ZSSNC From Germany, joined Feb 2003, 428 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5783 times:
IMHO there is no need for a 74L substitute. As great as the plane is (primarily by its looks and take-off performance), it was only built as Boeing wasn't able to built a plane the size of a Boeing 747-200 with the range of the Boeing 747SP back then.
ZSSNC - the longest temptation in the sky
Airbus A340-600 - the longest temptation in the sky
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5731 times:
The SP was a specially designed aircraft for a specific purpose - the goal was to develop an aircraft that could fly JFK-Tokyo nonstop and LAX-SYD nonstop; when the 744 was introduced, and could fly the routes that previously could only be served by the SP, the SP was no longer necessary.
The SP was a great airliner in its time, as it was the first ultra-long haul type (the range of the 742 was about the same as a 707-320B) and allowed airlines to open new routes.
The 777LR and A345 follow in the tradition of the SP, these aircraft will be capable of flying routes that were previously not possible.
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5658 times:
I flew the SP both with PanAm and here in Argentina... sure, it is a long range airplane, ideal for the 250-300 passenger payloads...
As a few of you mentioned, that aircraft was build to exceed the range of the early 747-200s... however the late series 747-200s and 300s are capable of longer range due to increased fuel capacity, provided a lighter payload is used. In Argentina, we sold our single SP when the 200s turned out to be capable of equal to or better range.
When an airline operate a fleet of 747s... sure, having a few SPs and a few 747-200/300s, at least achieves a "single type fleet" for parts, maintenance and crew qualifications. Bringing in another type aircraft, such as MD-11 or A340 brings in an aircraft type requiring different support and staffing, which may at the end, increase the operating costs...
Boeing could have increased weights, fuel capacities and range of the SP, yet they did not go that way... after a mere 40 or so SPs were produced...
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2472 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (11 years 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 5174 times:
Either the A345 of 772LR would make fine latter day SP spritual successors in terms of range, though in other aspects they fall short of its' greatness, as in the aforementioned hot and high takeoff performance. Cruise speed was another area, as the SP often operated between .87 and .90 mach. I believe, in a 'what if?' scenario, that if the Concorde had flown some of the same long-range routes as the SP, having to land twice to refuel, the 747 could have likely approached or matched its' trip time by NOT having to land and endure the airport delays the SST would've faced. TRULY a 'special' performer!
FLYSSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7412 posts, RR: 57
Reply 17, posted (11 years 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5036 times:
Here we go again...the A is better than the B.... B is the best of all... bla bla bla...
You seem to forget the other aspect of the question : A substitute for the -SP, OK, but for what Airline ? and for what network ???
I think "Pouyazad" is considering the remplacement of Iran Air 747-SP. For their flights to Europe, the A330-200 or -300 would fit perfectly. This aircraft is also suitable for the Asian network of IR from THR, combined with A342 if IR intends to launch nonstop THR-U.S or THR-SYD...witch is quite unlikely by now...
Don't think they really need the 777-200LR, or A346, or A345...
Na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10746 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (11 years 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4992 times:
The answer is obvious. There are a few aircraft that are -technically- capable to transport that amount of pax over a similar distance. All have been named before, and if A or B comes down to what a particular airline prefers.
LAst saturday I visited the terrasse at FRA airport for the first time since two years. And there was the 747SP of Iran Air standing next to UAs 772s and LHs A343s and I thought to myself: efficiency won against sheer "grandeur". How sad to think ordinary A330s will replace them once in Iran Air´s fleet.