jetskipper
Topic Author
Posts: 316
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2001 1:50 am

B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 9:42 pm

What was Boeings reason for putting the flight deck of the 747 on the second deck? Airbus positioned the flight deck of the A-380 on the first deck which seems to give the pilots a vantage point that they are more accustomed.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18859
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 9:51 pm

Because the 747F has a flip-up nose door. Don't think it would be very practical for the flight deck to be part of the cargo door.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim de Groot - AirTeamImages

 
warden145
Posts: 539
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 8:36 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 10:02 pm

Boeing put the flight deck on the second deck (and, for that matter, created the second deck hump in the first place) for cargo...so that the nose could swing open to allow full access to the main deck without interfering with the flight control linkage.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirNikon Collection-Pima Air and Space Museum
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Allan Rossmore


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Greg Yates
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bernd Sturm



For comparison, the Aero Spacelines Guppy (Boeing 377 conversion) had a setup where the entire front of the airplane swung open...and, I've heard that the flight control linkages had to be re-adjusted every time the front was opened up.

IIRC even when they were still actively planning the A380F, Airbus wasn't planning to have an opening nose, so they decided it wasn't necessary to put the flight deck on the second deck...and, in the days of fly-by-wire, I imagine that it wouldn't make a difference on a modern aircraft anyways since you don't have to deal with adjusting control cables and linkages and whatnot. With that said, from an aesthetics standpoint, I think the flight deck on the A380 looks like it's lower than it should be and is the single biggest thing that makes the plane look ugly IMHO. It still looks better than the 777 does, though   
ETOPS = Engine Turns Off, Passengers Swim
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22953
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 10:04 pm

Quoting jetskipper (Thread starter):
What was Boeings reason for putting the flight deck of the 747 on the second deck?

Boeing designed the 747 to be able to load cargo through the nose and that required the cockpit to be located above the main deck for clearance.

Boeing's early dual-deck 747 concepts had the cockpit on the upper deck, as well.

They did have a single-deck concept called "the anteater" where the cockpit extended out from the main fuselage to allow it to hang lower and offer better visibility for ground operations and landing.

http://www.socialwelfareagency.org/Public/Graphics/Aviation/Boeing_747_Anteater.jpg
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 10:59 pm

Hey, did Boeing design the 747 to be able to load cargo through the nose?

NS
 
brilondon
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 11:08 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 4):
Hey, did Boeing design the 747 to be able to load cargo through the nose?

I thought they were designing the 747 to be a military freighter transport to transport tanks and troops and made the cockpit where it is to be able to load large items through the nose for quick deployment in the battle theatre.

[Edited 2012-05-14 16:10:47]
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 11:12 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 4):
Hey, did Boeing design the 747 to be able to load cargo through the nose?

The legend goes that the common belief during the design stage of the 747 was that most future intercontinental passenger transport would be supersonic. So the 747 was designed to be able to load cargo through the nose, IIRC it was even considered to convert pax aircraft with fixed noses to open-nose freighters after the switch to SSTs.

I hope my memory isn't too rusty...
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
cargolex
Posts: 1201
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:20 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 11:23 pm

Yup.

The "SCD" portion of what you commonly see at the end of a 747 freighter's build code is for "Side Cargo Door" - The very first 747-200 freighters actually had the side cargo door as an option rather than a standard feature. I believe that the first 747-200 freighter, for Lufthansa, only had the nose door at first, and had the SCD added later. I don't think any other 747F's were delivered that way.

A small number of 747s with windows - the 747 Convertibles - were delivered with the nose door. In the above photos, you can see one of them. They were meant to be convertible between both full freighter and full pax, but in practice, this was not as practical for a 747 as it was for a 727 or 737 (the other convertible models in Boeing's lineup at that time).

That same aircraft as it appeared in 1974:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Juhani Sipilä



It too, looks like it doesn't have the SCD.

[Edited 2012-05-14 16:27:04]
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 14, 2012 11:52 pm

Quoting brilondon (Reply 5):
I thought they were designing the 747 to be a military freighter transport to transport tanks and troops and made the cockpit where it is to be able to load large items through the nose for quick deployment in the battle theatre.

The 747 design can be traced back to Boeing's failed bid for what eventually became the C-5. Lockheed, Douglas and Boeing were the three finalists for the CX-HLS project (Other manufacturers that submitted designs were General Dynamics and Martin Marietta.). The only reason why Lockheed won the contract was that their design had the lowest cost while the USAF preferred Boeing's design. You can definitely see elements of what became the 747 in Boeing's CX-HLS design:

http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/attachment.php?attachmentid=114238&stc=1&d=1285608482

Another thing to remember is that at the time the 747 entered service, conventional wisdom was that the SST (Concorde and B-2707) was the way passenger a/c would move towards and traditional jet a/c would be relegated to a cargo role. As we all know, this failed to happen.
 
ABpositive
Posts: 148
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:36 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 15, 2012 12:26 am

Quoting srbmod (Reply 8):
Another thing to remember is that at the time the 747 entered service, conventional wisdom was that the SST (Concorde and B-2707) was the way passenger a/c would move towards and traditional jet a/c would be relegated to a cargo role. As we all know, this failed to happen.

With most airlines treating their passengers like cargo, there is some truth in it.
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Thu May 17, 2012 10:21 pm

Quoting jetskipper (Thread starter):
Airbus positioned the flight deck of the A-380 on the first deck which seems to give the pilots a vantage point that they are more accustomed

The A380 flightdeck is actually between the lower and upper deck. So it's still higher than would normally be the case in a wide body.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 12:10 am

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 10):
The A380 flightdeck is actually between the lower and upper deck. So it's still higher than would normally be the case in a wide body.

It's up there to make space for the landing gear I think. The nose gear is further forward than on the 747, and the lower deck is lower in the fuselage. In any case it needs to be back a bit to make space for the radar.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
ssteve
Posts: 1133
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 8:32 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 3:15 am

It's amusing for me to see that -200C with windows in the nose door. Didn't realize that was possible!
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 4:41 am

Quoting brilondon (Reply 5):
I thought they were designing the 747 to be a military freighter transport to transport tanks and troops and made the cockpit where it is to be able to load large items through the nose for quick deployment in the battle theatre.

The 747 was never designed for the miliary. It was designed to be a freighter since it was being developed concurrently with the 2707, which was widely assumed to be about to steal all the passenger traffic.

Quoting aloges (Reply 6):
The legend goes that the common belief during the design stage of the 747 was that most future intercontinental passenger transport would be supersonic.

Not just legend; the original 747 chief engineer came right out and said it, on the record.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 8):
The 747 design can be traced back to Boeing's failed bid for what eventually became the C-5.

Not really. They share engines and the 2nd deck flight deck location and that's about it. The same 747 chief engineer vehemently denies this repeated rumour that the 747 was just a "commercialized" version of Boeing's failed military airlifter.

Tom.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 4:59 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 13):
Quoting srbmod (Reply 8):
The 747 design can be traced back to Boeing's failed bid for what eventually became the C-5.

Not really. They share engines and the 2nd deck flight deck location and that's about it.

Perhaps. But the section and fin look very 747.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 8:18 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 14):
But the section and fin look very 747.

Well, unless you're a T-tail, a fin is basically a fin but I agree they look similar.

The section I don't follow...the nose on the military model is clearly a different section than the 747 and the mid-cabin is high-wing rather than low-wing.

Tom.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 8:31 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 15):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 14):
But the section and fin look very 747.

Well, unless you're a T-tail, a fin is basically a fin but I agree they look similar.

The section I don't follow...the nose on the military model is clearly a different section than the 747 and the mid-cabin is high-wing rather than low-wing.

I'm sorry. That should have read "tail section". The TAIL section and fin look very 747.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 9:11 am

Yeah the tail looks very much 747, but the front looks a lot wider.
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 18, 2012 9:41 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 11):
It's up there to make space for the landing gear I think. The nose gear is further forward than on the 747, and the lower deck is lower in the fuselage. In any case it needs to be back a bit to make space for the radar.

The nosegear retracts into the lower lobe, so it doesn't force the cockpit to be higher. The radar doesn't necessitate it to be any higher than a 777 flightdeck, for example. Main deck and upper deck height of the A380 is comparable to the 747, but the A380 decks are slightly higher in fact.

747 Main deck 4.74m - 5.18m, Upper deck 7.53m-7.91m
A380 Main deck 5.07m-5.34m, Upper deck 7.57m-8.36m

The A380 flightdeck window sill is 7.14m-7.42m above ground level. 747 flightdeck window sill height is around 8.3m-8.7m.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7474sec2.pdf
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/medi...ata/AC/Airbus-AC-A380-20111101.pdf
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7772sec2.pdf
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2743
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Sat May 19, 2012 3:04 pm

Quoting warden145 (Reply 2):
flight deck on the A380 looks like it's lower than it should be and is the single biggest thing that makes the plane look ugly IMHO. It still looks better than the 777 does, though

The 777 is just a bloated fat 767.
767 versus 777


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jeff Miller
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Globalpics


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Erwin van Dijck
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gabe Pfeiffer



747 versus 380, IMO the 747 looks more regal.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Julian Whitelaw
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ian Lim
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Karl Nixon



No way, no how.
777 versus 380


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kay Hansen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Globalpics
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Karl Nixon

UNITED We Stand
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18859
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 21, 2012 2:10 am

Quoting SSTeve (Reply 12):
It's amusing for me to see that -200C with windows in the nose door. Didn't realize that was possible!

Boeing built 13 -200C Convertibles -- 3 each for Iraqi Airways, Transamerica Airlines and World Airways, and 2 each for El Al and Martinair.

Martinair -200C below while in use as a freighter and in all-passenger configuration.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thomas Millard
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Kelley



There were two missing windows where the nose door met the rest of the fuselage. Second photo of the nose section interior while in use as a freighter, showing some of the passenger fittings including the forward bulkhead and window frames etc.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © acinorev
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gerardo Wals

 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 21, 2012 3:23 am

A380 nose arrangement
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11768
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 21, 2012 3:42 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 21):

I was wondering when someone was going to point that out! The A380 cockpit is technically on a mid-deck, slightly above the lower deck.

Quoting gigneil (Reply 4):
Hey, did Boeing design the 747 to be able to load cargo through the nose?

Don't worry Neil, I laughed.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
rwessel
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:47 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 21, 2012 5:22 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 21):

The tire (a 1270x455 on the A380 nosegear, IIRC) seems far out of proportion with the pilot in that illustration.
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 21, 2012 10:57 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 19):
The 777 is just a bloated fat 767.
767 versus 777

You know, they do share the same Boeing section 41 (cockpit section)   The 777 just has an adaptor section behind it to allow the 767 cockpit to mate to the 777 fuselage...
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19631
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Mon May 21, 2012 11:13 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 24):
You know, they do share the same Boeing section 41 (cockpit section)

A Boeing engineer came on this site and said that this is not the case. They share cockpit windows only. They couldn't make the 767 Section 41 work aerodynamically with the 777 fuselage.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 22, 2012 2:02 am

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 22):
I was wondering when someone was going to point that out! The A380 cockpit is technically on a mid-deck, slightly above the lower deck.

I pointed it out a while ago:

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 10):
The A380 flightdeck is actually between the lower and upper deck. So it's still higher than would normally be the case in a wide body.

but wingedmigrator's diagram shows the layout very clearly.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
 
bond007
Posts: 4423
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 22, 2012 2:17 am

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 22):
Quoting gigneil (Reply 4):
Hey, did Boeing design the 747 to be able to load cargo through the nose?

Don't worry Neil, I laughed.

Me too...  


Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11768
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 22, 2012 3:18 am

Quoting Jetlagged (Reply 26):
I pointed it out a while ago:

Ah, my apologies - I missed that!
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 22, 2012 3:43 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 25):
A Boeing engineer came on this site and said that this is not the case.

Which one?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 25):
They share cockpit windows only. They couldn't make the 767 Section 41 work aerodynamically with the 777 fuselage.

As far as I know, it's common (aerodynamically) back to at least the end of the windows. Structurally it's probably different but that makes no difference to looks or flight deck placement.

Tom.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19631
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 22, 2012 5:15 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 29):
Which one?

I forget his name now. This was about five years ago.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 22, 2012 6:14 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 29):
As far as I know, it's common (aerodynamically) back to at least the end of the windows. Structurally it's probably different but that makes no difference to looks or flight deck placement.

Tom.

IIRC, the radome is interchangeable between a '67 and a T7, too...someone correct me if I'm wrong  
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Tue May 22, 2012 7:23 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 24):
You know, they do share the same Boeing section 41 (cockpit section)
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 29):
As far as I know, it's common (aerodynamically) back to at least the end of the windows.

Both of you are correct.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Wed May 23, 2012 6:28 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 19):
747 versus 380, IMO the 747 looks more regal.

Yeah, the A380 looks like it has a bloated head from the front. It is not the planes fault, form over function after all, but it is not a pretty thing to look at.
 
Euclid
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:42 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Fri May 25, 2012 7:43 pm

Those pictures in Viscount724's post does raise a question. The last picture of the interior of the convertible 747 shows it in cargo config with a crew ladder for accessing the upper deck. I therefore assume that when configured for passengers, the upper deck was not used for passenger seating.

First of all, I'm sure no airline would allow passengers to climb a ladder to reach their seats, or did the conversion process somehow include a removable set of regular stairs?

Secondly, the upper deck on freighters are usually configured for the crew, galley, toilet, some seats, rest bunks and so forth, and I'm sure this was not converted to accommodate fare paying passengers each time the plane was converted from freighter to passenger.

So, in short, am I right in saying that the upper deck was not used for passengers even in passenger carrying config? Anyone?
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18859
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Sat May 26, 2012 12:32 am

Quoting Euclid (Reply 34):
So, in short, am I right in saying that the upper deck was not used for passengers even in passenger carrying config? Anyone?

No, the normal stairway to the upper deck was installed when it was in all-passenger configuration and was removed (like the galleys, lavatories etc.) when converted to all-cargo configuration. That conversion was a pretty big job.
 
Euclid
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:42 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Sat May 26, 2012 7:12 am

Many thanks for the answer. Absolutely amazing how clever these things were designed to make provision for both the ladder access in cargo config and stair access in passenger config.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2743
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: B-747 Vs A-380 Flight Deck Placement

Sat May 26, 2012 2:28 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 24):
You know, they do share the same Boeing section 41 (cockpit section) The 777 just has an adaptor section behind it to allow the 767 cockpit to mate to the 777 fuselage...

That's correct. The 777 was the 767-X, until Boeing decided enough was changed that it deserved a new designation.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 31):
IIRC, the radome is interchangeable between a '67 and a T7, too...someone correct me if I'm wrong

Many things are interchangeable between the two, including at least the main gear tires of the 767-400 and 777-200.
UNITED We Stand

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests