okie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3282 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (2 years 9 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6610 times:
The 5th pod was an option that only 3 original operators chose, largely due to the lack of ability to ship a motor the size required for a 47 at the time.
There are turbines out there now considerably larger now not requiring an additional pod and shipped by freight aircraft which were not available at the time the 47 was new.
I suspect the option has fallen off into the round file.
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12710 posts, RR: 80
Reply 2, posted (2 years 9 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6605 times:
Quoting Max Q (Thread starter): Just wondering if the -8 can carry an engine in a fifth pod if necessary ?
I suspect not; they never tested a 5th pod and, given the new wing and significant size difference for the GEnX-2B over prior 747 engines, I don't think you'd be able to have certified it without flight testing.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26514 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (2 years 9 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5977 times:
Quoting okie (Reply 1): The 5th pod was an option that only 3 original operators chose
Since the question involved the 747-8 it's not clear what 747 model you are referring to. If you are referring to all 747s, there are A.net photos of 747s (all models, -100/200/300/400) of at least 12 original operators with the 5th pod installed.
747classic From Netherlands, joined Aug 2009, 2319 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (2 years 9 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4951 times:
All 747-100/200/300 series had the option (attachment point installed) to carry a fifth pod.
If an operator wanted to use this option, Boeing provided the amended OM (after paying the required fee).
AFAIK only the PW JT9D series and the RR RB211-524 series were certified for fifth pod operation at the 747 classic aircraft.
No GE engines (-50E/E1/E2 and -80C2B series) were certified for fifth pod operation. Both GE engine types were designed to be split for (lower deck) transportation and all early 747/CF6 operators (KL, AF, LH, etc) had 74M and/or 74F in their fleets, able to transport a spare engine (no splitting required) at the main cargo deck.
I have no knowledge about fifth pod operation at the 747SP.
The 747-400 series were also sometimes used for fifth pod operation. Known users are QF and SA (both RB211 series). But at that time (end of the eighties of the last century) almost all spare engines are already shipped with 74M, 74F or other wide body freighter aircraft.
The 747-8 series has not been certified for 5th pod operation. Also AFAIK no attachment point and re-enforced wing structure , inboard of engine #2, has been included in the new wing built up. ( for weight saving reasons ?).
[Edited 2012-06-30 06:02:01]
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.