Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26676 posts, RR: 83 Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2636 times:
If that is a 747-8 Intercontinental it might be related to the Extended Operations certification program. Or they could just be collecting NAMS data for validating their performance equations.
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5929 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2633 times:
Direct: 0 sm Planned: 9,976 Flown: 9,536 sm
Didn't know the 748 could do that on a single tank of gas Probably with no load...wonder how many hours they logged
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
jetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2020 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2618 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 2): wonder how many hours they logged
Looks about 21 hours! God that musta been a long ride! Though Im assuming there was back up crews.
Blue
Professor Foltz: You push down on that yolk, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yolk, the houses get bigger.
josekmlb From United States of America, joined May 2008, 493 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2601 times:
josekmlb From United States of America, joined May 2008, 493 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2572 times:
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2657 posts, RR: 12 Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2545 times:
I know they've been doing simulated commercial operations lately.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 1): If that is a 747-8 Intercontinental it might be related to the Extended Operations certification program.
I think it was an 8i. But why did that matter? I thought Boeing was doing ETOPS certifications on both freight and pax versions?
747classic From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 1779 posts, RR: 11 Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2415 times:
It was RC003/L/N 1440, call sign BOE440A, the third 747-8 Intercontinental test aircraft, performing ETOPS and/or NAMS tests., see reply 48 and further :
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26676 posts, RR: 83 Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2334 times:
Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 8): I think it was an 8i. But why did that matter? I thought Boeing was doing ETOPS certifications on both freight and pax versions?
That is correct, but the 747-8F has already completed her ETOPs certification, to my knowledge.
PC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2236 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2331 times:
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 7): Thats a full day on a plane I would of gone nuts
Sleep. Read a book. Also a test aircraft will not be packed full of monkeys in cattle class.
Big plane. Experimental for that matter. I would think a walkabout would be easy to do.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
dw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1244 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2304 times:
A large portion of the flight took place at FL420 (assuming flight aware data is correct which can be a big assumption to make). That is very unusual...
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2294 times:
They flew over every single state except West Virginia and Pennsylvania (unless you count the little piece within the St. Lawrence). Wonder why they didn't get any love from Boeing, especially since Philadelphia has one of their biggest offices!
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 81 Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2090 times:
Quoting dw747400 (Reply 12): A large portion of the flight took place at FL420 (assuming flight aware data is correct which can be a big assumption to make). That is very unusual...
Why unusual? They almost certainly weren't carrying payload (in order to be able to fly that far) and they're certified up to FL421. If you want minimum fuel burn, go high. The 787 is certified to FL431 and you catch them up at FL430 on flightaware fairly often.
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8737 posts, RR: 52 Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2075 times:
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 7):
Thats a full day on a plane I would of gone nuts
Sleep. Read a book. Also a test aircraft will not be packed full of monkeys in cattle class.
Big plane. Experimental for that matter. I would think a walkabout would be easy to do.
More than walking can be done. That airplane isn't configured with any seats as it is a BBJ (interior fitted after delivery). The engineers and extra crew could be playing football in the cabin of the plane since it is just one huge open area with nothing in it.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
murchmo From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 157 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2062 times:
lame, they didnt spell anything out. A while back the wrote "747" across the US. Also its very common for them to use a high altitude like that so as to stay above most traffic.
dw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1244 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2005 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 14): Why unusual? They almost certainly weren't carrying payload (in order to be able to fly that far) and they're certified up to FL421
It's an operational issue, not a technical limitation--its both possible and safe. FL420 falls above RVSM airspace, where 2000 foot altitude separation again comes into play. For most operations, it is not available. You can do FL410, 430, 450, etc... but 420 is not a "valid" altitude most of the time.
Thus, the 787 at FL430 is much less unusual than the 748 at FL420. The burn is better higher of course, so they might have gotten approval for this specific flight. An ATCer might be able to shed more light on how often this happens and how flexible ATC is at issuing FL420 (or 440 or 460 for that matter...).
canoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2657 posts, RR: 12 Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1828 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 10): That is correct, but the 747-8F has already completed her ETOPs certification, to my knowledge.
I asked today. It was definitely an ETOPS certification flight. So was the Barbados flight.
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 14): They almost certainly weren't carrying payload (in order to be able to fly that far) and they're certified up to FL421.
This particular plane only had something like 12 seats behind the cockpit door for flight test crew. There wasn't even simulated ballast for passengers. Just a boring 18 hours for the folks doing their job.
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5929 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1810 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 14): Why unusual? They almost certainly weren't carrying payload (in order to be able to fly that far) and they're certified up to FL421. If you want minimum fuel burn, go high. The 787 is certified to FL431 and you catch them up at FL430 on flightaware fairly often.
So, the 748 isn't certified up to FL452 like the rest of the 747 family? That's news to me
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 81 Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1781 times:
Quoting dw747400 (Reply 17): An ATCer might be able to shed more light on how often this happens and how flexible ATC is at issuing FL420
Up that high there is relatively little traffic, US ATC is usually pretty amenable to odd requests from experimental/test registered aircraft, and you can get a *lot* more flexibly when you don't care about your route or getting weird temporary vectors and offsets.
I would say less than 1% of the time I can't get the altitude (or altitude block) I want provided I'm willing to wait a few minutes, take a weird vector, or just call ARTCC the day before.
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 19): So, the 748 isn't certified up to FL452 like the rest of the 747 family?
Well, I'm looking at the AFM...don't know what else to say.
747classic From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 1779 posts, RR: 11 Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1748 times:
All 747 series up to the 744 are certified up to FL 451, only the 747-8 series is (-8F) or will be (-8I) certified to a ceiling of FL 421, probably limited by the new wing profile.
The only exception is the 747-400 Large Cargo Freighter (LCF), only certified up to FL431.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2008, 493 posts, 
Probably with no load...wonder how many hours they logged 
From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5742 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15867 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 1779 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
