dreamlifter
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1601
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dreamlifter
What Boeing parts are made in barden barden? Just seen the LCF come across Southend from there. Thought most Boeing parts were US made? Maybe it's the raw materials
I don't know where 'barden barden' is (and a google search didn't help). But as G-ARZG notes, some of the 787 fuselage sections are made in Italy, while the wing comes from Japan. The Dreamlifter (aka Large Cargo Freighter or LCF) isn't used for raw materials - just completed aircraft sections. With 787 production at 10/month, and an average of at least 3 LCF round trips to deliver the pieces to build a 787, the 4 LCFs are staying quite busy.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Plains, Montana, USA
Age: 69
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The LCF aircraft are owned by Boeing and operated by Atlas Air. It is an ungainly looking thing. The LCF is a common type rating with the 747-400 and other than having Pratt engines and operating in pounds as opposed to Kilograms it flies just like our other -400s. It does cruise a little slower and there is a constant low background vibration that's absent on the other models. There is no APU, the tail swings open to load and unload, the massive cargo area is unpressurized (although heated) and the pressure bulkhead is just aft of the galley.
I was working at Boeing Field when the first LCF was being flight tested - at that time they hadn't bother to paint it yet - so most of it was bare aluminum with that puke green preservative coating. Probably the ugliest airplane of all time (saving the A380 from that distinction 
). They look a whole lot better painted, but still something only a mother could love 
.
I've often said that they should have painted it in an Orca white/black pattern and called it "Shamu" - might have even gotten some sponsorship from Sea World
). They look a whole lot better painted, but still something only a mother could love .I've often said that they should have painted it in an Orca white/black pattern and called it "Shamu" - might have even gotten some sponsorship from Sea World
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1601
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dreamlifter
That was airbus trick, naming their aircraft after a whale. That's an ugly mo fo too. So it the LCF has no APU,does it use an Airstart for every departure ?
So it the LCF has no APU,does it use an Airstart for every departure ?
Ground cart... Turns out we had some pretty lousy ground carts at Boeing Field - we got several complaints during the flight testing that autostart didn't work - turned out the ground carts were so weak that N2 spooled up so slow it was tripping the 'sheared starter shaft' autostart logic
They got rid of the APU because no one was comfortable with running a fuel line through the hinges (the flight controls were bad enough).
How much demand is there to move very oversize freight? Plus it needs some special ground equipment to swing the tail. No one is going to want to buy that equipment only to have it sit a year between flights.
What Marker said 
Plus, what Boeing did to build the LCFs was buy back some well used 747-400s (passenger models) and sent them to Taiwan (I think, not absolutely positive) where the actual conversion was done. The work was done to Boeing drawings and engineering, but aside from a few managers and inspectors, the conversion work was done by the contractors.
In addition, the design itself was less than elegant - for example that big pressure bulkhead in front of the cargo section is basically just a big flat plate of aluminum - not the usual dome shape used for pressure bulkheads.
Also, the LCF was certified to a special purpose STC which is less rigorous than a full blown Amended Type Cert that would have been required for a production airplane.
Originally they were going to build 3 LCFs, but that was for a 7/month production rate - when it was decided to increased the production rate to 10/month based on the popularity of the 787, it was decided to build a fourth LCF. There was some serious lobbying going on a few years ago to build a fifth while we had the chance, but they couldn't get the bean counters to go along with it.
I'm sure there are some Boeing managers who's worse nightmare is that an LCF is seriously damaged (or worse) and out of service for an extended period - that would really throw the proverbial monkey wrench in the 787 production.
Plus, what Boeing did to build the LCFs was buy back some well used 747-400s (passenger models) and sent them to Taiwan (I think, not absolutely positive) where the actual conversion was done. The work was done to Boeing drawings and engineering, but aside from a few managers and inspectors, the conversion work was done by the contractors.
In addition, the design itself was less than elegant - for example that big pressure bulkhead in front of the cargo section is basically just a big flat plate of aluminum - not the usual dome shape used for pressure bulkheads.
Also, the LCF was certified to a special purpose STC which is less rigorous than a full blown Amended Type Cert that would have been required for a production airplane.
Originally they were going to build 3 LCFs, but that was for a 7/month production rate - when it was decided to increased the production rate to 10/month based on the popularity of the 787, it was decided to build a fourth LCF. There was some serious lobbying going on a few years ago to build a fifth while we had the chance, but they couldn't get the bean counters to go along with it.
I'm sure there are some Boeing managers who's worse nightmare is that an LCF is seriously damaged (or worse) and out of service for an extended period - that would really throw the proverbial monkey wrench in the 787 production.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have to do some digging, but being an ex-C-5 guy, the Dreamlifter feels bigger inside (much taller) and you don't have the center door, pressure door or the troop compartment floor limitations to deal with. Remember, there is air conditioning in the cargo area but no pressurization. No checking the cargo inflight. We have a camera system for that.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ground cart... Turns out we had some pretty lousy ground carts at Boeing Field - we got several complaints during the flight testing that autostart didn't work - turned out the ground carts were so weak that N2 spooled up so slow it was tripping the 'sheared starter shaft' autostart logic
It's the same 16 foot wide floor that balloons out to about 20 feet wide. Looking at the grid on the pressure bulkhead I'd say it's also about 20 feet high. Which makes sense if you're carrying a cylinder.