Jumbo Jets

[Daisy]

Hello Royd,

firstly I hope you wont mind that I may be asking lots of questions during the next few weeks.

I am flying on a 747-200 {apparently} Man-MCO. Is this a jumbo jet? How do you define a jumbo jet as opposed to any other plane? Can you tell me anything about this plane? I know Virgin have a 100% safety record but do the 747's? One thing that is worrying me is that ours will be one of the last flights that the plane does. Virgin are getting rid of them and bringing new 400's in. Ive heard reports that they are falling apart a bit :eek: . Ok thats probably enough questions for today! Thank you.

Daisy x

[Lynda]

Daisy, I don't know when Royd will get back to you but rest assured he will. He is an active commercial pilot and may be working.

[mkahanek]

The 747-200 is most definately a Jumbo. As is the 777, 767, A300 A310 A330 A340, and DC-10. Pretty much anything with two isles is considered a Jumbo. I flew a 742 from Seoul to Tokyo. Nice plane. I much prefer widebodies over narrow bodies. It is getting harder and harder to fly on them though.

[Falcon]

Yes it is, all 747 are nicknamed Jumbo jet, I think it came with the marketing of the original. The 747-100 now looks minuscule but no other aircraft carries the name Jumbo. The fact that the 200s are being replaced with 400s s probably due to the larger size of the 400 and the fact the 400 is a more modern version means that it is more fuel efficient and maintenance is cheaper. Older aircraft don't get tatty but they cost more to run as the years go by.

[Falcon]

Are you thinking of the term heavy which American air traffic use?The 747-200 is most definately a Jumbo. As is the 777, 767, A300 A310 A330 A340, and DC-10. Pretty much anything with two isles is considered a Jumbo. I flew a 742 from Seoul to Tokyo. Nice plane. I much prefer widebodies over narrow bodies. It is getting harder and harder to fly on them though.

[Daisy]

and the safety record?....

[Passenger Mark]

Wow... I did not know!

I like Mark K thought that any plane with basically two ailses was a "Jumbo". I did not know that it is only the 747 that enjoys that term.

Here is a definition that I found...

The Boeing (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Boeing) 747, also known as the jumbo jet, is the second largest passenger airliner (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Airliner) after Airbus A380 (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Airbus_A380). Until the first commercial flight of the A380 in 2006 (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/2006), however, it remains the largest aircraft (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Aircraft) in commercial service. The four-engine 747, produced by Boeing Commercial Airplanes (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Boeing_Commercial_Airplanes), combines passenger-carrying capacities with its unique two-deck (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Double_decker) configuration (the small upper deck is usually used for business-class passengers). A typical three-class layout would accommodate about 400 passengers. An advanced one-class layout would accommodate a maximum of 600 passengers. The characteristic hump created by the upper deck has made the 747 a hugely recognisable icon of air travel. The 747 flies at high-subsonic speeds (typically 0.85 Mach or 565 mph (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Mph) or 909 km/h (http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Km/h)) and features intercontinental range (8,430 statute miles, or 13,570 km, for the 747-400 version), in some configurations sufficient to fly New York-Hong Kong (roughly a third of the globe) non-stop. In 1989 a Qantas 747-400 flew non-stop from London to Sydney, a distance of 11,185 miles, in 20hrs 9min: this was a delivery flight with no passengers or freight aboard. By May 2004 (http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/displaystandardreport.cfm?cboCurrentModel=747&optReportType=AllModels&cboAllModel=747&ViewReportF=View+Report) (http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/displaystandardreport.cfm?cboCurrentModel=747&optR eportType=AllModels&cboAllModel=747&ViewReportF=Vi ew+Report), a total of 1381 aircraft have been built or ordered in various 747 configurations, making it an extremely profitable product for Boeing.

And I keep learning stuff... Again I thought "heavy" was a term that was used everywhere. Royd, What term do they use for "heavy" in Europe?

Daisy: The Boeing 747 has an EXCELLANT safety record.

[Falcon]

Safety record very good across all models. Mark even the single aisle 757 has the term Heavy (I think). It is a verbal reminder to other aircraft and the controlers for wake turbulence issues. In the UK we dont use the word we look up in our Aerad supliment which tells us the category of each aircraft ( Med, heavy etc) and then look at take off delays, and distance behind landing aircraft.

[spleisher]

I think it is cetain versions of the 757 that gets a "heavy" designation. I think with the 757, it is primarily due not so much to the size of the aircraft, but to the wing design, which is very efficient, but also produces a pretty sizeable wake. The whole point of the "heavy" designation is, as Royd said, for seapration and planning for wakes associated with larger aircraft.

As far as the 747 is concerned, all you have to do is look at the history. The 747 hs been flying for nearly 35 years, and is a real workhorse. Yes there have been accidents, but when you factor in the literally millions of hours that the 747 series have safely logged, the changes that you will have safe flight are as close to 100% as you can possibly bet without an outright guarantee.

Remember, in life there are no guarantees. The same is true of air travel. We can mitigate our risks be being "safe". Flying in an airliner is THE BEST means you have to mitigate your travel risk. Period. :thumbsup:

[mkahanek]

Yea I was thinking Heavy and Jumbo were just about interchangeable.