Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
747-500/600/700, 747X, 747-400XQLR, 747-8 Evol.  
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6482 posts, RR: 3
Posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 10538 times:

So I was looking at the various post-747-400 projects from Boeing, and was trying to determine the differences between them.

To me, it appears that the 747-500/-600-/700 would have had a wing derived from the 777, with the 747-500/-600 otherwise being stretches and the -700 essentially being a whole new aircraft.

The 747X project looks like it was all about stretching. 747-400XQLR looks a lot less ambitious.

What became the 747-8 appears to basically be the 747-500 fuselage with a modified -400 wing and much newer-technology engines.

Is this all correct?


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSm92 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 10317 times:



Quoting N328KF (Thread starter):

I'd be curious about this topic too. What were the specifications for each type. Anyone have a table? I'd be good to compare ambition to what is now close with the 747-8.


User currently offlineB2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1369 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 10247 times:

Here are some previous threads with information on 747 variants:

747-8 And 747-600 (by Speedmarque Jan 2 2007 in Civil Aviation)
Boeing 747-400XQLR Data (by CX747 Feb 26 2002 in Civil Aviation)

I'll repost a specification table from the first thread; the -500 and -600 data are from Boeing 747-400 by Peter Gilchrist and the others (I think) are from Boeing press releases. The "-7I" is the original 747-8I with a shorter fuselage stretch. Specs obviously changed over time during the various programs, so other sources may have different information.

747-400747-400ER747-7I747-8I747-500X747-600X747X747X Stretch
Pax (3-class)416416450467462548430522
Range7,260 nm7,670 nm8,300 nm8,000 nm8,700 nm7,750 nm8,975 nm7,600 nm
MTOW875,000 lbs.910,000 lbs.970,000 lbs.970,000 lbs.1,166,000 lbs.1,186,000 lbs.1,043,000 lbs.1,043,000 lbs.
Length231 ft. 10 in.231 ft. 10 in.244 ft. 1 in.250 ft. 8 in.250 ft.279 ft.213 ft. 10 in.263 ft.
Span213 ft.213 ft.224 ft. 7 in.224 ft. 7 in.251 ft.251 ft.229 ft.229 ft


What's really remarkable is how ambitious the -500X and -600X were in terms of gross weight, capacity, and range. If I had more room, it would be interesting to compare them with the A380. Too bad the stars never aligned for that program, although given lackluster VLA sales to date, it probably would not have been a commercial success (and the cost might have crowded out more important projects like the 787).

--B2707SST

[Edited 2009-12-06 11:41:21]


Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29680 posts, RR: 84
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 10173 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 747-8I is in many ways the modern version of the original 747-500X.

Boeing 747-8I and Boeing 747-500X


Boeing went through about a dozen different development models of the 747 after the 747-400 entered service, eventually ending up with the 747-8.

The 747-500 and 747-600 had some traction, with TG and BA originally signing on to launch them, however the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis knocked TG out and BA re-evaluated the need for such a large capacity jump and therefore also pulled out, eventually drifting towards the A3XX (ordering the A388 about a decade later).

LH was always interested in a larger 747 and expressed serious interest in the 747-X - especially after 9.11 impacted TATL traffic, which was to be a focus of their A388 fleet. They were disappointed when Boeing canceled the 747-X and privately continued to express interest in a larger 747 model, including suggesting Boeing re-launch the 747-X. So I have never been surprised at their ordering the 747-8 nor did I ever feel they would walk away from it, even if they had ended up being the only operator of the type.

[Edited 2009-12-06 11:59:36]

User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9894 times:



Quoting N328KF (Thread starter):
So I was looking at the various post-747-400 projects from Boeing, and was trying to determine the differences between them.

Interesting topic, if I was a student looking for a thesis it would be an interresting topic, probably all studies, meeting minutes etc are still available.

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 2):
changed over time during the various programs, so other sources may have different information.

747-400

Wow, you have to learn me how to create such a neat text table on this site..

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 2):
What's really remarkable is how ambitious the -500X and -600X were in terms of gross weight, capacity, and range.

And dimensions, it would have been a challenge to meet current airport requirements..


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6482 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8398 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
The 747-8I is in many ways the modern version of the original 747-500X.

This is the way I see it too. If they create a 'ER' variant of the 747-8I, then it will definitely be very close.

But wow, the 747-600X was gorgeous! That long wingspan really added to the gracefulness.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8090 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 7655 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting N328KF (Reply 5):
But wow, the 747-600X was gorgeous! That long wingspan really added to the gracefulness.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
The 747-500 and 747-600 had some traction, with TG and BA originally signing on to launch them, however the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis knocked TG out and BA re-evaluated the need for such a large capacity jump and therefore also pulled out, eventually drifting towards the A3XX (ordering the A388 about a decade later).

BA ordered its second tranche of 777 around that time. I wonder if that was in substitute for the 747-600. In the late 1990's BA CEO Roger Ayling resigned and they were "right sizing" teh fleet. BA was going premuim with its Club World Class and cutting back on coach. BA's 777 tendancy with heavy J class planes leads me to say the 777 was the "right" size plane.


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...
747x Is New 747-500/600? posted Mon Feb 19 2001 21:50:27 by Sm92
747x/747x-stretch: Same As 747-500/600 Plans? posted Fri Jul 28 2000 17:29:02 by Surf
747-8 And 747-600 posted Tue Jan 2 2007 11:34:57 by Speedmarque
Why Not Call It The 747-500? posted Thu Feb 28 2002 10:14:53 by 747-600X
747 - Trent 600 posted Tue Jan 15 2002 00:37:39 by Vinovalentino
747-500 Maybe? posted Mon Aug 6 2001 17:57:30 by VS744
Why Wouldn't The 747-500+ Have Winglets? posted Fri Feb 18 2000 03:49:48 by 747-600X
Boeing 747-500 Sretch Version posted Tue Aug 31 1999 15:52:26 by 777200
747-500 posted Mon Mar 15 1999 18:24:11 by JWM AirTrans
747-500 posted Thu Mar 11 1999 00:46:33 by Navion