747-400 versus 747-8

[fdcg27]

Wow!
Reading the wiki piece, it sounds like everyone aboard was lucky that the flight had a sharp crew who maintained their calm and worked the problem with helpful advice from NWA maintenance personnel.
The aircraft was landed with no injuries to anyone aboard and went on to fly for many more years.
Doesn't always happen that way.

 

[CT8]

The 747 stirs my soul for some reason. It is the only aircraft I ever think about when aircraft comes to mind. That and a HUEY

 

[FowVay]

Fdcg27, the 747 that you saw when you were in Atlanta in March was the ship that was taken to the Delta museum last week. It is ship no. 6301, N661US. This is the aircraft that was in the articles mentioned above. The #1 and #4 engines were removed, the interior was gutted, and two fan cowls had to be removed for clearance in order to tow that monster across one public roadway and through the Delta General Offices parking lot.

It is very common to see a 747 sitting at the east end of the hangar because these things are so incredibly maintenance intensive that they're always in need of something. Delta is retiring their last 747 in 2017 because they're too expensive to operate.

If anyone is interested they can do a Google search for Delta 6301 and read some information about it and read about it being put in the Delta museum. There might even be some YouTube video about this thing.

We look forward to a future of new and efficient widebody aircraft such as the Airbus A350, the B-787, and even some older long range 777's. The need for the capabilities of such machines as the 747 and A380 just isn't in Delta's future. Heck, we're finally retiring the MD-80 series of aircraft - for the third time in my career. It's time for an upgrade I think.

 

[FowVay]

One other thought,, if anyone is in Atlanta tomorrow, Saturday, 07 May, you can stop by the museum and watch the engines being reinstalled. It's fascinating if you're into that sort of thing.

Here's a bit of engine trivia with regard to the Pratt & Whitney engines on this particular ship:

Pratt 4062 identifier:

4 = engine family based on fan size (92" range)
0 = indicates that it is designed for a Boeing airframe.
If this number were a 4 then it would indicate that it is designed for an Airbus airframe (eg: 4462).
62 = the thrust rating of the engine in lbs.

This is a 92" fan Pratt 4,000 that produces 62,000 lbs of thrust.

A 2037 Pratt is a 2000 series engine, hanging on a Boeing (B757 for example) and producing 37,000 lbs of thrust.

Come by tomorrow and join the fun!

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: CT8
The 747 stirs my soul for some reason. It is the only aircraft I ever think about when aircraft comes to mind. That and a HUEY


I always think about the SR-71

 

[fdcg27]

THX!
With nearly twenty eight years in service the old girl had a good run.
Do you happen to know her hours/cycles?
Also, as someone who knows ATL well, what do you think would be the minimum layover time to nip on out to the museum sometime when we find ourselves connecting through, which happens at least a couple of times a year?
Four or five hours?
I've always had a yen to see the museum.

 

[FowVay]

To be truthful there really isn't a whole lot to see at the museum. There are three planes outside in the parking lot (757, DC-9, and now the 747) and inside is a small gift shop, a few pictures, the Spirit of Delta 767 and a flight simulator. I wish Delta would buy Elvis Presley's Convair 880 and display it. It was once a Delta aircraft and I think it should return home.

It only takes about 10 minutes to get from the south terminal over to the museum by taxi. You can cruise through the museum in about an hour and then head back. The worst part of the whole idea is that you have to clear security again and that can take an hour by itself. I always clear security through the international terminal because it's just not as busy.

As for the Total time/Total cycles on the airframe of ship 6301 - I'd have to try to find it in the records. I have no idea off the top of my head.

 

[fdcg27]

The Spirit of Delta aircraft was bought from Boeing with employee contributions and given to Delta, right? Most company managements would die for that kind of employee loyalty.
A Convair 880 would be really nice to see, but even if the Presley estate would give it up, how would you get it to ATL?
It may have been smaller than a DC-8 or 707, but it's still a lot of aircraft to move by road.

 

[cjcride]

There are companies that make giant blimps to haul cargo.

 

[IveBeenRued]

I personally like the 747-8. It is quieter, has better lighting, and has better insulation when sitting next to the window than some of the 747-400s that I've been on. I fly through quite a few major hubs and I've seen way more 747-8s than A380s.

Lately I've been getting put on a lot of older 777-200s but I was lucky enough to get a pretty new 777-300ER a few months back. Hearing that GE90 spool up was pretty fun and I liked the new interior lighting system.

 

[mcrn]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: CT8
The 747 stirs my soul for some reason. It is the only aircraft I ever think about when aircraft comes to mind. That and a HUEY


I always think about the SR-71

Me too

 

[fdcg27]

Yeah, but you can actually fly on a 747.
You'll never have the privilege of flying on a Blackbird.

 

[CT8]

While the SR71 is most impressive,I saw one at Beal Air Force base years ago. I should be the Bat plane. It is not for me, no bathrooms! I want a bathroom and a coffee room at least. I would love to own a 747 I don't want to own a SR71. I have my priorities. The 747 in my mind is my personal playground.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Are you sure Iran chose Airbus over Boeing ?
I don't think our Government could force them to buy Boeing aircraft.... which would be good for the orders / workers.

