Howdy.
Have airlines ever ferried (or do they currently ferry) engines under the wings of twinjet aircraft? I've only been able to find pictures of 3- and 4-engine aircraft doing this.
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
That was done in the early day when the engines were hard to ship. Event the early 737's had an option for a podded engine haul in case a plane was suck somewhere. Do not know if its an option as the 747 was the last one I knew you could still get the option.
-
- Redwood839
- Posts: 228
- Joined:
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
747-600X wrote:Howdy.
Have airlines ever ferried (or do they currently ferry) engines under the wings of twinjet aircraft? I've only been able to find pictures of 3- and 4-engine aircraft doing this.
The 747 is more than capable of doing it, there is a couple of Qantas 747's doing it. I know the 737 had it as an option at some point.
Now days cargo planes to the rescue. Mainly the Volga Dpner Antonov's.
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
Redwood839 wrote:747-600X wrote:Howdy.
Have airlines ever ferried (or do they currently ferry) engines under the wings of twinjet aircraft? I've only been able to find pictures of 3- and 4-engine aircraft doing this.
The 747 is more than capable of doing it, there is a couple of Qantas 747's doing it. I know the 737 had it as an option at some point.
Now days cargo planes to the rescue. Mainly the Volga Dpner Antonov's.
The the 707 & L1011 had it as well, but don't recall it on the DC-10's
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
rbavfan wrote:Redwood839 wrote:747-600X wrote:Howdy.
Have airlines ever ferried (or do they currently ferry) engines under the wings of twinjet aircraft? I've only been able to find pictures of 3- and 4-engine aircraft doing this.
The 747 is more than capable of doing it, there is a couple of Qantas 747's doing it. I know the 737 had it as an option at some point.
Now days cargo planes to the rescue. Mainly the Volga Dpner Antonov's.
The the 707 & L1011 had it as well, but don't recall it on the DC-10's
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/8025004734 FYI!
AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
Why can't it be done with modern aircraft? Seems like a more economical solution than to put an engine on a freighter.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
Dutchy wrote:Why can't it be done with modern aircraft? Seems like a more economical solution than to put an engine on a freighter.
Very good question.
Would like to read some experts answers either.
-
- smartplane
- Posts: 1608
- Joined:
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
Dutchy wrote:Why can't it be done with modern aircraft? Seems like a more economical solution than to put an engine on a freighter.
Building the hard point?
Airworthiness testing and approval?
Insurer approval to make the flight?
-
- VirginFlyer
- Posts: 5571
- Joined:
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
ojjunior wrote:Dutchy wrote:Why can't it be done with modern aircraft? Seems like a more economical solution than to put an engine on a freighter.
Very good question.
Would like to read some experts answers either.
I believe the primary issue is to do with the size of the fan stage on modern engines - they’re so big that if you wanted to carry them with the fan stage attached you’d be carrying a significant drag penalty, and if you wanted to carry them with the fan stage detached, the fan stage wouldn’t fit in the cargo hold.
V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
VirginFlyer wrote:ojjunior wrote:Dutchy wrote:Why can't it be done with modern aircraft? Seems like a more economical solution than to put an engine on a freighter.
Very good question.
Would like to read some experts answers either.
I believe the primary issue is to do with the size of the fan stage on modern engines - they’re so big that if you wanted to carry them with the fan stage attached you’d be carrying a significant drag penalty, and if you wanted to carry them with the fan stage detached, the fan stage wouldn’t fit in the cargo hold.
V/F
Drag penalty and also, where would it go? The ferry engines on the 747 and DC10 are inboard of the regular engines. A GE90 is not going to fit between the actual engines and the fuselage, which would mean the wing would need to be specially reinforced etc. To handle this.
Also, engine reliability is so much better than it was during the 747 hey day. Extra infrastructure for the few times a year someone needs to ferry an engine isnt worth it.
Militant Centrist
Let's all just use some common sense
Let's all just use some common sense
-
- wrongwayup
- Posts: 442
- Joined:
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
Dutchy wrote:Why can't it be done with modern aircraft? Seems like a more economical solution than to put an engine on a freighter.
Having a fleet of thousands of airplanes carrying a bunch of extra weight for a feature they rarely use would be inefficient.
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
Cargo in a hold is more economical than cargo hanging from a wing, else all cargo would be carried externally !
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
My bet is engine reliability reduced demand. Situations, where a new engine need to be hauled to a remote location, are rare. If I remember correctly, IFSD rate of GE-90 is about 1 per 50k hours, so a frame with 100k hours lifetime will see 4 IFSD, and not all of them are engine replacement. It may be plainly cheaper to pay extra for once in a lifetime heavy haul by a third party.
-
- ZaphodHarkonnen
- Posts: 1054
- Joined:
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
And the engine manufacturers have spares spread out about the place. So you're a lot closer to a replacement than in the past. Especially with stuff like power by the hour where the manufacturer is handling all that sort of stuff.
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
Antarius wrote:VirginFlyer wrote:ojjunior wrote:
Very good question.
Would like to read some experts answers either.
I believe the primary issue is to do with the size of the fan stage on modern engines - they’re so big that if you wanted to carry them with the fan stage attached you’d be carrying a significant drag penalty, and if you wanted to carry them with the fan stage detached, the fan stage wouldn’t fit in the cargo hold.
V/F
Drag penalty and also, where would it go? The ferry engines on the 747 and DC10 are inboard of the regular engines. A GE90 is not going to fit between the actual engines and the fuselage, which would mean the wing would need to be specially reinforced etc. To handle this.
Also, engine reliability is so much better than it was during the 747 hey day. Extra infrastructure for the few times a year someone needs to ferry an engine isnt worth it.
The B747 wing had to be reinforced to carry the attach point & engine. It was an option on the B747 from early on , QF certainly had it on their B744s, B742 I'm not sure about. AFAIK QF was the only airline to fit the option during manfacture on the B744, not sure it could be fitted after.. The RB211 fits just fine,good thing QF has never operated the GE90. [I'll get back to you when the Project Sunrise order is announced
Gemuser
-
- jetblueguy22
- Posts: 3505
- Joined:
Re: Twinjet podded engine ferry?
I know we’re talking global infrastructure, but at least on US domestic it is infinitely cheaper to put it over the ground. There are freight companies that specialize in it. I know of one that can dispatch a truck within 3 hours to ATL for DL.
My father is a freight broker and has done multiple of these moves. To go from ATL to LAX you’re talking 10K and it’s there in 2 days. Unless you’re critically short aircraft, it’s worth it to put it over the ground and get the resources in place in the mean time. Less engines go by air than you’d think...
My father is a freight broker and has done multiple of these moves. To go from ATL to LAX you’re talking 10K and it’s there in 2 days. Unless you’re critically short aircraft, it’s worth it to put it over the ground and get the resources in place in the mean time. Less engines go by air than you’d think...
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: aaron1011, Acey559, aerace, andrew1996, Avgeek21, aviator2000, BA744PHX, Baidu [Spider], biziomd11, BlueberryWheats, Boeing727, Calledonian, CLT704, DBCooper, Eiszeit, gdavis003, Google Adsense [Bot], hbernal1, Italianflyer, jbs2886, Jos227, Karlsands, klm617, moyangmm, NearMiss, Nicknuzzii, oldJoe, par13del, RalXWB, rjbesikof, seansasLCY, SkyLife, SomethingFishy, SteinarN, Texan101, Tkt96, Tn55337, tooluther, tphuang, TWAL1011, USPIT10L, yulexpansion and 278 guests