Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4378974/

Topic: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: 777ER
Posted 2009-04-09 16:14:33 and read 20482 times.

Boeing today announced that it will adjust its twin-aisle airplane production plans for 2010 due to significant deterioration in the business environment for airlines and cargo operators driven by unprecedented global economic conditions.

Monthly production of the 777 will decline from seven to five airplanes per month beginning in June 2010. Boeing will also delay previous plans to modestly increase 747-8 and 767 production. No change is being made at this time to the 737 production rate.
....
....
....
....

No 767, 747 or 777 orders have been cancelled this year. Boeing's commercial backlog of more than 3,500 airplanes remains strong and well-diversified in terms of airplane models, geography and customer business models


http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2009/q2/090409a_nr.html

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2009-04-09 16:17:23 and read 20469 times.



Quoting 777ER (Thread starter):
No 767, 747 or 777 orders have been cancelled this year. Boeing's commercial backlog of more than 3,500 airplanes remains strong and well-diversified in terms of airplane models, geography and customer business models

I imagine that there have been deferrals though, which would impact production.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-09 17:54:00 and read 20022 times.

Well I can see the 747 and 767 lines not increasing since the bulk of their orders are freighters and demand for them is weakening in the near term.

I am surprised to hear the 777 rate cut to five, but I suppose now with fuel cheap again airlines are going to try and stretch those 747-400s for as long as they can since the fuel costs are not as bad again.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: WestWing
Posted 2009-04-09 17:54:28 and read 20016 times.

Amazing how quickly fortunes change. It was probably only a year back that Boeing were evaluating whether it was feasible to increase the 777 production rate from seven per month to ten per month. Now they have to plan cutting down to five per month.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: 797charter
Posted 2009-04-09 22:44:50 and read 18464 times.

And from same source:

Meanwhile, Boeing acknowledges slower production and a price escalation for the 747, which is "currently in a loss position". Most units in the backlog will be delivered at reduced earnings levels, Boeing says.



That the LH order is sold cheap does not surprise me, - but "Most Units" is quite a lot to sell with reduced earnings.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2009-04-09 22:56:31 and read 18328 times.

It sounds as if to actually deliver planes at all, they have had to drop the agreed upon price. I am sure Airbus is in the same boat, and it's probably why their A380 delivery rate continues to slow down.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: LongHaul67
Posted 2009-04-10 02:03:08 and read 16862 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
Well I can see the 747 and 767 lines not increasing

When is the 747-8 production line likely to start?

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Slz396
Posted 2009-04-10 02:23:03 and read 16658 times.



Quoting 797charter (Reply 4):
Boeing acknowledges slower production and a price escalation for the 747, which is "currently in a loss position".

So far for the longstanding claim here on A.net that the 748 program must already be beyond breakeven levels as the 748F would be such a money maker to Boeing that it'd pay whetever bills the 748i sales don't pay for...

Reality is the 748F has the serious problem in that the cargo market has basically imploded, for more even than the pax market. Given the fact cargo airlines have always depended less on new built planes than the pax market, it seems the 748F is far more likely to suffer long deferrals and outright cancellations than any pax plane...

And then there's that 'little issue' of the continuous number of pretty good 747-4ERs which are coming onto the market cheaply for cargo convertion thanks to the A388 superjumbo which replaces them...

Looks like the window of opportunity for the 748F is about to close and Boeing is trying to keep it open by holding a fire sales campaign, combined with 'money back' coupons for existing customers...

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
they have had to drop the agreed upon price. I am sure Airbus is in the same boat, and it's probably why their A380 delivery rate continues to slow down.

As far as I know, Airbus are struggling to increase production to the target numbers, which under normal conditions would mean another round of penalty payments, yet they have the convenience of the economic downturn allowing them to accomodate requests for deferrals without charging (too much) for this from the customers... Wouldn't be surprised to learn EADS is making some extra cash from of lower than planned production increase.  Wink

As to the 748i, that deal with LH was a serious gamble from Boeing in order to kick start the pax version, yet clearly it didn't pay off and they are now stuck with a serious financial liability on their books because of it. LH and B are probably watching eachother very closely to see who blinks first.... I think LH will walk away with a very good deal here, regardless the outcome: either they'll get 20 x 748i for less then they cost to make, or they'll get to pick something from the Boeing store at greatly discounted prices, after which they'll just order more A380s then...  Smile

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Clickhappy
Posted 2009-04-10 04:55:00 and read 15345 times.

Slz396 - let me see if I can sum up what you have said:

Boeing - production cuts are bad, They can't even give away their products at "fire sales" prices, the 747-8 is dommed.

Airbus - production cuts are good. Infact, EADS is going to profit from cutting production.

Did I get that right?

Maybe EADS can take all that profit from a declining A380 line and use it to prop up the A400M project, which is now over 5 years late  thumbsup 

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Azhobo
Posted 2009-04-10 05:16:14 and read 15047 times.

Boeing sets firm prices for a plane about a year before it is delivered, decided by a formula tied to certain economic indices. The recent poor performance of the world's economy means that prices being set now are well below where Boeing expected them to be.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: PlaneHunter
Posted 2009-04-10 05:32:00 and read 14842 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 7):
And then there's that 'little issue' of the continuous number of pretty good 747-4ERs which are coming onto the market cheaply for cargo convertion thanks to the A388 superjumbo which replaces them...

There are only six 747-400ERs in service and it's not very likely QF will retire them anytime soon.
Apart from that, it's likely that many of the old 747-400s to be replaced by A380s will go directly to the scrapyard.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 7):
Wouldn't be surprised to learn EADS is making some extra cash from of lower than planned production increase.

It also wouldn't be a surprise to see cancellations for numerous widebodies.


PH

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2009-04-10 05:33:34 and read 14821 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 7):
As far as I know, Airbus are struggling to increase production to the target numbers, which under normal conditions would mean another round of penalty payments, yet they have the convenience of the economic downturn allowing them to accomodate requests for deferrals without charging (too much) for this from the customers... Wouldn't be surprised to learn EADS is making some extra cash from of lower than planned production increase.

There are serious flaws in your logic, and some statements are not true. So I hope that you are joking….? The problem for Airbus is that they might end up producing 3 more A380 airplanes, than will be delivered this year. This is a serious headache for A380. Even if the planned production increase is not as high as they first set as a goal Airbus is worried that they have 3 A380's without a home at the end of the year. The production slowdown at both Boeing and Airbus are necessary, but not good news for any of them.

What is interesting is that Airbus cancelled the planned production increase immediately, and plans on cutting narrowbody production. Boeing is sticking to their planned production rate for the rest of 2009 and halfway out in 2010. And then they will only cut in the widebody production. I wonder why they read the marked so differently? I know that with the 787 production coming online next year they will end up producing more widebodies than Airbus even if they cut the 777 production. But why does Boeing choose to stick to the current 737 production rate, whereas Airbus is decreasing the production on the A320? Both have a healthy backlog. It will be interesting to see what pays off in a year or two.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Slz396
Posted 2009-04-10 06:18:07 and read 14241 times.



Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):
Airbus - production cuts are good. Infact, EADS is going to profit from cutting production.

Did I say that? I suggest you read again....

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):

Boeing - production cuts are bad, They can't even give away their products at "fire sales" prices, the 747-8 is doomed.

Now I must admit that is a very good translation of what Boeing is saying in:

Quoting 797charter (Reply 4):
the 747 is currently in a loss position and most units in the backlog will be delivered at reduced earnings levels.

 Smile

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 11):
There are serious flaws in your logic and some statements are not true.

The only logic which has been shown to have flawns and the only statement which has been proved to be wrong is the longstanding claim here on A.net that the 748 program must surely be far beyond breakeven levels already as the 748F is such a money maker to Boeing that it'd pay whetever bills the 748i sales don't pay for.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2009-04-10 06:27:05 and read 14079 times.



Quoting WestWing (Reply 3):
Amazing how quickly fortunes change. It was probably only a year back that Boeing were evaluating whether it was feasible to increase the 777 production rate from seven per month to ten per month. Now they have to plan cutting down to five per month.

The bad side is that will take another year or more if they decide to increase production, even back to 7 per month.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Baroque
Posted 2009-04-10 06:47:08 and read 13810 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
777 rate cut to five, but I suppose now with fuel cheap again airlines are going to try and stretch those 747-400s for as long as they can since the fuel costs are not as bad again.

If it is based on fuel prices, there must be at least a 50% chance that by the time the changes take effect, fuel is no longer cheap.

The two things that happened first were a decrease in consumption and an unwinding of paper positions on oil accelerating the decrease in price leading to the next thing which has been a slowing of investment in oil production. Once consumption starts to rise, forget low prices. How long do you fancy the recession lasting. Some are talking about China starting to emerge from it, and there is much fascination with fishhook statistics. If they are right !!!!!!!

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-10 09:09:32 and read 11917 times.



Quoting 797charter (Reply 4):
That the LH order is sold cheap does not surprise me, - but "Most Units" is quite a lot to sell with reduced earnings.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
It sounds as if to actually deliver planes at all, they have had to drop the agreed upon price.

Rather then Boeing selling 747-8s at minimal margins, it is possible the large development and production cost increases are having a deleterious effect on the original margin calculations.

With 106 orders, every $100 million rise in costs knocks a million off the profit margin. And Boeing has announced hundreds and hundreds of millions in additional development costs alone, so I would not be surprised to see profits dropping upwards of $10 million per unit at the extreme end of the scale, which is going to hurt.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 7):
And then there's that 'little issue' of the continuous number of pretty good 747-4ERs which are coming onto the market cheaply for cargo conversion thanks to the A388 superjumbo which replaces them...

As noted, there are only six 747-400ERs in revenue service and they are not going anywhere. As to 747-400 conversions, with Boeing scaling back 777 deliveries that is a good sign that with fuel cheaper, airlines are going to hold on to their 747-400 passenger fleets longer then planned before replacing them with 777-300ERs which means they will not be available for conversion as planned. Also, some cargo operators are retiring older dedicated and converted 747-400 freighters for new build models now and it is not beyond the realm of possibility they will do continue to do so going forward which will mean continued 747-8F deliveries at the current base level.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2009-04-10 09:26:12 and read 11634 times.



Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):
Boeing - production cuts are bad, They can't even give away their products at "fire sales" prices, the 747-8 is dommed.

Airbus - production cuts are good. Infact, EADS is going to profit from cutting production.

Did I get that right?

Maybe EADS can take all that profit from a declining A380 line and use it to prop up the A400M project, which is now over 5 years late

Indeed. It cuts completely against the grain to see this argument, when it is almost universally presented on here pointing in the opposite direction......  yes 

Doesn't make either version any more right.
But I'll do you a deal.
You carry on picking this one out, and I'll trawl the reverse ones out of the system.  highfive   biggrin 

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 11):
The problem for Airbus is that they might end up producing 3 more A380 airplanes, than will be delivered this year. This is a serious headache for A380.

For goodness sake.  faint 

Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):
Rather then Boeing selling 747-8s at minimal margins, it is possible the large development and production cost increases are having a deleterious effect on the original margin calculations.

I suspect you are quite right in this

Rgds

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: SunriseValley
Posted 2009-04-10 09:29:49 and read 11603 times.



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 11):
What is interesting is that Airbus cancelled the planned production increase immediately, and plans on cutting narrowbody production. Boeing is sticking to their planned production rate for the rest of 2009 and halfway out in 2010. And then they will only cut in the widebody production. I wonder why they read the marked so differently?

I would suggest that the "quality" of the Boeing narrow body orders is probably better than those of Airbus. An analysis of these orders using probability analysis would be a useful exercise for someone with the necessary skills and the inclination to do so.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2009-04-10 09:41:38 and read 11424 times.



Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 17):
I would suggest that the "quality" of the Boeing narrow body orders is probably better than those of Airbus. An analysis of these orders using probability analysis would be a useful exercise for someone with the necessary skills and the inclination to do so.

The fact that Airbus's narrowbody production rate was planned to be approaching 25% higher than Boeing's might have a little bit to do with it, too....

Rgds

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Khobar
Posted 2009-04-10 10:06:15 and read 11051 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 7):
So far for the longstanding claim here on A.net that the 748 program must already be beyond breakeven levels as the 748F would be such a money maker to Boeing that it'd pay whetever bills the 748i sales don't pay for...

Boeing has invested how much in the 748 program? $Billions.

Boeing has delivered how many 748's? Zero.

Unless airlines pay fully up front, of course the program is "CURRENTLY" in a loss possition.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-10 10:08:35 and read 11027 times.

While a common (and somewhat tired, IMO) argument, considering the depth and breadth of the downturn across all areas of the world, I don't really see "quality of customer" being a major determiner about near-term deliveries. Even some of the largest and most established carriers are taking baths in certain markets while smaller, newer carriers are leveraging their lower costs to expand market share while conditions favor them doing so.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2009-04-10 10:08:45 and read 11027 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 7):
Reality is the 748F has the serious problem in that the cargo market has basically imploded

Yes, but that reality is not the same reality as last spring when you were saying the same thing about the program.

