Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/3215181/

Topic: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-22 10:11:40 and read 14882 times.

I came across an interesting depiction of the A380 as a triple-decker just moments ago.

Query:

1. What are the chances that the A380 can be equipped as a triple-decker aircraft?

2. What are the chances that the 747-8I or other aircraft could be configured as a triple-decker?

Thank you in advance for your responses.

(Source: http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/04/jetcabs/index_01.htm )

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Brenintw
Posted 2007-01-22 10:27:02 and read 14821 times.

The A380 and 748 are already triple deckers, as have been all the 747s. The lowest deck is where baggage and cargo is carried.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-22 11:09:49 and read 14681 times.

Would you foresee that the lowest deck might be equipped for passenger use in the manner contemplated, I wonder?

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: EGBJ
Posted 2007-01-22 11:51:45 and read 14555 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Would you foresee that the lowest deck might be equipped for passenger use in the manner contemplated, I wonder

Maybe if Ryanair odered one and didn't allow any luggage to be carried  Wink

Seriously though, I doubt airlines would forfeit cargo space for more passengers considering they earn more revenue from this on some sectors.

Rich

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-22 15:54:56 and read 14206 times.

Oh, I see, now. Thank you for that reply; it is much appreciated.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: HeliflyerPDC
Posted 2007-01-22 16:12:26 and read 14113 times.

Maybe some VVVIP (or other rich people) would have interest in the "triple deck" design. I can't imagine someone would need all the cargo space (of even half of it)

grtz PDC

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Geo772
Posted 2007-01-22 16:27:43 and read 14044 times.

Quoting HeliflyerPDC (Reply 5):
Maybe some VVVIP (or other rich people) would have interest in the "triple deck" design. I can't imagine someone would need all the cargo space (of even half of it)

Most scheduled airlines carry a great deal of cargo on intercontinental routes. In fact it is because of the twin deck passenger cabin that the A380 starts to lose out to the 747, and even more so to the 777 and A340 because the passenger bags will occupy more of the available cargo hold.

The frieght in the hold can often make an otherwise unprofitable route profitable, thus providing benefits to consumers and industry alike.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-22 16:27:49 and read 14046 times.

That's quite true!

Now that I think about it, the example of the U.S. Presidential 747 may be of interest. Part of its cargo deck has been converted into a vestibule from which the Passenger and others can exist through a self-carried deplaning stair. I wonder what else they've built into that particular deck!

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: EGBJ
Posted 2007-01-22 16:35:38 and read 14014 times.

Quoting Geo772 (Reply 6):
The freight in the hold can often make an otherwise unprofitable route profitable

Very true. Some of Virgin's services to India operate with a very unprofitable load factor, but the freight carried more than makes up for this and makes the route worthwhile.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2007-01-22 20:35:45 and read 13684 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Would you foresee that the lowest deck might be equipped for passenger use in the manner contemplated, I wonder?

Douglas once aired the idea of a 'panorama deck' with slant windows in the forward lower hold of the MD-11 (or was it still DC-10 then?).

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-22 20:45:26 and read 13654 times.

^^ I've seen pictures of early prop-era double-deckers well before the age of the DC-10, obviously, that had lounges downstairs, but not either the DC-10 or MD-11. It would be interesting to know more about the proposed design you mentioned.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: GQfluffy
Posted 2007-01-22 20:48:37 and read 13632 times.

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 9):
Douglas once aired the idea of a 'panorama deck' with slant windows in the forward lower hold of the MD-11 (or was it still DC-10 then?).

Not sure about MD aircraft, but Lockheed designed something similar for PSA on the L-1011... 1st picture gives a synopsis of this area. I swear there used to be pictures of this space on A.net, but I can't seem to find them.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mick West
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank Hudson

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Chuchoteur
Posted 2007-01-22 20:53:29 and read 13604 times.

A340's have an optional below deck crew rest in the aft cargo hold.
I believe Lufthansa is one of the customers who has taken that option.

you have a staircase down, toilets for the pax (which I think is a good idea, keeps the noise and smells away from the cabin!), a galley and the crew rest.

obviously, it's limiting in terms of spare cargo you can lug around, but if you are constrained due to the fact that you're right up there at Max fuel, you may as well use the space...

as to an A380 using the cargo deck, don't think a pax version will ever have that, but on a VVIP... who knows... maybe somewhere to stow the servants?

