United Airline
Topic Author
Posts: 8779
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:24 pm

747 Classics

Tue Oct 17, 2000 2:39 pm

I believe all of you know that B 747-400 is the only 747 available

Today, if an airline wish to order B 747-100, 200, 300 or even SP brand new from Boeing, do you think Boeing will do it for them?

Any idea from you guys? Say for example, if an airline wishes to order about 20+ 747-200s, do you think Boeing will do it for them? I mean special order

That airline would be real stupid if they want one as B 747-400 feature ALL the features of the classics

ANY ideas or suggestions are welcomed!

Good luck!

RE: 747 Classics

Tue Oct 17, 2000 4:30 pm

I'm no authority on Boeing's marketing ideals, But the simple answer is no way! It would be simply to cost inefficient to produce aircraft with obselete technology.
To my knowledge you can only order the 747-400 as a full Pax or a freighter (Do they still offer combi?)
Having said that however, I'm sure the parts would be available as spares including new engines.
But I really think the only three potential customers
(Bill Gates, Saudi Royal Flight and The Sultan of Brunei)
couldn't care less.
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2000 2:45 am

RE: 747 Classics

Tue Oct 17, 2000 4:39 pm

what you could do is refit a 747SP with a 400 cockpit, like the Sheikh or Emir or Sultan or whatever of Dubai, Oman or something like that, did.
Posts: 9186
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: 747 Classics

Tue Oct 17, 2000 4:40 pm

No way.

But of course Boeing builds a 747-400M (Combi). Why should they have stopped it?. There are at least two still on order for KLM.
Posts: 633
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 1999 12:27 am

RE: 747 Classics

Tue Oct 17, 2000 9:33 pm

This actually did happen some years ago when the government of Abu Dhabi ordered a 747SP. The aircraft was ordered on 1986, 5 years after the end of the 747sp production ( the second last was built in 1981) and was delivered in 1989. Boeing restarted 747sp production to build this last 747sp. But, you know, United Arab Emirates is a $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ country, so, they don't need to care about the price. Normal airlines would certainly not do it.

New 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 12:29 am

For as far I know, the 747-400 domestic uses the same wing as the 747-classic do. Same wing span! (See the Boeing site) So we are practically talking about a new build classic since the fusselage hasn't changed for 30 years.

Any reactions?

Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 12:34 am

I dont think it is any longer possible - the cocpits and avionics of the classic 747 models are very different from the -400s, and the engines that powered the classics are also no longer available. Why would an airline now want an "old-technology" aircraft?
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2000 4:04 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 1:56 am

Isn't Air Force One a 747-200? You can bet that the government didn't use an old 747-200 from another airline. That said, wouldn't boeing have had to build a brand new one (actually two) for the president? It entered service in the late 80's didn't it?
Posts: 2506
Joined: Sat Sep 04, 1999 3:15 am

Air Force One

Wed Oct 18, 2000 2:03 am

Actually, the 747s that serve as Air Force One and its backup incorporate features and parts from both the 747-200 and -400. The engines and systems of the two planes are 747-400 components, while the body and wings are 747-200. The planes also incorporate military technology, including missle countermeasures, special radar and in-flight re-fueling systems. There's alot more to it than that, but I'm just going by what I remember from what I've read on here.

Anyway, it's pretty obvious as well that if the US government goes to Boeing and says, "We want two specially-made 747-200s" and gives Boeing all the specs, that is exactly what Boeing built.  
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2000 4:04 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 2:06 am

I totally understand that. It also answers the question posted of whether or not boeing would make an older 747 for someone. Granted the government is a bit different than an airline.
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 2:07 am

Irrespective of whether or not Boeing could or would build 747 classics, the broader question I have is Why would any airline want to order a 747-100/200/300 when the -400 is available? Not to mention more modern, more fuel-efficient, etc...
Posts: 2645
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 5:53 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 2:31 am

92-9000, the 747 which is most regularly used as Air Force One is, to Boeing, a B747-2G4B and was NOT built after 200srs production had finished, being rolled out in September 1987. Originally having been given serial 86-8900, the aircraft was so long in outfitting and upgrading to the levels of equipment required, the USAF re-serialled the aircraft prior to it being delivered on 20 December 1990.

