long-distance travel without WWII

Absent World War II and the development of long-range aircraft it spurred, how might transcontinental, but especially transoceanic travel have developed?
By the mid/late 1930's, a nasty string of crashes had begun to cool ardor for airships, but private industry perhaps lacked the resources to refine and mass-produce long range landplanes without leveraging off WWII R&D.
On the other hand, transatlantic liners had probably begun to reach their limits: in shipbuilding, every additional knot beyond 25 or 30 is exceedingly costly in terms of power required.
that being said, how would travel have developed?
 
Pan Am Airways was already operating a fleet of flying boats (various Sikorsky models mostly, iirc) prior to the war.

Boeing's 247 and later 307 (though the latter was a duel military/civil development) were fairly long ranged, and the latter had a pressurized cabin.

Edit: to be more explicit, development of long range aircraft was thus clearly in the works well before the war, and would have continued absent it.

I think things would proceed nearly as fast as OTL, with flying boats taking up much of the slack in the interim.

2nd Edit: Oh, and look up the Boeing 314 as well; Transatlantic range and used in commercial service.
 
Last edited:
WW2 caused airstrips to be built in all corners of the world resulting in an explosion of air travel throughout the world. Without WW2 the era of the flying boat would have lasted into the fifties. Flying boats and seaplanes having the advantage of not needing a landing strip in remote areas. The era of jet travel would be delayed with piston driven aircraft such Lockheed Constellation or the continuing Douglas DC series providing service likely into well into the sixties.
 
Crossing on the Pan-Am clippers cost an order of magnitude more than taking a ship. Oh and about the Boeing 307-IIRC it was developed after the failure of the DC-4E, a transatlantic landplane which proved unaffordable to the airlines. Mass-producing long range aircraft during the war allowed their kinks to be worked out, and crucially it drove down the cost of subsequent development and production.
Without wartime experiences, people would have less confidence in aircraft, and important navigational instruments such as radar would remain crude.
I see at least a decade's delay.
PM-instructive point about the airstrips.
 
Crossing on the Pan-Am clippers cost an order of magnitude more than taking a ship.

Flying domestically in the US costs an order of magnitude more than taking the train or bus today. Flying survives, because for people and things like mail time is considered valuable. This, despite unconstitutional TSA searches and lousy food.

Boeing put out a publication a few years back that noted (IIRC) that 90% of international cargo moves by air in terms of value, but only 1% of international cargo moves by air in terms of weight. That's simply the reality of air travel.
 
Flying domestically in the US costs an order of magnitude more than taking the train or bus today. Flying survives, because for people and things like mail time is considered valuable. This, despite unconstitutional TSA searches and lousy food.

Boeing put out a publication a few years back that noted (IIRC) that 90% of international cargo moves by air in terms of value, but only 1% of international cargo moves by air in terms of weight. That's simply the reality of air travel.

Amtrak Syracuse - Chicago, round trip 136$
USAir Syracuse - Chicago, round trip 118$
(fairly random dates in January picked)

These are equivalent prices, not 10 different
 
Amtrak Syracuse - Chicago, round trip 136$
USAir Syracuse - Chicago, round trip 118$
(fairly random dates in January picked)

These are equivalent prices, not 10 different

(Shrug) I've typically seen much higher plane fares than that. Perhaps it is where I fly from (Seattle, and formerly Pittsburgh, Boston). I normally expect to pay at least $500 for a round trip to anywhere I wouldn't just drive to.
 
Helium filled zeppelin airships would survive into the late 1940's.
Flying boats, eventually jet propelled, into the late 1970's
Scheduled ocean liners a little longer than OTL
The US would maintain effective passenger rail.
Landplanes would eventually replace flyingboats for intercontinental flight, but rail might retain dominance for inter-city medium distance travel
 
Flying boats get larger and aren't phased out until the late '50s. Longer on feeder and might still be used in the present day for some smaller destinations (like in the Caribbean or Pacific). The Jet Age doesn't get going until the '70s.

As for airships you need to do alot more than remove WWII for them. Even keeping the Hindenburg from crashing isn't enough. Firstly Germany can't be the only country with an airship program. The US and the UK programs are the best candidates. The American program would be mostly military (Navy), Goodyear would team up with an airline (probally not PanAm) to run a passenger/mail service. They might focus on Pacific routes and leave the Atlantic to DELAG/DZR.

There is a catch-22. The only way for airships to be more widely used would be to avoid diasters like the R101 & Hindenburg crashes. But then hydrogen craft won't get as bad a rap as in OTL and the German & British programs will still fly with hydrogen for economic reasons (it's alot cheaper than helium would be). Americans still use helium though. In no case to they last longer than the late '40s or become an option for all but the super-rich & government travelers.

The real winner (at least in North America) would be rail. Without a post-war boom the '50s won't be as prosperous as in OTL. Suburbanization and rise in car ownership still happen, but on a much smaller scale. No Inter-State Highway system (or at least a much smaller one). Air travel doesn't really displace long-distance, transcontinental, travel until the '70s. Even so rail remains a more viable option up 'till the present day.

Urban planning is effected in a major way. Everythings much more focused on public transit, cities are more compact. Suburbs are built with the idea of all houses being within walking distance of a trolley/rail stop for workers to take into the city. Most middle-class families only have one car and most men leave it at home for their wives to use running errands while they're at work. Working-class families stay in the cities and don't have cars.

Ocean liners hold their own until the '60s, but are extinct by 1980. Cruising still becomes popular and somebody keeps a lone transatlantic liner in service. In 2011 most medium-distance intercity travel in the US is via rail, buses, private car, and air (in that order). There are a bunch of high-speed rail corriders, but you probally can't travel all the way from NYC to LA on one (though NYC-Chicago seems likely). Maybe more night-trains survived.

Passenger rail might not be privatized, air travel might not be deregulated (hence it'll be alot more expensive). Check out The Airship Legacy timeline by Eckener. It's a zepplewank, but there's alot of detail an what a world without WWII might look like.
 
Last edited:
The Lockheed Constellation was under development starting in 1939, and before that Lockheed was working on the Excalibur, basically a short legged version of the Constellation. Both were to be pressurized, so there is still that.

And the Constellation had a range of 3500 mi. Just enough to make it from New York to London. And more then enough to make it from LA to Honolulu. Not enough to make it from Honolulu to Tokyo though by a few hundred miles though. A fuel stop on say Guam or Wake would be ok I guess.

In either case it hurts the flying boats and airships. Faster then airships and cheaper/lighter then flying boats. Probably makes them unworkable aside from for feeder routes, maybe.


The interesting thing is jets. I don't know how much they would really be hurt by the lack of WWII. Sure there isn't the pressure of war, but their also won't be the pressure to get something in the air RIGHT NOW so maybe for resources are poured into research and development of more exotic technologies, like jet engines.

And maybe you'd have an eccentric billionaire who loves planes pushing the technology, ie Howard Hughes. He was the driving force behind the Constellation, and without the war he probably wouldn't be in the plane crash that made his, eccentricities, so much worse.
 
Top