First Pic Of 747LCF In Full Color Scheme!

highflyer9790 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:07 am

A lot better than the bare metal/primer colors!

sorry if this has already been posted. search was not fruitful.

I think it would have also looked nice in boeing house colors too..

highflyer

[Edited 2007-01-16 23:09:51]

[Edited 2007-01-16 23:10:08]

memphis · Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:12 am

where is the forward cargo door???

Leezyjet · Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:17 am

Quoting Memphis (Reply 1):
where is the forward cargo door???

Looks like a few other panels are missing too, above the engine, and the wing/body fairing.

Smile

adizzy · Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:18 am

WOW and they say the A380 looks like is has grown a big tumor! Yet-still impressive and most likely an awesome aircraft.

memphis · Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:21 am

a few panels, not that big of a deal, but the removal of the entire door, in my mind, is a little more than simply popping a panel! Why???

highflyer9790 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:32 am

Quoting Memphis (Reply 1):
where is the forward cargo door???

Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 2):
Looks like a few other panels are missing too, above the engine, and the wing/body fairing.

Quoting Memphis (Reply 4):
a few panels, not that big of a deal, but the removal of the entire door, in my mind, is a little more than simply popping a panel! Why???

my only guess is that those panels/doors must specially painted for weight precision, like thr rudder. other than that, its at evergreen, so maybe some additional mods or something.

747LCF-better than the A300 beluga? (no A vs. B intended)

highflyer

ZKSUJ · Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:24 am

If my facts are right, it was a PAX version and the cargo loading is done by the tail half swinging open. Not so much the nose door as on usual 744Fs

solnabo · Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:34 am

"747LCF or A306 Beluga?"

Both butt ugly.....but doing their job.

Micke// Big grin

jetblueatjfk · Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:37 am

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 7):
"747LCF or A306 Beluga?"

Both butt ugly.....but doing their job.

Exactly what I was about to say. I think the 747LCF doesn't look as awkward as the Beluga does though.

B6jfk airplane

pygmalion · Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:40 am

LCF delivered the first set of 787 parts to Charleston SC today. Next stop Seattle!

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q1/070116d_pr.html

JakTrax · Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:42 am

The tail section swings open for outsized cargo, hence no nose door.

Karl

highflyer9790 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:12 am

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 6):
If my facts are right, it was a PAX version and the cargo loading is done by the tail half swinging open. Not so much the nose door as on usual 744Fs

it was a PAX version? huh? i think i missed something..

highflyer9790 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:19 am

Looking at it again, It must have taken a lot of paint!! how much dollarsign

do you think it took?

UAL747 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:29 am

Stupid question, and I'm sure it's been asked before, but why does this aircraft have no winglets? At work, not able to really do a search.

Thanks,

UAL

BreninTW · Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:31 am

Quoting HighFlyer9790 (Reply 11):
it was a PAX version? huh? i think i missed something

The LCF's are all built from PAX versions -- no need for the added weight of the hydraulics etc needed to open/raise the nose, since the cargo is loaded from the rear of the A/C.

Quite why the lower cargo hold door is not fitted is beyond me, although I'm sure it will be fitted before this bird takes to the skies.

highflyer9790 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:46 am

Quoting Brenintw (Reply 14):
The LCF's are all built from PAX versions -- no need for the added weight of the hydraulics etc needed to open/raise the nose, since the cargo is loaded from the rear of the A/C.

duuhhh that makes sense!

Yellowstone · Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:48 pm

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 13):
Stupid question, and I'm sure it's been asked before, but why does this aircraft have no winglets? At work, not able to really do a search.

Thanks,

UAL

IIRC, it flies a lot slower than the standard 747-400 (for obvious reasons). Hence, the drag reduction from the winglets isn't enough to make them worth the extra weight.

LHR777 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:28 pm

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 10):
The tail section swings open for outsized cargo, hence no nose door.

I think the question is regarding the huge gaping hole where the lower-deck forward hold door used to be, not the fact that there is no upward-opening nose door.

It's maybe just been removed for painting, as there are 2 pressure-relief valves in the door and you don't want to just spray over them, as they need to open. They're also used to vent the hold, in case dangerous goods such as dry-ice are carried.

PolymerPlane · Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:29 pm

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 16):
IIRC, it flies a lot slower than the standard 747-400 (for obvious reasons). Hence, the drag reduction from the winglets isn't enough to make them worth the extra weight.

I think the reason for winglet removal is more to unexplained vibration rather than the weight reduction.

Cheers,
PP

gyojoo · Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:51 pm

I wonder if it has crew accomodations in front of the forward bulkhead, where first class used to be.

GQfluffy · Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Quoting HighFlyer9790 (Reply 11):
it was a PAX version? huh? i think i missed something..

Yes. The LCFs are being converted from PAX versions. Not sure from what airline(s)...

mptpa · Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:33 pm

Quoting Gyojoo (Reply 19):
I wonder if it has crew accomodations in front of the forward bulkhead, where first class used to be.

Is there any living area in the forward upper deck behind the cockpit? I would think this area may be used for this purpose????

ryanairCRL · Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:53 pm

how many are they gonna built? and if more than1, when's the second one due?

brendows · Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:37 pm

Quoting RyanairCRL (Reply 22):
how many are they gonna built? and if more than1, when's the second one due?

There will be three LCF at first, and I believe there are plans for another two. The aircraft in the picture in the first post is the second LCF, and it's being delivered in the next few weeks. The first one (N747BC) was delivered about five months ago.

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 20):
Not sure from what airline(s)...

The first LCF, N747BC, is a former Air China bird (B-2464) (cn 25879/ln 904)
The second one (on the picture in the first post) is N780BA, former China Airlines B-162 (and B-18272) (cn 24310/ln 778)
Third LCF is N249BA, former China Airlines B-18271 cn 24309/ln 766 (ex B-161)

N1120A · Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:44 pm

Quoting HighFlyer9790 (Reply 5):
747LCF-better than the A300 beluga?

It will lift more

Quoting HighFlyer9790 (Reply 11):
it was a PAX version? huh? i think i missed something..

It is a converted passenger aircraft

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 13):
but why does this aircraft have no winglets?

Not needed for short hauls

Quoting Brendows (Reply 23):
The first LCF, N747BC, is a former Air China bird (B-2464) (cn 25879/ln 904)
The second one (on the picture in the first post) is N780BA, former China Airlines B-162 (and B-18272) (cn 24310/ln 778)
Third LCF is N249BA, former China Airlines B-18271 cn 24309/ln 766 (ex B-161)

Mainland and Taiwan, working together Big grin

albird87 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:08 pm

Back to the front cargo door.... is it possible that because they wont be using the cargo compartments for the haulage of anything, will they not remove the door mechanics and just put a panel there to save weight??

airbusA346 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:48 pm

Quoting Albird87 (Reply 25):

AFAIK the APU is in the forward cargo hold, so they still need access from time to time, but I might be wrong.

Tom.

vivekman2006 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:10 pm

Finally it has been painted! Was getting tired looking at the green/metallic colours.

Looks neat!

SRMD11 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:29 pm

Wow! really impresive. Thanks for the Pic! The LCF looks like a Snake - digest a A-350XWB Wink

LOL

777Dad · Wed Jan 17, 2007 8:34 pm

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 7):
Both butt ugly.....but doing their job.

Go easy man,Ive seen some "Nice Butts" in my life,
"butt" nothing like this! ( pun intended) Big grin

See Ya,
Jeff

haj96 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:18 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 24):
The aircraft in the picture in the first post is the second LCF, and it's being delivered in the next few weeks

So if I understand correctly the first LCF is still green and is doing it´s work unpainted? Or has it been painted meanwhile too?

Regards,
haj96

RICARIZA · Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:34 pm

Quoting JetBlueAtJFK (Reply 8):
I think the 747LCF doesn't look as awkward as the Beluga does though

I have to disagree, this looks worse than the Beluga! Anyway, is not here for its looks but functionality.. ugly as hell but it does its work I suppose....!

n314as · Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:50 pm

Boy you guys are so in a hurry to upload this......at least let the damn thing come out a little more to get a good shot.

EMA747 · Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:57 pm

Does anyone else agree that its a really dull livery? Surely they could have come up with an interesting paint job for it? (I'm thinking Malaysian Freedom Of Space Big grin

)

dambuster · Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:42 am

I agree (partially), it's not horrible, but I'd have preferred it in the Dreamliner livery itself... I like the name: "Dreamlifter"! bigthumbsup

zvezda · Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:54 am

I still think it would have looked better with three rows of fake windows painted on. Smile

If Boeing ever build a Y3, do you think they would build an even larger set of converted 747s to deliver the parts?

DfwRevolution · Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:58 am

Quoting EMA747 (Reply 33):
Does anyone else agree that its a really dull livery? Surely they could have come up with an interesting paint job for it? (I'm thinking Malaysian Freedom Of Space Big grin)

You should be thankful Boeing even painted it that well. Initial plans were just plain white with no titles at all.

What I do think would have been cool and simple would have been to put a larger #1, #2, and #3 on the tails of the respective aircraft.

Quoting Dambuster (Reply 34):
I agree (partially), it's not horrible, but I'd have preferred it in the Dreamliner livery itself... I like the name: "Dreamlifter"

That was never going to happen. The Dreamliner paint scheme would be impractical (cost, weight) on an aircraft that big.

HAWK21M · Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:18 am

Looks Good.
regds
MEL

NoWorries · Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:23 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 35):
Boeing ever build a Y3, do you think they would build an even larger set of converted 747s to deliver the parts?

Maybe they'll order up an A380LCF from Airbus ?? duck

mustang304 · Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:35 am

While I don't think it is horrible, I think they should of rigged it with LEDs, and they could advertise as they fly over, kind of like the Goodyear blimp. Imagine seeing a giant billboard as it is in the landing or takeoff cycle....a changeable livery Smile

dambuster · Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:49 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 36):
That was never going to happen. The Dreamliner paint scheme would be impractical (cost, weight) on an aircraft that big.

Yeah, I agree, plus the shape of the LCF is kinda bizzar... maybe the Dreamliner livery wouldn't look the same... but who cares, it's not bad.

AirEMS · Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:08 am

Very impressive - I like the name Dream Lifter

-Carl

NYCA330 · Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:30 am

I guess this is it on flightaware. It is airborne right now, apparently routing BFI-BFI.

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE876

S12PPL · Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:35 am

As much as I love Boeing...

Holy crap that thing looks ugly! Thank god it isn't a new model! Smile

Very interesting though... It does look like one of those REALLY fat people.

highflyer9790 · Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:44 am

Well, it gets the job done. Now the fusalage pieces wont get shot up on passing frieght train the plains like th 737s....plus, the composite fusalage would be hard to repair..

747hogg · Thu Jan 18, 2007 5:32 am

Looks like it needs to fart real bad!

brendows · Thu Jan 18, 2007 6:22 am

Quoting Haj96 (Reply 30):
So if I understand correctly the first LCF is still green and is doing it´s work unpainted?

That's correct, it hasn't been painted yet. You can see it on a picture from Monday here:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/2007/q1/070116d_pr.html

gunsontheroof · Thu Jan 18, 2007 6:53 am

Quoting Vivekman2006 (Reply 27):
Finally it has been painted! Was getting tired looking at the green/metallic colours.

This is a new Dreamlifter. The one you're referring to is still green...I saw it at BFI on Sunday night.

Quoting N314as (Reply 32):
Boy you guys are so in a hurry to upload this......at least let the damn thing come out a little more to get a good shot.

Not an a.net photo, I believe it came from Boeing's site.

Quoting EMA747 (Reply 33):
Does anyone else agree that its a really dull livery? Surely they could have come up with an interesting paint job for it?

It's a freighter...Boeing isn't going to take the weight penalty that an "interesting" paint job would add.

raventom · Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:25 am

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 13):
why does this aircraft have no winglets

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 18):
I think the reason for winglet removal is more to unexplained vibration rather than the weight reduction.

I think PolymerPlane is correct. I read in Flight International that Boeing said "it was decided not to fly with winglets following vibration issues".

It should complete certification in the next few weeks though!

airfoilsguy · Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:33 am

Quoting N314as (Reply 32):
Boy you guys are so in a hurry to upload this......at least let the damn thing come out a little more to get a good shot.

Thats how far it got before someone realized that the front cargo door was missing and they pushed it back in.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net