cun757
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 12:27 am

B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:16 am

I was thinking why Boeing never launch the 747 with full double deck, does any one knows...?
757 forever
 
tockeyhockey
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:57 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:19 am

there are many factors, but i believe that the aerodynamics of the plane are perfectly suited to having the hump exactly the way it is on the 744. any further lengthening would create aerodynamic penalties that would make the jet inefficient.

furthermore, i don't believe the current engine system could support that much additional weight. a whole mess of re-engineering would have to take place to accomodate such a dramatic change. i think that if boeing wanted a true double decker, they'd be better served to start from scratch.
 
cun757
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 12:27 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:25 am

Quoting Tockeyhockey (Reply 1):
i think that if boeing wanted a true double decker, they'd be better served to start from scratch.

don't you think its cheaper and better to try with the one that all ready exist... I mean, change engines and work in the aerodynamics... And try to making work...?
757 forever
 
kiwiandrew

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:40 am

Hi Cun757

interesting idea - one potential problem I can see ( apart from redesign/aerodynamics etc etc which more competent people than me can comment on ) - most pax airlines earn a lot from belly hold cargo as well - if you had two full length pax decks but still the same amount of underfloor space for baggage and cargo then a lot of valuable cargo is going to be squeezed out by the increased baggage - I have been told ( by the usual friend of a friend , so not sure how accurate the info is ) that the cargo sales are often the difference between profit and loss on a given route - forgoing cargo revenue for more pax who are all chasing their way around the web looking for the lowest $$$ might not make economic sense .
 
A350
Posts: 1010
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:40 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:02 am

I have often been thinking the opposite: removing the top, make a new nose and maybe new wings and offer a stretched version. That would be a superb, light large a/c family and a good complement to the T7 family  stirthepot 

A350
 
CruzinAltitude
Posts: 408
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 5:02 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:06 am

Quoting A350 (Reply 4):
I have often been thinking the opposite: removing the top, make a new nose and maybe new wings and offer a stretched version. That would be a superb, light large a/c family and a good complement to the T7 family

A350

If Im not mistaken, doesn't that describe the A340, which has proven to be less than a good complement to the T7 family?
 
tockeyhockey
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:57 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:15 am

Quoting Cun757 (Reply 2):
Quoting Tockeyhockey (Reply 1):
i think that if boeing wanted a true double decker, they'd be better served to start from scratch.

don't you think its cheaper and better to try with the one that all ready exist... I mean, change engines and work in the aerodynamics... And try to making work...?

i can't imagine boeing being able to simply "retro-fit" the 747 with a new, extended upper deck that ran the whole length of the airplane. this would require all new analysis of weight, construction, thrust, aerodynamics, electric systems, and on and on and on. a change of that magnitude would probably cost as much as a completely new airliner, in terms of production costs and changes to existing parts.

it would make more sense for boeing to start with a blank slate, incorporate all the knowledge they have gained from the 787 project in terms of bleedless engines and composite fuselages into a totally new design.

but, to be honest with you, it's simply not needed right now. airbus is going after the super-jumbo market, and boeing doesn't think that the super-jumbo market is large enough for one competitor, let alone two.

the 747adv is the right step, in my opinion. it is a simple stretch of an existing and very well proven design. it offers fleet commonality for many existing 747 operators, a lifting nose door option, and the ability to fly to all major airports without major infrastructure changes.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:41 am

The B747-400 already stretched the upper deck as far as was reasonable to stretch it (for that length). Eventually, Boeing will start with a clean-sheet design and replace both the B777-300 and B747. I don't expect it to have passenger seating on the upper deck, though it may have passenger bunks, galleys, and lavs. Certainly it will have crew rest upstairs. The shortest version needs to have about the capacity of the B777-300 because it will be the next step up from the B787-10.

With 11 across seating on a single deck, a version with B777-300 floor area would be around 66 meters long. One can imagine 66, 73, and 80 meter long variants.
 
airfrnt
Posts: 1992
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:05 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:43 am

It's simply a matter of capacity. You can bet that if there ever was that much demand for it (even during the regulation days) Boeing would have built it.
 
wdleiser
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 9:32 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:01 am

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 8):
It's simply a matter of capacity. You can bet that if there ever was that much demand for it (even during the regulation days) Boeing would have built it.

Boeing built the hump for the sole purpose of Cargo ops. So if Cargo shifted during flight it wouldnt go flying into the cockpit and the Hump also allows the liftable nose feature.


I just wish Boeing would do a comparison of the 744 with current engines and 744 with GenX engines. I just want to see the range and efficiency that engines alone would make.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1604
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:31 am

Quoting A350 (Reply 4):
I have often been thinking the opposite: removing the top, make a new nose and maybe new wings and offer a stretched version. That would be a superb, light large a/c family and a good complement to the T7 family



Quoting CruzinAltitude (Reply 5):
If Im not mistaken, doesn't that describe the A340, which has proven to be less than a good complement to the T7 family?

