747 Take-Off Run
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Coburg, Germany
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
747 Take-Off Run
Hi all,
what is the approximate take-off run of the Boeing 747-400 at MTOW? (I do not mean take-off distance)
Beside personal experience I would appreciate written sources for that information ( I have manuals for the 757 and DC-10 for example, and do not find this sort of information there).
Kind Regards
Carl
what is the approximate take-off run of the Boeing 747-400 at MTOW? (I do not mean take-off distance)
Beside personal experience I would appreciate written sources for that information ( I have manuals for the 757 and DC-10 for example, and do not find this sort of information there).
Kind Regards
Carl
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Coburg, Germany
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...a case for better definition.
I mean take-off run as distance to the last point when main wheels stay on the ground and not take-off distance (TOD), which as I understand is the distance to the point when the plane has height of 35 ft.
Carl
Carl
Last edited by carl josef; 5th Oct 2002 at 15:00.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dallas, TX USA
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try this link...
This is a Boeing website link that may have the information you're looking for.
Boeing 747 performance information
Scroll down to the 747-400 section, then click on the "3.0 Airplane Performance" link. Takeoff and landing distances, as well as other performance data, are contained in the .pdf document. You will also see that performance data is available for other versions of the 747 as well.
Boeing 747 performance information
Scroll down to the 747-400 section, then click on the "3.0 Airplane Performance" link. Takeoff and landing distances, as well as other performance data, are contained in the .pdf document. You will also see that performance data is available for other versions of the 747 as well.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Coburg, Germany
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mutt,
I like to know if Microsoft´s FS2002 PC Flight Simulator does it right.
Deficiencies in that programm always make me learn more of real-life aerodynamics and flight-mechanics.
So I´m now thinking of the farther issue: What is the absolute minimum rotation and lift-off speed, not including any safety margins at MTOW and Standard conditions.
Sorry, maybe I should have asked this question in the Flight Testing forum.
Is there any objection to put it there too ?
Thanks for all replies
Carl
I like to know if Microsoft´s FS2002 PC Flight Simulator does it right.
Deficiencies in that programm always make me learn more of real-life aerodynamics and flight-mechanics.
So I´m now thinking of the farther issue: What is the absolute minimum rotation and lift-off speed, not including any safety margins at MTOW and Standard conditions.
Sorry, maybe I should have asked this question in the Flight Testing forum.
Is there any objection to put it there too ?
Thanks for all replies
Carl
FWIW in the simulator I've practiced getting the 747 off the ground in much less than the normal ground roll. At about 270 tonnes, I rotated at ~90kts, pull it off the ground and held ~110kts. The stick shaker was rattling away madly, as there was airframe buffeting, but the plane flew.
The ground roll was perhaps 1,100', no more.
The ground roll was perhaps 1,100', no more.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If i was to tell you that the answer was 8,753 feet, how would you compare this to the FS2002 distance?
I would be very surprised if you find any airline pilots who have actually tested VMU speeds or MinVR,
Mutt.
I would be very surprised if you find any airline pilots who have actually tested VMU speeds or MinVR,
Mutt.
Be surprised then.
The reason I was taught it is because the airline that ran the sim had at least two incidences where cars or planes had taxied out in front of them on the take-off roll, so they were teaching their pilots how to get the thing off the ground in a hurry.
The airline I was flying for at the time hired the sims off the other airline and we were swapping over to their procedures, so we did a little extra training on top of that.
The reason I was taught it is because the airline that ran the sim had at least two incidences where cars or planes had taxied out in front of them on the take-off roll, so they were teaching their pilots how to get the thing off the ground in a hurry.
The airline I was flying for at the time hired the sims off the other airline and we were swapping over to their procedures, so we did a little extra training on top of that.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: one dot low as usual
Age: 66
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
18 wheeler posed a worrying thought. You either have a V1 or you don't. I have never heard of a conditional V1 (ie, we'll stop except if it's a vehicle ahead when we'll rotate early).
I know the arguments between stopping and certainly hitting an obstacle (at a lower speed and decelerating). But to try a take off at anything below normal speeds is surely inviting disaster?
I know the arguments between stopping and certainly hitting an obstacle (at a lower speed and decelerating). But to try a take off at anything below normal speeds is surely inviting disaster?
V1 is based on the full (or planned) length of the runway. If some twit taxies out in front of you, then that figure is not worth anything.
If you can't stop in time then it may well be worth getting the plane into the air at a speed at which it will physically fly. It'd be better to do that than to run into another plane when one or both have a lot of fuel on board.
That's why they pay us to make decisions like that.
I know what the plane can really do, so I am better equipped to make the decision whether to try to stop or try to go, rather than make a seat-of-the-pants one based on sheer guesswork.
If you can't stop in time then it may well be worth getting the plane into the air at a speed at which it will physically fly. It'd be better to do that than to run into another plane when one or both have a lot of fuel on board.
That's why they pay us to make decisions like that.
I know what the plane can really do, so I am better equipped to make the decision whether to try to stop or try to go, rather than make a seat-of-the-pants one based on sheer guesswork.
Moderator
Given the sort of height to be cleared, I would put my money on stopping performance EVERY time in a crossing situation detected prior to V1 - the risk outcomes warrant avoiding a highspeed impact at all costs ...... there was a celebrated almost disaster at Sydney years ago ... as I recall a domestic 727 was faced with this sort of situation when an international DC8 (?) took a wrong turn and crossed the active in front of the accelerating 727.
Post accident analysis indicated that stopping would have been a doddle. In any event the crew, faced with a situation for which they had no knowledge or training, took a punt and went for the continued takeoff ... the result was that the tail of the 8 ripped the belly out of the 727. The 727 crew then did an excellent job of recovering the situation.
They were, of course, crucified at the enquiry and in subsequent legal proceedings .....
Post accident analysis indicated that stopping would have been a doddle. In any event the crew, faced with a situation for which they had no knowledge or training, took a punt and went for the continued takeoff ... the result was that the tail of the 8 ripped the belly out of the 727. The 727 crew then did an excellent job of recovering the situation.
They were, of course, crucified at the enquiry and in subsequent legal proceedings .....
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You either have a V1 or you don't. Not exactly, there are a range of V1's, most operations are conducted at a Balanced V1 for the sake of convenience. There is also a Minimum V1 where you can have an engine failure and still reach V2 and a Maximum V1 where you can still stop on the available runway!
Mutt.
Mutt.
Paxing All Over The World
carl josef
"Sorry, maybe I should have asked this question in the Flight Testing forum.
Is there any objection to put it there too?"
Yes!!
The moderators and Chief Pilot of PPRuNe, do not like the same subject being debated in two threads at the same time. This makes more work for the server and slows performance. Which means that it takes Danny longer to get airborne but I don't know by exactly how many metres.
"Sorry, maybe I should have asked this question in the Flight Testing forum.
Is there any objection to put it there too?"
Yes!!
The moderators and Chief Pilot of PPRuNe, do not like the same subject being debated in two threads at the same time. This makes more work for the server and slows performance. Which means that it takes Danny longer to get airborne but I don't know by exactly how many metres.
It must get awfully boring on layovers.....!
