Back to Squawk list
  • 94

Boeing 747-8I flies over every state in the lower 48 in 18 hours

Boeing returns to their canvas again -- this time to fly over every state in the lower 48 United States in a single flight! ( 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

the same jet flew from Washington to Charleston, SC made a flyover of the airport and then flew back to Washington on Oct. 21st, 2011. Check out for some photos.
Missed WV and RI
Looks like WV was a planning mistake and they missed RI by cutting the corner.
Also missed the landmass of PA
Barely got MS and AR either.
looks like they frogot to fly over west virginia or the lines were drawn incorrectly????
Well, if Boeing had moved the route 50 miles, it would have crossed over W. Virginia...
sbirch 0
Including all the states looks like it may have not been the original plan, as the scheduled flight plan would have missed Nebraska and Wyoming. WV was an oversight, but then who remembers WV. Still pretty cool.
screw you
Cannikin 0
What was the purpose of this flight?
they also missed kentucky. fail.
They flew across the western side of KY.
Looks like they missed WV.
Washington D.C. is not a state. It it's own world :)
Washington D.C. is not a state.
It's in it's own world :)
So true!
I think that RI was clipped and also PA near Lake Erie. WV was defnitely missed. They weren't even close.
They flew over California at FL42 so no visual but if you have a Radar Box or SBS1 it can be tracked real time on your PC.
According to the chart, they missed West Virginia
Heading to KOA right now - sounds like a lot more fun than zigzagging the Mainland!
DC is not a state
DC is not a state...
what's the point?
Thet missed West Virginia.
Based on the above posts, I wonder if the 748 happened to miss West Virginia...?
My Guess would be so that, as an economy measure, they can sell it with the option of only running two engines on longer over water-or over anything. Given a light load on a long stage this has a real sales value.
indy2001 0
In Feb, 2005 a British Airways 747 took off from KLAX for a flight to EGLL with only 3 engines operating. (The incident report said BA had done 3-engine passenger ops 15 times in the 5 years previous to that incident, so it was nothing new to them.) So BA should be interested in shutting down the "extra" engine to save even more money with 2 engines running.
There are some reports here-in Wichita, Kansas-that Boeing has been tempted to produce a twin engine version of the 47. (probably the -400 model). Were that so, and they could hold the current flight characteristics, it would be a welcome entry to the long range twin. Of course they already have the 777 so it must be wondered if a twin 47 would have purpose other than to carry more passengers. Certainly in high density seating on certain routes, it should find favor. (Remember that JAL specifically had 47-200 models that held over 600 passengers on commuter routes within Japan.) Plus freight carriers would be intrigued by the internal volume. Even if only used on the trans-Atlantic routes or transcontinental ones, they would be a welcome addition. I have a friend at SPEA with whom I've not spoken in a while. Perhaps I should ring them and ask what's new....CKH
all 47**??? clearly missed WV
I wonder why nobody metioned that they missed WV yet?? JOKE!! does nobody read before they post?
all ok! thank you
very impressive
zennermd 0
Looks like they have to do it again.
And with petrol prices and economic struggle across the globe, they do this why?
because they can......because they can
They need to do long flights anyway for certification (cold soak, NAMS testing), may as well have some fun with it.
ETOPS Certification flight. You want your airplanes to be safe dont you. We test them for a reason
Why would a 747 need to do Extended Twin engine OPerationS certification?

I understand that it was a test flight, but I highly doubt it was for ETOPS.
Ok .. I guess you know more than I do. I only work Boeing.
From Flight Global (Since I cannot link from internal)

ETOPS rules were updated in 2007 to include four-engine aircraft starting in 2015, though Boeing opted to include it in the Intercontinental's certification ahead of the requirement.

Boeing clarified the status of ETOPS certification for the 747-8I, saying that because it was not required by the initial FAA requirements it was not completed as part of the certification trials that wrapped up on October 31. Continued flying of the test fleet will include completion of the ETOPS validation on the 747-8I in the coming days, says Boeing.

Because of overlapping certification efforts, the -8F will also be certified under ETOPS rules. The freighter did not undergo ETOPS testing because its customers did not require it for its shorter missions.
Ricky Scott just owned you.
Interesting that freighters don't fly long trips. Really Ricky?
The 747-8I isn't a freighter. But the freighters can fly long trips, if the operators choose. A ferry flight across the globe for the next load would be a good example.
It went over MEM and I didn't even know about it.......
That's pretty cool! I would have loved to have been part of the crew on that flight! :)
Dubslow 0
Damn. According to the Google Earth file I dl'ed from FlightAware, it literally came within .98 miles of my house, laterally. Man, I wish I'd known, and I wish I wasn't in college yesterday.
They passed very near my hometown of Miamisburg, OH. I was going to see if the flight was above the horizon but suddenly course lines aren't rendering for me in IE8.
I would hate to be the one that had to readback that clearance!
"Cleared as filed, Roger Being 440." ;-)
Yes, they misses WV and DC. And they were sooooo close... Why?
Ask Ricky who works at Boeing.
He'll probably say that certification and testing standards didn't require a flight over West Virginia pursuant to 2015 amendments which Boeing voluntarily complies with on a case by case basis.
Right Ricky?
Too busy trying to figure out how to deliver all these planes all over KPAE like the land of orphaned airplanes to make sure they actually hit all 48 states.
Missed WVA & D.C. - Didn't miss much ;)
Screw you
mikeNY 0
FL420, abv RVSM airspace, ... through 5 ARTCC's


계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
이 웹 사이트는 쿠키를 사용합니다. 이 웹 사이트를 사용하고 탐색함으로써 귀하는 이러한 쿠기 사용을 수락하는 것입니다.
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..