slightly more premium prices.  United Airlines offers Economy Plus with greater seat pitch as a sub-section of their coach cabin and having tried it I’d say it was worth the extra $30 / segment I paid.  US Airways is selling location on existing configurations such as exit aisle seats, bulkhead seats and aisle seats all for a slight increase in price.   Jet Blue has been reconfiguring their aircraft to offer a choice in seat pitch at varying prices. 

 

Jet Blue’s model is where I expect the majority of legacy airlines will go.  Over time, new seating products such as Delta’s (described above) combined with varying seat pitches will allow the airlines to price discriminate among their customer and generally *increase* their revenue without necessarily a loss in total passenger capacity. 

 

30 years ago, the model was to price discriminate on the basis of flight convenience.  A passenger who bought far in advance paid less than an impulse buyer.  Then airlines such as American Airlines realized that an unfilled seat was lost revenue and began offering unfilled seats at prices that includes restrictions on flight times and days (convenience). 

 

Next we’ll see far greater choice in our prices based upon seat pitch, location, service, advanced purchase, travel dates and times and even based upon how much luggage you want to carry (already happening.)  My prediction is that seat choice will be the prime discriminator.  Today’s passenger most wants a decent seat and a flight that takes off and arrives on time.  The airline that provides that wins.

 

Filed under: Airline Seating by ajax
No Comments »

Right now, I’m not entirely certain which direction this blog will go.  Being an avid fan of the airline business and someone who follows the business daily, I found myself having some opinions.  Being pretty certain that my family no longer wants to hear them, I thought I could write them here.  We’ll see what happens.

 

I said I was an airline business fan which means I’m not an old aircraft fan or a warbird fan.  Mostly I’m a fan of the business and my interest in commercial aircraft comes second to that.   As you can imagine, this is not a hobby that impresses dates.

 

On the header of this blog there are 5 different photographs depicting Braniff International aircraft.  Interestingly enough, 3 of those 5 never served Braniff.  One of those that did never served in Braniff livery.  The one on the far left is a photograph of a Braniff DC-10-10 model and working from left to right the remaining aircraft are a concept of the Boeing 2707 SST in Braniff colors, a model of a Braniff L1011, the Concorde in Braniff livery and, finally, the Alexander Calder Braniff DC-8. 

 

The DC-10, L1011 and B2707 SST never served Braniff.  (Indeed, the B2707 SST never got beyond full size model mockups).  Braniff did operate the Concorde, for a short time, by “sharing” the Concorde with both British Airways and Air France.  The services operated from London and Paris to Dulles Airport (Washington D.C.) and then Braniff flew them with their crews to Dallas.  By the end of the service, tickets on the Concorde from Dallas to Washington D.C. cost a $10 premium over standard first class fares. 

 

The Calder DC-8 is my favorite Braniff aircraft.  Designed by Alexander Calder, this DC-8 served Latin American routes through the 70’s.  It was only very rarely seen in Dallas and I can only recall seeing it once myself when, I believe, it was substituted onto the DFW-HNL (Honolulu) service in place of the regular 747-100 (N601BN).  I last knew of its fate about 4 or 5 years ago when I discovered it was serving an air cargo airline out of Miami.

 

If anyone finds this blog outside of my family, I’ll be impressed.  If you do and you like it, please leave a comment. 

 

Greg

Filed under: Uncategorized by ajax
1 Comment »