Boeing lets fly with a jumbo sales pitch (Qantas ... 747-8 efficiency statistics)

The Australian ^ | 24 March 2006 | Steve Creedy

[DennisR]

Actually, there were 33 injuries.

[DennisR]

Source???

[Prophet in the wilderness]

From the experience I had taking off in the 747, when it gets off the runway, it's a little wobbly , but, once the 747 gets to cruising altitude, it's a smooth as glass , unless you run into turbulence.
You'll be amazed once you sit down in your seat and look out the windows and actually see how long the wings are on the 747, it's makes the wings on the 737, 757, 767 look tiny.

[Petronski]

I'm now looking forward to the crummy three hour layover at LHR. Apparently it's a great place for planewatchers.

I see commercial jets in up close in person and I'm like a little kid (again).

There's something highly irrational and magical about air travel. I might be more giddy about that than I should, but I'm a geek and Dearest understands that...so I guess it's okay.

[COEXERJ145]

Injuries during the evacuation tests are very common regardless of the manufacturer. Usually it is from burns caused by the plastic slides and sometimes broken bones from being hit by another person.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

well,, I never saw the wing flex in reality, only on video or PBS specials, anyhow, interesting to say the lest to see how much they test those planes today.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" The 747SP is a rocket! I changed a whole vacation around just to ride on one! "

Lucky guy

They were built like a tank those 747SP.
Did you even hear about the 747SP flying to SFO and all 4 engines stalled and the pilot tried to go into a controlled dive and lost control of the 747 ( actually into a spiral uncontrolled dive and for a few seconds was doing over mach speed ).
The plane had a few parts actually tear off , but, the plane still managed to land limping safely back to SFO.
There is not many 747SP around today, and I don't think I will ever be lucky enough to ever get to fly in one.
The 747-800I is looking to be a great airplane in it's own right, even though it might not reach the sales of the 747-400, but, only time will tell, this plane might sell or exceed the 400 sales, but who knows at this point.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

There are a few 747-100s and 200s still flying in the freighter market, how many, I don't know, but, yes, they are slowly fading into the sunset.

[Central Scrutiniser]

There are a few very dodgy operators flying them in SE Asia right now, and JAL still flies a few.

The ones we got in '89 were already 15 years old and had 15,000 cycles on them. Parts fell of on takeoff, I was on a flight where the gear punctured the fuselage...

Same goes for the DC-10, its become a rareity as well. The MD-11 does great for cargo though.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Trust me, that was an incredible sucess. Evac tests always have injuries, McDonnell had a woman break her neck and be paralyzed for life. They put out more people in a shorter period of time than any one else ever, they are to be congratulated.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" where the gear punctured the fuselage... "
I don't know if that was the one I heard about on Airliners.net or heard in the news, but, yes, I heard about that.
Must have been a unusual sight to see, the 747 punked out as a low rider with the gear into the fuselage. Was it from bad maintenance ? or just corrosion ? or old age ?

[Central Scrutiniser]

I actually saw 2 last year in action, one at Bangkok, its the Oman government's, and one in Baltimore that is owned by a relief agency. Air Namibia has a few that South African own. NASA has one that is an airborne observatory. Nothing beats the pumpkin though.

[Central Scrutiniser]

We took off out of HNL at about 11 pm, and turned around about 30 minutes later and landed. They couldn't get the gear doors closed, and would have burned too much fuel with the doors open.

We went back to the gate, sat on the plane for a few hours, then got off for an hour or so, got back on for another few hours, then crew rest time was violated and we cancelled around 3 am. I was with a bunch of other employees and I was in charge of finding us a ride. QANTAS wouldn't take any of us even though they had room (foreign carriers can't take "real" passengers between 2 points in America, so they had seats from people that flew in from SYD and stayed in HNL. I waited till the counters opened canvassed the charters, and then found Phillipines, who let only employees (no spouses, no passes) on for $100 to SFO, we left around 2 PM. Long day....

For the plane, they worked all day on it, and tried again the next night, same thing, they had to turn around and land. It was our only 747 and we had nothing that could make the flight, so we ended up cancelling 4 days of flights. It was a nightmare, I lucked out and got out before lots of others did.

[Paleo Conservative]

From the experience I had taking off in the 747, when it gets off the runway, it's a little wobbly , but, once the 747 gets to cruising altitude, it's a smooth as glass , unless you run into turbulence.

Back in the '70s and '80s before airline deregulation fragmented the transatlantic market, there would be 20-30 747's queued up on the taxiways at JFK in the early evenings. It was awesome to see that many 747's lined up behind each other waiting their turns to takeoff.

[Paleo Conservative]

The 787 is suppose to replace the 757 and 767.

Which model replaces a 757? They're all bigger than a 757. The 787 is turning out to be a replacement for various 767 models and with the 787-10 also the 777-200ER. I think the larger variants of Y1 will replace the 757.

[Petronski]

I hope y'all understand how little I know about this, and how I enjoy just listening.

Ten weeks from now, I get to fly. I'm excited enough about that to just sit and watch and read and learn.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Opps, my mistake, yes, it's suppose to replace the 767.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

http://www.airliners.net/

[Prophet in the wilderness]

http://www.flightlevel350.com/

[Paleo Conservative]

Opps, my mistake, yes, it's suppose to replace the 767.

Maybe originally it was supposed to replace the 757, but the only model of it that is in the 787's capacity range is the 757-300. Boeing will have to address a replacement for the 757-200 eventually. Airlines like Continental have found it very useful for hub to point flights across the Atlantic. It would be nice if a 757-200 replacement could offer enough range to fly from interior cities in North America to Europe.