User avatar
MoKa777
Topic Author
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

747-8 Project Ozark

Tue May 02, 2017 10:32 am

I know it was something that Boeing would have done had they found more customers.

From my research, I have found that Boeing (or GE or some other party) pitched the 748i to EK for West Coast USA flights with Project Ozark improvements. DXB to West Coast USA is somewhat (and unofficially) EK's benchmark route for aircraft capability. EK ultimately rejected any offers.

How far can the 748i fly right now from DXB? I guess it currently falls short of reaching Florida, Texas, California, Brazil and/or East Coast Australia hence the need to make improvements in order to be a relevant and reasonable option.

The range in the articles I have found about it state that the 748i had a range of 7800nm and Ozark would boost that to 8200nm. After adjusting all of their aircrafts' brochure range figures, I am guessing that with Ozark the 748i would be good for just under 8200nm.

Would this have been enough for EK to fly between the US states mentioned above and DXB? What about East Coast Australia and/or Brazil? What range does the 748i need in order to operate these routes with a full (350+ pax + bags + freight) payload?

Unfortunately, I do not have access to flight planning software to do this myself and cannot figure it out manually either.

What would it take to get the 748i there and what order size would have justified Boeing moving forward with Ozark?

Can anyone satisfy my curiosity in this matter?
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Topic Author
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Tue May 02, 2017 10:39 am

I also realise that this topic has been discussed on here before but I did not find all the answers I am looking for in those discussions...
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 1957
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Tue May 02, 2017 11:19 am

Clueless regarding any 747-8i OZARK projects but if you were doing this today:
BDX-MCO, MIA alt 6939NM W/C M02
14+33 total required fuel would be 163200KG
Payload 45400
T.O GRS WT 404747
Not sure that helps with the discussion?
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Topic Author
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Tue May 02, 2017 12:02 pm

BravoOne wrote:
Clueless regarding any 747-8i OZARK projects but if you were doing this today:
BDX-MCO, MIA alt 6939NM W/C M02
14+33 total required fuel would be 163200KG
Payload 45400
T.O GRS WT 404747
Not sure that helps with the discussion?


I assume you mean DXB-MCO?

Yes, this helps! Exactly the type of information I have been hoping to get.

Would you say that DXB-LAX would be unreasonable with the current 748i (payload restricted)? The route would be ±500nm further, I believe..?

http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-av ... -campaigns

^A link to an article about it from a few years back.
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 1957
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Tue May 02, 2017 12:14 pm

Yes I did mean DBX

Here you go. A walk in the park for this great machine.


FUEL TIME DIST ARRIVE TAKEOFF LAND AV PLD OPNLWT
DEST KLAX 155363 15/46 07646 1046Z 415935 260572 045359 197200
RESV 011898 01/35 ZFW 242559
ALTN KONT 002131 00/12 0041 1058Z
HOLD 003984 00/30
REQD 173376 18/03 NAM
TAXI 001000 7647
XTRA 000000 00/00
TOTL 174376 18/03
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Topic Author
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Tue May 02, 2017 2:52 pm

Aaah I see! Great machine, indeed!

And this is with the aircraft as it is right now?

Any improvements to it would obviously allow it to fly further or on the same route take a slightly higher payload, I assume.

For am aircraft like this, how much more payload can it carry on the exact same route instead of using 400-500nm extra range available?

From my rudimentary understanding, 400-500nm would be an hours flying time. I assume the per hour fuel consumption to be in excess of 10t for a 747. So, if structure is beefed up and MTOW increased, I assume that an airline choosing to carry more payload instead of fly 400-500nm further would benefit from a ±10t payload boost?
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
FrmrKSEngr
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:05 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sat May 13, 2017 4:56 am

Check-out page 29 of the linked 747 airport planning document. It has the basic 747-8i range/weights curves.

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commer ... /747_8.pdf
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 24019
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sat May 13, 2017 6:28 am

Main focus of Project Ozark were additional weight reductions (from a couple hundred to a couple thousand pounds) and lower drag side-of-body fairings in place of the current design.
 
