1969 was truly the pinnacle of US aerospace industry - Concord, Boeing 747 and Apollo 11 all happened during this year.

ceejayoz 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The Concorde wasn't made in the US. It was a UK/France partnership.

	▲	d_silin 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		My bad! Global aerospace industry then.

▲

AnimalMuppet 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Concorde wasn't the US aerospace industry.

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

mrcwinn 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is such an absurd statement. What US aerospace has created post 1969 is nothing short of remarkable in comparison. (And we can be proud of the Apollo era too.)

▲

rayiner 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Today’s airliners cruise slower than a 747.

	▲	dcrazy 22 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		For very rational economic reasons, underpinned by the same fundamental physical principle that makes my car more fuel-efficient doing 60 instead of 85.
	▲	rootusrootus an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Not due to any technical limitation, and that is just one single metric.
	▲	decimalenough an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		But they do so much more efficiently, and the speed difference is minimal (Boeing 747-8 cruises at 706 mph, 787 Dreamliner at 690 mph).

▲

A_D_E_P_T 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> This is such an absurd statement.

Oh come on, it's hardly "absurd."

> What US aerospace has created post 1969 is nothing short of remarkable in comparison. (And we can be proud of the Apollo era too.)

What are you referring to?

If you want to chart progress over time, consider this: In 1919, people were still flying biplanes and civilian aviation barely existed. Fifty years later, in 1969, you've got the 747 -- consider the progress made over those fifty years! Fifty years from then, in 2019, you've still got the 747 -- alongside, as the article notes, smaller and less remarkable aircraft "that are more efficient, but far less majestic and memorable."

So what, pray tell, is so remarkable?

▲

Waterluvian 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The onboard WiFi was terrible prior to 1970.

	▲	rbanffy 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		And no internet access!

▲

ReptileMan 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The efficiency and the safety. Modern planes are disgustingly safe to the point that hull loss is almost unheard of. For 50 years the industry has optimized for safety and fuel efficiency. And the modern machines are marvels in that.

▲

rbanffy 3 hours ago | parent [-]

True, but still incremental improvements over proven designs - maybe a sign of very strict safety standards making new designs and differentiation more expensive than just the development.

	▲	aunty_helen 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Or more likely, that’s exactly how you make incredibly safe systems. Not by introducing clean sheet unproven designs but by taking what works and improving any deficiencies over and over again.