Re: Hydrogen Powered Supersonic Concorde Replacement

On Dec 21, 7:08 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Clearly, Boeing already has instituted a 12 meter stretch in their
existing 747 line.

No they DAMN WELL HAVEN'T !

It's a 5.6 metre stretch.

YOU CAN'T EVEN GET BASIC FACTS RIGHT !

Graham

Um, here are the numbers I get, from Boeing's website;

747-400 is 64.4 m in length

That's the WING SPAN YOU COMPLETE MORON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/747tech.swf

YOU LYING ***.  It states 70.7 m

On this page that you can copy the text from it's 70.6mhttp://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/pf/pf_400_prod.html

Basic Dimensions
  Wing Span
  Overall Length
  Tail Height
  Interior Cabin Width
211 ft 5 in (64.4 m)
231 ft 10 in (70.6 m)
63 ft 8 in (19.4 m)
20 ft (6.1 m)

The 747-8 is 76.4 m in length.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/747-8_fact_***.html

The difference between 76.4 m and 64.4 m is 12 meters.

The difference between 76.4 m (747-8) and 70.7 m (747-400) is 5.7 metres.
Which is consistent with a 5.6 m fuselage stretch as I stated.

STOP LYING !

Graham- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Listen you foul mouthed ***, I told you in 30 other replies to 30
other posts that you have made that I didn't have my reading glasses
on when I posted that and mistook the wing span of a 747 for its
length. That doesn't make me a liar, or a fool or anything else. It
obviously has no bearing whatever on the ability to make 80 m
fuselages lol. If you think 80 m fuselages are an impossiblity - then
the answer is simple - sit down do the hard work of figuring out the
weight of an 80 m long fuselage the diameter of a 747 or 777 and prove
that its impossibly heavy.

I've done it and its within acceptable structural limits - especially
when given the huge weight savings afforded by the use of hydrogen
fuel.
.

Quantcast