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):
Did I get that right?

Well, that's what it sounded like, but it doesn't sound right...

Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):
Rather then Boeing selling 747-8s at minimal margins, it is possible the large development and production cost increases are having a deleterious effect on the original margin calculations.

Okay, I'm getting this information from a different link. I had just read that before posting in this thread, and didn't realize that the information about pricing was not in the above link.

But, despite what some people on this forum think, prices are NOT set in stone on order and this economic environment has meant that Airbus and Boeing are delivering their 747s and A380s at lower prices than ever imagined, because prices are "firm" but pegged on market indices that have fallen.

This is how the "above water" 748F has gone below water in the books, but because it doesn't EIS until next year, if there is a recovery by YE2010, the 748F could go back above water without Boeing doing much at all.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/30142664/for/cnbc/

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-10 10:16:49 and read 10918 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
But, despite what some people on this forum think, prices are NOT set in stone on order and this economic environment has meant that Airbus and Boeing are delivering their 747s and A380s at lower prices than ever imagined, because prices are "firm" but pegged on market indices that have fallen.

It would be rather perversely ironic should the huge order run-ups Boeing and Airbus scored the past few years come back to haunt them as all those 737s/777/787s and A320s/A330s/A380s could end up being delivered at prices well below plan if this economic malaise really does push deep into 2010 or even 2011.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Scipio
Posted 2009-04-10 10:19:37 and read 10881 times.



Quoting Azhobo (Reply 9):
Boeing sets firm prices for a plane about a year before it is delivered, decided by a formula tied to certain economic indices. The recent poor performance of the world's economy means that prices being set now are well below where Boeing expected them to be.

Interesting. I always wondered how Boeing, Airbus and the airlines could appropriately agree on prices for contracted deliveries 5-10 year in the future. A well-designed pricing formula could, in theory at least, achieve an acceptable degree of risk sharing between manufacturer and airline.

Can you be more specific about how this works?

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2009-04-10 10:20:16 and read 10846 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 22):
prices well below plan

Well, I do doubt they would be so stupid to allow for delivery prices WELL below plan, but for programs like the 748 and A380 which are fighting to go positive, the lower prices combined with delays and concessions that may be necessary to prevent very expensive white tails would keep them negative.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Keesje
Posted 2009-04-10 10:39:31 and read 10649 times.

Well lets hope the production slow down is for 2 yrs only & its not the good folks that leave the company.

There are some indication Boeing has to take action;
http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/...rary/boeingvairbusproductivity.JPG
source: SeattlePI, april 10

I fear drastic rationalisation, 747-8i and 767 out, innitiation of HGW 787 versions and a 737 replacement in a few years (the 777-200 /ER/LR backlock is dropping fast (40 last dec?) & the original 787-10 seems unpopular).

Lets hope 737 demand keeps strong for the next few yrs and the backlog remains intact.

The 777-300ER seems to have good prospects whatever happens..   

photo : flightglobal

Maybe a low risk 777-400 medium/long range version (Steven UH asked for it) could better break into the 747-400 replacement market then the 747-8i. LH as a launch customer?   

[Edited 2009-04-10 10:59:48]

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-10 11:00:12 and read 10928 times.

Airbus have a "Price Revision Formula" which they use to revise the price as necessary between the signing of the Purchase Agreement and actual delivery. There are also separate price revision formulas with the engine manufacturers and revisable credit memoranda generally subject to the same escalation as the airframe/aircraft themselves. There can also be escalation caps equal to a certain percentage, annually compounded.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2009-04-10 11:03:15 and read 10909 times.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...space/2009017116_boeingcuts10.html

"The production cut's effect on Everett employment may be offset somewhat when assembly of the new787 Dreamliner ramps up at the plant.
But that will take some time. An executive at a Boeing supplier said the 787 program is no longer planning for a furious buildup, as many customers are likely to defer their Dreamliner deliveries, too.
"Rather than ramping up, the (787 suppliers) are really slowing things down," the executive said."


Plans for rate 10/month by 2012 being dropped? Hope we get some clarification from Jim and James at the first-quarter 2009 results conference on April 22nd.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-10 11:06:20 and read 10835 times.

Well a slower ramp would help Boeing deliver planes on schedule (less pressure to rush) and reduce compensation payments (as customers defer of their own accord), so it wouldn't be all bad news. As I believe Ikramerica noted, 787 customers still appear to be taking a long-term positive view of the program and continue to hold on to their orders.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2009-04-10 11:12:30 and read 10767 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 16):
For goodness sake.

