|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#29
November 30th 03, 02:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
"Gord Beaman" wrote in message news  "Leadfoot" wrote: For 747-100, -200, -300 yes. For the -400 it was an option many airlines chose. Remember the 747-400 was designed for long-range flight with the winglets, the FMS and the wet tail Speaking of which...anyone any idea of how much this feature actually saves? (wet tail system I mean). The wet tail carried almost the same amount of fuel as a 737. It is simply additional fuel to be sused and generally it is the first tank to empty -Gord. "You are completely focused on RPM as the single factor producing rotational velocity" -Guess who? 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode