Cargo 360 just bought Southern Air

[ironspud]

I think we have 3 or 4 743s. They go everywhere. Where ever the customer wants world wide. And yes I like the 743 a lot better. It has a much more roomy upper deck. Other then that the plane is identical to the 742.

Due Diligence. SAI has no 743's. They are all 742's. What SAI does have are 2 747-200 SUD's amongst the mongrels. That's all.

 

[27 driver]

deleted

 

[dutch747]

Due Diligence. SAI has no 743's. They are all 742's. What SAI does have are 2 747-200 SUD's amongst the mongrels. That's all.

Do those SUD's have the two rear doors with escape slides in the Upper Deck as well as the little forward door in the upper deck? (Just wondering how to pick them out)

 

[ironspud]

Do those SUD's have the two rear doors with escape slides in the Upper Deck as well as the little forward door in the upper deck? (Just wondering how to pick them out)

Yes. N746SA/N748SA. 746 is allegedly the highest time (or cycles, not sure which) 747-200 in the world.

 

[27 driver]

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Boeing's 747-300 model introduced the distinctive stretched upper deck which can seat up to 69 economy class passengers.

The 747-300 was the end result of a number of Boeing studies which looked at increasing the aircraft's seating capacity. Ideas studied included fuselage plugs fore and aft of the wing increasing seating to around 600, or running the upper deck down the entire length of the fuselage. In the end Boeing launched the more modest 747SUD (Stretched Upper Deck) with greater upper deck seating on June 12 1980.

The 747SUD designation was soon changed to 747EUD (for Extended Upper Deck), and then 747-300. The new model first flew on October 5 1982 and was first delivered to Swissair on March 28 1983. Other customers included UTA, Saudia, SIA, Qantas and Cathay.

Compared to the -200, the -300's upper deck is stretched aft by 7.11m (23ft 4in), increasing economy class seating from 32 to a maximum of 69. The lengthened upper deck introduced two new emergency exit doors and allows an optional flightcrew rest area immediately aft of the flightdeck to be fitted. Access is via a conventional rather than spiral staircase as on the earlier models.
Otherwise the 747-300 is essentially little changed from the 747-200 and features the same takeoff weight and engine options. 747-300 variants include the 747-300M Combi and the short range 747-300SR built for Japan Air Lines for domestic Japanese services.

same same
[/FONT]

 

[FreightGod]

Me thinks JAL had -100 SUD back in the days.
Not sure if they were delivered that way, or if they were modified later. ?

As for -200 SUD, that would be the -300, no?

 

[FreightGod]

Did a quick Google search and found that JAL modified -100s and -200s to stretch the upper deck.

High density domestic ops in Japan, 500+ pax probably.

Never flew a -300, but heard it had a different fuel system than the -200. True?

 

[B747Flyer]

Did a quick Google search and found that JAL modified -100s and -200s to stretch the upper deck.

High density domestic ops in Japan, 500+ pax probably.

Never flew a -300, but heard it had a different fuel system than the -200. True?

You might be thinking of the fuel system differences between a -100 and a -200. The -200 has 2 more Reserve Tanks over the original -100s (4 vs. 2). Some Carriers (Atlas/Polar for one) have deactivated these extra tanks as they have speed restrictions when filled. They are usually dry by TOC though.

The -300's fuel system is the same as the -200.

The -300's cruise .01 mach faster at LRC due to the more efficient, larger fuselage "wetted area"...that's about the only difference - at least between C360's two -200Fs and our -300SF. They are all sequential line numbers, built for the same carrier (KAL originally) so that certainly helps.

 

[dutch747]

Did a quick Google search and found that JAL modified -100s and -200s to stretch the upper deck.

High density domestic ops in Japan, 500+ pax probably.

Never flew a -300, but heard it had a different fuel system than the -200. True?

The only thing that I remember that was different (In the cockpit) on most -300's (C360's -300 is an exception) is the starter switches were magnetically held in to 50% instead of the sore arm method.

 

[OrionFE]

The only thing that I remember that was different (In the cockpit) on most -300's (C360's -300 is an exception) is the starter switches were magnetically held in to 50% instead of the sore arm method.

Right the f@#& on!