As a long retired B-747 Captain, let me share my recollections of "The Queen of the Sky's" with you.
[FONT="]Boeing 747 aircraft, the once largest and fastest passenger aircraft flying, it is probably fitting that it be remembered for the grand old lady of the sky that she was. [/FONT]
[FONT="]First flown commercially by Pan American on January 22nd 1970 she changed the economics of air travel, making an international flight affordable for the mass population. The last aircraft to bring about such a paradigm change, was the DC-3 way back in 1935, which had proved the viability of travel by air.[/FONT]
[FONT="]When I left the Fleet Air Arm in 1962 to pursue a career as a commercial airline-pilot I never dreamed that in the distant future I would have a command on such an aircraft, but twenty-one years, and 11,000 thousand command hours, flown on a variety of different aircraft later, I received a promotion to the 747 fleet with Singapore Airlines. [/FONT]
[FONT="]I would remain on the fleet for the next sixteen years, flying five of the eight different series, of which, eleven years were spent as a type check and training captain and would add an additional 11,000 hours on this aircraft to my logbook. [/FONT]
[FONT="]That time would encompass one engine failure on take-off, one precautionary in-flight shut down, one jammed flight control, one blown main-gear tyre, a leading-edge slat failure, a death on board and 4 bomb warnings. Just a small sample of the incidents experienced during long haul international flying. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Another aspect of the 747 was that with a total of 470 passengers and up to 17 crew, flying international routes, the level of authority and responsibility was increased.[/FONT]
[FONT="] My first favourable impressions were formed whilst undergoing the engineering ground school. The designers had put a of lot of thought into the amount of aircraft system duplication, a lot had to fail before it became a serious handling problem. With four 90 kva generators, and an APU all of which were combined and switchable through a common bus system, there was plenty of electrical power. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Four independent hydraulic systems powered all of the flight controls, nose wheel steering and split body and wing gears operation, all of which had normal and alternative means of being operated. [/FONT]
[FONT="]The flight controls were totally hydraulically powered, with no manual reversion available, which was a first for a Boeing aircraft. It was considered that due the size of the control surfaces and associated dynamic loading, it would be impractical to operate the controls manually. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Lateral control consisted of both inboard and outboard ailerons, the outboard locking out once the flaps were retracted, plus five roll spoilers. The massive rudder, split into upper and lower panels, controlled direction and 4 elevator surfaces the pitch, trimmed by means of an adjustable horizontal stabilizer. Six positions of slotted trailing edge flaps provided options for both T/Off and LDG configuration. Hydraulic power was distributed so that each control surface had two independent sources of power. [/FONT]
[FONT="]The design philosophy was such that it would be impossible to suffer a simultaneous loss of all flight controls. It was sound reasoning, but unfortunately, Murphy as usual, had other ideas and when in 1984 a poorly repaired aft pressure bulkhead, the result of an earlier tail strike, blew out on a Japan Airlines aircraft as it climbed through 24,000ft. resulting in the loss of all four hydraulic systems and total flight control. After a valiant effort by the crew to gain control using thrust only, the aircraft crashed into Mount Takamagahara, killing all but four of the 524 souls on-board.[/FONT]
[FONT="]The initial type rating consisted of thirty-eight hours of simulator, split between two crew and covering every aspect of normal, alternative and emergency procedures, and whilst you started a session on all four engines, it certainly didn't end that way. Classroom sessions covered engineering and aircraft performance.[/FONT]
[FONT="] Finally, after completing a simulator check flight, two hours of actual aircraft time doing circuits and bumps, shared between myself and my co-pilot before commencing two months of route training conducted on regular revenue flights.[/FONT]
[FONT="]But what from a pilot's point of view, was this "Jumbo," almost twice the weight and size of her predecessor the B707, really like to fly?[/FONT]
[FONT="]The aircrafts size becomes apparent when you do your first pre-flight walk around – usually done by the flight engineer – and you walk under the fuselage and still look up at the belly. I am almost six feet tall, but can stand in an engine intake cowling with room to spare. To get to the flight deck you first need to climb to the upper deck, via a circular stairway on a 200 series, or sloping stairway on a 300. [/FONT]
[FONT="]On initially entering the flight-deck, the impression is that it is surprisingly small considering the aircraft's size, but once in the seat – the height of which has to be adjusted with reference to a set of eye levellers - the value of the ergonomically designed cockpit can be appreciated.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Once seated the height of the cockpit above the ground becomes very apparent. With an overall length of 232ft (71mtrs) and a wingspan of 195ft (60mtrs) the aircraft takes up quite a bit space, but ground manoeuvring is assisted by both nosewheel and body gear steering. The latter moving opposite to the direction of the nose wheel. [/FONT]
[FONT="]On releasing the brakes, the aircraft wants to go and even at idle thrust will accelerate quickly along the taxiway and the technique is to allow the aircraft to reach around thirty knots before braking back to around ten knots. Riding the brakes and/or taxiing too fast only builds up the tyre and brake temperatures, which in turn effects stopping capability in the event of an abortive take off.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Carrying out a 180 degree on the runway requires an exercise in geometry due to the nose gear being located several feet behind the pilot. The runway edge is intercepted at about 45 degrees and the pilot positioned well over the edge before commencing the turn. A minimum of 150ft of runway width is required. [/FONT]
[FONT="]During the take-off, speeds are called at 50kts (Full rudder authority), 100kts (Engines and instruments normal), V1 (Decision Speed) and VR (Aircraft rotation). V2 (T/OFF Safety Speed) is achieved as the aircraft becomes airborne and at max weight is around 160kts depending on flap setting. Rotation has to be carried out smoothly to a pre-calculated angle – around 10 degrees - determined as part of the take-off performance data. Over rotation will cause the tail to strike the runway, which was what had led to the previously mentioned Japan Airlines crash. Once airborne and the gear retracted, body angle is increased to maintain V2+10kts until reaching acceleration height, which at most international airports, due to noise abatement requirements, is 3000ft. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Having met the prevailing ATC restrictions, a climb speed of up to 320kts until Mach transition, then M.82 to cruise level. Cruise speed for the 200 series was M.84 and the 300 M.85, the latter being higher due to the stretched upper deck reducing Mach drag.[/FONT]
[FONT="]During cruise the aircraft was a stable platform, with dual yaw dampers coupled with a gust response system and its sheer size and weight, it handled turbulence well. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Due to the artificial feel system aircraft handling was positive, and whilst the roll rate would not challenge a F15, it was smooth and effective. Pitch just needed a few blips of the stabilizer to keep the aircraft in longitudinal trim. [/FONT]
[FONT="]Whilst the aircraft had a maximum demonstrated cross[FONT="][1][/FONT]wind landing limit, it could handle much higher thanks to the massive rudders. Using the crab angle and wing down side slip technique 45kts at 90 degrees was not a problem. However, having said that, some pilots still managed to spoil their day by scraping an outboard engine pod on the runway. This was usually caused by over-banking coupled with an excessive body angle and if the landing was heavy then wing bending would also add to the mix. [/FONT]
[FONT="]One cargo operator recently managed to scrape three pods, two on one side and one on the opposite… That took real talent! Having spent much of my early flying years on tail-draggers, I personally never found cross wind landings much of a problem! [/FONT]
[FONT="]However, the 747 was definitely a hands-on aircraft, both the heaviest and fastest commercial jet of its era, it had a lot of momentum, every manoeuvre had to be anticipated for the pilot to stay ahead of the aircraft. [/FONT]
[FONT="]During descent and approach, it was important to maintain the correct profile and configuration, with any deviation correctly early. Configured for landing, the high degree of inertia could work either for you, or against, small adjustments of power early, was preferable to large adjustments late. [/FONT]
[FONT="]The body or deck angle on final approach is around 5 degrees and flaring add another 2-3 degrees, at which point with an eye distance between the cockpit and the main gear of 100ft and an eye height above the ground of around 50ft, it is was important to maintain the correct aiming point otherwise the aircraft would land short. Remember the eye levellers…[/FONT]
[FONT="] Actual landing is quite straight forward. On passing 30ft (Radio Altimeter) pitch up an additional 3 degrees, at 20 ft reduce power, hold the attitude and this magnificent aircraft would slip onto the runway like the lady she was. On the odd occasion when the pucker factor registered a higher-than-normal sink rate, easing the pressure on the control column would save the day.[/FONT]
[FONT="]After fifty years of serving the industry, carrying millions of passengers safely to their intended destination, only a few will remain, mostly in a freight configuration. The Boeing 747 really was the, "The Queen of the Skies." [/FONT]