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-22 20:57:46 and read 13585 times.

^^ I sort of miss that PSA smile. I used to take PSA between Los Angeles and San Francisco.

^^ In addition to the A380, the VIP 747-8I's that I've read about might allow for a "triple-decker" configuration, I would imagine. The downstairs could be anything -- a disco, even perhaps, since there are no windows.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2007-01-22 22:11:08 and read 13397 times.

VIP aircraft can use the lower deck on most widebodies, should they want to, but often those aircraft do use the cargo hold for cargo, mainly bringing rolls royces and such with them to whereever they fly...

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Bluewhale18210
Posted 2007-01-22 22:23:36 and read 13358 times.

Quoting Chuchoteur (Reply 12):
A340's have an optional below deck crew rest in the aft cargo hold.
I believe Lufthansa is one of the customers who has taken that option.

Same for CI's A340-313X. The crew rest area is in the place of 31P, occupying a 92"*125" area. Literally crew lives in a modified LD7.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: FlyLKU
Posted 2007-01-23 00:20:06 and read 11699 times.

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 1):
The A380 and 748 are already triple deckers, as have been all the 747s. The lowest deck is where baggage and cargo is carried.

Indeed, I have been on at least 1 747 and one L-1011 that each had a large galley below deck. I believe the issue is that these lower decks must be vacated during takeoff and landing. This I believe is due to their lack of adequate provisions for evacuation and perhaps even structural requirements for situations such as a gear up landing. Can others elaborate?

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: ADiZzy
Posted 2007-01-23 00:21:13 and read 11699 times.

When I strike it rich-i will buy and A380 and have its three deckes converted into the ultimate moble home.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Terryb99
Posted 2007-01-23 00:52:10 and read 11297 times.

I posted this a few weeks ago, in a thread about short 747 routes.

I was at JAL's maintenance base at Haneda in December. While there we talked about all their 747 and 777's used for domestic flights out of Haneda. Simply amazing how many people they move in those short hops.

Later that month when I was back in Seattle, my FAA-DAR was in issuing some 8130-3's for export. He is retired from Boeing and while talking about my trip and the high density 747 and 777 domestic flights in Japan, he mentioned an old project at Boeing.
Seems Boeing and JAL did a joint study of a 747 with non retractable gear to save weight. They would put fairings in front of the gear to help some with aerodynamics. Here is the amazing part; they actually looked at using the cargo level, for seats! It never got past the study level, but what a crazy thought of a 747 flying with the gear down, and filled to the brim with passengers.
Next time he is in, I will ask if he remembers the potential passenger load. I know some of the domestic, single class 747's can be well over 500.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: PanAmOldDC8
Posted 2007-01-23 00:56:21 and read 11246 times.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 10):
I've seen pictures of early prop-era double-deckers well before the age of the DC-10, obviously, that had lounges downstairs, but not either the DC-10 or MD-11

I think the name was the Boeing Strato cruiser, can't remember the number but it had a lounge deck downstairs

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: FlyLKU
Posted 2007-01-23 01:51:24 and read 10722 times.

Quoting Terryb99 (Reply 18):
Seems Boeing and JAL did a joint study of a 747 with non retractable gear to save weight.

Ask him if it was because the structure required to provided a belly that could withstand a gear up landing with people in what had been previously been a cargo hold was greater than the weight of the gear and the resulting drag.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-23 02:18:16 and read 10470 times.

Quoting PanAmOldDC8 (Reply 19):
I think the name was the Boeing Strato cruiser, can't remember the number but it had a lounge deck downstairs

Oh, yes, I believe that that's the one.

Here are links to three photos of interest. Ihe first, the photo shows the "double bubble" cross-section of the fuselage. Note the stewardesses (flight attendants) for a size comparison!

http://www.washington.edu/uwired/out...raphics/Boeing%20Stratocruiser.jpg

The second photo is a cutaway of the aircraft in an advertisement:

http://www.airchive.com/Memorabilia/Northwest/**NWAinsert5005.jpg

The third is a sign of comfort aboard the 377 and what one might find oneself doing after a long trip:

http://www.ovi.ch/b377/articles/boeingUnited/sleep.jpg

Finally, here is a link to a page full of Stratocruiser photos and related images:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...um%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN

That Stratocruiser certainly had a tall fuselage, even compared to the A380.  

[Edited to fix second link.]

[Edited 2007-01-23 02:20:08]

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: BeechNut
Posted 2007-01-23 02:21:03 and read 10445 times.

Quoting PanAmOldDC8 (Reply 19):
I think the name was the Boeing Strato cruiser, can't remember the number but it had a lounge deck downstairs

Boeing 377 Stratocruiser.

Biggest piece of crap Boeing ever made. It used the B29 wings, tail and engines. Had a habit of shedding props. Not that many were built (56) for civilian use, and the hull loss rate was astronomical: 13 hull losses. That's a whopping 23% hull loss rate...

It was rather more successful as military B367, which to the Air Force was known as the KC97 tanker or C97 transport. A total of 888 of those were built.

It was also famous as one of the most awesomely ugly airliners in the sky, so ugly in fact, that this made it beautiful to propliner fanatics like me.

Beech

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Speedbird747BA
Posted 2007-01-23 02:25:29 and read 10402 times.

Quoting HeliflyerPDC (Reply 5):
I can't imagine someone would need all the cargo space (of even half of it)

Yeah. Think of all the cargo coming from China to the US, and from China to Europe.

Tons of cargo.

Maybe a possibilty would be .5 for lounges and F, .5 for J, .75 for Y, another .25 for lounges, and 1 for cargo. An efficient system for huge intercontinental routes.


Cheers,
Kyle

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-23 02:40:40 and read 10267 times.

By the way, can you imagine how the "powder rooms" aboard a premium A380 might look, when one compares to what already was available in the 1950's?

See: http://www.ovi.ch/b377/articles/boeingUnited/beauty.jpg

(The above reminds me of that famous publicity still for an airline or airliner, I believe, in which a certain very young Norma Jean Mortensen appeared. I believe we know her better from her later years, when she became known as Marilyn Monroe of Hollywood and John F. Kennedy fame.)

The A380 and 747-8 surely offer unlimited appeal for people who can afford the very best in interior fittings.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: PlanenutzTB
Posted 2007-01-23 02:44:03 and read 10218 times.

I think Airbus needs to focus on just getting a double-deck plane in production before attempting the triple-deck.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: FlyDreamliner
Posted 2007-01-23 02:49:28 and read 10367 times.

Quoting HeliflyerPDC (Reply 5):
Maybe some VVVIP (or other rich people) would have interest in the "triple deck" design. I can't imagine someone would need all the cargo space (of even half of it)

Well, I mean, Air Force One is chased by a C-17 which carries things like the presidential limo and what not, the belly space isn't exactly necessary.

I mean, if you can afford an A380 or 748i as your personal ride, why not spring for the cargo chase plane, lol?

Quoting BeechNut (Reply 22):
Boeing 377 Stratocruiser.

Biggest piece of crap Boeing ever made. It used the B29 wings, tail and engines. Had a habit of shedding props. Not that many were built (56) for civilian use, and the hull loss rate was astronomical: 13 hull losses. That's a whopping 23% hull loss rate...

Well, the B-29 wings/engines wasn't so bad that they were copied as that the engines were ... well, bad. B-29s were famous for engine trouble.... the giant Pratt and Whitney Wasp Majors had major oil problems, as well as prop problems, as you mentioned. Some carriers wouldn't fly their 377s over water anymore because of the reliability issues.... and the big long oil trails they left all of the plane didn't inspire confidence either.

The wasp major was a mess of an engine - incredibly powerful, a wonder of engineering, it just didn't work right all that often... in fact, it was almost as bad as the Cyclone Turbo Compounds that the later Constellations got.

For this time period, it was all about the DC-6. Rugged as nails, Double Wasp engines that never failed, economical as could be.... everything you needed, nothing you didn't. The connie may have been fancier looking, had a little bit more top end speed, but the DC-6 was the backbone of commercial aviation.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Grude1087
Posted 2007-01-23 07:20:20 and read 8550 times.

Quoting Terryb99 (Reply 18):
Next time he is in, I will ask if he remembers the potential passenger load. I know some of the domestic, single class 747's can be well over 500.

Actually, according to JAL's website http://www.jal.co.jp/aircraft/conf/744d.html, they currently hold 546 on a 744D. That's still with 80 in "J-Class" (quasi Domestic Business).

