Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Next Generation B747-600 & 790  
User currently offlineSquirrel83 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 12954 times:

Just a squirrelly Idea out of the box ~

Boeing competition For A380 ~ 747-600 the 600 will soon be 790 MEANING 790 Passengers . . HA take that

https://home.comcast.net/~squirrel83/images/edit.gif


I tried to do the winglets but hey I need some time . .

[Edited 2004-07-18 23:21:34]

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineScottysAir From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 12786 times:

Yeah, this is really lot of those passengers on the 747-600 or 700. It is possible for more than of thousand people who flew on the jumbo jet.

User currently offlineL.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 12729 times:

Unfortuntely, the 747 fuselage structure couldn't support that weight. You'd need new wings, a dramatically altered fuselage, and a new tail. You'd basically have a new airplane, if not in name.

User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2223 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 12697 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It's not showing the whole picture on the post. Great try but you may need some help with it. I'll try to fix it for you.


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16908 posts, RR: 67
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days ago) and read 12618 times:

Also, area ruling advantages would go out the window. The 747 is fast and efficient in large part because of the hump.


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineSquirrel83 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 12418 times:

THANX CcrLR ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~``

User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2223 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 12343 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

here is what I did to it.
http://www.geocities.com/miranova42/Korean747700.html?1090196799020

I used the clone in Adobe photoshop to put the windows and fix the doors. I also tried to save the playe on the fuselage but couldn't. I also fixed the paint and logo too that was ghosted on.

I really don't think they will tryit out, but it doesn't hurt to try-Well they could loose money from the program and end up in Chapter 11, well it still doesn't hurt to try and extend it a little. Some airlines who do passenger and cargo are looking into seeing a longer 747, but not this long.

[Edited 2004-07-19 02:40:40]


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineSquirrel83 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 12312 times:

THANK YOU CclR ~ if you dont mind ill post it ~ I just need the winglets ~



User currently offlineCcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2223 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 12194 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Uh, It still didn't work. It was better the way you posted it first. The only problem was the size of the photo.


"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
User currently offlineJutes85 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 12132 times:

I think that this is a more accurate representation.

User currently offlineFJWH From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 968 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11379 times:

Jutes85:

That one is very nice  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

FJWH



FlightS in the next 3 months: MSP, PHX, MEM, NCE, TFS, BCN. All round trips from AMS
User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 847 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 10814 times:

Boeing had the chanse in late 60´s with the double-decker, but scrapped it, and I personaly think B is out of ideas right now to buildt a bigger 747-SMURF
but..........I can be wrong! Lets wait ´til 2010-2015 Big grin

Time will tell, and B will have to make one hell of a airliner to compete with A388 / 389 / 387........

Cheers *Mike//SE*  Big grin



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineMconway From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 10622 times:



User currently offlineHlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 10175 times:

It would definitely need four 777 engines and additional landing gear like perhaps the 777 6 wheel bogies in the front main, then the usual 4 in the back

User currently offlineSquirrel83 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9884 times:

Niiice FJWH . . I love BA ~ http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00000250.jpg

User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 12
Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6343 times:

What did Boeing have on the drawing board for the Super Transport it was going to make out of the 744 for transporting the 7e7 parts? That would take a whole lot of work and I saw the picture for it and it's way bigger than your modified pics. So maybe it is still possible. I think they will want to get the 7e7 out of the way and then maybe think about an A380 competitor.

I think the issue is really that not too many are in the market for such a large airliner. Boeing might have missed their chance in that market. And really, the 744 is turning into a cargo a/c than a pax a/c. 777-200/ER-300/ER are taking over those pax routes with more high tec gear and better reliability.

Let time tell as they have been saying here!

Thanks again!

UA777222



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlineRupesnz From New Zealand, joined May 2004, 105 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5738 times:

"What did Boeing have on the drawing board for the Super Transport it was going to make out of the 744 for transporting the 7e7 parts? That would take a whole lot of work and I saw the picture for it and it's way bigger than your modified pics. So maybe it is still possible."

Yes, but the 744 Super Transporter would be carrying items of large bulk but of ( relatively ) small weight so new gear, wings etc are not needed, also in their case efficiency is of less importance than that of a commercial carrier.



User currently offlineMark777300 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 388 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5620 times:

A 747 with a full length upper deck is something that has been mentioned a few times in the past. In fact, I have a book on the 747 which shows one of the proposed 747 expansion models which showed a 747 with a full length upper deck and a 747SP style tail. While I'm sure these modifications can be made to the fuselagr itself, the wing would have to be changed, the type of engines would be much like the ones used for the A380, and the landing gear would have to be heavily modified to compensate for the larger engines. I'm sure it's possible, and it would probably be cheaper for Boeing to do than to come up with a completely new design. But Boeing would most certainly have to make this aircraft comparable in economics to the A380 to be a good sell.

User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6289 posts, RR: 54
Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 5538 times:

As L.1011 correctly stated, a heavier 747 will not only need a new fuselage, but also a new wing. The 744 is really stretched to the limit of the current wing.

When taking off with a heavy load the 744 cannot stick to the 250 kts. speed limit below FL100 without flaps extended. Some upgraded engines won't do the job.

It's no big problem on the 744. But anyway flaps means both drag and noise. Drag means also higher power needed for the same climb profile, and therefore even more noise. (And of course increased fuel burn).

Still no big problem, but on a significantly heavier 747 the problem would escalate.

In that respect the 380 is in a different class since it has a 50 feet wider wing span.

The bump, area ruling and the last 0.01 or 0.02 Mach number will not be the deciding factors for future large airliners.

Any future large ship will at least have to match the noise properties of the 380. Otherwise they will have to pay a significant noise penalty at many airports, or they will be banned altogether.

Revised fuselage, new wings, larger engines, tail to fit, you see, there isn't much left.

It is common practice to regard the 747 and the 380 as sort of competitors, where the former is just a little smaller. And efficiency factors are compared down to fractions of cent per seat/mile. But in the long run the 380 may be the winner simply because noise rules make it the only realistic choice for the airline companies.

And in the other end of the size scale the 777 will the same way outperform the good old 747.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Pilatus Announces The Next Generation PC-12 posted Mon Oct 16 2006 20:13:10 by Airimages
Next-Generation 737-900ER Takes Maiden Flight posted Tue Sep 5 2006 20:26:07 by Leelaw
Atlas Air To Order Next Generation Freighters posted Mon Aug 14 2006 16:20:47 by PanAm_DC10
The Next Generation Of Airport Movies posted Mon Feb 27 2006 21:23:29 by AAFLT1871
Next Generation 767? posted Fri Jan 20 2006 08:23:01 by Wargo7772
Will There Be A "next Generation" An124? posted Fri Jan 6 2006 15:07:40 by ZakHH
Next Generation SST posted Sun Dec 11 2005 05:26:53 by IAH744
The Next Generation 737 WN Launch Customer? posted Wed Apr 27 2005 17:03:15 by Georgiabill
737: Next Generation Till When? posted Tue Mar 22 2005 18:53:04 by SU184
737-600 & 737-700 For Aerolineas? posted Thu Mar 3 2005 08:02:58 by ArgInMIA