8 ms·

Also four engines are a must if you operate long haul from hot and high airports like Mexico, Bogota or Quito. Due to engine failure performance requirements a

Also four engines are a must if you operate long haul from hot and high airports like Mexico, Bogota or Quito. Due to engine failure performance requirements a twin engine needs to cut back almost half the traffic load(cargo and passangers) to be able to take off within the tables. Once they have to retire 747 and A340 airlines din't really know what to do in those airports. New hot and high versions of the twin engines are being studied, but they have failed to meet the expectations previously.

sho 8y ago
Don't forget the MD11, also a favourite of the cargo operators due to having plenty of spare thrust for hot and high ops. Although it's also a truism that high altitude locations don't generally have a lot of heavy things to export. AFAIK Quito's main outgoing cargo is cut flowers...
- omegant 8y ago
  Mexico main cargo are avocados for Europe, Bogota fruis and flowers too. There isn't enough cargo offer for the demand that exists now a days. We are leaving cargo behind every single flight between these airports and Madrid.
russdill 8y ago
I love how planes like the 747 can attach an extra engine to ferry it around. https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/62014_1283325243.jpg https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/0...
- taneq 8y ago
  Is there an attachment point on the other side as well? Being super-cynical, I can't help but wonder if these attachment points were also added just in case existing fleets of 747s were pressed into service as long range bombers...
  - sgillen 8y ago
    I bet there is an attachment point and another engine on there to balance things out. I would be surprised if Boeing considered or purposely designed in some long range bomber capabilities into the 747. Maybe though as part of the sales pitch to countries that would like to add military capability in a low key sort of way...
  - Steve44 8y ago
    No, there is one mount just on one side and the engine also has to be prepared for ferrying. There are quite a few planes which can do this, sometimes the engines have a pod put around them, in this case I think the fans are removed to reduce drag. In all cases, the engine isn't working. Think of it more like putting an engine on your car roof rack.
    - privong 8y ago
      I read the parent's comment as suggesting the attachment points could be used for bombs or missiles, rather than additional working engines.
      - taneq 8y ago
        Yeah, that was my thought. I bet you could fit an awfully big bomb under there... or a long range tank with enough fuel in it to keep you in the air for a day or more.
        patentatt 8y ago
        747 was developed in the 60s when it was clear that ICBMs were the future of long-range bombing. I doubt they were thinking of military applications with this. The only long-range bomber missions envisioned by that time were super-sonic deep penetration designs (e.g., see XB-70 bomber), and even those were abandoned in the face of improving anti-aircraft missile tech (see: when the Soviet Union shot down a U-2).
        Merad 8y ago
- stcredzero 8y ago
  The airlines now ferry around extra fuel from airport to airport as well. Some logistics smarty-pants figured out the airlines can save money this way. (Basically doing arbitrage with regional differences in fuel costs.)

sho 8y ago

Don't forget the MD11, also a favourite of the cargo operators due to having plenty of spare thrust for hot and high ops. Although it's also a truism that high altitude locations don't generally have a lot of heavy things to export. AFAIK Quito's main outgoing cargo is cut flowers...

omegant 8y ago
Mexico main cargo are avocados for Europe, Bogota fruis and flowers too. There isn't enough cargo offer for the demand that exists now a days. We are leaving cargo behind every single flight between these airports and Madrid.

russdill 8y ago

I love how planes like the 747 can attach an extra engine to ferry it around. https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/62014_1283325243.jpg https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/0...

taneq 8y ago
Is there an attachment point on the other side as well? Being super-cynical, I can't help but wonder if these attachment points were also added just in case existing fleets of 747s were pressed into service as long range bombers...
- sgillen 8y ago
  I bet there is an attachment point and another engine on there to balance things out. I would be surprised if Boeing considered or purposely designed in some long range bomber capabilities into the 747. Maybe though as part of the sales pitch to countries that would like to add military capability in a low key sort of way...
- Steve44 8y ago
  No, there is one mount just on one side and the engine also has to be prepared for ferrying. There are quite a few planes which can do this, sometimes the engines have a pod put around them, in this case I think the fans are removed to reduce drag. In all cases, the engine isn't working. Think of it more like putting an engine on your car roof rack.
  - privong 8y ago
    I read the parent's comment as suggesting the attachment points could be used for bombs or missiles, rather than additional working engines.
    - taneq 8y ago
      Yeah, that was my thought. I bet you could fit an awfully big bomb under there... or a long range tank with enough fuel in it to keep you in the air for a day or more.
      - patentatt 8y ago
        747 was developed in the 60s when it was clear that ICBMs were the future of long-range bombing. I doubt they were thinking of military applications with this. The only long-range bomber missions envisioned by that time were super-sonic deep penetration designs (e.g., see XB-70 bomber), and even those were abandoned in the face of improving anti-aircraft missile tech (see: when the Soviet Union shot down a U-2).
      - Merad 8y ago
stcredzero 8y ago
The airlines now ferry around extra fuel from airport to airport as well. Some logistics smarty-pants figured out the airlines can save money this way. (Basically doing arbitrage with regional differences in fuel costs.)