1972 or 1973 London to Los Angeles
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1972 or 1973 London to Los Angeles
Can anyone tell me about BA flights between Heathrow and LAX during the summers of 1972 and 1973? What planes would they have used?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you had a look at departedflights.com although they don't list 1972/73 they do list 1971 as it shows the following.
LHR depart 12.00
JFK arrive 14.50
JFK depart 16.15
LAX arrive 18.55
Flights operated by BOAC Super VC10.
I should imagine that B707 may well have been used on LHR to LAX by 1973 but a few years before the arrangement with Air New Zealand and the use of their DC10-30's on the route which lasted until 1979.
LHR depart 12.00
JFK arrive 14.50
JFK depart 16.15
LAX arrive 18.55
Flights operated by BOAC Super VC10.
I should imagine that B707 may well have been used on LHR to LAX by 1973 but a few years before the arrangement with Air New Zealand and the use of their DC10-30's on the route which lasted until 1979.
swavesey,
A little later than the summer but in December 1973 I travelled LHR-LAX on a BOAC B707 with a refuel stop in Winnipeg.
A little later than the summer but in December 1973 I travelled LHR-LAX on a BOAC B707 with a refuel stop in Winnipeg.
Last edited by primreamer; 24th Jan 2018 at 19:01. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: London
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
June ‘73 LHR-LAX with a stop outbound at Winnepeg - the return was non-stop although at times we had a stop at Ottawa . Due if I recall correctly to the Cabin crew union playing silly buggers again.
The transition to the ANZ DC-10 was in May 1975. I was a regular on these at the time. Prior to that BOAC (still until April 1974) and finally BA had since 1972 operated a 707, ostensibly nonstop but the westbound made an unannounced stop in Winnipeg. Prior to that, it was a VC-10 through JFK and continuing to Sydney.
BOAC at that time also operated quite a number of transatlantic charters, with 707s, trading separately as "BOAC Ltd" to appease IATA, and LAX was one of the more common destinations. These used a small pool of economy-only 707s, which also were used on scheduled services to Toronto, although strangely nowhere else.
BOAC at that time also operated quite a number of transatlantic charters, with 707s, trading separately as "BOAC Ltd" to appease IATA, and LAX was one of the more common destinations. These used a small pool of economy-only 707s, which also were used on scheduled services to Toronto, although strangely nowhere else.
the newish 747 (-136 P/W) could not make westcoast, not until the 747-236 RR came along late 70's
the ANZ/BA DC10 interchange came in mid 70's
prior to this the Super VC-10 certainly in 1971 op'd via JFK
the ANZ/BA DC10 interchange came in mid 70's
prior to this the Super VC-10 certainly in 1971 op'd via JFK
There have been various accounts of why BA did not use the 747 on Los Angeles from the start, the most convincing of which is that it was beyond range of the initial -100 models. So how come Pan Am and TWA did so ? It seems that BA standards for range were somewhat stricter than theirs.
Several accounts from Heathrow ATC of how the summer afternoon departures of the two US carriers to LAX/SFO were met with some concern, given the unreliability of the early JT9Ds, especially if on easterlies. A TWA departure off 10R was described as "Leaving by the Piccadilly Line", and a Pan Am one was said to be a "Hedge Clipper". The moment the Rolls-powered 747-200B was available to BA, the first route it was put on was LAX, and SFO was started.
I don't know how often the US carriers had to stop for fuel westbound with their 747s. Presumably this was somewhat easier for them to arrange a relief crew to be at say Las Vegas to take over, where BA stopping there would be stranded.
Several accounts from Heathrow ATC of how the summer afternoon departures of the two US carriers to LAX/SFO were met with some concern, given the unreliability of the early JT9Ds, especially if on easterlies. A TWA departure off 10R was described as "Leaving by the Piccadilly Line", and a Pan Am one was said to be a "Hedge Clipper". The moment the Rolls-powered 747-200B was available to BA, the first route it was put on was LAX, and SFO was started.
I don't know how often the US carriers had to stop for fuel westbound with their 747s. Presumably this was somewhat easier for them to arrange a relief crew to be at say Las Vegas to take over, where BA stopping there would be stranded.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just thought I would add my two pennies worth , but had to look up my log book first,
Last Sydney through the west that I operated was leaving London on the 17-7-74 and arriving back at London on the 01-08-74. The aircraft used though out the trip were both Standard and Super VC-10
Now I always thought that , at that time on a schedule basis Lax was a VC-10 destination whereas San Francisco was a B707 destination
Goodness me I just realised I am talking about a trip that took place some 44 years ago, surely I cannot be that old !!!!!!!
Last Sydney through the west that I operated was leaving London on the 17-7-74 and arriving back at London on the 01-08-74. The aircraft used though out the trip were both Standard and Super VC-10
Now I always thought that , at that time on a schedule basis Lax was a VC-10 destination whereas San Francisco was a B707 destination
Goodness me I just realised I am talking about a trip that took place some 44 years ago, surely I cannot be that old !!!!!!!
Last Sydney through the west that I operated was leaving London on the 17-7-74 and arriving back at London on the 01-08-74. The aircraft used though out the trip were both Standard and Super VC-10
Now I always thought that , at that time on a schedule basis Lax was a VC-10 destination whereas San Francisco was a B707 destination
Now I always thought that , at that time on a schedule basis Lax was a VC-10 destination whereas San Francisco was a B707 destination
The VC-10 route was London-JFK-Los Angeles-Honolulu-Fiji-Sydney. Brit312 above can probably make us all envious with entries from his log books 
.The 707 route was London-JFK-San Francisco-Honolulu-Tokyo-Hong Kong. The Sydney flights had been 707s until the late 1960s, but the Tokyo ones seem to have been 707s until the transpacific flights were given up. The Tokyo route of course was on Hong Kong licences, this was long before Cathay Pacific flew such routes.
The BOAC 707 that was lost at Mount Fuji in (1966 ?) was on this routing, many of the passengers were American, including a substantial corporate "best sales" group on a junket to Hong Kong. BOAC sold a lot of transpacific traffic from California - in fact, possibly more than over the Atlantic from there.
.The 707 route was London-JFK-San Francisco-Honolulu-Tokyo-Hong Kong. The Sydney flights had been 707s until the late 1960s, but the Tokyo ones seem to have been 707s until the transpacific flights were given up. The Tokyo route of course was on Hong Kong licences, this was long before Cathay Pacific flew such routes.The BOAC 707 that was lost at Mount Fuji in (1966 ?) was on this routing, many of the passengers were American, including a substantial corporate "best sales" group on a junket to Hong Kong. BOAC sold a lot of transpacific traffic from California - in fact, possibly more than over the Atlantic from there.
http://www.timetableimages.com/ttima...66/ba66-09.jpg
There used to be a poster here on PPrUne who was a BOAC timetable devised in the 1960s, but haven't seem him around lately.
That timetable may well be how the Mount Fuji 707 actually routed, in which case the various reports and the Wikipeda article are wrong (nothing new there). Even for a 707, LHR-SFO non-stop does seem quite a long way.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland
Age: 77
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I may be wrong but I didn't think BOAC operated LHR - SFO, wetsbound, in the very early 70s.
I seem to recall the service routed eastbound through Tokyo and then to SFO, turning round there and then back across the pacific to Tokyo and thence to LHR.
I think SFO - TYO was quite a long sector for a -436 and a refuelling stop (Guam?) may have been neccessary occasionally.
I seem to recall the service routed eastbound through Tokyo and then to SFO, turning round there and then back across the pacific to Tokyo and thence to LHR.
I think SFO - TYO was quite a long sector for a -436 and a refuelling stop (Guam?) may have been neccessary occasionally.
Last edited by finncapt; 26th Jan 2018 at 04:53.
My memory agrees with finncapt that the SFO B707 routing was eastbound via Tokyo then reverse back to LHR.
DaveReidUK is also correct that the VC10 would not have made LHR-LAX without a tech stop. In fact there was a brief period (1975 or 76 ?) when the VC10s operated LHR-LAX with a scheduled tech stop at Gander. I believe this was because of delays in getting the nonstop DC10 service up and running
DaveReidUK is also correct that the VC10 would not have made LHR-LAX without a tech stop. In fact there was a brief period (1975 or 76 ?) when the VC10s operated LHR-LAX with a scheduled tech stop at Gander. I believe this was because of delays in getting the nonstop DC10 service up and running
Agree, the BOAC sector from JFK to San Francisco had been given up by 1971, the timetable shows a connection on United. The route onwards, ultimately to Hong Kong, was doubtless worth retaining. The 707 did indeed have to get there the long way round, outward via Asia.
San Francisco to Tokyo on BOAC always routed through Honolulu rather than direct, but it was still a bit of a stretch across the western Pacific and I believe even the inaugural 707 had put in at Guam, although it was never shown in the timetable.
San Francisco to Tokyo on BOAC always routed through Honolulu rather than direct, but it was still a bit of a stretch across the western Pacific and I believe even the inaugural 707 had put in at Guam, although it was never shown in the timetable.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
References to the "707" need to distinguish between the Conway powered 707-436 and the longer ranged P & W JT3D powered 707-336B/C, of which by 1972/73 BOAC had several in passenger trim (the two 707-336Bs were specifically ordered for the new polar route from London to Tokyo via Anchorage).
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did a couple of trips on the LHR LAX route. June 74 was via Ottawa on G-AXGW 707-336
and November 74 via Calgary on G-ASZF 707-336. Cabin crew changed there but flight deck crews carried on to LA-due to union rules etc.
The other LAX route was the 591 service London/JFK/LAX and on to HNL and beyond -at that time they were always on the VC.10
and November 74 via Calgary on G-ASZF 707-336. Cabin crew changed there but flight deck crews carried on to LA-due to union rules etc.
The other LAX route was the 591 service London/JFK/LAX and on to HNL and beyond -at that time they were always on the VC.10