Sorry for my typing errors lately  Smile Keyboard dyslexia perhaps?  Silly

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 17):
I would suggest that the "quality" of the Boeing narrow body orders is probably better than those of Airbus

That might have something to do with it. And of course the fact that Airbus was aiming for really high numbers as Astetuteman argued.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 25):
I foresee drastic rationalisation, 747-8i and 767 out,

I hope that you are wrong in the regards of 747-8i. I still hope it will prove itself. The 767 will depend on the tanker order. I wonder if Boeing still is showing the 767-200LRF to customers? I guess that plane will also depend on the tanker program.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: FRNT787
Posted 2009-04-10 11:32:58 and read 10510 times.



Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 17):
I would suggest that the "quality" of the Boeing narrow body orders is probably better than those of Airbus. An analysis of these orders using probability analysis would be a useful exercise for someone with the necessary skills and the inclination to do so.

I have seen that argument made. But, imo, both manufacturers have narrowbody orders in the future that could go either way (i.e. delivered or cancelled).

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 18):
The fact that Airbus's narrowbody production rate was planned to be approaching 25% higher than Boeing's might have a little bit to do with it, too....

I have to agree this would be the main reason. I believe Airbus is planning on now delivering around the same narrowbody pace as Boeing...

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Rheinbote
Posted 2009-04-10 11:38:36 and read 10435 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
Well a slower ramp would help Boeing deliver planes on schedule (less pressure to rush) and reduce compensation payments (as customers defer of their own accord), so it wouldn't be all bad news.

I don't get your logic. How can a slower ramp help to deliver on schedule if you are 2 years behind already? How can a slower ramp help to reduce penalties?

It's the other way round: Customers deferring their orders may be saving Boeing's derriere. Even a ramp to 10/month by 2012 would not have sufficed to make good on the 2 year delay.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Manfredj
Posted 2009-04-10 12:38:58 and read 9844 times.



Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):
Slz396 - let me see if I can sum up what you have said:

Boeing - production cuts are bad, They can't even give away their products at "fire sales" prices, the 747-8 is dommed.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 16):
Indeed. It cuts completely against the grain to see this argument, when it is almost universally presented on here pointing in the opposite direction......

Doesn't make either version any more right.
But I'll do you a deal.
You carry on picking this one out, and I'll trawl the reverse ones out of the system.

I'm very confused by all this...is there sarcasm or are you both in agreement that the program is doomed and hemorraging money?

How does this bode for my beloved 748i program? I thought the freighter was all but a go. After all, isn't it the only VLA freighter on the market? Didn't Boeing just sign a contract with a well known outfitter for the interiors of Lufth aircraft?

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Keesje
Posted 2009-04-10 13:14:46 and read 9511 times.



Quoting Manfredj (Reply 32):
How does this bode for my beloved 748i program? I thought the freighter was all but a go. After all, isn't it the only VLA freighter on the market? Didn't Boeing just sign a contract with a well known outfitter for the interiors of Lufth aircraft?

The Boeing 747-8F is indeed wihout competition from Airbus and likely a good freighter too. However usefull 747-400 are entering the conversion market while airlines park other 747-400 freighters. So business wise the 8F has bad luck, right aircraft at the wrong moment.

I have seen nobody comment on the contracten 8i outfitter. Imo Its a strange situation fitter. They are an unproven brand new off-spring from the notorious loss making technical division from ANZ. A big question is why the #1 MRO supplier / aircraft outfitter Lufthansa Technik (with daughter companies all over the world) did pass on this "opportunity"..

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 29):
I hope that you are wrong in the regards of 747-8i.

I too hope so for two yrs. However business logic points the other way.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: FrmrCAPCADET
Posted 2009-04-10 14:12:03 and read 8907 times.

I would suspect that there are price adjustments tied to the cost of aluminum, titanium, graphite fiber, plasticiser, leather etc at about the time the Airframe people are actually ordering those materials and financial committments are made.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: AirNz
Posted 2009-04-10 17:38:46 and read 7764 times.



Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 17):
I would suggest that the "quality" of the Boeing narrow body orders is probably better than those of Airbus.

Could you explain further what you mean by quality?

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2009-04-11 01:16:34 and read 7433 times.



Quoting Manfredj (Reply 32):
I'm very confused by all this...is there sarcasm or are you both in agreement that the program is doomed and hemorraging money?

