Unbuilt, experimental and unusual Boeing 747s

[Graham1973]

Boeing 747 modified to act as a tow-plane for the space shuttle Approach and Landing Tests.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760026053.pdf

Later: While still available via the NTRS website, I've taken the precaution of attaching the document to the posting just in case it disappears.

 

[bigvlada]

Boeing 747 modified to act as a tow-plane for the space shuttle Approach and Landing Tests.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760026053.pdf

Was there any attempt to put jet engines on Enterprise for these tests? Something similar to what was done with the Buran OK-GLI?

 

[Graham1973]

Boeing 747 modified to act as a tow-plane for the space shuttle Approach and Landing Tests.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19760026053.pdf

Was there any attempt to put jet engines on Enterprise for these tests? Something similar to what was done with the Buran OK-GLI?

This post from the "US Space Shuttle Projects" thread covers the only report on similar ideas that I've been able to find.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1928.msg122506.html#msg122506

 

[hesham]

Great find Graham.

 

[bigvlada]

Thank you for pointing out that document, will check it out.

 

[hesham]

I think many of us don't know those Boeing-747 Hydrogen fuel shapes.

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19731217/20/2http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19731217/21/2

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-air-force-one-idUSKCN0V72P9

 

[carsinamerica]

This from Flight International, 4 November 1978, p. 1642: "Welch admits that 747SP sales have been disappointing, but he describes the variant as "a firm member of the family." Six more SPs out of 29
ordered by seven customers remain to be delivered, and TWA has just ordered three. In presenting the 747 Boeing emphasises that the range of the 20OB is almost as good as that of the SP (could it be the stretched SP that SP customers are now asking for?)."

Does anyone know what this author is talking about? I've never heard of a stretched 747SP, and it's very counter-intuitive.

 

[Yellow Palace]

It reads like 747SP customers had been asking for a stretched version to carry more passengers; since the 747-200 had almost the same range as the 747SP, it filled that need.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Greetings All -

A recent donation to the Museum included a box full of various commercial aircraft proposal brochures that came from the United Air Lines library. They were being thrown away at the time the donor was there visiting for research and thankfully he was able to save them. I'll start off with material from various Boeing 747 proposals and the first being a March, 1968 "Model 747-3 Three Engine Aircraft for U.S. Domestic Service". Clearly written as a study and reaching out to the airlines for their input, the objectives stated on the first page are:

"We are studying, The Boeing 747-3, a 3 engine companion to the 747

The objective is to determine characteristics of an aircraft having:

- Common JT9D Engines
- Common System
- Common Interiors, Cargo and Baggage
- Common Maintenance, Training and Spares which potentially can provide attendant cost reduction and profit potential"

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Interesting. I really should read that 747 book on the shelf

 

[carsinamerica]

Greetings All -

A recent donation to the Museum included a box full of various commercial aircraft proposal brochures that came from the United Air Lines library. They were being thrown away at the time or donor was there visiting for research and thankfully he was able to save them. I'll start off with material from various Boeing 747 proposals and the first being a March, 1968 "Model 747-3 Three Engine Aircraft for U.S. Domestic Service". Clearly written as a study and reaching out to the airlines for their input, the objectives stated on the first page are:

"We are studying, The Boeing 747-3, a 3 engine companion to the 747

The objective is to determine characteristics of an aircraft having:

- Common JT9D Engines
- Common System
- Common Interiors, Cargo and Baggage
- Common Maintenance, Training and Spares which potentially can provide attendant cost reduction and profit potential"

Enjoy the Day! Mark

Very interesting, Mark. I've seen a couple of those pages in other books on the 747, but not with the comparison overlay. It's clear that this was considered at least twice: once as the 747-3, and then again as the 747-300 (a label that was later reused with the SUD). I'll be very interested in seeing what else you find. Thank you!

