Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
747-8 Skylofts Concept  
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 7 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6196 times:

I came across this feature of a Boeing Concept study, called the Boeing 763-246C , which bears resemblance to a single deck A380. You could almost say its an early ineration of the Y3 concept. It was a design study for a 747 replacement. One thing that struck me is the design of sky lofts in this airliner, which look uncannily like the design that was proposed for the 747-8 Intercontinental.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/design/q0108.shtml





What is your opinion on the skylofts shown?

[Edited 2007-05-21 17:55:14]

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3599 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5852 times:

Wasn't favored by airlines for the 748i, don't think it would be favored for the 747 replacement. Airlines would use the space for galleys and crew rests. Personally I would love to have a place where I could escape to or maybe a playroom onboard for my daughter (keep her out of the hair of other passengers) but practicality and cost always wins.


Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineMotorHussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3334 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5796 times:

Looks kind of claustrophobic to me plus kinda weird having a totally unsupervised area on a plane carrying that many people. Good idea as a crèche, galley and crew rest area though.

Thanks for the interesting post.

Regards
MH



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5748 times:

Quoting EI321 (Thread starter):
I came across this feature of a Boeing Concept study, called the Boeing 763-246C , which bears resemblance to a single deck A380.

You should start a new thread on this bird as it's actually quite fascinating; far beyond the topic of skylofts.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3599 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5691 times:

Looking at the picture again. Got a wacko idea.

Instead of skylofts, sky suites. Ultimate First class. The current idea for lofts is that the passengers sit in a regular seat for take-off and landing and can go to the loft during the flight. This is kind of a waste. You want butts in all the seats not just for 30 minutes.

Instead, there could be 10 suites above the main deck. There could be two escape hatches ala 747 pilot escape through the ceiling or at the base of the space. These hatches have slides. By having emergency exits the pax don't have to sit in a regular seat on the main deck for take-off. They can be in their suite. It would be like having the upperdeck of a 747 but much higher class. Each suite has seats for take-off and landing, a bed, dining table, desk and large screen TV. There would be a limit of pax on this upper deck to limit liability but the cost would be very very high.

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 2):
Looks kind of claustrophobic

Yes but think about if JL or NH got these, they could just fill them with tatami mats and futons. It could be a flying Ryokan.



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5580 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 3):
You should start a new thread on this bird as it's actually quite fascinating; far beyond the topic of skylofts.

That 763-246C might actually be a natural candidate for being a derided/shunned (with good reason) trijet. A much lighter, fully composite version could probably make do with three 80-85Klb thrust engines.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 4):
Each suite has seats for take-off and landing, a bed,

Weren't the Skybeds of yore certified for takeoffs and landings?

[Edited 2007-05-22 05:08:50]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5352 times:

Look at the head on view, its a dead ringer for a single deck A380, expecially the wings!

User currently offlineAerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 802 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5279 times:

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 5):
That 763-246C might actually be a natural candidate for being a derided/shunned (with good reason) trijet. A much lighter, fully composite version could probably make do with three 80-85Klb thrust engines.

Personally I would like Y3 to be a standard 10 abreast at 18.5in seat width (or 11 abreast 17.5in seat width), single level aircraft (kinda like a bigger, wider 777), with twin engines at around 140,000lbs thrust each... hehehe. Could come in two lengths a max at just under 80m (262ft) and a smaller longer range version at just under 62m (I mean 72m). This would allow rome for the 787-10 to be fully developed at 8 or possible 9 abreast.

[Edited 2007-05-22 12:54:36]


What?
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5262 times:

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 7):
a smaller longer range version at just under 62m.

Wouldnt that be very similar in size & capacity to the 787-10?


User currently offlineAerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 802 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5258 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 8):
Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 7):
a smaller longer range version at just under 62m.

Wouldnt that be very similar in size & capacity to the 787-10?

Not with an extra 2 abreast it wouldn't



What?
User currently offlineAerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 802 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5250 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 8):
Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 7):
a smaller longer range version at just under 62m.

Wouldnt that be very similar in size & capacity to the 787-10?

Sorry just re-read what I wrote... I meant the smaller version to be 72m, not 62m. My apologies



What?
User currently offlineAlanUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5237 times:

Looks wierd. What I want to know... What is the guy waiting for on all fours on the right?  bouncy 

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5166 times:

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 11):
What is the guy waiting for on all fours on the right?

Admiring the nice pillow  scratchchin 


User currently offlineTod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1729 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4576 times:

Quoting Centrair (Reply 4):
There could be two escape hatches ala 747 pilot escape through the ceiling or at the base of the space. These hatches have slides.

747 flight deck excape hatch use requires training to be certifiable. To make an excape hatch pax friendly, the size and location of the hatch would add signigant structural weight, then slide would also add weight, the location where the hatches would need to go would be blocked off by all the relocated ducting that need to move outboard when you consider an overhead crewrest or similar space on any Boeing widebody.

The sketch provided by the OP looks similar to the crewrest that International Aero designed for Delta.

Tod


User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4358 times:

Quoting Centrair (Reply 4):
Yes but think about if JL or NH got these, they could just fill them with tatami mats and futons. It could be a flying Ryokan.

 laughing  Thanks for this; I laughed out loud! "R" class used to be the Concorde...in future it could be Ryokan class. smile 



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4330 times:

Just looking at the Calvin Klien model that is walking through

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 9):
Quoting EI321 (Reply 8):
Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 7):
a smaller longer range version at just under 62m.

