747-8 problems
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Northern Territory Australia
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@msbbarratt - is LHR quieter
The Qatar airways & BA 787 overfly my house at perhaps 1000ft ish and they are significantly quieter than the whine of a 777. The 380 is so much quieter than the 777 and the 747/a340
This is a personal experience
This is a personal experience
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Gove N.T. incoming LHR traffic flies over my workshop east of Heathrow at about 4,000ft, and 380 and 787 are noticeably quieter than other planes. Furthermore their tone is more "centered" with less bassy roar and trebly whine, and the volume seems more consistent. The 380 sounds more like an average twin engine plane, very impressive. When they take of Eastwards they are further south and I cannot form an opinion of their noise.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Or-E-Gun, USA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a good part of Boeing's reason for building the 747-8i and -F is that they simply refused concede that business to the other major airframer. The freighters are starting to pick up and, as you note, a bunch of customers who can stall delivery as waiting for the improved spec engine. With four burning and such heavy loads, even 1% or 2% fuel reduction makes a huge difference in operating costs. I don't know, but I'd suspect that it is not possible to retro fit the PIP into existing engines.
As for the -8i PAX model, my guess it was just a convenient add-on to the -F program, with 95% of the engineering already done. The capacity differences between the stretched 777s and the A380 are just not all that great. Othe than a handfull of VIP airplanes, I think LH is the only 8i customer on the books. Ha-ha, maybe Boeing is just holding out for the Air Force One order - as if they don't already have it in the bag! Can't you just see the U.S. President noodling around the world on a French made jet? That just won't happen, so the modified 747-8i is the only game in town that meets the basic specs, one of which is four engines. The 747-8 series will sell in time...
As for the -8i PAX model, my guess it was just a convenient add-on to the -F program, with 95% of the engineering already done. The capacity differences between the stretched 777s and the A380 are just not all that great. Othe than a handfull of VIP airplanes, I think LH is the only 8i customer on the books. Ha-ha, maybe Boeing is just holding out for the Air Force One order - as if they don't already have it in the bag! Can't you just see the U.S. President noodling around the world on a French made jet? That just won't happen, so the modified 747-8i is the only game in town that meets the basic specs, one of which is four engines. The 747-8 series will sell in time...
I think LH is the only 8i customer on the books.
DLH have their fingers in virtually every pie it seems, A333s,A343s,A346s,744s,748s,A380s and MD-11s for the cargo. Does it look like the 748 will get enough buyers to justify the expense in development?
I don't know, but I'd suspect that it is not possible to retro fit the PIP into existing engines.
I noted before it's hard to do apples to apples comparisons of 'seating' because there is no such thing as a 'typical' seating layout. The bottom line is that the 747-8I still has quite a bit more 'floor space' relative to the 777-300ER and even the -9X. They also did something rather cool with the Intercontinental upper deck - aft of the 'hump', they cleared out the main deck attic space and provisioned for sleeping quarters. Some of the VIP customers have taken advantage of that to install some ritzy bedroom setups. So far I don't think any of the regular airline operators have elected to take advantage of that, but it would be relatively easy to do - the upper deck is typically business or first class anyway - wouldn't it be nice - on a 12 or 14 hour flight - after reaching cruise to head to your private bedroom in the back?
Private Bedrooms
I've seen them on the unmentionable middle east airline's A346s, I assume they have them on the 77ws too? Also Emirates definately have them on some of their A380s, as well as showers! I hope the 748 works out, even as just a freighter. Anybody know how many hulls they need to sell to break even?
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,096
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One also hears all sorts of rumours of high passenger satisfaction beginning to mean that passengers are choosing it over other types. The ride quality does matter.
Talking to A380 pilots I was told one drawback is that when carrying a high pax load it is unable to carry the high value cargo, like Swiftrider, that normally goes on pax aircraft at premium fright rates.
I've seen them on the unmentionable middle east airline's A346s, I assume they have them on the 77ws too? Also Emirates definately have them on some of their A380s, as well as showers! I hope the 748 works out, even as just a freighter. Anybody know how many hulls they need to sell to break even?
I know what the business case number was for the 747-8 but it's considered proprietary. It's probably garbage anyway since we went significantly over budget (though not nearly as bad as the 787).