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Greetings All -

I probably should have posted this first to stay in chronological order, oh well. Date October 1965, this design iteration has been posted elsewhere in the thread but I'll share some other info to go with it. Note in the wind tunnel images there is a 3 engine version (with an unusual location for the wing mounted engines) along with the 4 engine version noted in the rest of the proposal brochure.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Graham1973]

I'm sorry I missed these when they first came out. They are very interesting, especially the ducting they were going to use on the tail engine.

 

[Triton]

Model of Boeing 747-300 concept with T-tail.

Source:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_model_of_the_once_considered_Tri-Motor_747_(7292987352)_(2).jpg

 

[taildragger]

This from Flight International, 4 November 1978, p. 1642: "Welch admits that 747SP sales have been disappointing, but he describes the variant as "a firm member of the family." Six more SPs out of 29
ordered by seven customers remain to be delivered, and TWA has just ordered three. In presenting the 747 Boeing emphasises that the range of the 20OB is almost as good as that of the SP (could it be the stretched SP that SP customers are now asking for?)."

I'd understood that the 747SP was primarily a strategic move to block DC-10-30 and especially the L1011-500 purchases by 747 operators so it might not have needed to show a respectable ROI to be considered a success. Even if Boeing lost money on it, it probably was a significant factor in Lockheed's exit from the market and dimmed Douglas' prospects.

 

[sgeorges4]

 

[martinbayer]

The Enterprise TSTO thread at https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,23384 features a carrier aircraft incorporating the wings and landing gear from a Boeing 747 as outlined in outlined in the AIAA Paper 79-0879 named "Utility of High Bypass Turbofans for a Two-Stage Transport" by Len Cormier.

Martin

 

[bercr]

Nice color photo from Boeing images (seen in B&W in a previous post):

http://www.boeingimages.com/archive/Design%20Studies%20for%20the%20747-100-2F3XC5ICBLW.html

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Nice - thanks! Mark

 

[hesham]

Hi,

in Le Fana 2/2019,there is an article about Boeing-747 and its development,they
mention that there was a LX-HLS Program,what was it ?.

 

[TomS]

Hi,

in Le Fana 2/2019,there is an article about Boeing-747 and its development,they
mention that there was a LX-HLS Program,what was it ?.

Sounds like a typo for the CX-HLS program.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,535.0.html

 

[hesham]

in Le Fana 2/2019,there is an article about Boeing-747 and its development,they
mention that there was a LX-HLS Program,what was it ?.

Sounds like a typo for the CX-HLS program.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,535.0.html

It is not a Typo,it mentions in two positions in the article ?.

 

[Hood]

A typo is still a typo no matter how many times it appears.
A mistake is still a mistake no matter how many times it appears.

 

[Hobbes]

A quick search for "LX-HLS" yields 0 relevant search results, so a typo is likely.

 

[hesham]

A typo is still a typo no matter how many times it appears.
A mistake is still a mistake no matter how many times it appears.

No my dear Hood,

we find them both in the same article,here we go ?!.

 

[Jemiba]

hesham, did you even try to translate those snippets ?
In the last one, it is said, that Boeing under the program, which here is called
(erroneously ?) LX-HLS already had aquired 315 ha of properties for production
facilities. Hardly believable, that they did so for a programme, that isn't even
known today ... :

 

[hesham]

OK my dear Jemiba,

I did't translate it.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

http://archive.aviationweek.com/search?QueryTerm=boeing+wrestled+with+double-deck&DocType=All&sort=

 

[trexslee]

Boeing New Large Airplane (NLA).

Source:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Boeing-Publicit...llectables_Photographs_MJ&hash=item45fa2bff46

I really remember seeing that same big plane on the Flightglobal archive before, but I never saw the picture of what the plane looks like on the inside. I think it looks to be at least 16 abreast to as much as 20 abreast. So do you have any idea what that plane is called? If not, maybe you could give it your own name.
(UPDATE) I think that plane could actually be the biggest proposed NLA that was said to be 280 feet long, have a 290 foot wingspan, seating for at least 800 passengers and a MTOW of 1.7 million pounds.
(UPDATE #2) That plane is actually an artist's concept of what British Airways' superjumbo would have looked like, and it also has 3 decks, but might have room for 4 or even 5 decks due to the height of the plane's fuselage compared to the much smaller plane in the foreground

