TomB
Topic Author
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:17 pm

Better Aerodynamics - B-747-8F Or B-747-8I?

Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:52 pm

Now that both the Boeing 747-8F and the B-747-8I have been flying, which aircraft has the better aerodynamics? The airframe on both aircraft are very similar with the Freighter model having a short crown behind the cockpit whereas the Intercontinental model has the extended crown behind the cockpit to increase passenger capacity.

Are there any experts on the Forum who can tell us the aerodynamic effects of a short crown vs. the elongated crown?
 
GST
Posts: 808
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:27 am

RE: Better Aerodynamics - B-747-8F Or B-747-8I?

Mon Aug 22, 2011 7:23 pm

The longer crown will have marginally (and this is very marginal indeed) greater surface area and thus friction drag. On the other hand it may make for a more favourably consistent change in cross sectional area of the aircraft as you go back, so for highish transonic cruising this may be better. I doubt there are released figures that can let the layperson (and competitors) check this too carefully mind, so you'll probably only get theories here.
 
Qantas744er
Posts: 1152
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:36 am

RE: Better Aerodynamics - B-747-8F Or B-747-8I?

Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:09 pm

A B744 captain who unfortunately is no longer a member once wrote that the B744F enjoyed flying slightly faster than the B744. They planned for Mach .86 on the freighter and .85 on the pax.
Happiness is V1 in Lagos
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Better Aerodynamics - B-747-8F Or B-747-8I?

Tue Aug 23, 2011 12:05 am

Quoting GST (Reply 1):
The longer crown will have marginally (and this is very marginal indeed) greater surface area and thus friction drag. On the other hand it may make for a more favourably consistent change in cross sectional area of the aircraft as you go back, so for highish transonic cruising this may be better. I doubt there are released figures that can let the layperson (and competitors) check this too carefully mind, so you'll probably only get theories here.

The history of the SUD (Stretched Upper Deck):

-Boeing develops 747SP, discovers during testing that fuel consumption during high mach cruise (~0.84M and above) is much better than predicted. This turns out to be because having the upper deck terminate just before the wing root creates a previously unknown area rule benefit.
-To capitalize on this discovery (on non -SP's), Boeing develops -300 model, and even sells some SUD modifications (for -200's and even -100's) to the likes of KLM, ANA, and JAL...
-400 passenger model available as SUD only

Of course, the 747-8i carries on the legacy of the stretched upper deck, including more favorable fuel consumption at higher mach numbers.

Non-converted freighters don't use it, because #1, it adds weight and #2 the upper deck floor impedes on cargo volume (apparently, some freight operators load out the 747 floor to ceiling). The (slight) aerodynamic benefits of the SUD don't outweigh the disadvantages in this case. Passenger operators like it because you get more seating upstairs...
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
Max Q
Posts: 5634
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Better Aerodynamics - B-747-8F Or B-747-8I?

Tue Aug 23, 2011 1:16 am

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 2):


A B744 captain who unfortunately is no longer a member once wrote that the B744F enjoyed flying slightly faster than the B744. They planned for Mach .86 on the freighter and .85 on the pax.

Think you have that backwards, the longer upper deck lowers drag, improving aerodynamics and increasing the cruise mach number.



The -8i is predicted to be slightly faster than the -F version in fact.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests