747!?

Captain Slow IRL · 28-08-2008 7:51pm #1

Is it possible to get a 747 from Ireland to America? (NY in particular) What route would I have to go on to get a flight on one?!?
thanks:)

pclancy · 28-08-2008 8:28pm

Dont think any use Dublin any more except for cargo.

Get yourself over to Heathrow and theres plenty of long haul airlines that still use 747s there...

highlydebased · 28-08-2008 9:23pm

Captain Slow IRL wrote: »

Is it possible to get a 747 from Ireland to America? (NY in particular) What route would I have to go on to get a flight on one?!?
thanks:)

!!!????!!

No

Fratton Fred · 28-08-2008 9:29pm

Book Virgin from Heathrow to JFK, not sure about BA they might use the odd 777 but I'm pretty sure Virgin are all 747s.

I think the Virgin booking engine tells you what the plane is while you are booking.

Steyr · 28-08-2008 9:40pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Book Virgin from Heathrow to JFK, not sure about BA they might use the odd 777 but I'm pretty sure Virgin are all 747s.

I think the Virgin booking engine tells you what the plane is while you are booking.

Don they not "mix" it up between the 744's with A340-300 and A340-600's too?

Fratton Fred · 29-08-2008 7:37am

Steyr wrote: »

Don they not "mix" it up between the 744's with A340-300 and A340-600's too?

Possibly, I've only flown to JFK with them a few times and it has always been 747s. The last time was about 5 years ago though.

I'm pretty sure you can find out the plane on their site though, I looked at booking a flight to Florida with them and that gave the details if you click on the flight number.

OP, out of curiosity, why are you asking, do you specifically want to fly on a 747?

diverdriver · 29-08-2008 11:06am

When you sit in the middle seat, any airliner is the same.

*Kol* · 29-08-2008 1:15pm

diverdriver wrote: »

When you sit in the middle seat, any airliner is the same.

True it's the same no matter what aircraft you are on. Unless you are flying in business class there's no real difference.

Biro · 29-08-2008 1:20pm

I still prefer the 747 of any of the long haul flights I was on. BA and Virgin use them, but they mix them up as was mentioned, so check the site. They tell you what you'll be on, which is handy.
I'm going transatlantic in a month on a 757, which I'm not looking forward to. These weren't designed for that sort of trip in mind!

*Kol* · 29-08-2008 1:28pm

Biro wrote: »

I still prefer the 747 of any of the long haul flights I was on. BA and Virgin use them, but they mix them up as was mentioned, so check the site. They tell you what you'll be on, which is handy.
I'm going transatlantic in a month on a 757, which I'm not looking forward to. These weren't designed for that sort of trip in mind!

The B757 is fine for the transatlantic trip. I have done it in an MD-80 before!!

Fratton Fred · 29-08-2008 1:52pm

I've flown transatlantic on a 747, 767 and a 777. The best of the lot was star class on a First Choice airways 767.

as the previous poster said, sat in the middle of a 777 or a 747 there is zero difference between them. presuming you are flying cattle class of course.

oops, nearly forgot the BWIA tri star i flew on to trinidad. I was just glad to get off that one

highlydebased · 29-08-2008 2:24pm

Virgin Fly B744's and A343's and A346's. The 346's are savage

Steyr · 29-08-2008 2:40pm

Biro wrote: »

I'm going transatlantic in a month on a 757, which I'm not looking forward to. These weren't designed for that sort of trip in mind!

FACT they weren't, cramped feet wise!! Oh ya PICS please.:)

*Kol* · 29-08-2008 4:07pm

Its not too bad on the 757. I flew SNN-EWR then straight away EWR-LAX both on 757. Just watch the movies!

Biro · 29-08-2008 4:22pm

*Kol* wrote: »

Its not too bad on the 757. I flew SNN-EWR then straight away EWR-LAX both on 757. Just watch the movies!

I'm down the back too, which means noise! Still, I'll try to enjoy it...

Biro · 29-08-2008 4:23pm

Steyr wrote: »

FACT they weren't, cramped feet wise!! Oh ya PICS please.:)

I'll try!

Captain Slow IRL · 29-08-2008 5:41pm

Thanks, never thought of virgin.
I was looking at delta, ba, aa and us - they told me the type of plane but none were 747's (all flights incluced a stop in heathrow anyway)

Kevster · 29-08-2008 7:59pm

Being on a 747 is certainly not the same as being on a smaller sized jet. The two biggest differences are:

1) Reduced turbulence
2) Reduced feeling of being squished inside a 'tin-can'

I got a 747 from Madrid to Buenos Aires a few years ago - It was 14 hours of the best flight I have ever had and even included a refueling stop at the Canaries.

Kevin

highlydebased · 29-08-2008 8:02pm

Captain Slow IRL wrote: »

Thanks, never thought of virgin.
I was looking at delta, ba, aa and us - they told me the type of plane but none were 747's (all flights incluced a stop in heathrow anyway)

More than half LHR-JFK's are B744's, I know that for a fact

Clytus · 29-08-2008 8:46pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I've flown transatlantic on a 747, 767 and a 777. The best of the lot was star class on a First Choice airways 767.

as the previous poster said, sat in the middle of a 777 or a 747 there is zero difference between them. presuming you are flying cattle class of course.

oops, nearly forgot the BWIA tri star i flew on to trinidad. I was just glad to get off that one

Your kidding me right!!
First choice cram as many people into the planes as they can....horrible experience.

Captain Slow IRL · 30-08-2008 12:28am

Kevster wrote: »

Being on a 747 is certainly not the same as being on a smaller sized jet. The two biggest differences are:

1) Reduced turbulence
2) Reduced feeling of being squished inside a 'tin-can'

That's why I want a spin on one!

jahalpin · 30-08-2008 11:14am

*Kol* wrote: »

The B757 is fine for the transatlantic trip. I have done it in an MD-80 before!!

I flew from PHL - DUB on a US Airways 757 a few months ago and it was an experience that I would prefer not to repeat.

For a start the planes are quite old, they are very cramped and not really suited to long flights. The entertainment system is not existant and because they are not wide-bodied, you can't get up and walk around during the flight.

Virgin 747's are definately the best for long-haul

Foggy43 · 30-08-2008 12:35pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

oops, nearly forgot the BWIA tri star i flew on to trinidad. I was just glad to get off that one

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

The last regular Tristar to serve LHR. It was good training for the Emergency services! Not sure if ATC need binoculars now since it ended service. Had to make sure the gear was down from time to time.
It was replaced with a A340 but I believe was to be replaced again with a A330. I must look up what is happening in Terminal 3. Lost touch since Terminal 5.

jmayo · 30-08-2008 8:42pm

Kevster wrote: »

Being on a 747 is certainly not the same as being on a smaller sized jet. The two biggest differences are:

1) Reduced turbulence
2) Reduced feeling of being squished inside a 'tin-can'

I got a 747 from Madrid to Buenos Aires a few years ago - It was 14 hours of the best flight I have ever had and even included a refueling stop at the Canaries.

Kevin

Jsut to add to the mix the two worse flights of my life have been on 747s.
Auckland to LAX and San Fran to Heathrow so I have no desire to ever get back on one.
OP if you are stuffed in the middle beside some fairly large people it is even worse than being on a small jet. Accepted all wide bodies can give you that feeling.
There are more people, longer queues and longer waits for everything, even more people breathing the same reguritated air.

When your stuck jammed in the middle you don't get to appreciate the aesthetics of the 747.

The only nice way to fly is if the aircraft is half empty and tip for anyone flying stateside, fly on thanksgiving.
The airports are morgues and the flights are half empty

Fratton Fred · 30-08-2008 9:16pm

Clytus wrote: »

Your kidding me right!!
First choice cram as many people into the planes as they can....horrible experience.

The star class upgrade, cosidering it is only £90 return extra is a very nice way to fly. it's only available on the 767 though.

Foggy43 wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

The last regular Tristar to serve LHR. It was good training for the Emergency services! Not sure if ATC need binoculars now since it ended service. Had to make sure the gear was down from time to time.
It was replaced with a A340 but I believe was to be replaced again with a A330. I must look up what is happening in Terminal 3. Lost touch since Terminal 5.

We had an 8 hour delay going out because the windscreen fell out on landing. we ended up getting bused to a hotel for a few hours and I then ended up spending 6 hours over night waiting for a connecting flight at Port of Spain airport. Not pleasant jouney but the week spent scuba diving and drinking Stag beer more than made up for it

Gekko · 31-08-2008 12:17am

Maybe the OP wants to fly on a plane with 4 engines, as opposed to 2.

Captain Slow IRL · 31-08-2008 11:46am

Do you not pre-select your seats before the flight?

faceman · 31-08-2008 11:58am

747's look great but I reckon the 777's out do them in the noise dept etc

Davidth88 · 01-09-2008 7:02am

I have flown longhaul ( ie over the Atlantic if that still counts and other places ) down the back on

A340
B747 ( BA , AC , United , AF )
Tristars
DC10
MD11
B777
B767
B757

Ill be honest , there is little to chose between them if they are full

The first Tristar was wonderful , but it was TWA , and virtually new /empty ( I am showing my age now )I also flew Delta when they were good , the other one was ATA , OMG it was just the worst flight I have ever been on , when we took of half the lighting system in the cabin fell down , the plane was a wreck ( although the ice cream in Gander is wonderful )

The B757 was not comfortable , because of the single aisle during service you felt locked in.

I too wonder why the request to fly 747 ?
If you can go through Dublin , it cuts out the horrible INS queues .

From Dublin I have flown USAir 767 , horrible , the aircraft had peeling paint on the outside , seats that were broken, uncomfortable ..... felt unsafe because of the percieved lack of maintainance
CO 757/767 , pretty terrible, but at least felt safe, actually the 767 was quite comfortable
EI A330 , tatty , ok service , total lack of IFE ( old systems only I have not flown on the newer aircraft )

Not much to chose between them TBH

pclancy · 01-09-2008 8:13am

Feck the US, get on a Singapore Airlines A380 from Heathrow to Singapore.....BRAND NEW and gorgeous inside. Economy have some 2x4x2 across seats upstairs which was amazing and so comfortable

Plus you've got two decks to strech around on and the best economy inflight entertainment and service in the world, flight attendants cant do enough for you.

I've been on a few 747s and found them in some cases to be a bit tatty and quite noisy near the rear though im sure all planes are. DO NOT go for an emergency exit seat near the middle, the escape slides happen to live in a massive internal box ruining legroom. It all depends on when it last had its interior refitted. Check the reviews on http://www.seatguru.com/ also and see what people have been saying. The second nicest interior I've had was a pretty new China Southern 777 last year. Worst entertainment by far though, 4 tv channels with only 1 in English :O

Biro · 01-09-2008 12:43pm

The big drawback about the A330 is that the walls are curved, where as the 747 has almost straight walls. That means that the window seat you can prop your pillow against the wall and rest, but in the A330, the pillow falls between the seat and the wall due to the pronounced curve, at it's widest point next to the armrest.
Only on one 777, Premier economy with BA. Nice, £150 extra, probably only really worth it on an over night flight.

747!?

Comments