Boeing already did that. Anybody remember Project 397 (or whatever that number was)? Four engines, circular fuselage, three aisles, I believe it had 2-3-3-2 cross section or something like that... plus 777-based supercritical wing... Base model had 450+ seats, the stretch would match A380-800 in capacity... too bad it was just a study...
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
boysteve
Posts: 885
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 7:02 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:34 am

Quoting A350 (Reply 4):
have often been thinking the opposite: removing the top, make a new nose and maybe new wings and offer a stretched version. That would be a superb, light large a/c family and a good complement to the T7 family

Are you describing the B773, afterall it can fit 386 pax into a 3 class formation according to this site
 
Slarty
Posts: 302
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:23 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:43 am

Also, I read that the current 747 landing gear, tire/runway loading, wing support at mid-section, etc. is just about maxed out ... to substantially increase this would require a complete re-layout/design of the main load-bearing mid section.
 
Leezyjet
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:26 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:16 am

Don't forget that the Upper deck would be much narrower than the A380 too, and would only allow at most 3-3 seating with a single asile.

I guess it would look a little like this :-

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifieda...earch/photo_search.php?id=00000056

 Smile
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7795
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:19 am

After much research in the late 1980's Boeing saw no market for the '747-500'. Right now it looks like Boeing was correct as sales figures for the A380 are yet to support that a market for such a jet exists.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
aviatortj
Posts: 1694
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2003 9:15 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:26 am

The 747X would have brought it closer than it is now to a full double deck. I would love to see the mythical 747A come to look like the 747X-Stretch.

 
jetdeltamsy
Posts: 2688
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 11:51 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:30 am

While I've worked in this business for over 20 years, I don't claim to understand airline economics very well.

But it seems to me that a two deck 747 would dramatically reduce the space available for cargo. And with cargo, you make a lot more money per inch of space than you do in a passenger cabin.

I think it would make the aircraft unprofitable.
Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
 
zippyjet
Posts: 5077
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:15 am



This is one of the reasons why a double decker 747 will probably remain a pipe dream. Many good points were brought up re: engine size and cargo capacity. You'd be literally designing a plane from the wheels up. And, the flying public likes New and Improved! Depending on how the A 380 does, could determine if Boeing would want to fly into the Uber Jumbo arena.
And by then, this design/concept could be resurrected or, Boeing may just design a BWB. And, from my understanding, the hump was an afterthought on the 747! Time will tell.




I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:09 pm

The 747ADV will have an extended upper deck .

They will do this by using the existing space above the main deck as an area for passenger suites. Some system components will have to be relocated to accommodate this.

The upper deck will run almost the entire length of the main deck, WITHOUT extending the hump.
FLYi
 
sonic67
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 1:17 pm

The original 747 design was a true double Decker but was changed to the current config half way through the design processes because of emergency exit concerns and stability issues. This change almost bankrupted Boeing at the time because they had to start over.
 
tockeyhockey
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:57 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:41 pm

Quoting PITrules (Reply 18):
The 747ADV will have an extended upper deck .

They will do this by using the existing space above the main deck as an area for passenger suites. Some system components will have to be relocated to accommodate this.

The upper deck will run almost the entire length of the main deck, WITHOUT extending the hump.

where did you get this information? has boeing made this public? not saying you're wrong, just that i have not heard this before.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 10:03 pm

If I remember correctly, about 10 yrs ago, Boeing said that the 747 would need a new wing to support a full double decker... something they weren't willing to throw quarters into...

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:40 pm

Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 21):
If I remember correctly, about 10 yrs ago, Boeing said that the 747 would need a new wing to support a full double decker... something they weren't willing to throw quarters into...

Yes, the current wing wouldn´t support the weight.
If you stretch the upper deck you´ll add weight behind the wings. To get the balance work again, you would have to reposition the wing towards the back of the plane or stretch the fuselage in the front of the aircraft which would add even more weight.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
Geo772
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:40 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:42 pm

Quoting Tockeyhockey (Reply 20):
where did you get this information? has boeing made this public? not saying you're wrong, just that i have not heard this before.

Was in Flight International a couple of years ago. The space behind the hump - roughly in line with the leading edge of the wing all the way back to between DR4 and 5. There is plenty of height available and with a redesign of the overhead bins along with rerouting of control cables, air conditioning ducting and some wiring looms quite a lot of space would become available. At the moment it is just a place to store a huge quantity of dust!

There wouldn't be the possibilty of windows in this area, although LCD bulkheads and projector systems could get round this.
Flown on A300B4/600,A319/20/21,A332/3,A343,B727,B732/3/4/5/6/7/8,B741/2/4,B752/3,B762/3,B772/3,DC10,L1011-200,VC10,MD80,
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5006
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:52 pm

The ADV gonna look like a stuffed turkey when full w/ pax. How much more can B do with the 747 model?  stirthepot 

Micke//SE  Confused
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
tockeyhockey
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:57 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:37 am

Quoting Geo772 (Reply 23):
Was in Flight International a couple of years ago. The space behind the hump - roughly in line with the leading edge of the wing all the way back to between DR4 and 5. There is plenty of height available and with a redesign of the overhead bins along with rerouting of control cables, air conditioning ducting and some wiring looms quite a lot of space would become available. At the moment it is just a place to store a huge quantity of dust!

