hkgspotter1
Posts: 5750
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:43 pm

Still Not A W/O?

Thu Sep 06, 2001 9:57 am

 
FlagshipAZ
Posts: 3192
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 12:40 am

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Thu Sep 06, 2001 10:22 am

Looks like a write-off to me. The structural integrity has been compromised significantly. Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
 
OPNLguy
Posts: 11191
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 1999 11:29 am

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Thu Sep 06, 2001 10:41 am

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...


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Scandpix



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt



Boeing also spliced the nose of a new 707 on and older one damaged in a terrorist attack long ago, so they sure have the expertise to do whatever the airline (or hull insuror) wanted them to do.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
Mark_D.
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 9:55 am

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Thu Sep 06, 2001 10:41 am

It's dead, Jim

 Sad

(check out those other pictures, #3 and #7:

http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/sa747/3.shtml
http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/sa747/7.shtml

must've been going at a fair clip for the nosegear to `make it to the other side', like that)
 
IMissPiedmont
Posts: 6200
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 12:58 pm

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Thu Sep 06, 2001 11:52 am

The damage is not as bad as it looks. It could be repaired without much difficulty, but a fair amount of money. Whether repairs are economically feasible is the question.
The day you stop learning is the day you should die.
 
242
Posts: 495
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2000 1:10 pm

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Thu Sep 06, 2001 2:24 pm

Sure, it can be fixed. Bring the speed-tape, the BIG roll!  Wink/being sarcastic

It's pretty much up the insurance company whether this aircraft will fly again.
 
watewate
Posts: 2216
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2000 6:00 am

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Mon Sep 10, 2001 8:35 am

There's nothing a little duct tape can't fix.
 
Guest

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Mon Sep 10, 2001 9:16 am

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'!!!
 
Guest

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Mon Sep 10, 2001 9:21 am

Ok, a closer look at the photographs shows me that unfortunately the nosegear has been shoved quite a way back into the forward fuselage, beyond Sec 41 which could mean bad news  Crying
 
heavymetal
Posts: 4443
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

RE: Still Not A W/O?

Mon Sep 10, 2001 10:19 am

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!).