Wouldnt that be very similar in size & capacity to the 787-10?

Not with an extra 2 abreast it wouldn't

It would be very similar, the 787-10 will have 9 abreast, bar a handful of expections. 8 abreast on a 787 will be no more common than 10 abreast on a 777.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4319 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 16):
8 abreast on a 787 will be no more common than 10 abreast on a 777.

That is far from true  Yeah sure


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4257 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 17):
Quoting EI321 (Reply 16):
8 abreast on a 787 will be no more common than 10 abreast on a 777.

That is far from true

Feel free to explain how so......

[How many operators are putting 8 abreast on their 787s?]


User currently offlineCJAContinental From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 459 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4229 times:

We won't see this design replacing the 747. Airbus studied this concept years ago and found that the middle isle would be insufficient for passengers leaving the aircraft during an emergency.

Interestingly though, at 264.4 feet, if that is the correct length, the length would be 80.6 meters.

This would be one huge aircraft!

[Edited 2007-05-23 01:51:50]


Work Hard/Fly Right.
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4204 times:

Quoting CJAContinental (Reply 19):
We won't see this design replacing the 747. Airbus studied this concept years ago and found that the middle isle would be insufficient for passengers leaving the aircraft during an emergency.

True (I only noticed the third aisle just now!). It is possible to configure a 12 abreast aircraft in two aisles, but I think that the above design wound be better in an A380 type layout. I just dont see lofts making onto an all new aircraft of this size when the cross section is similar in size to the A380s. A double deck layout like the A380 has more revenue earning potential.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31393 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4176 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CJAContinental (Reply 19):
Interestingly though, at 264.4 feet, if that is the correct length, the length would be 80.6 meters. This would be one huge aircraft!

The 747-600 would have been 85.01m in length (278.9ft). The 747-X Stretch was planned to be 79.8m (261.8 ft).


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4160 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
Quoting CJAContinental (Reply 19):
Interestingly though, at 264.4 feet, if that is the correct length, the length would be 80.6 meters. This would be one huge aircraft!

The 747-600 would have been 85.01m in length (278.9ft).

Stitch, by any chance do you know where I can find a detailed 747-600 spec? Im curious what the weight effeciency ratio would have been like compared to the A380, considering that the 747-8s is apparently less than that of the 747-400.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31393 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4120 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EI321 (Reply 22):
Stitch, by any chance do you know where I can find a detailed 747-600 spec? Im curious what the weight effeciency ratio would have been like compared to the A380, considering that the 747-8s is apparently less than that of the 747-400.

This is all I have for her:

747-600X Length: 278.9ft / 85.01m
747-600X Wingspan: 255ft / 77.72m
747-600X Horizontal Stabilizer Span: 78.1ft / 78.08m
747-600X Height: 71ft / 21.64m
747-600X Cabin Width: 20ft / 6.1m
747-600X MTOW: 1,200,000lbs / 544,320kg
747-600X MLW: 845,000lbs / 383,292kg
747-600X OEW: N/A
747-600X MZFW: N/A
747-600X Maximum Range: 7,750nm / 14353km

It comes from the 1998 Edition of Burns and MdDonnel's Aircraft Characteristics and a few other sources and is preliminary data.


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4111 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
This is all I have for her:

Wasnt it also to have a twin nosegear setup, like the AN225? It would have been an awesome machine.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31393 posts, RR: 85
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4084 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EI321 (Reply 24):
Wasnt it also to have a twin nosegear setup, like the AN225? It would have been an awesome machine.

It doesn't look like it from the drawings, but it would have had 777-style triple-axle wing main bogies (as would the 747-500 and 747-700) along with the standard double-axle twin centerline main bogies.


25 DfwRevolution : To date more than one third. That is a far cry from the number of carriers who fit 10-abreast into the 777. Troll at your own risk.
26 EI321 : Are you quoting a market estimation, or actual numbers? Can you name them? Boeing have also said that two thirds of 747-8s will be Intercontentals. I
27 Stitch : Boeing's own comments say that around 2/3rds of orders are going for nine-abreast which leaves a third at eight. Plus Airbus' own data shows only .3"
28 Brenintw : Anyone else notice that the concept drawing has FIVE MLG bodies in a 3-2 configuration?
29 EI321 : I know, but I dont believe a third will be 8 abreast in the end. We dont see many 747-400s configured in 9 abreast for the same reasons - airlines wa
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...
Lufthansa 747 Engines? posted Mon May 21 2007 07:19:20 by Bocajoe
Ana 747-400s For Lease posted Sun May 20 2007 23:03:42 by AF022
Pan Am 747 Configuration posted Sun May 20 2007 18:53:05 by 747buff
Future Of The 747 posted Sun May 20 2007 00:44:43 by Thrust
How Many UA B 747-400s In Operation? posted Sat May 19 2007 02:54:54 by United Airline
Which LH 747-200s Did I Take? posted Fri May 18 2007 17:35:37 by TurkishWings
Any 747-8 Orders Expected? posted Thu May 17 2007 20:31:45 by Soylentgreen
Who Will Take ANA's 747-400Ds? posted Wed May 16 2007 18:25:39 by DIA
747(s) At YIP posted Sun May 13 2007 01:38:08 by Falstaff
New Great Wall 747-400BCF. posted Fri May 11 2007 18:47:59 by Nlspot2004