Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is This Special Delivery The Fix For The 787?  
User currently offlineTommyy From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 67 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 17711 times:

There seemed to be a special delivery yesterday at Boeing Field with a AN-124 and a lot of people standing around watching it


http://paineairport.com/kpae2304.htm

33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 17598 times:

The parts are way smaller than that, and not a single piece.

Maybe this is a part for the 748.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTommyy From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 17363 times:

why would it come in a An-24 instead of the dream lifter ?

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 17248 times:



Quoting Tommyy (Reply 2):
why would it come in a An-24 instead of the dream lifter ?

Why would the 787 fix come in an An-24 and not a Dreamlifter?

Dreamlifters are dedicated to the 787 program. Large 748 parts generally arrive by train or ship.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 17220 times:



Quoting Tommyy (Thread starter):
There seemed to be a special delivery yesterday at Boeing Field with a AN-124 and a lot of people standing around watching it

Can't be the 787 fix...that part looks like a flap. Nothing to do with the side-of-body join.

Quoting Tommyy (Reply 2):
why would it come in a An-24 instead of the dream lifter ?



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
Dreamlifters are dedicated to the 787 program. Large 748 parts generally arrive by train or ship.

Not only are Dreamlifters dedicated to the 787, their type certificate allows them to *only* carry 787 parts.

Tom.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 17137 times:

Maybe it's a part FOR a Dreamlifter?  Wink


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently onlineBlueShamu330s From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 3073 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 16874 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Tommyy (Thread starter):
Is This Special Delivery The Fix For The 787?

It did route NGO - ANC - PAE.

Are they just short of large uplift ?

Rgds



So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
User currently offlineNicoEDDF From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 1110 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 16549 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Not only are Dreamlifters dedicated to the 787, their type certificate allows them to *only* carry 787 parts.

How so, Tds?
Does a type certificate make the difference between what type of cargo (of course no pax) can be loaded?
Don't see the logic behind that.

rgrds
Nico


User currently offlineDynamicsguy From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 887 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 16377 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Can't be the 787 fix...that part looks like a flap.

Looks too curved to be a flap. A fuselage section (wrapped in plastic) for one of the other widebodies, perhaps? It may be worthwhile for Boeing to ship in a part like that any way it can if it's going to stop a line otherwise. Maybe either a supplier delay or damage to a section already in Everett.

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 6):
It did route NGO - ANC - PAE.

I have a vague recollection that some fuselage panels are made in Japan, but I could be completely wrong.


User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7719 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 16319 times:



Quoting Tommyy (Reply 2):
why would it come in a An-24

124. You couldn't even swing a cat in a 24.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineXaraB From Norway, joined Aug 2007, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 16225 times:



Quoting Dynamicsguy (Reply 8):
Looks too curved to be a flap.

It's a downsized A380 wing direct from TLS, which Boeing bought as they decided to replace the 787 wing with something that works...
 Big grin  duck 



An open mind is not an empty one
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12185 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 15767 times:

IIRC one of the JSDF-AF KC-767As was damaged last year during cargo loading operations. The part looks like a cargo door from a large WB, like a B-767. Could this be the cargo door from the KC-767 going back to Boeing to be refurbushed?

There is noting saying that Boeing chartered this An-124, a customer, like the JSDF-AF could have chartered it, too.


User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1259 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 14226 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Not only are Dreamlifters dedicated to the 787, their type certificate allows them to *only* carry 787 parts.

How stupid. Why is this? Are you certain the type certificate can specify the type of cargo that specifically?



Sic 'em bears
User currently offlinePygmalion From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 969 posts, RR: 38
Reply 13, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 13373 times:



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 12):
How stupid. Why is this? Are you certain the type certificate can specify the type of cargo that specifically?

Tom is correct, the FAA type cert for the LCF limits it to specific cargo ie 787 section shipments and empty shipping fixtures.

IIRC it has to do with the FARs around cargo fire protection. The LCF has no main deck cargo fire protection, is unpressurized and is inaccessible in flight. Normally you would have to have 2 hours of fire suppression.. those would be some huge halon bottles, not to mention that the main deck cargo area of the LCF is vented to atmosphere. They therefore control the cargo put in.

