Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Who Will Take ANA's 747-400Ds?  
User currently offlineDIA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks ago) and read 6911 times:

With ANA phasing out all 747s, who will take the 747Ds? JAL? Who else would use these short-range domestics?

**Bonus if you can list who took any of the 747SRs.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kota murahashi



23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJimyvr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6769 times:

They can be modified to regular 747-400 so other carriers would take it.

User currently offlinePurpleBox From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6697 times:

Quoting Jimyvr (Reply 1):
They can be modified to regular 747-400 so other carriers would take it.

Yes, but the number of cycles will be huge - my HND-CTS flight at Christmas was only 1.5 Hrs!

PurpleBox.


User currently offlineOceansWorld From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6694 times:

Quoting DIA (Thread starter):
**Bonus if you can list who took any of the 747SRs.

Most have been scrapped. QR used two of them between 1995 and 1999, while Atlas Air bought some to get GE-engines for their ex. SQ PW-powered B742s, and perhaps spare parts too.

NH B747s & KZ B747s

Cheers.


User currently offlineSEPilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6674 times:

What about converting them to freighters? There's plenty of demand for those.

User currently offlineAV8AJET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6643 times:

Quoting Jimyvr (Reply 1):
They can be modified to regular 747-400 so other carriers would take it.

That's true, add back the fuel tanks and winglets then they could go almost anywhere. Maybe JAL could take them since they also operate the 744D.


User currently offlineMCOflyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6637 times:

How bout Oasis Hong Kong? They could convert them to regular 400 stats. Also, UPS could get them and convert them to F standards.

Hunter


User currently offlineOceansWorld From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6610 times:

Quoting PurpleBox (Reply 2):
They can be modified to regular 747-400 so other carriers would take it.
Yes, but the number of cycles will be huge

Well, at least NH is not a complet newcomer to such conversion. At least two of their B747-481D served for a while as B747-481 before being converted back for domestic ops.

JA8955 was delivered in May 1992 as a -481D, was converted to -481 and operated as such between 12/1996 and 10/2001, before reverting to -481D.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Yakfreak - VAP
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George iliopoulos



Same for JA8957. The aircraft was used as a -481 between 04/1997 and 04/2002.



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ky Cheng
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Yuxiaobin


[Edited 2007-05-16 21:40:33]

User currently offlineUnited_Fan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6519 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 4):
What about converting them to freighters? There's plenty of demand for those.

Wouldn't they be at a disadvantage because they were built stronger (heavier) to withstand more cycles?

I wonder if the 777's will be able to withstand all the short flights?

[Edited 2007-05-16 22:08:15]

User currently offline787EWR From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6440 times:

Quoting United_Fan (Reply 8):
Wouldn't they be at a disadvantage because they were built stronger (heavier) to withstand more cycles?

I would think with modifications, this would not be an issue. I would further assume that they would go through a D check(allowing for such modifications) before going back into service.

I wonder if the 777's will be able to withstand all the short flights?

I was unaware that they were using 777s for domestic services, although financially, it makes perfect sense. Not to answer a question with a question, but has Boeing created a 777 Domestic version?


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6402 times:

Quoting 787EWR (Reply 9):
Not to answer a question with a question, but has Boeing created a 777 Domestic version?

Not exactly, but the 777-200 or 777-300 (non ER) would be suitable for domestic operations. However, the 787-3 would likely be an even better choice.

Quoting DIA (Thread starter):
With ANA phasing out all 747s, who will take the 747Ds? JAL? Who else would use these short-range domestics?

ANA is not (yet) phasing out the 747-400D. They are only retiring the 747 on long-haul international routes. The -400D will be around for some time.


User currently offlineCarpethead From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 6197 times:

By the time NH and JL start retiring 744Ds, they will be approximately 20 years old and airframe cycles will be sky high. Any second-hand carrier will balk at the prospect of putting money in an airframe that will have extensive conversion costs and little remaining airframe cycles. Just like most of the 747SRs, they will be stripped of any valuables such as engines and scrapped at MZJ, VCV, or MHV.

Most of the NH 747-481s that are going to be retired the next couple of years have buyers. A few are going to Oasis in Hong Kong and a few to Air Atlanta Iceland for cargo conversion or charter config.

Quoting 787EWR (Reply 9):
Boeing created a 777 Domestic version?

In short, no.
NH & JL both operate basic 772 & 773 for their domestic operations.
However, they are both certified at the lowest gross weights.
(Why? Reduced fees all across the board. Why carry excess weight or certification around for an aircraft that would fly at maximum 2.5 hours.)


User currently offlineMotorHussy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6070 times:

Maybe EK can take them for The Haj shuttles between DXB and JED?!

User currently offlineLufthansa747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5996 times:

OX took 2 ex-JAL 74R's.

User currently offlineAfterburner From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5990 times:

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 12):
Maybe EK can take them for The Haj shuttles between DXB and JED?!

Hajj pilgrimage only happens once a year. What will EK do about them for the rest of year?