There wouldn't be the possibilty of windows in this area, although LCD bulkheads and projector systems could get round this.

that's interesting. but if there is no way to have windows, how will they have escape doors?
 
kiwiandrew

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:44 am

Quoting Tockeyhockey (Reply 25):
that's interesting. but if there is no way to have windows, how will they have escape doors?

my understanding is that pax would be in main cabin in normal seats for t/o and landing - and would move to the "private suites" for the cruise only ( maybe when they reach a mile high  Wink )
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22943
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:52 am

Correct. Airlines could put suites and even conference rooms in this space. It would also allow any lower-bay crew rest areas to be moved up, freeing space for additional cargo payload.

See more at http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRHeft/FRHeft04/FRH0409/FR0409e.htm
 
tockeyhockey
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:57 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:07 am

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 26):
Quoting Tockeyhockey (Reply 25):
that's interesting. but if there is no way to have windows, how will they have escape doors?

my understanding is that pax would be in main cabin in normal seats for t/o and landing - and would move to the "private suites" for the cruise only ( maybe when they reach a mile high Wink )

that sounds like fun! imagine being able to have your own "room" on an airplane, with a bed, a tv, and maybe a mini-bar. if i were on one of those, i'd hope it never landed!
 
anxebla
Posts: 1696
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 8:31 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 6:00 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 7):
Eventually, Boeing will start with a clean-sheet design and replace both the B777-300 and B747

Don't you think now is it too soon to speculate about it??
AIRBUS 320 The world's most advanced single-aisle aircraft
 
cun757
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 12:27 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:07 am

Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 13):
I guess it would look a little like this :-

That was exactly what I was thinking about it...
I think in few years Boeing its going to give us a surprise with a new super jumbo, any way, Boeing was the first one in think in "Jumbos"...  bigthumbsup 
757 forever
 
ktachiya
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 5:54 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:32 am

I saw a special on NHK television about building the A380. I heard that they had many obstacles that they had to clear in order to make it a complete double decker. Such as using new durable and light material to make the aircraft weight less, etc. They mentioned that a lot of Japanese firms invested in the R&D of this process and thus we succesful in doing this. So maybe this technology was not available in the late 80's when the 744 was launched.
Flown on: DC-10-30, B747-200B, B747-300, B747-300SR, B747-400, B747-400D, B767-300, B777-200, B777-200ER, B777-300
 
User avatar
ODwyerPW
Posts: 944
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Thu Oct 13, 2005 10:42 am

I've lost my specs for the old proposed 747X-Stretch. How did it's fuselage length compare to what Boeing is proposing with the 747ADV Freighter? Of course, you also have to bear in mind the upper deck of the 747Adv Freighter would be much shorter than the 747X-Stretch regardless of total aircraft lengths.
learning never stops.
 
cun757
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 12:27 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:42 am

Quoting Ktachiya (Reply 31):
So maybe this technology was not available in the late 80's when the 744 was launched.

Yes, so now Boeing have the chance to think big... Remember 70 years ago the biggest plane was for 30 people... Can you imagine some one on this years thinking on the 747 and A380...?
757 forever
 
GUAMVICE
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 3:46 am

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:51 am

http://tinypic.com/ejik5f.jpg
The two most engaging powers of a photographer are to make new things familiar and to make familiar things new. ~Thacker
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: B747 Double Full Deck... Why Not.?

Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:52 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 7):
Eventually, Boeing will start with a clean-sheet design and replace both the B777-300 and B747.



Quoting Anxebla (Reply 29):
Don't you think now is it too soon to speculate about it??

No, I don't think it's too soon to speculate about it. Boeing's plan (which, like all plans, might change) is called Project Yellowstone. It consists of three airplane families all based on composite fuselages and bleedless systems:
Y1: B737NG and B757 replacement
Y2: B787
Y3: B777-300 and B747 replacement
Whether Y3 will be sized for 10 abreast, 11 abreast, or 12 abreast seating is pure speculation at this point. If I had to guess today, my guess would be a circular fuselage diameter around 290 inches, an 84 inch cargo hold ceiling height, 18 inch seating options of 3-5-3 or 2-3-3-2 (2-2/2-2 or 2-2-2-2 in business class), and an upstairs with passenger bunks but not passenger seating.

I'm sure Boeing don't yet have concrete plans regarding timing for either Y1 or Y3, though most observers expect Y1 to come before Y3. This much is reasonably clear:
- Boeing will not want to develop Y1 and Y3 at the same time.
- Airbus will not develop a competitor to either while they are busy with the A350.
- Boeing will not want to develop Y1 while there is a huge backlog of B737NG orders.
- Y3 will be much more urgent if the B747Adv somehow falls through and much less urgent if it garners a lot of orders.
- Y3 will become more urgent if Airbus develop an A350 that effectively competes with the B777-300ER (unlikely because keeping a long thin tube stiff requires a lot of structural weight).

Who is online