Its no different than commercial cargo carriers that have restrictions on what they put in the cargo areas... ie no oxygen generators or explosives. Boeing could probably amend the TC for the LCF to carry other things but right now there isn't anything that warrants that kind of cargo volume except the 787 sections. The LCF is purpose built, no surprise.


User currently offlineBoeingFixer From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 534 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12510 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Not only are Dreamlifters dedicated to the 787, their type certificate allows them to *only* carry 787 parts.

Tom.

Actually the TCDS, A20WE, states the following for the 747-400 LCF Allowable Cargo:

Quote:
These airplanes are not approved for commercial freight hauling operations of material other than that approved per Exemptions 8769 and 8769A. Only cargo that supports Boeing corporate lines of business is allowed for carriage. The lower lobe cargo compartments are decommissioned and may not be used to carry cargo. All items intended for carriage must conform to the standards found in Document D926U013-44, “747-400 LCF Flammability Acceptance Criteria for Cargo Carriage,” or be accepted by the FAA once a safe method of transport has been established. A summary of all items allowed for carriage is identified in Document D451U742-01, “Allowable Cargo – 747-400 Large Cargo Freighter.” Document D451U742-01 is considered part of the Weight and Balance Manual/Airplane Flight Manual. In addition, a listing of the FAA-approved shipping mechanical equipment (SME) fixtures that are approved for installation on the 747-400 LCF aircraft are contained in the Weight and Balance Control and Loading Manual (DocumentD043U545-BHC1).

At no point does the TCDS state that only 787 parts can be flown on the 744 LCF's.

Cheers,

John



Cheers, John YYC
User currently offlineShurik74 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 28 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 10614 times:



Quoting XaraB (Reply 10):
It's a downsized A380 wing direct from TLS, which Boeing bought as they decided to replace the 787 wing with something that works..

Good one... Made me smile for today



Shurik
User currently offlineMax777geek From Italy, joined Mar 2007, 538 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8951 times:



Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 13):
Tom is correct, the FAA type cert for the LCF limits it to specific cargo ie 787 section shipments and empty shipping fixtures.

IIRC it has to do with the FARs around cargo fire protection. The LCF has no main deck cargo fire protection, is unpressurized and is inaccessible in flight. Normally you would have to have 2 hours of fire suppression.. those would be some huge halon bottles, not to mention that the main deck cargo area of the LCF is vented to atmosphere. They therefore control the cargo put in.

Its no different than commercial cargo carriers that have restrictions on what they put in the cargo areas... ie no oxygen generators or explosives. Boeing could probably amend the TC for the LCF to carry other things but right now there isn't anything that warrants that kind of cargo volume except the 787 sections. The LCF is purpose built, no surprise.

It's me or there are quite a lot of things that are not oxygen generators or explosives and at the same time aren't in anyway part of the 787 program ?


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31444 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8905 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting XaraB (Reply 10):
It's a downsized A380 wing direct from TLS, which Boeing bought as they decided to replace the 787 wing with something that works...

I know you jest, but based on the computer and wind-tunnel modeling data, I hear the 787's wings are expected to be very impressive in terms of their performance once the plane eventually takes to the skies.


User currently offlineReggaebird From Jamaica, joined Nov 1999, 1176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8573 times:

It's a side body brace that will be put into the first few flight aircraft to support the weakened wing join areas.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31444 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 8166 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Reggaebird (Reply 18):
It's a side body brace that will be put into the first few flight aircraft to support the weakened wing join areas.

Where do they plan to fit it?

How do they plan to fit it?


User currently offlineN104UA From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 921 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7613 times:



Quoting Reggaebird (Reply 18):
It's a side body brace that will be put into the first few flight aircraft to support the weakened wing join areas.

Source Please



"Learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly." -H.H. The Dalai Lama
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 21, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6929 times:



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 12):

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Not only are Dreamlifters dedicated to the 787, their type certificate allows them to *only* carry 787 parts.

How stupid.

No, how smart. Why would you pay all the money to design and certify systems to meet full up freighter requirements when you know that the thing is only going to carry specific 787 bits?

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 12):
Why is this?

Much easier path to certification (and a simpler and lighter freighter).

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 12):
Are you certain the type certificate can specify the type of cargo that specifically?

Yes.

Quoting BoeingFixer (Reply 14):
At no point does the TCDS state that only 787 parts can be flown on the 744 LCF's.

That depends, very strongly, on what's in this document:

Quoting BoeingFixer (Reply 14):
A summary of all items allowed for carriage is identified in Document D451U742-01, %u201CAllowable Cargo %u2013 747-400 Large Cargo Freighter.%u201D

That's a Boeing document number and, without seeing it, we don't know what it lists. I had heard, several times, that the Dreamlifter is only allowed to carry 787 parts, but of course it's possible that other things are listed in D451U742-01. However, it's clearly obvious from the TCDS that the Dreamlifter is limited to some subset of cargo...just because it fits doesn't mean it's OK to carry.

Tom.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6724 times:



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 21):
That's a Boeing document number and, without seeing it, we don't know what it lists. I had heard, several times, that the Dreamlifter is only allowed to carry 787 parts, but of course it's possible that other things are listed in D451U742-01. However, it's clearly obvious from the TCDS that the Dreamlifter is limited to some subset of cargo...just because it fits doesn't mean it's OK to carry.

I would guess it is also certified to carry 748 engines, and Dreamlifter parts.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTF39 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6646 times:

Looks like either an outboard aileron or an upper rudder.

User currently offlineXaraB From Norway, joined Aug 2007, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 6504 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):
I hear the 787's wings are expected to be very impressive in terms of their performance once the plane eventually takes to the skies.

I'm sure they will be! I just couldn't resist... Can't wait for this plane to get in the air, where it belongs.



An open mind is not an empty one
25 Rheinbote : Too much chord for a movable like flaps or rudders, moreover the surface is spherical. Looks like a fuselage skin panel to me. The radius is too big f
26 Tdscanuck : Why? 748 engines can be transported cheaper and more quickly by truck (within the US) or 747F (anywhere else). Tom.
27 Pygmalion : its the inboard flap for the 747-8. The section sticking out to one side is the torque tube that is on the inboard end. They usually ship by sea, but
28 Pianos101 : yeah, you answered your own question. Determining what parts/fasteners/fixtures are allowed to go on barrels/sections for shipment on the LCF is a HU
29 Post contains links Rheinbote : Aha, I stand corrected, thank you. Forgot how much aft camber the new supercritical wing profile has. See page 31 of this presentation http://aci-na.
30 Tdscanuck : I think it went double-slotted on the freighter and single-slotted on the passenger. Tom.
31 Post contains links Rheinbote : See page 10 of this: http://aci-na.org/static/entransit/sunday_747-8.pdf Why would there be a difference between the -8F and the -8I? Both have the s
32 Post contains links Brendows : You are correct Rheinbote when it comes to double- and single-slotted flaps (for the inboard and outboard flaps respectively), something the presenta
33 Tdscanuck : True, but the -F has 40 tons higher MLW and 34 tons more MZFW. Flaps performance is much more critical on landing than on takeoff. However... I goofe
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 This Plug On The 777 posted Wed Nov 14 2007 05:00:18 by Qantas83
What Is This Next To The A380? posted Sun Oct 23 2005 21:24:21 by Frontiercpt
What Is This Hump On The Learjet posted Mon Apr 12 2004 07:53:34 by Jcded
Is This A 747 In The Backround Or What? posted Mon Mar 29 2004 04:21:50 by Trijetfan1
Is This Standard On The A346? posted Wed Feb 5 2003 10:22:10 by LMML 14/32
What Is This Plane On The Boeing Website? posted Sun Sep 29 2002 21:58:49 by Airplanetire
What Is This Plane In The Background? posted Fri Aug 31 2001 15:53:27 by Fjnovak1
What Airport Is This II? Follow The Clues. posted Tue Nov 21 2000 05:02:22 by Dellatorre
What Is This Mess On The DC10? posted Tue Oct 24 2000 19:46:21 by Sushka
Is This True About The Concorde? posted Sat Sep 30 2000 03:34:27 by Derek H