PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - More KC-46A woes....
View Single Post
Old 31st May 2016, 13:14
  #451 (permalink)  
sandiego89
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 56
Posts: 1,062
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by evansb
Quote post #442: "The first time Boeing has really fumbled the ball in the post-war airline market".

Really? Perhaps I missed the sarcasm..




The Stratocruiser was larger than the Douglas DC-6 and Lockheed Constellation and cost more to buy and operate. Its reliability was poor, chiefly due to problems with the four 28-cylinder Pratt & Whitney Wasp Major radial engines and their four-blade propellers. Only 55 Model 377s were built for airlines, along with the single prototype.

Boeing skipped the development and marketing of an interim turboprop airliner, but it still took Boeing 10 years to recover and ultimately excel in the commercial airliner market. I recall a Boeing product development department slogan in the mid 1950's, "Life is too short for propellers"..

Not sure how relevant a cut and past of the Stratocruiser wiki page is to the KC-46 unless you just want to cite a Boeing "failure", but not sure I would call the Stratorcruiser "fumbling the ball" badly in the commercial field which with other programs we see gross cost escalations, major time delays, high operating costs and teething problems. Boeing was producing bombers as fast as they could at the time, and saw an opportunity to make a commercial derivative of the C-97/KC-97. It did not sell to well as it was not economical, there was a limited market, a glut of cheaper airframes, and as you say had troublesome engines. I see the Stratocruiser as a niche jumbo (for its era), that did not make economic sense. Perhaps a Concorde or A-380 type niche. Did what it was designed to do, but not a huge seller when there were cheaper alternatives.


The C-97 and KC-97 did just fine with over 800 built, but the airframe was really not what the airlines needed at the time.


Boeing was producing bombers and transports as fast as they could at the time: B-29, B-50, C/KC-97, B-47, B-52, and was a minor player in the commercial filed, so not sure I agree that it took them a decade "to recover" from the Stratocruiser. Recover from what? A few years later Boeing made the brilliant move with the Dash 80, which became the KC-135 and the 707.


If we want to press the American football analogy, I would chalk up the Stratocruiser as an "incomplete pass" with a play you never really expected to win the game with.
sandiego89 is offline