She will commence flight tests next week...

http://myweb.hinet.net/home1/black_mafia/lcf-1.jpg

http://myweb.hinet.net/home1/black_mafia/lcf-2.jpg

Not the prettiest of birds! :lol: ;)

What is that???!!!!! Are they doing the same as cars to cover the design or what???

Definitely a case of form follows function.

Oh yah, I heard Taiwan modified this bird.

What would they be hauling with that? Never mind. Found the info online.
Maybe airbus can borrow it to move A380 components. :lol: :lol: :lol:

^^
LOL!! They would need to enlarge it again for that!. :lol: Better not, it's ugly enough now. I'm sure it will serve it's purpose though.

^^ It's used to transport huge parts of the 787 Dreamliner...

http://myweb.hinet.net/home1/black_mafia/lcf-3.jpg

it made me feel like, airbus invented the A380 now boeing is trying to catch up by enlarging their planes =P

dang, I must say, that is one ugly bird, must be quite huge though inside, a flying warehouse

it made me feel like, airbus invented the A380 now boeing is trying to catch up by enlarging their planes =P

Looks more like they're copying the A300 Beluga version instead of the A380.

Most of the people don't want to use this to be their computer desktop 'cause it's too ugly, and some pilots who saw this big monster mistakely recongnize her as A380! Even B744 pilots!! :oops:

All it needs is a little paint to make it look pretty [and airworthy for that matter.] ;)

Where is the main cargo door? Does the nose swing open like regular 747Fs or does this one open up in a different spot? :?

http://myweb.hinet.net/home1/black_mafia/lcf-4.jpg

All it needs is a little paint to make it look pretty [and airworthy for that matter.] ;)

Where is the main cargo door? Does the nose swing open like regular 747Fs or does this one open up in a different spot? :?
It would look good in the boeing dreamliner livery :yes:

This is where the "door" is
http://boeingmedia.com/imageView.cfm?id=14304&ResID=4

^^ I believe they have completed this largest cargo loader in the world (the blue one) a few months ago.

thats quite an awkard door to have..........

^^ I believe they have completed this largest cargo loader in the world (the blue one) a few months ago.
Is it bigger than the Antonov An-225? Btw Antonov are building a second An-225 and possibly 2 more. One for the US Govenment and the other for the European Space program. http://home.hetnet.nl/~mobyfoby/an-225/images/Antonov225UR-820607-13_jpg.jpg

^^ No I was referring to the pale blue machinery which is loading the 787 fuselage into the B747LCF.

Now that is a plane;););)

Is it bigger than the Antonov An-225? Btw Antonov are building a second An-225 and possibly 2 more. One for the US Govenment and the other for the European Space program.

In terms of overall size and max takeoff weight, the Mriya is still the largest operational aircraft in the world. The A380 though the largest airliner is still smaller than the Antonov cargo transporter.
However the 747LCF will be the most voluminous when it takes to the air by the end of this month.
But the widest wingspan title still belongs to the Hughes H-4 "Spruce Goose" (320ft vs 290ft for the An225 & the A380's 261ft).

Looks more like they're copying the A300 Beluga version instead of the A380.

The Beluga was a copy of the original "bloated fuselage" cargo aircraft; the Super Guppy which was modified from the Boeing Stratocruiser.
Incidentally in the early years of Airbus Industries, the Super Guppy was employed to transport Airbus parts between the Airbus factories....leading to the saying that all Airbuses were delivered on the wings of Boeing.
The new-built Beluga was developed from the A300 to take over the Super Guppies' duties when the latter became increasingly difficult to maintain due to age.
Anyway the 747 LCF will be used solely by Boeing as a manufacturing support tool (unlike the Belugas which besides ferrying Airbus parts, are also availabe for charter by third parties).
In a way the LCF is a continuation of the Guppy tradition of grafting an oversized shell on used Boeing airliners.

It would look good in the boeing dreamliner livery :yes:


Here's a rendering :) :
http://cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00007206.jpg

And while on the subject of the venerable 747, here's an "unusual variant" :hahaha: :

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/1276/yourfile1hu.jpg
Sneak pic of "almost-ready-to-fly" N88892 hybrid bomber being towed
on the taxiway at the former Hawker aircraft factory airfield in the UK.