User currently offlineWCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5945 times:

Quoting Jimyvr (Reply 1):
They can be modified to regular 747-400 so other carriers would take it.
Hi,

Sorry to answer a question by another but how far are going the modification for a "D" model? Is it just a matter of cabin conf', or is there anything more?

[edit] I saw on the picture that the winglets re gone, so I assume that isn't just a matter a cabin. I will be glad to learn about others modifications!

[Edited 2007-05-17 04:38:47]

User currently offlineMDorBust From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5895 times:

Quoting United_Fan (Reply 8):
Wouldn't they be at a disadvantage because they were built stronger (heavier) to withstand more cycles?

I was also under the impression that the Ds were heavier than a stock 744 because of reinforced floors and a couple of other things.

Wouldn't reconverted Ds be heavier than other 744s?


User currently offlineCarpethead From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5846 times:

Quoting WCS (Reply 15):
Sorry to answer a question by another but how far are going the modification for a "D" model? Is it just a matter of cabin conf', or is there anything more?

If a 744D model is to be converted to a typical int'l configuration various plumbing work will have to be done beacuse the 744D don't have nearly the number of toilets as standard int'l ones and then there's the question of galleys, which 744Ds have very minimal of.
As for the airframe, the landing gear and surrounding structure is beefed up due to the the obvious.
The brake fan in the landing gear can probably be taken-off easily. This is due to a normal 744 doesn't see six cycles in a day!
I am not sure of other differences but there are probably some other minor details.

Of course, if a carrier wants to convert a 744D into a cargo config, all the pax systems are just ripped out and end of story. However, again considering the number of cycles, only two are probably going to be candidates for any future work: JA401A & JA402A, which have only recently (5/6 years ago) been converted to a 744D and airframe itself is about 10 years old. If I am not mistaken, I have seen a story on these two aircraft are indeed leaving in the next two years.


User currently offlineSllevin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5805 times:

Quoting PurpleBox (Reply 2):
Yes, but the number of cycles will be huge - my HND-CTS flight at Christmas was only 1.5 Hrs!

But those cycles are accounted for differently when the aircraft is operated within the "D" parameters (which includes lower weights, etc).

Quoting United_Fan (Reply 8):
Wouldn't they be at a disadvantage because they were built stronger (heavier) to withstand more cycles?

Does anyone have a source for the "beefing" up? I know it was true for the SRs, but with the 400D's I believe the reverse is true; Boeing did everything to lighten the birds, and then built a different MX process for aircraft operated within the "D" parameters of lower landing weights, lower taxi and takeoff weights, etc. The stab tank was omitted, for example, because not having it and the associated plumbing saved significant weight.

Steve


User currently offlineMotorHussy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5676 times:

Quoting Afterburner (Reply 14):
Hajj pilgrimage only happens once a year. What will EK do about them for the rest of year?

Hence the ?! on the end of my comment!


User currently offlineCricket From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5676 times:

Doesn't the lower MTOW make 400D's unsuitable for cargo opns?

User currently offlineAlbird87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5433 times:

Could Boeing take them and make them into LRFs for the 787 program??

User currently offlineCyclonic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3823 times:

Would it be wrong of me to say that I might feel uncomfortable flying on an aircraft with such high cycles and long life?
Or am I mistaken?

Either way, sad to see them go - have always wanted to see them in action.


User currently offlineTod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 3538 times:

Quoting OceansWorld (Reply 7):
Well, at least NH is not a complet newcomer to such conversion. At least two of their B747-481D served for a while as B747-481 before being converted back for domestic ops.

NH also does this with their 777 fleet. Four of the International cofiguration 772 are currently being converted to domestic configuration.

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 17):
If a 744D model is to be converted to a typical int'l configuration various plumbing work will have to be done beacuse the 744D don't have nearly the number of toilets as standard int'l ones and then there's the question of galleys, which 744Ds have very minimal of.

Not too tough of a job to install the applicable potable water supply, sink / floor drains and vacuum waste system plumbing.
Heath Tecna, Flight Structures and Jamco do this sort of work all the time.

Tod


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...
Who Will Take RG's Planes? posted Sun Apr 23 2006 03:30:32 by MD90fan
Who Will Take The 28 FlyI A-319's? posted Mon Jan 2 2006 19:53:01 by UAL747-600
Who Will Take AC A340-300s When They Are Replaced? posted Mon Dec 26 2005 06:43:41 by AirCanada014
Who Will Take The Dumped A340-500/600s? posted Thu Oct 13 2005 06:49:37 by Kaitak744
Who Will Take The $22M Deal At DFW? posted Sun Jan 23 2005 06:15:02 by AirStatDFW
Who Will Take U.S. Airways' Philly Hub? posted Tue Dec 28 2004 23:15:07 by SwissINTLA340
Who Will Take Over The Swiss Routes? posted Wed Feb 26 2003 10:48:15 by 717fan
Who Will Take NWA's DC-9 When Retired? posted Fri Aug 23 2002 08:08:50 by Alaskaairlines
Who Will Take Over At Mci? posted Mon Aug 5 2002 05:22:06 by Jcxp15
Who Will Take Over The Charlotte Hub If US Folds? posted Thu May 30 2002 18:50:05 by Beechbarron