airplanetire
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun May 13, 2001 11:59 pm

What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 4:00 am

What was wrong with the 747-300? I believe only 80 some were made adn that's not very many. What didn't airlines like about it?
 
AA717driver
Posts: 1502
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:27 am

RE: What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 4:15 am

The -300 was followed almost immediately(in aircraft years) by the -400. I don't have the numbers, but I would imagine that the capabilities of the -400 far outweighed the additional cost.

I do know that TWA tried to replace it's -100's and -200's with ex-Saudia -300's and couldn't because the upper deck emergency exits did not conform to FAA requirements. Shame, 1996(the last year TWA really had a chance) might have gone very differently.TC
FL450, M.85
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 4:24 am

The 743 entered service in 1983 while the 744 entered service in 1990.....so the 7-year gap was significant. The 743 was not immediately superceded by the 744.

The 742 was well-established & airlines found it easier to keep adding the 742 to their fleet than stepping up to the 743. The 743 also had less range than the 742.

I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
bacardi182
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2000 2:47 am

RE: What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 5:22 am

the -300 also had a 3 man crew instead of the -400's 2 man flight crew.
 
aamd11
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2001 11:54 am

RE: What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 5:25 am

It was mainly down to the fact the -300 was way off the range of the -200, i trhink about 1000nm with a full load, and that made it a little more expensive over longer routes.
The fact that a more advanced version was in the works, BA did consider 300s, but was told by boeing one year that a more advanced one was on the way, so they waited. im not sure about other airlines and why they didnt commit, if they did or didnt hear that news.
 
User avatar
ATA L1011
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 6:47 am

RE: What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 6:18 am

Yyz actually the 744 entered service in 1989 with NWA airlines.
Treat others as you expect to be treated!
 
fanofjets
Posts: 1980
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2000 2:26 am

RE: What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 7:15 am

On its own, the 743 isn't a bad aircraft. However, it doesn't always compare favorably with its predecessor (the 742) or its successor (the 744).

The 743's range is inferior to that of the 742, a problem for airlines operating the aircraft on very long-haul routes. The 743 is less well suited for carrying cargo because of the additional lower ceiling behind the forward hump (as compared to the 742). That's why dedicated 744 freighters have the 742's short hump.

The 744's advanced-technology engines offer much better fuel economy over those on the 742, which adds to a lot of fuel on a long flight. The 744's two-crew cockpit's advantages over the three-crew examples found on the classics are self-evident.
The aeroplane has unveiled for us the true face of the earth. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
 
Mr.BA
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: What Was Wrong With The 747-300?

Sun Feb 17, 2002 11:57 am

Wonder if anyone could help me here too. Are the landing gears on the B743 exactly the same as the B744 or are the 44s' are strengthened? And the fuselage, are they the same?

thanks very much.
Boeing747 万岁!