Re: SP vs. 400

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



The 747SP was really a shortened, longer-range version of the 100.  The
later -200 versions essentially killed off the SP, which then became
uneconomic.  It was a specialized product for very long range services and
only a handful were made.  But at the time, it was a brilliant aircraft.

Mike Gammon

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerard M Foley" <gfoley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: SP vs. 400


> From: "Alireza Alivandivafa" <DEmocrat2n@xxxxxxx>
>
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 2:58 AM
>
>
> > Does anyone know how an SP and a 744 compare to eachother as far as
> > performance?  Max speed, runway length to range comparison, True full
> range (both 744
> > and 744ER would be appriciated), climb rate?  This is appriciated
> >
> The listed range of the 744 with 420 pax is around 700 nm more than the SP
> with 276.  Oddly enough the 742 with 366 is said to be able to make 250 nm
> more than the SP.   The tankage of the SP is listed as considerably less
> than that of the -200.  On the other hand, the SP set some records.
>
> The 744 carried me from Atlanta to Jo'burg without stopping.  The SP
coming
> back stopped in the Cape Verdes.  I understand that the 744 doesn't come
> back non-stop either, because Jo'berg is 5000 feet high and the winds are
> hardly ever favorable.
>
> Gerry
> http://foley.ultinet.net/~gerry/aerial/aerial.html
> http://home.columbus.rr.com/gfoley
> http://members.fortunecity.com/gfoley/egypt/egypt.html
>

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]