That will never happen… will need new wings, fuselage reinforcements, probably landing gear too. Will cost more money than a clean sheet design and will take an age to get done. Will also cut in to 777x sales.
Not the same. The 737 could not fit the new engines under it’s wings so they opted for changing the wing to allow the engines to be mounted higher which created the requirement for the MCAS system.
@@pvisit A 2 engine 747 would not need MCAS. The reason MCAS was added to the MAX was because the CFM Leap engines would no longer fit under the wings.
A twin engine A380 is far from possible with today's engines. The A380 is a fair amount heavier than the 747, and therefore requires more thrust. The A380 originally boasted 280,000 lbs of thrust across its 4 engines. The issue with that is, there's no engine powerful enough to match that in a twin engine configuration, The A380 already didn't have good take off and landing performance, so giving is less thrust is an absolute no, and the most powerful engine available, the GE9X, produces 115,000 lbs of thrust, so in a twin configuration it'd be 230,000 lbs, which is a 50,000 lbs loss from the A380s original amount of thrust. I don't disagree that a Twin A380 is more viable than a Twin 747, as boeing already has the 777, which functionally is already a twin 747, but a twin A380 is simply impossible with today's engines
@@Prodagist no only that, the complete wing has to be replaced because the present wing is not designed for 115000 pounds of thrust (or more) at one point. In other words it is impossible to put only 2 engines on a wing designed for 4 even if you could have the good engines
@@howardtenenbaum3537 flew recently to Hong Kong on the A380. Where the 747 is the queen of the skies, the A380 with its low noise levels and stability is a House in the sky. Fantastic airplane, rocksteady
The 747 with 2 engines would be the first dual engine super jumbo. Long haul airlines like Emirates would line up to buy it. Also the 747 was the best cargo carrier plane ever designed, capable of flipping the entire front up to load large containers, something no other plane could do.
Boeing definitely won't be making a twin 747, lol. The 777 is, functionally at least, already a twin engined 747. The 777 can carry just as many passengers, just as much cargo, all while being able to fly further, land at smaller airports, and be more fuel efficient. Boeing has no reason to invest money into making a twin engine 747 when they already have a plane that does exactly what a twin engined 747 would do, but better
The 747 design is ancient. I think Boeing has learned its lesson with the 737; shoehorning new engines into a 1950s airframe is problematic, at the very least.
This will be exactly the same disaster as in case of 737 MAX. Larger engines won't fit, they will be mounted higher so MCAS will be mounted on 747 leading to unevitable crash.
I do not want to see a 2 engines 747 - there is absolutely No need for it. I'm all for bringing back an iconic plane if it's operationally and economically viable but then what's the problem with 4 modern smaller, yet same/more powerful and efficient engines instead. RR are redoing the B-52 engines and are basically fitting small commercial engines into a similar dual pods design to keep the planes structure and engineering exactly the same.
Re-engining the 747 is the easy part. The problem with the jumbo now is that they're getting very old so the airframes are now coming to the end of their useful life, the avionics are old and there's only a handful of the last version, the 747-8. This is not going to happen in a million years.Boeing needs to concentrate on its 747 replacement, the 777-X. Not waste time fluffing about with unappealing and expensive upgrades that will make little to no difference in the long run.
My fear is can Boeing of today build a 747 twin that will be as reliable as the 747 of yesterday? Boeing seems to be in a failure mode with their production of many things. Aircraft, space programs and other things seem to have problems that are insurmountable. I do not want to see something like this new 747 twin in the air till Boeing gets their head back on straight.
lol letting these new guys at boeing take a crack at the 747? here come the crashes and door plugs flying off, wheels being ejected or engine cowls blowing off in flight.
So they can do this but cannot get the 777x certified? I think this is bogus propaganda
That will never happen… will need new wings, fuselage reinforcements, probably landing gear too. Will cost more money than a clean sheet design and will take an age to get done. Will also cut in to 777x sales.
So they'll do the same mistake they did with the 737. Instead of making a NEW plane, they will refit the old project and call it a new plane.
and they will add MCAS of course.
Are you a dumb guy?
@@antoniosoares2903no - knowing Boeing management he’s bang on the money
Not the same. The 737 could not fit the new engines under it’s wings so they opted for changing the wing to allow the engines to be mounted higher which created the requirement for the MCAS system.
@@pvisit A 2 engine 747 would not need MCAS. The reason MCAS was added to the MAX was because the CFM Leap engines would no longer fit under the wings.
"Twin engined 747s" are on the way. It's called the 777x.
Let’s hope ! Best plane ever. Flew it over 150 times and want to fly it again 😊
Are you a dumb guy?
yep the queennn
I'm sure the 747 can fly with two engines. But can it fly with _one_ engine, which is necessary if one engine fails?
Are you a dumb guy?
