B747-400/300 differences
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B747-400/300 differences
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
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
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Pacific
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: prime meridian
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.....
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.....
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
"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
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Sun worshipper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Sun worshipper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