BTW, the 747-8 has a much lower noise level during takeoff and landing than the 747-400 - similar noise levels to the 787. Not only are the new engines quieter, but the -8 got a new (quieter) flap system (a surprising amount of the noise during landing is aero noise from the flaps and gear).
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: huntsvegas
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How long does it take to build a panel?
... The unique giants have been needed because of a serious run of quality issues with large 747-8 fuselage panels and tail pieces produced at a Triumph Group manufacturing plant in Texas.
.... this year, 17 have come in from Dallas-Fort Worth.
The reason was revealed earlier this month in a frank investor teleconference by Triumph Chief Executive Jeffry Frisby ... replacing “a very significant number” of structural 747-8 pieces that failed inspection, then “renting Antonovs to ship (those) parts” to Boeing
Triumph’s leadership first mentioned quality issues with 747-8 parts in January and brought in new top managers at the plant to turn it around.
Boeing spokesman Larry Wilson...said Boeing has provided support personnel to Triumph’s Grand Prairie plant — formerly owned by Vought, which was acquired by Triumph in 2010 ... the Antonov deliveries has maintained its 747-8 production rate of 1.75 jets per month, or 21 per year.
.... this year, 17 have come in from Dallas-Fort Worth.
The reason was revealed earlier this month in a frank investor teleconference by Triumph Chief Executive Jeffry Frisby ... replacing “a very significant number” of structural 747-8 pieces that failed inspection, then “renting Antonovs to ship (those) parts” to Boeing
Triumph’s leadership first mentioned quality issues with 747-8 parts in January and brought in new top managers at the plant to turn it around.
Boeing spokesman Larry Wilson...said Boeing has provided support personnel to Triumph’s Grand Prairie plant — formerly owned by Vought, which was acquired by Triumph in 2010 ... the Antonov deliveries has maintained its 747-8 production rate of 1.75 jets per month, or 21 per year.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually no. This is directly from the Seattle Times article on the folding wingstips. They were originally offered on the 777-200, and were 21 feet long.
The 777-x proposed folding wingtip is only 10 feet long.
"In fact, it isn't a new idea. In 1995, Boeing obtained a patent for a folding wingtip design on the original 777, which had a 200-foot wingspan.
That mechanism was even built and tested — the full-scale model used then is on display at the Museum of Flight Restoration Center at Paine Field in Everett. But no airline ever bought this option."
The 777-x proposed folding wingtip is only 10 feet long.
"In fact, it isn't a new idea. In 1995, Boeing obtained a patent for a folding wingtip design on the original 777, which had a 200-foot wingspan.
That mechanism was even built and tested — the full-scale model used then is on display at the Museum of Flight Restoration Center at Paine Field in Everett. But no airline ever bought this option."
Actually no. This is directly from the Seattle Times article on the folding wingstips. They were originally offered on the 777-200, and were 21 feet long.
The 777-x proposed folding wingtip is only 10 feet long.
The 777-x proposed folding wingtip is only 10 feet long.
The new wing on the 777X is wider span than current 777-300ER - the folding portion is intended to get the 777X into the same gate footprint as the -300ER. The designers believe they can get the associated weight penalty small enough that drag improvement from the greater span overwhelms the weight penalty. Further, the folding section is small enough that even if it should fail, the aircraft would still be airworthy.
No first hand knowledge, but I'm hearing that on the 777X, the folding wingtip will be basic, not an option.
Actually no. This is directly from the Seattle Times article on the folding wingstips. They were originally offered on the 777-200, and were 21 feet long.
Just amused at the choice of photo to illustrate the point.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That picture is the folding wing of a Lockheed S-3 Viking.
This is the original 777 folding wing test rig which I believe has been vastly improved for the 777X ie the weight has been cut considerably.
This is the original 777 folding wing test rig which I believe has been vastly improved for the 777X ie the weight has been cut considerably.
That picture is the folding wing of a Lockheed S-3 Viking.
I guess what that has in common with the 777 is that both are/were folding wings built by companies that didn't know how to design one (Lockheed subcontracted theirs to LTV, who came up with a very neat offset-hinge design so that the folded wings would overlap).
