Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is That A 741 With Winglets?  
User currently offlineLevg79 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 994 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10075 times:

Hello everyone!

I was looking at this picture and got confused:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Marlow


Considerin the upper deck, this looks like a 741, but what about the winglets. Is it really a 744 whose upper deck looks smaller than it's supposed to be or is there something wrong with my eyes?

Any comments would be appreciated.

Leo.


A mile of runway takes you to the world. A mile of highway takes you a mile.
41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePhilb From Ireland, joined May 1999, 2915 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10057 times:

No, it's a bog standard B747-400F. No need for the extended upper deck

User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4747 posts, RR: 45
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10056 times:

It's a 747-400F, all -400Fs have the shorter fuselage and 3-window upper deck...hope that helps


Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently offlineJJMNGR From Brazil, joined May 2004, 1018 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10040 times:

Sorry but there is something wrong with your eyes. May a suggest a dark sunglass and a guide dog? I´m joking of course...sorry for the joke!

It is a B744F. All the B744F don´t have the longer upper deck. What for? Just to carry extra weight and loose in payload? Also the engines are brand new and are totally different from the older B741...

Again, sorry for the joke ok?

Cheers.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21503 posts, RR: 60
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10039 times:

All non-conversion 744Fs, that is.

As for a 741 with winglets, you will see one soon as they are tested out, and eventually, you will see 741/2/3 and possibly 400 with new blended winglets somewhere around 20 feet tall.

Also, early 777s have winglets in the works...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2644 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10025 times:

As already correctly answer, its a 747-400F

Basicaly the 741 airframe (to put it simply) with 747-400 aerodynamics, wing and engines.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineLevg79 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 994 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10016 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 4):
Also, early 777s have winglets in the works...

I remember reading that 777's wing is designed to be efficient without winglets.

Also, what are the differences between 741Fs and 744Fs, except for the cockpit and newer engines? I assume the size is about the same, or am I wrong?

Leo.



A mile of runway takes you to the world. A mile of highway takes you a mile.
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2432 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 10014 times:

The 744F has the 741 upper deck.
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...eral_aviation/read.main/1866460/4/

.



Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9967 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 4):
As for a 741 with winglets, you will see one soon as they are tested out, and eventually, you will see 741/2/3 and possibly 400 with new blended winglets somewhere around 20 feet tall.

Wasn't there a study release from Boeing a couple of months back saying that raked wingtips were their "way of the future" for their larger craft, as they were just as efficient in the longterm and the widebodies weren't as gate-restricted as the winglet and blended-equipped narrows (since raking adds to wingspan)?

That also could have just been a shot at the aftermarket winglet manufacturers, as well (although the concept photos of the 787 with rakes as opposed to winglets/blended would lead me to believe otherwise).



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1608 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9807 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

One 747-200 has been flown with winglets by API. However, the design was not taken to certification:



Quoting Levg79 (Reply 6):
I remember reading that 777's wing is designed to be efficient without winglets.

Propaganda from The Empire. Any wing can benefit from a span extension. A winglet is just a non-planar span extension.

Quoting Wukka (Reply 8):
Wasn't there a study release from Boeing a couple of months back saying that raked wingtips were their "way of the future" for their larger craft, as they were just as efficient in the longterm and the widebodies weren't as gate-restricted as the winglet and blended-equipped narrows (since raking adds to wingspan)?

More propaganda from The Empire.


User currently offlineRobK From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3946 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9769 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 4):
and eventually, you will see 741/2/3 and possibly 400 with new blended winglets somewhere around 20 feet tall.

You're kidding, right?

Winglets 20ft tall ????

RK


User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9750 times:

Quoting RobK (Reply 10):
Winglets 20ft tall ????

Seems crazy, but consider the size of the plane and wing...then thing about the 73G with it's 8ft tall blended winglets. 20ft on a 747 isn't so insane, to scale.



