Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:56 am

Was just wondering and I may have missed it someplace, if anyone knows why Boeing is naming the next 747 the 747-8 or 800? Why not 747-500? The 500 would seem to be the next likely generation. Just curious if anyone knows.
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
dean
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:01 am

I'm not sure, but It can be some kind of marketing... To show, this new type of 747 is a rival of Airbus A380-800... Also, why 787-8 is not 787-200? I think it's all about marketing...
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:02 am

The 747-8 is named to show the technology tiein with the 787.

N
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23075
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:02 am

The 747-500, 747-600, and 747-700 (nee 747-X) were all formal design studies submitted to customers. So while they are "available" since none of those programs ever formally launched, Boeing choosing 747-8 is not completely left-field as it:

  • Ties into the 747-800, which is next in the design study lineup (though this one did launch)
  • Ties into the 787 program, both in the "8" and the numbering (787-8)
  • Is a lucky number in many Asian cultures (not that the unlucky "4" hurt 747-400 sales in those cultures)
 
swissy
Posts: 1481
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:12 pm

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:11 am

I am not sure but does it not have something to do with the certification
process?? as the 747-4 frame is certified it would be cheaper for B to get that bird in to the air if the changes are not to great?

Cheers,
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 627
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:14 am

What Randy's Blog Said

So, why call it 747-8 and not 747-500, or -600, or something like that? The simple answer is we decided on -8 because of the connection to so many of the 787 technologies that will be incorporated into this new airplane.


http://www.boeing.com/randy/archives/2005/11/8_and_still_gre_1.html
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23075
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:17 am

Quoting SWISSY (Reply 4):
I am not sure but does it not have something to do with the certification process?? as the 747-4 frame is certified it would be cheaper for B to get that bird in to the air if the changes are not to great?

What Boeing calls it probably doesn't affect the certification process, I imagine.  Smile
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:26 am

I saw the "new airplane" site that Boeing has for the 747-8 and it has a wicked cool photo of a sleeper in it.  Smile I hope that some airline out there will actually do a build-out with sleepers. Hopefully with the 747-8, but the 777 is plenty big enough.

The sleeper is more of a bunk with a privacy curtain, lights, an area for your stuff (books), and a mirror on the side that probably gives the illusion that it's twice as big. Yes, I said "privacy curtain". Sort of like the way they had it for the old prop planes on transcontinental flights.

Of course, it'd cost ya plenty of green, but it'd still be the best first-class configuration out there.
What's fair is fair.
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: Why Is It The 747-8?

Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:27 am

Anybody know if the 747-8 can be certified under the 'grandfather rules', or will the certification have to be done from scratch (or just from scratch for the new bits?)?

As it will be a new wing, the old rotorburst rules for fuel tanks probably won't be valid anymore, as now you have to have the 'safe zones' for crossfeed and separate tanks, so you can feed the remaining good engines on the intact tanks.
The FAA assumes infinite energy for a rotorburst, so at least one tank would have to be outside the 5° or 7° rotorburst cone of a different engine..

Who is online