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Chuchoteur
Posted 2007-01-23 08:53:12 and read 8074 times.

Quoting BeechNut (Reply 22):
Boeing 377 Stratocruiser.

Biggest piece of crap Boeing ever made. It used the B29 wings, tail and engines. Had a habit of shedding props. Not that many were built (56) for civilian use, and the hull loss rate was astronomical: 13 hull losses. That's a whopping 23% hull loss rate...

I seem to recall reading an article in the specialised press a long time ago on the aircraft... and apparently, it used to have an interesting tendency to land on the nosewheel first?

problem with the angle of the fuselage...

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: IOEAOK
Posted 2007-01-23 08:59:37 and read 8046 times.

Thanks, AeroSpaceFan, for putting those links together for us. Very fun to look at!

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: BeechNut
Posted 2007-01-23 17:07:54 and read 7365 times.

Quoting Chuchoteur (Reply 28):
seem to recall reading an article in the specialised press a long time ago on the aircraft... and apparently, it used to have an interesting tendency to land on the nosewheel first?

problem with the angle of the fuselage...

More of a center-of-gravity issue I would think. This is apparently true. It was also very sensitive to crosswinds because of the tall fuselage. To be fair some operators like BOAC managed to have a fine safety record with them. FlyDreamliner was right, the engines were a major problem. But the achille's heel appeared to be the props and prop overspeeds were a major problem. One fatal accident in Brazil was due to a prop loss which caused major structural damage. The props would overspeed (go into flat pitch) which resulted in tremendous drag, until the prop separated, slicing up the airframe along the way depending on which prop it was.

The engines though were indeed a nightmare. A total of 28 cylinders arranged on 4 rows of 7. Back cylinders could not have had adequate cooling. Add to that: 2 spark plugs per cylinder for 56 per engine times 4 = 224 spark plugs. There were spark plug analyzers to see if each plug was firing OK, so the FE had to monitor the health of 224 spark plugs, not to mention keeping an eye on oil consumption, props, etc etc. He was a very busy man indeed. This was the absolute limit of what one could do with pistons, and pretty much limited the size of airliners of the era. The DC-7 and Lockheed Starliner (Connie stretch) had similar engine issues.

But as he pointed out, the DC-6 was a real sweetheart, THE propliner for economy and reliability. The DC-4 would be a close second but it was unpressurized, except for the DC-4M which was otherwise known as the Canadair North Star (or Canadair C4 or Canadair Argonaut on BOAC). The North Star/Argonaut had Rolls Royce Merlin engines instead of P&W radials. They were famously noisy inside. The Super Connie, was known facetiously as the best three-engine airliner flying the Atlantic run...

I used to live under the Rwy 28 approach at YUL. I'm old enough to remeber the sound of Canadian Pacific DC6s flying overhead...and Nordair Connies, DC3s and Curtiss Commandos (C46).

Beech

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: Chuchoteur
Posted 2007-01-23 22:34:16 and read 7137 times.

I still like the idea of a flight engineer...

Due to my work, I get to fly jumpseat quite often, and Pilots like the idea of a qualified 3rd person on the flight deck...

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: BA787
Posted 2007-01-23 22:50:15 and read 7092 times.

Quoting Geo772 (Reply 6):
Maybe some VVVIP (or other rich people) would have interest in the "triple deck" design. I can't imagine someone would need all the cargo space (of even half of it)


Most scheduled airlines carry a great deal of cargo on intercontinental routes. In fact it is because of the twin deck passenger cabin that the A380 starts to lose out to the 747, and even more so to the 777 and A340 because the passenger bags will occupy more of the available cargo hold.

The frieght in the hold can often make an otherwise unprofitable route profitable, thus providing benefits to consumers and industry alike.

Read what he posted before you reply. He was talking about VVIP customers, not airlines.

Topic: RE: The A380 As A Triple-Decker?
Username: AerospaceFan
Posted 2007-01-24 02:46:00 and read 6954 times.

Quoting IOEAOK (Reply 29):
Thanks, AeroSpaceFan, for putting those links together for us. Very fun to look at!

It was my pleasure.

The level of amenities provided during passage on the Stratocruiser sets a high standard of personal service for First Class treatment today. It's always fun for me to revisit the days so many travelers view with such fondness.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/