There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
User currently offlineB744F From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9664 times:

The 744F's are beautiful airplanes

User currently offlineEg777er From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 1837 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9652 times:

I thought that one of the reasons for putting the extended hump into the 747-300 was that it reduced drag and increased range/payload....so why not incorporate into the 744F?

User currently offlineN754PR From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9639 times:

Is this for real?? A member of a site such as A.net with over 300 posts and you dont know what a 744F is .....

User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9615 times:

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 9):
More propaganda from The Empire.

I'm sorry... I guess that I didn't include that in my post when I said, "That also could have just been a shot at the aftermarket winglet manufacturers..."

*groan*



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlineB744F From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9580 times:

Quoting Eg777er (Reply 13):
I thought that one of the reasons for putting the extended hump into the 747-300 was that it reduced drag and increased range/payload....so why not incorporate into the 744F?

No easy way of getting cargo up there to the top deck


User currently offlineHalophila From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 646 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9546 times:

IIRC they also tried the blended winglets on a L-1011 a while ago too (seem to remember it being in CO old c/s), but the winglets never materialised on the a/c in production and were not retrofitted.


Flown on 707, 717, 727, 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 741 742 743 744 74SP 757 753 762 763 772 773 77W D10 DC9 M11 M80 M87
User currently offlineBhmbaglock From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2698 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9490 times:

Quoting Levg79 (Reply 6):
I remember reading that 777's wing is designed to be efficient without winglets.

That's the newer ones with raked wingtips. Older standard wings would definitely benefit particularly since 777s tend to fly long routes.



Where are all of my respected members going?
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1608 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 9321 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Wukka (Reply 15):
I'm sorry... I guess that I didn't include that in my post when I said, "That also could have just been a shot at the aftermarket winglet manufacturers..."

Ooooops - sorry about that. I read the beginning of your post and jumped to conclusions too quickly. Your last paragraph is dead nuts on. BTW - the short range 787-3 will have winglets (Boeing designed, not APB designed), while the 787-8 and 787-9 will have raked tips.

Quoting Halophila (Reply 17):
IIRC they also tried the blended winglets on a L-1011 a while ago too (seem to remember it being in CO old c/s), but the winglets never materialised on the a/c in production and were not retrofitted.

No L-1011 has ever been flown with winglets. I think you are thinking of the NASA testing of a DC-10 with winglets.


User currently offline4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 3011 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 9265 times:

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 9):
Propaganda from The Empire. Any wing can benefit from a span extension. A winglet is just a non-planar span extension.



More propaganda from The Empire.

So, what you're trying to say here is that you think it's really clever to refer to Boeing as "The Empire"?
I disagree.

The original question has been answered, but I gotta say that I prefer the "short hump" 747 to the extended 743/4 (passenger!)



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
User currently offlineLeanOfPeak From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 509 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 9230 times:

Yep, as has been said, factory -400F's have the short upper deck.

Just to confuse things further, some -100's and -200's have been converted to the stretched upper deck.  Smile


User currently offlinePhilb From Ireland, joined May 1999, 2915 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 9130 times:

Which 100srs were cvtd to SUD?

User currently offlineHalophila From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 646 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 9030 times:

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 19):
No L-1011 has ever been flown with winglets. I think you are thinking of the NASA testing of a DC-10 with winglets.

That's exactly what I was thinking of, thanks.



Flown on 707, 717, 727, 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 741 742 743 744 74SP 757 753 762 763 772 773 77W D10 DC9 M11 M80 M87
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21503 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 8866 times:

Quoting Bhmbaglock (Reply 18):
That's the newer ones with raked wingtips. Older standard wings would definitely benefit particularly since 777s tend to fly long routes.

Exactly. Any winglets you see on the 777 would be 772ER and 773 retrofits, not on new planes (though theoretically, they could be on newly delivered 772s in the future, still as a retrofit). B has decided raked tips are their factory option for widebodies.

