Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Better Aerodynamics - B-747-8F Or B-747-8I?  
User currently offlineTomB From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 79 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3192 times:

Now that both the Boeing 747-8F and the B-747-8I have been flying, which aircraft has the better aerodynamics? The airframe on both aircraft are very similar with the Freighter model having a short crown behind the cockpit whereas the Intercontinental model has the extended crown behind the cockpit to increase passenger capacity.

Are there any experts on the Forum who can tell us the aerodynamic effects of a short crown vs. the elongated crown?

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineGST From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 930 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3170 times:

The longer crown will have marginally (and this is very marginal indeed) greater surface area and thus friction drag. On the other hand it may make for a more favourably consistent change in cross sectional area of the aircraft as you go back, so for highish transonic cruising this may be better. I doubt there are released figures that can let the layperson (and competitors) check this too carefully mind, so you'll probably only get theories here.

User currently offlineQantas744ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1286 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3062 times:

A B744 captain who unfortunately is no longer a member once wrote that the B744F enjoyed flying slightly faster than the B744. They planned for Mach .86 on the freighter and .85 on the pax.


Happiness is V1 in Lagos
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6343 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3035 times:

Quoting GST (Reply 1):
The longer crown will have marginally (and this is very marginal indeed) greater surface area and thus friction drag. On the other hand it may make for a more favourably consistent change in cross sectional area of the aircraft as you go back, so for highish transonic cruising this may be better. I doubt there are released figures that can let the layperson (and competitors) check this too carefully mind, so you'll probably only get theories here.

The history of the SUD (Stretched Upper Deck):

-Boeing develops 747SP, discovers during testing that fuel consumption during high mach cruise (~0.84M and above) is much better than predicted. This turns out to be because having the upper deck terminate just before the wing root creates a previously unknown area rule benefit.
-To capitalize on this discovery (on non -SP's), Boeing develops -300 model, and even sells some SUD modifications (for -200's and even -100's) to the likes of KLM, ANA, and JAL...
-400 passenger model available as SUD only

Of course, the 747-8i carries on the legacy of the stretched upper deck, including more favorable fuel consumption at higher mach numbers.

Non-converted freighters don't use it, because #1, it adds weight and #2 the upper deck floor impedes on cargo volume (apparently, some freight operators load out the 747 floor to ceiling). The (slight) aerodynamic benefits of the SUD don't outweigh the disadvantages in this case. Passenger operators like it because you get more seating upstairs...



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4357 posts, RR: 19
Reply 4, posted (2 years 11 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3013 times:

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 2):


A B744 captain who unfortunately is no longer a member once wrote that the B744F enjoyed flying slightly faster than the B744. They planned for Mach .86 on the freighter and .85 on the pax.

Think you have that backwards, the longer upper deck lowers drag, improving aerodynamics and increasing the cruise mach number.



The -8i is predicted to be slightly faster than the -F version in fact.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Better Aerodynamics - B-747-8F Or B-747-8I?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
BA 747 Mid Or High J Question posted Sun Jun 28 2009 14:17:17 by Mockney
Changes We Will Ever See A 747-8F/I(ER)? posted Mon Jan 3 2011 14:46:08 by 747400sp
Will 747-8i 's Wings Be So Curved? posted Fri Nov 5 2010 00:48:17 by dennys
Boeing 747-8i Questions posted Sat Sep 18 2010 12:31:53 by GearDownFlaps30
Will 747-8I Have Four Thrust Reverser posted Thu Nov 13 2008 19:07:59 by 747400sp
747 Better At Precision Flight-Path Control? posted Mon Dec 31 2007 02:25:31 by Faro
Expected Operating Data 747-8i V 747 400 posted Tue May 8 2007 18:10:01 by SunriseValley
High Altitude Airports: 747-200 Better Than 744? posted Tue Feb 20 2007 14:21:23 by Mozart
Would A 747 Be Better With 2 GE-90s? posted Mon Mar 8 2004 20:57:03 by Fly2hmo
Is It True That A 747 Has A Smaller Cockpit? posted Thu Aug 18 2011 19:57:43 by 747400sp

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format