Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Hopefully Not A Stupid ANA747 Question  
User currently offlineAvroArrow From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 1045 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 10 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2910 times:

I was cruising another unrelated thread and came across a photo of an ANA 747-400 and after clicking on it I noticed that it didn't have winglets. I thought this was strange and looked at a bunch of other ANA 747-400 and they didn't have winglets either. So yes I'm a moron and I never noticed this before tonight.
My question is in two parts:
A) Is this because it is a high density short haul config aircraft?
B) Does anyone else fly the 747-400 without winglets?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dennis Chang



I do know that the 747-400 can legally fly without the winglets since I remember seeing Qantas (I think) flying with only one winglet attached due to an incident that damaged one a few years back.


Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2869 times:

Some Japanese customers have what is known as the 747-400D, D for Domestic. These aircraft are optimized for short haul, high density routes. They are the only -400s without winglets.


LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineWdleiser From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 962 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2794 times:

Yes LY744 is completely correct, the winglets on short hauls would be less effecient than without them due to the added weight. Winglets prove effecient over the course of a long haul flight.

User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1290 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 20 hours ago) and read 2695 times:

And in the list of other carriers operating the Boeing 747-400D, only JL and NH are customers if I'm not mistaken.


I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3993 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 2632 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

BrightCedars is right, only JAL and ANA operate this variant of the 747-400. I don't think any other airline will ever order the 400D. You can tell it's a 400D as opposed to a 300 because the older variant has HF antennae attached to the wingtips, the 400 doesn't. If you see a 400D in ANA livery, I mean a 747 with a stretched upper deck and withouth winglets, you know at first glance it's a 400D because ANA never had 300's. If you see a 400D in JAL livery then you have to see if it has HF antennae like I explain, or not, because JAL did have 300's. JAL is the only airline having flown both the 300 and the 400D variants.

Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineNumberTwelve From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 2604 times:

lol@Avro - when I read the topic, everything was clear.
I had same doubts when I saw an ANA 744 D half a year ago - now next question: why cargo 742 with winglets?  Wink/being sarcastic



signature censored by admin - so check my profile
User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4871 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 2575 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

all JL 744s are GE powered, all their previous 747s are PW, another way to tell whats what.

User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3993 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 14 hours ago) and read 2505 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

NumberTwelve, the cargo "742" you are talking about is a 744, not a 742. The 747-400F has it's upper deck shrinked to that of the original lenght to save weight. The freight is loaded only on the lower deck and the upper deck is used only as a galley and rest area for the crew: four pilots and two flight attendants, in other words six people onboard the aircraft at the most. So there is no reason to keep the upper deck stretched.

Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 2395 times:

The winglets were removed because of the compatibility with existing gate widths. All the domestic stands & gates were designed with 747 classic wingspan in mind. The 744 wingspan would jut into adjacent gate space restricting the aircraft to something like 763 or smaller. At most provincial airports this is not a big problem but at HND, it provides a major scheduling headache for NH & JL. When the 744D was being designed in the late 1980s, Boeing allowed the option of removing the winglets plus the outer section of the wingspan.

AvroArrow,
No need to be embarrassed. Many people haven't been to Japan and I don't mind educating enthusiasts about this no matter how many times it takes.


User currently offlineWestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2135 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 2370 times:

Hey. ANA 747s aren't stupid  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Quoting American 767 (reply 4):
You can tell it's a 400D as opposed to a 300 because the older variant has HF antennae attached to the wingtips, the 400 doesn't


Excellent point ! You can see what American 767 is saying in these examples (View Large):


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © S.L. Tsai
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Helmut Bierbaum



[Edited 2005-02-24 01:44:55]


The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
User currently offlineAvroArrow From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 1045 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 3 hours ago) and read 2320 times:

Thanks to everyone for the info. A380 or not, the 747 has always been my favorite heavy hauler. Sadly I live where they are very rare, but at least I have A.net to ease my pain.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
User currently offlineCOAMiG29 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 515 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 2 hours ago) and read 2287 times:

can legally fly without winglets? are there some planes that cant fly without winglets?

this is my stupid question

i know what winglets do but how effective are they?

--COAMiG29--



If Continental had a hub at DFW with nonstop flights I would always fly them, unfortunantely good things take time.
User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1868 times:

Great discussion forum we would have if we all already knew everything...


LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineVS74741R From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 272 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1733 times:

Also 747-400D aircraft have strengthened landing gear to cope with more landings then usual long haul 747s. Another way to tell JAL 747-300s apart from 747-400Ds is that the 400Ds have the new engines where as the 300s have the older type.


Obviously a Virgin Atlantic fan!!!
User currently offlinePositiveClimb From Germany, joined Jun 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1726 times:

@COAMiG29

I think AvroArrow did not question whether the 744 can fly without winglets, of course it can, I think he stressed the word legally, as the 744 is certified with the winglets. Therefore I am not sure whether it is allowed to fly without (but seems to be, as AvroArrow stated).

Concerning your question of efficiency, the following link states that a 747-400 suffers about 2.5 % drag losses without winglets attached.
http://aerodyn.org/Drag/tip_devices.html

Can't find the exact figures for a 744, but according to
http://www.b737.org.uk/winglets.htm
the blended winglets on a 737 allow an improve of cruise fuel mileage up to 6 percent.

Hope that helps!  Smile

Regards,
Fabian/PositiveClimb



Proud Airbus employee
User currently offlineBH346 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3265 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1704 times:

Another question... on the 744Ds, do they have coach seating on the upper deck? I though I saw a pictures of an ANA 744D with coach seats on the upper deck. Does anyone know if they are reserved for higher fare classes or passengers with higher FF status?


Northwest Airlines - Some People Just Know How to Fly
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...
Not Negetive Delta Question posted Sat Sep 25 2004 22:48:39 by Jetranger2000
NW DC-9's - Not The Typical Question posted Sun Jul 13 2003 01:12:25 by MCOtoATL
Stupid A-380 Question posted Fri Feb 1 2002 09:12:21 by Mikeclod
A Stupid Question Re: Ticketing Today posted Sun Dec 24 2006 02:31:32 by Symphonik
Merger Question, NOT Theory. posted Tue Aug 22 2006 05:37:44 by CVG2LGA
Stupid Question About CO 777 posted Wed Aug 3 2005 05:18:13 by Crownvic
Probably A Stupid Question But I Am Going To Ask posted Sat Jul 2 2005 04:43:18 by Lando
A 777 Belly Landing (Question, Not Accident) posted Mon Apr 4 2005 20:03:43 by KhenleyDIA
Stupid Question....c/n...? posted Tue Mar 1 2005 03:55:52 by ERJ145LR
Really Quick (and Really Stupid) Question posted Thu Oct 21 2004 05:51:46 by DLKAPA