Good luck, Boeing.
thanks ✈️
Bring on a twin engined A380 instead. Far more sensible.
thanks for your comment
A twin engine A380 is far from possible with today's engines. The A380 is a fair amount heavier than the 747, and therefore requires more thrust. The A380 originally boasted 280,000 lbs of thrust across its 4 engines. The issue with that is, there's no engine powerful enough to match that in a twin engine configuration, The A380 already didn't have good take off and landing performance, so giving is less thrust is an absolute no, and the most powerful engine available, the GE9X, produces 115,000 lbs of thrust, so in a twin configuration it'd be 230,000 lbs, which is a 50,000 lbs loss from the A380s original amount of thrust. I don't disagree that a Twin A380 is more viable than a Twin 747, as boeing already has the 777, which functionally is already a twin 747, but a twin A380 is simply impossible with today's engines
@Prodagist Well short of what is required.
Remember, a twin has to be able to take off and climb on a single engine, rather than three on a quad.
@@Prodagist no only that, the complete wing has to be replaced because the present wing is not designed for 115000 pounds of thrust (or more) at one point. In other words it is impossible to put only 2 engines on a wing designed for 4 even if you could have the good engines
単純に双発の747見たい
yep surely people still want to see it
The new aircraft is called the 777X, made by Boeing. A redesigned 747 is not going to happen.
thanks for your comment
I think the main issue will be convincing the public that the twin engine 747 is just as reliable, efficient and SAFE as the old 747
thanks for sharing your thoughts
Two engine wings could be redesigned to increase efficiency requiring less fuel/thrust during cruising operations.
yep thanks for comment bro
As impressive as the A380 is, I still have great feelings of respect and nostalgia for the Queen of the Skies!
@@howardtenenbaum3537 flew recently to Hong Kong on the A380. Where the 747 is the queen of the skies, the A380 with its low noise levels and stability is a House in the sky. Fantastic airplane, rocksteady
The 747 with 2 engines would be the first dual engine super jumbo. Long haul airlines like Emirates would line up to buy it. Also the 747 was the best cargo carrier plane ever designed, capable of flipping the entire front up to load large containers, something no other plane could do.
thanks for your feedback
Boeing definitely won't be making a twin 747, lol. The 777 is, functionally at least, already a twin engined 747. The 777 can carry just as many passengers, just as much cargo, all while being able to fly further, land at smaller airports, and be more fuel efficient. Boeing has no reason to invest money into making a twin engine 747 when they already have a plane that does exactly what a twin engined 747 would do, but better
thanks for sharing your thoughts
The 747 design is ancient. I think Boeing has learned its lesson with the 737; shoehorning new engines into a 1950s airframe is problematic, at the very least.
They haven't learned anything.
Change my mind, LoL.
Are you a dumb guy?
make a tri jet, they look good
yep thanks ✈️
Yes let them try it.
thanks for your comment
Why not.
What do they have to lose?
Boeing can try with 3 engines instead of proposed 2 engines.
2.5 engines
GUYS SHUT UP WITH THE HATE OML I KNOW THIS IS PROPAGANDA BUT I ENJOY WATCHING IT ANYWAYS
✈️✈️✈️thanks
Lucky Henry Ford didn’t have the same lack of ambition that Boeing seem to have!
RR Trent Engines.
🛫
Probably quicker/easier to put a 747 hump and high sitting cockpit design on a 777 tbh 😂
😂😂😂
Just Photoshop that and look🤣🤣🤣
Looks so gay
This will be exactly the same disaster as in case of 737 MAX. Larger engines won't fit, they will be mounted higher so MCAS will be mounted on 747 leading to unevitable crash.
Are you a dumb guy?
I do not want to see a 2 engines 747 - there is absolutely No need for it. I'm all for bringing back an iconic plane if it's operationally and economically viable but then what's the problem with 4 modern smaller, yet same/more powerful and efficient engines instead. RR are redoing the B-52 engines and are basically fitting small commercial engines into a similar dual pods design to keep the planes structure and engineering exactly the same.
thanks for your feedback
This is an excellent example of how to compress the LARGEST number of words into the SMALLEST thought... 🤣
Re-engining the 747 is the easy part. The problem with the jumbo now is that they're getting very old so the airframes are now coming to the end of their useful life, the avionics are old and there's only a handful of the last version, the 747-8. This is not going to happen in a million years.Boeing needs to concentrate on its 747 replacement, the 777-X. Not waste time fluffing about with unappealing and expensive upgrades that will make little to no difference in the long run.
thanks for your comment
Boeing seven hundred and forty seven???? 4 or 5 engines???? Shmuck
thanks for your feedback
My fear is can Boeing of today build a 747 twin that will be as reliable as the 747 of yesterday? Boeing seems to be in a failure mode with their production of many things. Aircraft, space programs and other things seem to have problems that are insurmountable. I do not want to see something like this new 747 twin in the air till Boeing gets their head back on straight.
thanks for sharing your thoughts
Can I have a plane with wheels and doors please? Ah , and Airbus? Yes please...
Are you a dumb guy?
✈️
Boeing has to get back to building a machine and away from profit. If they don't convince regulators, this may be dead on arrival.
Are you a dumb guy?
thanks for your feedback
The following video was made 2 years ago I am so glad Boeing are finaly waking up... ua-cam.com/video/soNIOmSVoKA/v-deo.html
thanks
Fake news 😂
lol letting these new guys at boeing take a crack at the 747?
here come the crashes and door plugs flying off, wheels being ejected or engine cowls blowing off in flight.
Are you a dumb guy?
thanks for your comment