PDA

View Full Version : B747-400/300 differences


Maxpowerhome
30th May 2004, 02:55
Greetings all.
I did a search on here to find out the basic differences between the 747-400 and the -300, but had no answers,

anyone know?,, thankyou very much;)

Intruder
30th May 2004, 03:16
MANY!

The -300 was an evolution of the -200, with upper deck and exit door changes. The -400 was essentially a new airplane, with new wings, avionics, engines, gross weight...

conch
30th May 2004, 06:15
B747-300

1983
three crew flight deck
MTOW 377t / MLW 285t
range 11500km
wing span 60m



B747-400

1989
two crew flight deck (digital, 6 CRT displays)
lower basic empty weight / MTOW 395t / MLW 295t
range 13000km
new engines
wing span 64m
first airliner to introduce winglets (3% fuel mileage improvement)
recontoured wing to fuselage fairing
weight savings (floor panels, graphite composite / wing, alluminum alloy, 1900kg / carbon brakes, 900kg)
new interior (increased passenger stowage capacity)


I am sure there are a lot more!

catpinsan
30th May 2004, 07:24
747-400 has a 'glass cockpit' and two man crew.

also 'everything you always wanted' on the -200/300 in terms of automation, redundancy,navigation etc. - a lot if automation.

if you are looking for differences from a pilot's point of view there are more details.....

rotornut
30th May 2004, 13:08
I believe Airbus was the first to have winglets - the A320 in 1987.

azzamang
30th May 2004, 22:31
They are not winglets, the A320 used Wing Tip fences, Theres a slight difference, operate on same principle though

hawk37
31st May 2004, 01:14
the GIII beat that
"True intercontinental flying range of 4,174 miles (6,717 kilometers) coupled with fuel-efficient winglets (which reduced drag) marked the introduction of the Gulfstream III in 1979. This trend in drag-reducing winglets was matched by the Learjet 55 Longhorn, also introduced in 1979, and continued by the more advanced Learjet 60, which made its debut in 1990."

Hawk

Flight Detent
31st May 2004, 03:27
Ohhh....

But for a few upgraded bits, like the carbon brakes and redesigned wing and the increased thrust engines, the B747-300 Series was easily the best model B747 Boeing made!

If it had been in production a little longer, the -300 would have indeed had all these improvements, but the -400 became available, and Boeing was having trouble getting initial sales going with the automated flight deck and no Flight Engineer, so they ceased production of the -300, to force the issue!

A bad decision, as it has turned out!

Hey "conch", you didn't mention the most uncomfortable seats of any B747 model, in your -400 list!

Cheers

conch
31st May 2004, 05:56
May be Mr. Boeing did not have any money left for better seats or he did that on purpose to be able to improve something yet on the -500 ?!!?........

Lemurian
31st May 2004, 15:19
FD,
I beg to disagree.
In my opinion,the-300 was the worst 74 to handle,probably because of the flag effect the extended upper deck was introducing on -200 unchanged controls.I still remember an approach to Kai Tak,30 knots right xwind from the right on rwy 13 and the yoke about 90 degrees to the left to hold the turn.
In comparison,the 744 was the sweetest of all Boeings to handle.Control balance and feel were pure delight.

hawk37
1st Jun 2004, 02:41
Lem, can you expand a bit on what you mean?
flag effect?
crosswind affects ability to hold a turn?
thanks
Hawk

Flight Detent
1st Jun 2004, 03:59
Hi Lemurian,
Yeah, I remember coming into Kai Tek using Rwy 13 IGS with a strong Xwind from over the hills.
With our freighter aircraft, coming back from Japan very empty, we found fairly quickly, that when we slowed to normal Vref40 speeds, the amount of correction required to counter the Xwind was tooo much, as you say, full aireron (+spoiler) deflection, and then we waited for a reaction.

We found that using Vref 30, flaps 30, was a much better option, the extra airspeed worked well!

Still think the -300 was easily the best!!

Cheers:ok: :ooh:

747fanatic
1st Jun 2004, 04:30
I read some where that the B747-300 is actually more efficient on long hauls compared to the 400 series. Is it so?

Lemurian
1st Jun 2004, 10:48
Hawk,
Yes,that's it.The -300 tail surface wasn't large enough to prevent adverse yaw on a turn or with a xwind.
Mind you,that made the -300 a pilot's airplane as it is the only airplane I remember which behaved like a glider and demanded some fairly aggressive rudder pedal input for a coordinated maneuvre.In this respect,flying it was quite rewarding in terms of professional pride.

I bet that's the main reason you liked it so much,Flight detent!:ok:

Flight Detent
1st Jun 2004, 12:51
Hi again,
All conventional airplanes feel the affects of adverse yaw to some extent, but most larger airplanes do have a yaw damper system to counter it when the flaps are extended.

Just noticed - pity I didn't spell aileron correctly - hate that!!

Yes, I agree with your comments, but its not entirely that, its also the relaxed atmosphere in the flight deck with a professional FE aboard, it makes for an entirely different conversational tone than talking to the CRT screens, especially when you know you can't really trust the response.
Your always thinking - did the software programmers cover every conceivable outcome (knowing they didn't), and there's no common sense check built in!!

There's absolutely no comparison to talking with an experienced, professional FE,(or having him loudly mention something you've just forgotten (or missed), with still enough time left to correct the problem!!!

Cheers :cool: ;) :ok: