OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 907 times:
I'm not an aeronautical engineer (nor do I play one on TV) but my guess would be that if Boeing could re-build that JAL 747 from the floorline down (on-site, off-runway, in the dead of an ANC winter), than they could darn sure so something like, maybe, repair/convert this aircraft into a nose-loading freighter...
Zbeeblebrox74 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 816 times:
Ok, my $10 input. From the looks of it, the fractures in the fuselage are obviously very severe, but at the same time they seem to be limited entirely to Section 41, mostly along the assembly point. My guess is that if the damage is indeed limited to this section, the plane could fly again if a new nose section is fitted (eg cannibalize one of KLM's B747-206B SUDs currently sitting in the desert).
If, however, the structural damage extends beyond the first passenger door into the much larger forward fuselage assembly I'm pretty sure it's a writeoff (could still be fixed but probably cheaper to buy a new one). I do hope they can repair it. Sure looks like a major 'oopsie daisy'!!!
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 793 times:
The latest Airliners magazine out of the UK has an awesome article on the onsight restoration of the JAL 747 at ANC. They literally re-built a 747 out in the open.
It cost 21 million at the time, which was cheaper than a new one for 35 or 40 million (twenty years ago prices!).