The other of the pair, 92-8000 was 86-8800, is a couple of months older and went into service on 23 August 1990

Tg 747-300
Posts: 1282
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 1999 6:08 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 4:18 am

Can airlines choose the 747 classic interior on the 744?
I think that nterior is much nicer.

Tg 747-300
intentionally left blank
Posts: 2115
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

BA And LH 747s Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 4:41 am


747s Classic fleets downsize quickly with all the new aircraft entering airlines' fleet.

How many of them are left at Lufthansa and British Airways please?
What routes do they operate?

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Vasco Garcia

Thank you,

Best regards,
Alain Mengus
northwest 777
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2000 2:48 am


Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:26 am

Did anyone ever hear about a 747-200X? I read an article in ACAR magazine awhile back stating EVA was interested in the proposed 747-200X. What happened to this plan? I'm guessing it would have been a 200 body with the hardware of a 400. I have no idea though because for all I know it could have been a typo. If anyone has any info I would love to hear it. Thanks!
User avatar
Posts: 1560
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 1999 11:31 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 9:41 am

It wouldn't be hard to make a -100/200 lookalike. The 744F has the same fuselage (smaller upper deck). I think that is what they were thinking about with the -200X.

User avatar
Posts: 8017
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 10:22 am

Actually, there's another really good reason why they'll never build the 747-200 series again: the 777-300 and the upcoming 777-300ER.

After all, the 777-300 series has pretty much the seating capacity of the 747-200, but the new 773ER has almost the range of the 747-400 and definitely way less fuel burn per passenger mile than a 742!  

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 12:47 pm

This is sort of off-subject, but Boeing did re-open the 767-200 production line when Continental Airlines ordered 767-200ER aircraft. I know the avionics and flight deck are the same as the 767-300, but still, they did it even though physically it is different.
Posts: 7584
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 1:30 pm

The one slight advantage of the shorter-upper deck of the older 747s was that is was a good deal lighter. So to mate the 747-400 wing to the shorter upper deck fuselage would maybe have some benefits in slightly increased range. But then you would lose many high yield business class seats.

And that what the 777-300ER and 747-400X are designed to fit.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: 747 Classics

Wed Oct 18, 2000 5:18 pm

It isn't a big trick to reopen production of a line as long as the tooling still exists. One of the reasons why Continental was able to get -200 767's is that Boeing is retaining the -200 tooling for military contracts.

They have chosen to use the 767-200 for any future tanker or AWACS aircraft procurement. This was done after the retirement of the 707 tooling after the Royal Air Force recived their last AWACS aircraft in the early 1990's.
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 1999 4:26 am


Wed Oct 18, 2000 5:50 pm

The 762 was never officially discontinued. There simply hasn't been any commercial demand for it since 1994. A quick check of Bill Harms' site shows one built as a private jet in 1996, and four built for the Japanese AWACS program in 1996-98.
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 5:50 am

RE: 747-200X

Thu Oct 19, 2000 3:47 am

I don't think Boeing would do it. there are newer planes that offer more (777, A340). If an airline wants 200's, get them on the used market, there are some available and if they really have their hearts set on it, pay to have them upgraded with modern aviaonics etc.

RE: 747 Classics

Thu Oct 19, 2000 4:49 am

Didn't KLM and Singapore Airlines have some of their 200s modified to the 300 model with the stretched upper deck?
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2000 1:59 am

RE: 747 Classics

Thu Oct 19, 2000 6:16 am

I know KLM did, but as for SQ, they got their new as B747-312s in the 80s... They (SQ) were one of the largest B743 operator of the time, with a total of 14 in service (11 all pax model and 3 pax-cargo combis)...