I had never seen that pic of the 747 with blended winglets. Av Partners said they thought it would be good for cargo ops, so why did they stop the certification process? as for 20 feet, that was an educated guess, but those winglets look to be a bit less than that, maybe 15 feet. But it's hard to tell. The 10 foot winglets on the 757 don't look that tall, so those could be 20 feet and just seem smaller next to the tall 747. Would be easier to tell from a direct side view.

I think the next plane they are looking at certifying, now the the 757 is working out and the 737 line is not incorporating winglets in all NG models, is the 762 and 763.

Quoting LeanOfPeak (Reply 21):
Just to confuse things further, some -100's and -200's have been converted to the stretched upper deck.  

It's not just that, as while the SUD was available as a retrofit, the 741 and 2 were also made available in SUD versions, and JAL took 2, IIRC.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 ZK-NBT : Not sure on 741's but KLM had several 742's converted to SUD in the mid 1980's. Just trying to think weather AF or UTA's 742SUD's were delivered like
26 Post contains images Ljungdahl : "SUD" means Stretched Upper Deck, also a conversion. So the answer is that not a single 742SUD was delivered as such. /Johan
27 Post contains images RobK : Because all the extra metal involved to make it a full length "pod" adds a significant amount of weight and more weight means a higher fuel burn so e
28 LorM : It does not increase payload. In fact it restricts bulk pallet height under the forward hump section by a few feet which is exactly why Boeing does n
29 Post contains links and images SpeedbirdEGJJ : IIRC there is also an issue with the available cargo space being reduced directly underneath the upper deck. Therefore the shorter the upper deck the
30 Ikramerica : No, the term SUD does not indicate a conversion. It is Boeing term used for the option to have the SUD, and they made that offer available on the 741
31 Post contains links LeanOfPeak : PlaneMad doesn't have any conversion date, so it would appear they were actually made that way, but JAL has JA8170 and JA8176, cn 23390/636 and 23637
32 Lemmy : Off topic, but where is the light coming from in the picture that SpeedbirdEGJJ posted? I looked at exterior shots of that aircraft and it doesn't hav
33 Post contains links and images LeanOfPeak : Looks like recessed artificial lighting. View Large View MediumPhoto © Peter.Pan
34 AvroArrow : I think those are just lights built into the side of the fuselage Lemmy.
35 LO231 : KLM's 747's in th earlier days? I think.
36 Chiawei : JAL 747-146SR were made with SUD. In fact, those are late model 747-100 made in late 1980's.
37 Post contains images Patroni : Correct. Under the upper deck the max height is 2.40m, behind it (loaded via the side cargo door) it is 3m. Actually the 747-300SF has the same avail
38 HAWK21M : B744F looks great with the Smaller Upper deck & Winglets. regds MEL
39 AKelley728 : Would they do something similar for the -400SF conversions?
40 AirWillie6475 : Actually you don't even have to look at the body, just look at the engines, that's not a classic 747 engine.
41 Patroni : Definitely. Don't have the 744SF specs here, so am not sure if they will bring it up to 742F volume or 744F volume. I guess this also depends on the
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...
What Is That Site With The Live Flight Tracker? posted Tue Sep 21 2004 22:39:29 by Rjpieces
Is There A 727 With Winglets? posted Fri Nov 3 2000 21:29:00 by Ericmetallica
First Ryanair 737 With Winglets Is Here posted Sat Dec 3 2005 12:47:04 by B742
Where Is That Jungle Airport With The "bumpy" Rwy? posted Sat Nov 8 2003 21:17:06 by Mozart
Where Is WN Equipping Their 737NG With Winglets? posted Tue Jul 8 2003 07:19:48 by Jcs17
What Is Going On With FLG5738? posted Sun Nov 26 2006 17:45:47 by Onetogo
Is There A Problem With Germanwings? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 09:35:18 by LordHowe
First AY B757 With Winglets Today To AGP posted Fri Oct 27 2006 09:29:51 by LordHowe
What Is That Thing Hanging Down From The Tail posted Wed Oct 18 2006 06:35:10 by FL370
What Is That In The Front Tires? posted Tue Oct 17 2006 19:29:38 by Flymario