Off Topic:
Boeing is cutting 8000 jobs due to Airbus winning more orders than had Boeing expected.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0WW0AF




I'll avoid the treasonous Iran "deal" so I don't get political.

But Boeing isn't really "cutting" all those jobs exactly. They are reducing through attrition and as of yet, no layoffs are needed to get the numbers where they want them. Early retirements are another option. It may, in the very long term, be a reduction of 4 to 6k positions. I doubt 8,000. Many of them (most) will be from the non-production, salary side....not nearly as many from the assembly floor. Boeing as PLENTY of orders to get it slammed with work, and many employees are on overtime every week.

But....has Airbus hurt Boeing? Of course...very much so. Boeing was late with the newest 737 and has spent billions on the 787 issues and now they are spending billions on ramping up the new 777 that should be an extremely good aircraft.

I think part of the problem is the way Airbus can sell it's aircraft at seemingly no profit. The structure of Airbus (financially) seems to allow for this low margin. Boeing aircraft are more expensive in general and at the moment the company is doing everything it can to reduce waste and costs in order to keep up.

 

[fdcg27]

To be fair, Airbus also makes some very compelling aircraft that sell on their merits.
Boeing is also willing to take a hit on margins as needed, as they did in the recent competition for new small mainline aircraft at United.
Boeing has never before faced a competitor with the engineering and financial resources to seriously match it. Douglas and later MD were not in the same league as Airbus.
Boeing faces challenges going forward, but Boeing does have a depth of experience and capability that should see it through.
Derivative aircraft like the new 777 versions are hardly the final word in a competitive market.

 

[CT8]

Airbus gets you there with a scare.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: CT8
Airbus gets you there with a scare.


What's that mean, exactly?

I've flown (as in, pilot flying) an Airbus in some genuinely terrible weather. Blizzard snow in Cleveland, thunderstorms in Chicago, severe turbulence in the Rockies, pea-soup fog in San Francisco.

The airplane handled all of that with aplomb.

I love the 747, but you're kidding yourself if you think Airbus makes a lousy airplane. The A-380 is an overpriced, overweight, over-engineered behemoth with little market appeal, but the A-320 is, frankly, a better airplane than the 737. Better takeoff and landing performance for the same passenger count. More room.

Boeing is facing a formidable competitor in Airbus.

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: CT8
Airbus gets you there with a scare.


What's that mean, exactly?

I've flown (as in, pilot flying) an Airbus in some genuinely terrible weather. Blizzard snow in Cleveland, thunderstorms in Chicago, severe turbulence in the Rockies, pea-soup fog in San Francisco.

The airplane handled all of that with aplomb.

I love the 747, but you're kidding yourself if you think Airbus makes a lousy airplane. The A-380 is an overpriced, overweight, over-engineered behemoth with little market appeal, but the A-320 is, frankly, a better airplane than the 737. Better takeoff and landing performance for the same passenger count. More room.

Boeing is facing a formidable competitor in Airbus.
I like the way it sounds. Years ago I would hear Delta gets you there with a scare, Time marches on.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: CT8
Airbus gets you there with a scare.


What's that mean, exactly?

I've flown (as in, pilot flying) an Airbus in some genuinely terrible weather. Blizzard snow in Cleveland, thunderstorms in Chicago, severe turbulence in the Rockies, pea-soup fog in San Francisco.

The airplane handled all of that with aplomb.

I love the 747, but you're kidding yourself if you think Airbus makes a lousy airplane. The A-380 is an overpriced, overweight, over-engineered behemoth with little market appeal, but the A-320 is, frankly, a better airplane than the 737. Better takeoff and landing performance for the same passenger count. More room.

Boeing is facing a formidable competitor in Airbus.

So...do other pilots, equally qualified, all agree that the A320 series is superior to the 737...or is it your opinion? And other than a particular model of the 737 having less than ideal specifications, are you asserting that the entire 737 line is inferior to the Airbus?

 

[Sam_Julier]

What's that mean, exactly?

I've flown (as in, pilot flying) an Airbus in some genuinely terrible weather. Blizzard snow in Cleveland, thunderstorms in Chicago, severe turbulence in the Rockies, pea-soup fog in San Francisco.

The airplane handled all of that with aplomb.

I love the 747, but you're kidding yourself if you think Airbus makes a lousy airplane. The A-380 is an overpriced, overweight, over-engineered behemoth with little market appeal, but the A-320 is, frankly, a better airplane than the 737. Better takeoff and landing performance for the same passenger count. More room.

Boeing is facing a formidable competitor in Airbus. [/quote]

+ 1. Totally agree. I retired in 2013 with 1,937,000 base miles on Delta. I planned my travel so I could fly the A-319/320 over the 737 or MD80. I've owned 2 planes in which I had instrument and commercial ratings. I read Aviation Week for years. Never once has there been anything but praise for the A-318, 319, 320, and 321.