Jump to content

Jumbo Jet


Guest ozzie
 Share

Recommended Posts

I saw it a while back pretty good but its a sad ending

bugga FT, why spoil our fun. I love 747s, they are my favourite by far, the A380 is a bloody big boring aluminium tube with not enough toilets IMHO.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Maj Millard

Did you know the first B747 wouldn't fly properly until they installed a square foot cube of depleted uranium in the tail just below the fin. Depleted uranium being much heavier than lead. There is a nuclear symbol on the tail hatch where the block is. The 747 at Longreach has the weight removed, but the symbol is still in place on the hatch. There is an access gallery and ladder up into the vertical fin. The early ones didn't have a hatch over this entryway, but after the rupture of the Japanese 747 rear cabin bulkhead occurred, which allowed massive cabin pressure into the vertical fin and blowing it off !... a hatch cover was installed over this opening into the fin.

 

Many don't know that the B747 was originally designed to be a military transport, but lost out to the Lockheed C-5a because the C-5 could 'kneel ' at the front by retracting the nose wheels and the 747 couldn't. Military freighters traditionally only do half the 'cycles' that civilian airliners do (+hours) so the first jumbos used the wrong grade of alum for the foward fuselage stringers up where it went flat by the upper deck. This led to massive skin cracking cause by the pressurisation cycles and led to the 'section 41' modifications that all had to have to continue in service. Those who carried out 'section 41' mods described the job as ' peeling an orange from the inside out '.......

 

Pan Am was the launch customer with the first -100s. Only three little windows up on the top deck which is around the same size as a DC-3 cabin. (First class)....when I worked at UPS at Oakland Airport in California, UPS would lease some of the old Pan Am -100s for the Xmas season....they had been stored at Mojave Airport in Southern CA. Although whitewashed over you could see the round blue Pan Am symbol on the tails. They had been converted to freighters by then. UPS wanted to fly them Oakland to Hawaii but the FAA said no to long overwater flights....continental US only where there are lots of airports !..the mechanics hated entering the avionics bays in the bellys of these old birds as they were full of spiders, teranchilas, and scorpions from being stored for years in the high desert at Mojave. To climb up the ladder into the massive cabin of a cargo freighter 747 where there is nothing but a roller covered floor was always a sight to see, especially after traveling in ones with normal passenger cabins. There was another single ladder foward leading up throught the upper floor for access to the cockpit in the freighters.

 

Sitting there at night on the cargo ramps looking old and whitewashed, they still looked proud as the first of many with the three little windows up on the top deck. I loaded these aircraft in the mid 90s, so there is a very good chance they are alum ingots by now.............Maj.....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont think any QF 747's had the tail ballast, i have spent a few days up in that area, climbing through the bulkhead, over the rear stab, through the battery room, and up into the rudder. fwd of the APU firewall. i know the elevator and aileron balance weights were depleted uranium. make some fantastic sparks when a new employee from South Africa decided to remove a few grams with a grinder in the hangar!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know where we can see video of the 747 making it's final landing at Longreach?I believe there was a similar one in South Africa.

Here's one - only 48 sec long though.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Maj Millard
i dont think any QF 747's had the tail ballast, i have spent a few days up in that area, climbing through the bulkhead, over the rear stab, through the battery room, and up into the rudder. fwd of the APU firewall. i know the elevator and aileron balance weights were depleted uranium. make some fantastic sparks when a new employee from South Africa decided to remove a few grams with a grinder in the hangar!

Did QF ever have the -100s .??

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When British Airways took delivery of their first 747, I was invited on board for lunch as part of their launch programme.

 

We had a nice lunch on the ground, and oodle's of bubbly, probably so we didn't notice that the engines had actually been removed after flying across the pond, because they had a problem of busting into flames when applying reverse-thrust, or so I was told.

 

Just keep the good old " British Stiff Upper Lip", we'll have it sorted before it goes into service.

 

Done many dozens of flights on them, I love em!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea David!, that is great to know mate

 

But some years ago when I booked to London with Garuda and having experienced three abortive take-offs at Abu Dhabi on one and finally getting off-loaded to an old Air Lanka 747, I was not at the time convinced. It shook rattled and rolled, and on reading the in-flight magazine, it assured me that it was flying with a real progessive airline, which boasted a fleet of 1 Boeing 747 plus I think, several F27's they picked up on Ebay.

 

Apart from being stuck in a cabin with 350 people who didn'nt know which supermarket isle contained body deodorant, I found the curry- flavoured corn-flakes for breakfast a tad unusual:yikes:.

 

Fortunately the Capain trimmed to port wing very low at sun-up, before the majority got on their knees and faced to the East, presumably groaning with stomach cramps like I had?

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't think they produced too many SP's, maybe 40 or 50 primarilly for Pan Am and i think maybe Iran Air, for runs between NY and the middle east, but i beleive they had grunt to spare with the shorter fuselarge, and great range for the time

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Maj Millard
nope, they had the -200 in the early days, then the -300 and finally the -400, as well as a few combies, and my favourite, the SP model.

Maybe the block of depleted uranium was only in the -100s ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Maj Millard
don't think they produced too many SP's, maybe 40 or 50 primarilly for Pan Am and i think maybe Iran Air, for runs between NY and the middle east, but i beleive they had grunt to spare with the shorter fuselarge, and great range for the time

The SPs (special purpose) were produce initially to fly the Pacific route, most ended up with South African Airways. Qantas had a few the most notable VH-EAA which did a few runs to Oshkosh. Same engines as the bigger ones but much shorter fuselage and no under wing 'boats' for less drag and a higher tail . Had the cability of going supersonic as they burned fuel if the throttles weren't retarded. I flew Syd-LAX on one and as I recall cruising was around 41-42 thousand feet............Maj....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting Maj. I knew they were quick and had heard they were somewhat overpowered for normal op's, so not to driven flat out. Probably good to have that extra grunt on take-offs in hot climates though.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most take-offs on a larger jet is derated . this gives better engine life. You still have to make the statutory performance parameters.. 4 engined aircraft are not as overpowered as twins as the % power loss for one engine failed is 25% instead of 50%. This makes the take-off longer on the runway than would otherwise be the case..

 

A no payload Twin with a small amount of fuel has ridiculous performance on full power especially on cold days at sea level, so it's not done much. Unless you are having a bit of fun. and CAN. Nev

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Maj Millard
Interesting Maj. I knew they were quick and had heard they were somewhat overpowered for normal op's, so not to driven flat out. Probably good to have that extra grunt on take-offs in hot climates though.

Got talking to a 747 co pilot once . He told me about his first SP take off empty on one they were ferrying. He said he got so far behind it the captain called " I've got the gear " before he exceeded gear up speed......

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...