A former British Airways (BA) Boeing 747-200 airliner is being specially modified into a one-of-a-kind hybrid bomber.
This aircraft, formerly G-BDXJ, was previously in the BA longhaul fleet and has also seen service with Atlanta Air Cargo.
It is now being re-badged with the registration N88892.
Its two outer engines have been replaced with outboard wing tanks to increase its already substantial range, while the inner engines have been replaced with dual pylon-mounted engine pods under each wing near similar to those initially on the Boeing B-47 Stratojet.
Sir Richard Branson, owner of Virgin Atlantic Airways is also involved in some ways with this hybrid bomber.
Performance figures and technical specifications are unavailable but the aircraft is scheduled to make its "public maiden flight" in mid-November.
Watch for it. http://www.tokcok.com/forum/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

coooooooooooooooooooooool looking aircraft i like the eingins

the new painted one looks better but i dont really like the "hump" near the front...

Why not hire the Antonov?

Why not hire the Antonov?

I can advance many reasons why the Mriya is not suitable but just one will suffice.
Its cargo hold measure 21 ft by a tad under 14 1/2 ft. How to fit in the Dreamliner's fuselage cross section of almost 19 ft? And carrying aircraft sub-assemblies piggyback is no go, unlike a complete craft like the Buran for which the Antonov monster is designed.

the new painted one looks better but i dont really like the "hump" near the front...
That comes with the territory.... :)

http://cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00007206.jpg
Will these aircraft be painted like this? I thought Evergreen owns them. :yes:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/1276/yourfile1hu.jpg
I thought this was a prop for a movie, not meant to fly, am I wrong? If it is airworthy, why not replace the four engines with two GE90-115Bs and save a little gas? :yes:

Wow, that 744 LCF cargo door is impressive, I mean the whole tail plane arrangment rests on those hinges, there must be some serious reinforcement along the fuselage around there.

As for the 'bomber' plane, thats bloody weird, like Fusion said, why not have two 120,000lb GE 90s in place of double 58,000lb RR 211s?
Plus, what missions is that suitable for? No speed, no stealth, the things a sitting duck in hostile skies - bombing missions, I think not.

Hehe, just done a bit of research - the damn things to be used in the new James Bond film!

This plane looks pretty damn cool. Like others said not really pretty but it's purely functional.

Anyway the 747 LCF will be used solely by Boeing as a manufacturing support tool (unlike the Belugas which besides ferrying Airbus parts, are also availabe for charter by third parties).


Why would Boeing not let third parties rent their LCF though?

Plus, what missions is that suitable for? No speed, no stealth, the things a sitting duck in hostile skies - bombing missions, I think not.

Look at the B-52.

Will these aircraft be painted like this? I thought Evergreen owns them. :yes:


That's just a rendering found on the web.
The actual scheme on the LCFs is not disclosed yet.
Evergreen International Airlines Inc. (EIA) of McMinnville in Oregon (no relation of Taiwan's Evergreen Aviation Technologies Corp who are doing the conversions), is contracted by Boeing to operate and maintain the freighters on their Dreamliner delivery flights between Japan, Europe and the States.
The aircrafts will remain under the ownership of Boeing.

I thought this was a prop for a movie, not meant to fly, am I wrong? If it is airworthy, why not replace the four engines with two GE90-115Bs and save a little gas? :yes:
Hehe, just done a bit of research - the damn things to be used in the new James Bond film!
:) Right on!
That pic was slipped in just for fun. I had put on some clues to its real nature by way of <"unusual variant"> and <"public maiden flight" in mid-November>, with the latter refering to the movie's scheduled opening. Sir Richard Branson will also make a cameo appearance.

As to why four instead of two, I suppose dual engine pods look cooler on a bomber, especially in a JB movie.