 

[taildragger]

Any information on the 747 derivative depicted here? This image was recently sold on eBay without any identifying details. It shows an aircraft based on a 747-100 or 200 with the following features:
- a rotodome that looks like it might be similar in size to that used on the E-3 but on taller struts
- a dorsal fairing behind the upper deck fairing, probably for a satellite antenna
- some sort of fairing on the aft end of the fuselage, perhaps with a dielectric tailcone
- something being streamed from a tube under the rear fuselage, perhaps a wire antenna
- a missile being launched from doors under the forward fuselage. The missile looks like a long range air-to-air type, perhaps a Phoenix or Eagle with a booster. It looks like there are a set of doors right and left of centerline under the forward and aft fuselage
- what could be optical sensors below the nosecone and above the tailcone
- a break for the nose cargo door
I have trouble imagining what sort of mission would require this set of features other than some sort of all-purpose AWACS/Command Post/Missileer battleplane.

 

[Foo Fighter]

Some kind of advanced aerial command and control like the (SP) NECAP?

 

[TomS]

Any information on the 747 derivative depicted here? This image was recently sold on eBay without any identifying details. It shows an aircraft based on a 747-100 or 200 with the following features:
.....
I have trouble imagining what sort of mission would require this set of features other than some sort of all-purpose AWACS/Command Post/Missileer battleplane.

You're on the right track, I think. Probably intended for continental air defense, a single airframe to detect and intercept Soviet bombers in the far North.

 

[Sundog]

Was this missile some sort of extended range phoenix?

 

[TomS]

Was this missile some sort of extended range phoenix?

Sure looks like it. Or an extended booster version of Eagle, which amounts to almost the same thing.

 

[Hood]

Assuming this is an early/mid-1970s design it would be too late for Eagle surely?
The APY-1 radar makes sense for a long-range stand-off interception platform, but it does also have nose and tail radars, presumably for fire-control but two such radars seem overkill, especially given the APY-1 coverage assuming they are not meant for look-down over ground cluttered areas where APY-1 performed less well?
Still not sure why the trailing comms aerial is fitted. Its hard to say if this is a command platform or a stand-off defence platform (to fill something like the GIUK gap).
A voice in the back of my mind still keeps saying "is this genuine" though.

 

[taildragger]

A voice in the back of my mind still keeps saying "is this genuine" though.

I can't vouch for the authenticity of the image, but:
- The eBay seller was located in Derby, Ks which is about 5 miles from Spirit Aerosystems (formerly Boeing Wichita)
- The image looks the part and, if a what-if concoction, is very well done. The physical copy is an inkjet printed copy, not the original (I assume) lithograph

 

[Hood]

I can't vouch for the authenticity of the image, but:
- The eBay seller was located in Derby, Ks which is about 5 miles from Sprit Aerosystems (formerly Boeing Wichita)
- The image looks the part and, if a what-if concoction, is very well done. The physical copy is an inkjet printed copy, not the original (I assume) lithograph

In that case, this may well be an undiscovered proposal. It is certainly intriguing.

 

[_Del_]

With the fairing an extended antenna, I would say Air Battle Management.
As an AEW platform, it almost certainly features better endurance than the Sentry.
I suppose the ability to loft even a couple of extremely long-range AAM in the Phoenix class makes some sense if you have a platform with the room and lifting margin. Both as a supplement to interceptors and for self-defense. Let go one or two, and turn tail where your (AN/AWG-9?) radar provides guidance while you try to put as much distance between you and the bandit as possible. Gives them something to think about anyway. If you disrupt an intercept for five minutes, that's almost 50 miles you gain towards safety, and around three minutes longer you stay out of range for a Mach 1.2 interceptor closing. More time to get deeper behind your own SAM batteries and to allow friendly fighters to close/engage. Bonus points if your ER-AAM hits something.
Seems like cost would be a real issue with a gold-plating an already expensive AEW/Air Battle Management platform.

 

[hesham]

From Internet.