KLM 747 returns to JHB on 3 engines
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to note they didn't carry on. There was an endless thread over in R&N about a BA 747 that experienced engine failure shortly after t/o from LAX but carried on (on three) to the UK.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: asia
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5th Pod
Boeing call this setup a 5th Pod.
There are only wing attachments on the port wing. the strut is a self contained unit with a built in winch system to get the engine on and off the wing.
There is 5th pod performance figures to operate the aircraft, including a lower max flight level and a lower max cruising speed.
Not 100% sure about this part. On the JT97R4G2 engines, there was a special cowling to prevent / reduce the airflow through the engine core. some or all of the fan blades were also removed.
There are only wing attachments on the port wing. the strut is a self contained unit with a built in winch system to get the engine on and off the wing.
There is 5th pod performance figures to operate the aircraft, including a lower max flight level and a lower max cruising speed.
Not 100% sure about this part. On the JT97R4G2 engines, there was a special cowling to prevent / reduce the airflow through the engine core. some or all of the fan blades were also removed.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Gauteng ( South Africa )
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You cant just make out in the pictures the grey color "aerodynamic cover" that is placed in the 5th engines intake, to direct airflow through it.
The engine cannot run in that location
The 707 used to fully enclose the spare engine in a pod.
As did the VC-10
The L-1011 Tristar could carry a 4th engine on the starboard wing, and it was open like the 747 engine
The engine cannot run in that location
The 707 used to fully enclose the spare engine in a pod.
As did the VC-10
The L-1011 Tristar could carry a 4th engine on the starboard wing, and it was open like the 747 engine
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Jo'burg
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just to set things straight here... GE CF6 can't be transported as 5th pod...
KL operates 747-400Combi to JNB and the CF6 fits quite nicely on the maindeck, 16ft. pallet. Same arrived JNB on-board KL0591/07JAN AMSJNB.
KL operates 747-400Combi to JNB and the CF6 fits quite nicely on the maindeck, 16ft. pallet. Same arrived JNB on-board KL0591/07JAN AMSJNB.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mactheknife said "Isn't 410 pax on a normal 744 (with multi-class cabin) a bit much anyway (let alone Combi configuration)??? "
All reports say the aircraft had 410 pax and 17 crew on board. Sounds a bit much for a three class layout but would depend on seat pitch and not sure what the layout/config is for KLM anyway. Maybe someone knows? 743's I operated in the East had 475 seat config in a one class, high density seating layout.
172driver said "Interesting to note they didn't carry on. There was an endless thread over in R&N about a BA 747 that experienced engine failure shortly after t/o from LAX but carried on (on three) to the UK."
Thats because their next stop was not Nairobi in its current mess
All reports say the aircraft had 410 pax and 17 crew on board. Sounds a bit much for a three class layout but would depend on seat pitch and not sure what the layout/config is for KLM anyway. Maybe someone knows? 743's I operated in the East had 475 seat config in a one class, high density seating layout.
172driver said "Interesting to note they didn't carry on. There was an endless thread over in R&N about a BA 747 that experienced engine failure shortly after t/o from LAX but carried on (on three) to the UK."
Thats because their next stop was not Nairobi in its current mess