Wow, that 744 LCF cargo door is impressive, I mean the whole tail plane arrangment rests on those hinges, there must be some serious reinforcement along the fuselage around there.
The LCF’s entire tail section will be held up by independent ground support equipment when it swings out for loading/unloading of its oversized cargo.
The latches, originally designed for a proposed folding wing on the Boeing 777, will be activated only by the ground support equipment and are specially designed to assure that the swing tail always is latched and locked when in service.
The swing zone - essentially the area about 10 feet forward and 10 feet aft of where the airplane will swing open for loading - does require complicated, “dense” structure to handle the airplane’s load requirements.

Why would Boeing not let third parties rent their LCF though?
Here's your answer: For tax reasons amongst other considerations, no marketing of the aircraft outside Boeing's own requirement is planned...Kurt Kraft, Chief Project Engineer for the Large Cargo Freighter.

My personal simplistic take on "tax reasons" is that the LCF development & hardcare costs is to be charged under "production tools" for the Dreamliner. If Boeing were to hire the freighters out, then they couldn't claim the associated tax set-offs.
"Other considerations" could include the anticipated tight schedule in ferrying the Dreamliner sub-assemblies, leaving no spare time-slots for third parties. This is since further reinforced by the unabated flood of orders of the fast-selling 787. If Boeing decide to further ramp-up its production, then they might need more than the three LCFs currently planned.

Here's your answer: For tax reasons amongst other considerations, no marketing of the aircraft outside Boeing's own requirement is planned...Kurt Kraft, Chief Project Engineer for the Large Cargo Freighter.

My personal simplistic take on "tax reasons" is that the LCF development & hardcare costs is to be charged under "production tools" for the Dreamliner. If Boeing were to hire the freighters out, then they couldn't claim the associated tax set-offs.
"Other considerations" could include the anticipated tight schedule in ferrying the Dreamliner sub-assemblies, leaving no spare time-slots for third parties. This is since further reinforced by the unabated flood of orders of the fast-selling 787. If Boeing decide to further ramp-up its production, then they might need more than the three LCFs currently planned.

Thanks for your informative answer!

Haha! Is the plane wearing a winter jacket?

http://myweb.hinet.net/home1/black_mafia/lcf-5.jpg

http://p.airliners.net/photos/middle/9/3/1/1097139.jpg

Does anybody know what delivery will it be in?

Does anybody know what delivery will it be in?
Do you mean livery?
If so, most likely it will be in the colours of the contracted operator; Evergreen International Airlines (EIA).

^^ Sheesh yea i mean livery
Thanks!

She's airborne now!!

http://myweb.hinet.net/home1/black_mafia/lcf-8.jpg

what an ugly plane :D i assume it's a cargo plane (didn't read the 1st page).

it looks grumpy!

what an ugly plane :D i assume it's a cargo plane (didn't read the 1st page).

Again, it's built solely for the purpose of transporting hardware for building the 787.

Further to my fun post no. 25 in this thread, here are more pics of that B747 N88892 hybrid bomber in Casino Royale:


http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14417

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14424

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14422

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14421

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14420

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14419

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14418

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=14423

sorry to ask, but why did they modify this 747-?

p5

sorry to ask, but why did they modify this 747-?

p5

To transport 787 parts.

Boeing should have bought an A380F for that :lol:

¡¡Boeing have to buy Airbus A300-600ST "Beluga"!!
:D :D


http://www.eads.net/xml/content/OF00000000400004/3/84/535843.jpg

http://www.eads.net/xml/content/OF00000000400004/1/85/535851.jpg

A pic of the old Super Guppy!.

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/station/assembly/superguppy/gallery/sg1_high.jpg

Thanks for the explanation londo-b!

Just a side note- for those of you are interested, MIT and Cambridge University, have teamed up and developed a prototype for a new jetliner, which is quite reminiscent of the American B2 Bomber (flying wing).

Supposedly, this plane will be no louder than a washmachine, reducing its impact on the environment, will have much more efficient engines and will also be able to transport a lot more people. Naturally, this is still in the early stages, but according to some reports, the jets we are seeing built today, will probably be the last of their kind..2030 expect something different..if all goes well.

Here is a link i found to the MIT/Cambridge site, for those of you who might be interested or have not heard about this yet:

http://www.cambridge-mit.org/cgi-bin/default.pl?SID=6&NewsID=368

p5