LH707330
Posts: 1686
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sat May 13, 2017 11:16 pm

Stitch wrote:
Main focus of Project Ozark were additional weight reductions (from a couple hundred to a couple thousand pounds) and lower drag side-of-body fairings in place of the current design.

Did they implement both of them, or only the weight reductions?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 24019
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sat May 13, 2017 11:28 pm

LH707330 wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Main focus of Project Ozark were additional weight reductions (from a couple hundred to a couple thousand pounds) and lower drag side-of-body fairings in place of the current design.


Did they implement both of them, or only the weight reductions?


Just the weight reductions, which amount to I believe some 10,000 pounds by last year compared to the first builds, which were some 5000 to 6000 pounds heavier than design spec. So the latest builds are a fair bit lighter than design spec.
 
jarheadk5
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:45 pm

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sun May 14, 2017 2:26 am

Stitch wrote:
Just the weight reductions, which amount to I believe some 10,000 pounds by last year compared to the first builds, which were some 5000 to 6000 pounds heavier than design spec. So the latest builds are a fair bit lighter than design spec.

The A&P in me needs to know: What sort of things has Boeing done to cut ~10k lbs off the 748? Even on an aircraft that big, 10k is a significant number - that's gotta involve significant structural changes between early and late serial numbers. Can't get numbers like that from simple changes, like switching all Adel clamps from steel bands to aluminum bands...
-Boom stowed, leaving position.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 24019
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sun May 14, 2017 3:05 am

jarheadk5 wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Just the weight reductions, which amount to I believe some 10,000 pounds by last year compared to the first builds, which were some 5000 to 6000 pounds heavier than design spec. So the latest builds are a fair bit lighter than design spec.


The A&P in me needs to know: What sort of things has Boeing done to cut ~10k lbs off the 748? Even on an aircraft that big, 10k is a significant number - that's gotta involve significant structural changes between early and late serial numbers. Can't get numbers like that from simple changes, like switching all Adel clamps from steel bands to aluminum bands...


I'm not aware of all the specifics, but I do know that in general the structure was "overbuilt", which allowed Boeing to certify the plane at a much higher MTOW than originally planned (987,000 pounds as opposed to 970,000 pounds) which more than covered the OEW overage and allowed the frame to meet it's payload-range targets from EIS (the fuel consumption miss was still pronounced, however). A fair bit of the plane was designed at the Moscow Design Center and Boeing also had a fair number of Japanese contract engineers helping out as Boeing resources were pulled to supplement the 787 development program and as I hear it, they were more conservative in their design ethos than Boeing's people which contributed to the OEW overage.
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sun May 14, 2017 3:15 am

I wonder what the efficiency penalty is they pay for having the chevron nozzles. I do know they reduce max rated thrust from 67,400 lbs. to 66,500 lbs. I'll bet they could use the new "chevron-less" design for the GE9X.
 
Dalmd88
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 3:19 am

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Sun May 14, 2017 2:19 pm

jarheadk5 wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Just the weight reductions, which amount to I believe some 10,000 pounds by last year compared to the first builds, which were some 5000 to 6000 pounds heavier than design spec. So the latest builds are a fair bit lighter than design spec.

The A&P in me needs to know: What sort of things has Boeing done to cut ~10k lbs off the 748? Even on an aircraft that big, 10k is a significant number - that's gotta involve significant structural changes between early and late serial numbers. Can't get numbers like that from simple changes, like switching all Adel clamps from steel bands to aluminum bands...

I saw piece about Airbus improving their manufacturing process to save even more weight. It showed the old cluncky triangle aluminum bracket compared to the new one. With advanced milling processes they were able to swiss cheese the crap out of that bracket. I think the weight saved was like 40%. I bet Boeing is doing the same. I think 3D printed parts were also mentioned as a huge weight savings.
 
LH707330
Posts: 1686
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: 747-8 Project Ozark

Mon May 15, 2017 10:58 pm

SCAT15F wrote:
I wonder what the efficiency penalty is they pay for having the chevron nozzles. I do know they reduce max rated thrust from 67,400 lbs. to 66,500 lbs. I'll bet they could use the new "chevron-less" design for the GE9X.

The chevrons cost about a quarter percent overall.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dardania, gloom and 2 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos