Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/1509823/

Topic: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Alitalia7e7
Posted 2004-04-13 07:05:30 and read 4508 times.

In the good old 80's there were a number of airlines that operated the 747. Nowadays that has changed significantly a number of airlines have dropped the "Queen of the Skys".... Can you name a few airlines and why they have ditched this Queen!

Alitalia - Operated the following 741, 742, 742 Combi, 744F, 742F's
Now they have all been retired - Why?????

Olypmic Airways - Had 4 747-200's but now all scrapped and has the A340.

Continental had 741's and 742's they are all gone

American had 741's and 747SP's they are gone too

VARIG had a great mix of 741, 742, 743 and 744's - they are all gone

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Rjpieces
Posted 2004-04-13 07:10:49 and read 4476 times.

For the most part, those airlines didn't have route networks that could sustain 747s. Many of them ordered it because it was the prime international aircraft for a while....However, twins became very popular and allowed all sorts of new routes to spring up across the Atlantic. Nowadays, it is a lot more efficient for smaller airlines to operate smaller A340s/777s than have huge 747s flying empty....That is why the airlines that need the 747 kept it (BA,AF,LH, etc) and airlines that wanted to operate a route, but needed a smaller aircraft opted for twins.......Not sure if this answers your question, I need sleep!!!  Smile

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: United4everDEN
Posted 2004-04-13 07:17:56 and read 4439 times.

those 741s and 742s and 743 aren't the most new and effecient planes around, the 744 might be old too, and may have had numerous mechanical problems. The CO and AA 741 and 742s, those are really outdated. I think it is unfair for you to say they are ditching the 747 just based on those old planes. Look, that is only 4 airlines, the CO and AA are using the 777. Airlines like LH, UA, BA, Qantas, Northwest, Air France, Eva Air, JAL, KLM, Singapore Airlines, Virgin Atlantic, etc. Just a few off the top of my head. Please, this to me looks like an attempt at a vs. b,

Quote: Olypmic Airways - Had 4 747-200's but now all scrapped and has the A340.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: LVZXV
Posted 2004-04-13 07:20:04 and read 4419 times.

Aerolineas Argentinas - 10 742s and 1 747SP acquired 1976-98. 5 742s still flying. 1 744 joined fleet in February and another 3 will follow shortly. All is not lost, my friend!

XV

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Cloudy
Posted 2004-04-13 07:22:17 and read 4396 times.

1. The 777 and the A340 are more efficient than older 747's on a per seat basis. The 777-300 and A340-600 are almost as big, so there is not much of a seat loss. Even the new 747-400 has a hard time matching the 777-300 on the basis of operating cost per seat on many routes.

2. Many of the airlines you mentioned (and others) had the 747 not for its size but for its range. If they could have gotten a smaller plane with the same range instead of the 747, they would have done so. Now that the 777-200ER/LR and the A340-500 can more than match the 747's range, that appeal is gone.

3. Since the 777/A330/340 can also replace widebodied trijets, it is possible for many airlines to eliminate a fleet type by replacing both DC-10 type jets and 747's with different variants of the same basic airframe.

4. 747's are still very valuable for cargo service, this makes it possible to sell older (or even newer ) ones pretty easily and for pretty good prices. This is one reason the MD-11 became a rarity in passenger fleets so quickly. It would have stayed longer, in more places, had it been harder to get rid of on good terms.

The days of the new-build 747 passenger jet are almost over, unless there is a major update. Already most of the new deliveries are for the cargo variant.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Alitalia7e7
Posted 2004-04-13 07:23:00 and read 4386 times.

United4everDEN,

Please do not involve politics into this thread. I love BOEING AND AIRBUS they are great commercial airline manufacturers.

Also note my USERNAME "ALITALIA7e7"? If I was supporting Airbus I would be called AlitaliaA340 or something like that.........

So now can everyone explain why airlines in the past and NOW have not replaced their old 747's with new replacement models etc, I am new to Airliners.NET and would like know more, as the 747 is MY FAVOURITE AIRCRAFT.

United4everDEN, perhaps its late and you need some sleep?  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Alitalia7e7
Posted 2004-04-13 07:25:15 and read 4371 times.

Cloudy, you are a wealth of information that is exactly what information I was after.

However would the 777-300 have ETOPS for Pacific Operations? ie LAX-SYD nonstop?

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: United4everDEN
Posted 2004-04-13 07:25:39 and read 4369 times.

I might, but I do know if you keep spinning your head like that, it is going to come unscrewed and fall off.  Wink/being sarcastic

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Bruce
Posted 2004-04-13 07:26:35 and read 4363 times.

Delta had a few 747-132's in the 1970s but ditched them in favor of the L1011.

Smart move??

bruce

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Alitalia7e7
Posted 2004-04-13 07:27:58 and read 4345 times.

LOL: I have to get used to the icons, I got suprised that I made it spin!
What type of mechanical problems did the 744 have?

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Alitalia7e7
Posted 2004-04-13 07:29:59 and read 4324 times.

SAS dropped their 742's? does anyone know why?
Why did AZ not replace their planes with the original 744 order that went to Virgin Atlantic? AZ went for the 777 instead? I would of loved to see a 744 in AZ colours.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: SIA_B777
Posted 2004-04-13 07:32:00 and read 4306 times.

Also America West experimented with a couple of 747s (-200s I believe) in the early 90s, offering flights to Japan (i forgot which city). It would sure be interesting to see a 747 in HP's new livery.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: DETA737
Posted 2004-04-13 08:12:30 and read 4203 times.

There are a variety of reasons that 747s are not as popular as they used to be before and many of them have been mentioned above.

However, one thing not mentioned is that there is now much more competition in the air and there is far more point to point flying. This is the result of open skies agreements between nations. Nations used to limit the number of carriers and seats that could fly between cities (this still happens but not as much). For instance as late as 1990 Alitalia, Pan Am and TWA were the only carriers connecting the U.S. and Italy. Both Pan Am and TWA flew from JFK to Rome and Milan using 747s. In 2004 you have Alitalia, American, Continental, Delta, Ethiopian and US Airways all connecting the two countries and none of these carriers operate 747s. Also there are non-stops from Atlanta, Cincinnati and Philadelphia nowadays. This means that there is more capacity but it's more spread out so it would be hard to fill up a 747 for any of the carriers.

Another point to mention is that up until the 1970s IATA used to set international air fares and they were largely upheld. This made it so that carriers would not lose money so there was less competition. By keeping prices artificially high, carriers were able to operate 747s that would otherwise not be profitable. Also sixth freedom rights were often limited, for instance today I could fly British Airways from Montreal to Athens with a stopover in London Heathrow. Well into the 80s many nations limited these rights to protect their national carriers my only other option would be to fly to Montreal and catch an Olympic Airways 747 to Athens.

Also people may wonder why their so popular with the transpacific market. The transpacific market is much denser than the transatlantic and less deregulated. There are two U.S. carriers that pretty much have the market cornered from the American side: Northwest and United. This is much like the transatlantic market before 1978 when TWA and Pan Am pretty much had the Atlantic to themselves from the American side.

Among the carriers that abandoned their 747s and here are some of the reasons that I know of:

Aer Lingus- though they were easy to fill on transatlantic runs during the summer, they usually had to be wet leased during the winter season. Left the fleet by 1994.

Alitalia- 747-400s were on order, but the order was substituted with 777s. They were probably easier to fill on a year round basis and could substitute the 747-200Bs as well as the MD-11s.

American- acquired 747s in 1970 but were too large for American's mostly domestic route network. Several were sold in 1974 after the oil crisis but were used until 1984 on flights to Hawaii. In 1986 747SPs were purchased from TWA for DFW-NRT flights.

Avianca- used for European and North American flights but were too large and were replaced with 767s.

Continental- bought them in 1970 and used on flights to Hawaii until 1973. When they purchased People Express in 1987 they again became a 747 operator. However, these were phased out in favour of 777s in the 1990s.

