In response to your reply to Bill Combs’ whinge…

It is not boring shit.

Bill Combs should perhaps read something else, like that Indian guy who uses ChatGPT to copy-and-paste stuff about planes on Quora and beg for likes.

When you do post stuff on here, I am always pleased, and it is always interesting, original and thought-provoking. It gives a completely different point of view on aviation to anything else that I read.

Thank you for doing it.

Modern planes being limited to 6,000 feet would make sense: that must be why I never seem to be high enough to see the edge of the flat earth.

You don’t see those air intakes (and the compressors just to the rear of them, under the sheet metal)((B-707, DC-8 (chin), et al)) nowadays because modern airliners are altitude-limited to 6,000 feet (1,828,000 millimeters) and don’t really need the cabin to be pressurized. It’s a way to reduce complexity and costs to the airlines. Instead these pilots hand out bags of peanuts. And blankies. Solved.

Bill, that’s so kind of you.

Not even “remotely” interesting? Damn.

I dunno. Maybe if Google hadn’t banned me from its advertising platform (for reasons it refused to disclose), and I could make even a dime from this site, I’d have a stronger motivation to put together the kind of quality posts that even Bill Combs would enjoy.

Until then, more boring shit.

Sorry – I have a Q, so I’ll put it in here and hope for an A, since, understandably, there isn’t a comments section under the Express Blog.

In the graphic for the “Remembering the 707” article, there’s a picture of an engine and a wing.

There’s a hole in the front of the pylon, above the engine intake. I don’t think I’ve ever noticed anything like that on a modern jet. And I can’t think what it could be for. I’m really intrigued – please could you tell me what it is?