Delta- acquired in 1970 with the anticipation that Delta would get transatlantic routes, however these would not come until 1978. They were flown around the U.S. on domestic routes and were finally abandoned in 1975 in favour of Tristars.

National- used from 1970 until 1975 on flights up and down the eastern seaboard as well as from Miami to London Heathrow. Were too large and substituted with DC-10s.

Olympic Airways- acquired in 1973 and eventually became the backbone of the longhaul fleet. Eventually they were replaced in the 1990s with A340s.

Sabena- were in the fleet until 1999 when they were replaced with A340s.

SAS- were far too large for the route network and were replaced with DC-10s.

Swissair- left the fleet in 1999 after the carrier decided to go all Airbus. Were replaced with MD-11s until the A340s were supposed to come online.

TAP- arrived in 1972 when Portugal still had a colonies in Africa. Once the colonies were gone in 1975 they were hard to fill. Left the fleet by 1984.

Varig- acquired 747s in 1981 for flights to Europe and USA. However they proved too large and though 747-400s were acquired they were dumped for being too expensive to operate.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Solnabo
Posted 2004-04-13 09:17:14 and read 4056 times.

SAS dropped 742 cuz of too big a/c for Scandinavia, we got the DC10-30, smaller but more economical Big grin
We had 742F for quite a while......not sure how long though!

Michael//SE  Big thumbs up

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: AirframeAS
Posted 2004-04-13 11:04:05 and read 3860 times.

I thought the 747 family was sort of being phased out or stored in the desert because of financial difficulities and less pax loads. Since we are seeing US carriers not using the 747 so much anymore, they've all gone to smaller and more fuel efficent aircraft. The 777 is one good example.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Spike
Posted 2004-04-13 11:19:53 and read 3804 times.

I think the primary reason is that the 747 (all variations) have become less popular with the passenger. The difference in cabin space on a 777 and a 747 is significant. Personaly though, I prefer the 747 ride.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: AirframeAS
Posted 2004-04-13 11:22:53 and read 3795 times.

I also wanted to add that most U.S. carriers are operating more narrowbody a/c than widebodies.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Gilesdavies
Posted 2004-04-13 11:49:04 and read 3729 times.

Back in the 1980's etc there was limited choice of long range equipment and now airlines have the choice of the A340 and B777.

In this day and age also airlines seem to fly smaller aircraft on longer routes on a more frequent basis alnd also to more cities in a particular country.

For Example...
US airlines would only usually operate flights to Heathrow, but now many airlines fly to other major UK cities like BHX, MAN and GLA.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: StarGoldLHR
Posted 2004-04-13 13:51:22 and read 3577 times.

Lets not forget....

the 747-100/200 are old old old...
and the 747-400 is bigger....

the 777 is a 747 old series replacement.
the A380 is the 747-400 new replacement.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Alessandro
Posted 2004-04-13 13:59:20 and read 3514 times.

I think both AF and KLM will ditch their passenger B744 as soon the start to get A380ies going.
Will Singapore keep their B744s (I assume they got a few?)...

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Ex_SQer
Posted 2004-04-13 14:49:39 and read 3337 times.

Will Singapore keep their B744s (I assume they got a few?)...

Scheduled for phaseout by 2006 or thereabouts.

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Roberta
Posted 2004-04-13 14:59:02 and read 3260 times.

Will Singapore keep their B744s (I assume they got a few?)...

Scheduled for phaseout by 2006 or thereabouts


Nooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Sad

will they begin phaseout in 2006 or will they all be gone by then?

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Horus
Posted 2004-04-13 15:30:09 and read 3149 times.

Egyptair are getting rid of their B7447-366s because they are very old (in service since 1988), but also they want to concentrate on growing their Airbus fleet. Besides the 777s all the Boeings are leaving  Sad


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Jongeneelen




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Zorro




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Daniel Schmid

Topic: RE: Why Airlines Have Ditched The 747
Username: Pwm2txlhopper
Posted 2004-04-13 16:11:21 and read 3008 times.

Horus,
1988 Old?!?!


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/