If you're a betting man, I'd put my money on the sarcasm...  bigthumbsup 

It's astonishing to me just how often we see arguments which insist that the very same set of circumstances which is dreadful for one manufacturer is great for the other.

It's a phenomenon which works "in both directions" (i.e. arguments pre-Boeing, and arguments pre-Airbus).

Whichever way they go, it's hard to get one's head round the logic.

But then, this is A-net..  biggrin 

Rgds

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: MotorHussy
Posted 2009-04-11 02:08:30 and read 7336 times.

Given the massive delays with the 787 (including the 9-series) and the renewed interest in the 767, particularly with Boeing offering them as a sacrificial appeasement, has any airline requested a 400-series 767?

Sorry for the long winded sentence.
MH

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2009-04-11 03:56:01 and read 7189 times.



Quoting Keesje (Reply 33):
I too hope so for two yrs. However business logic points the other way.

If the cargo market will get worse then who knows. Even if IATA believes in a small recovery next year they have lowered their forecast for the rest of the decade. It will be interesting to follow the future of the 747-8 the next couple of years and how the market will evolve. As long as the orders are not canceled I believe that this plane will be alive some years from now. What is bad news for the 747-8 program is that Emirates will only take 5 of the 10 747-8F they had planned. It will be interesting to see if the leasing company is able to find a home for the rest of the 5 planes that were headed for Emirates.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: OyKIE
Posted 2009-04-11 04:08:01 and read 7167 times.

According to IATA Chief Economist Brian Pearce he

Quote:
...warned that slow recovery means aircraft order backlogs at Boeing and Airbus "are vulnerable. . .I think we are likely to see a significant fall in aircraft deliveries over the next couple of years."

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=16090

This suggest that Boeing and Airbus current production rate still seem a bit optimistic and that we could see further production cuts at both manufacturer in the not distant future.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-11 06:10:06 and read 7031 times.



Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 37):
Given the massive delays with the 787 (including the 9-series) and the renewed interest in the 767, particularly with Boeing offering them as a sacrificial appeasement, has any airline requested a 400-series 767?

No. All the recent top-up orders for the passenger 767s have been 767-300ERs,

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Parapente
Posted 2009-04-11 06:17:12 and read 7009 times.

The "will they won't they" discussion on the production decision on the 748i has been and continues to be an interesting one.I believe that if Boeing were to "blink" they would have done so by now.Its up to LH to blink I feel or take the 20. (they will not ever take the options up IMHO).

As has been said there is nothing on the market (nor will there be) that can lift the cargo (and over the distances) that the 748 can. No one doubts that oil will return to the $100 mark as we move out of recession as such there should be a fair long term future for the "C".As for the "i" a couple of presidental planes is all that is likley IMHO.

As Keejse says. A -400 777 is what they sould (should have done) do. But right now I believe Boeing will concentrate on the 787 to avoid a disaster senario. They just have to get this craft right the farm has been bet....

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-11 06:59:42 and read 6919 times.



Quoting Parapente (Reply 41):
The "will they won't they" discussion on the production decision on the 748i has been and continues to be an interesting one.I believe that if Boeing were to "blink" they would have done so by now.Its up to LH to blink I feel or take the 20. (they will not ever take the options up IMHO).

While I know at least one person will not believe LH will take delivery of the 747-8I even after 20 to 40 of them are in daily revenue service with the airline, that Boeing and LH continue to cut contracts with suppliers (the recent one with Altitude for some First Class cabin fittings, for example) continues to convince me Boeing is going to build it whether or not they plan to make any money on it.

After all, they built the 747-400ER even though they only had interest from three customers (QF, UA and CX) and orders from only one (QF) - and that order was effectively one-fifth of the current 747-8I/747VIP order book.

Maybe it is a case of "hope springs eternal". Maybe the Board of Directors are holding absinthe parties and have lost control of their mental faculties. Or maybe it is a case of the 747-8I Product Team having some incriminating pictures of McNerney that they are using to blackmail him.

But maybe it's just a case that LH is considered an important enough past and future customer that Boeing is willing to do for them what they have done for many other such customers throughout their history and build them a special model of an existing family to meet their needs.

Some might say such sentimentality has no place in today's spreadsheet-driven world where the only thing that matters in making a decision is how much money you can generate from doing so. That a customer is only as important as the profit margin of their last order. That it is better to lose a percentage point of market-share then a percentage point of profit.

Well, you can't generate sales revenue if you don't have any sales...

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: LipeGIG
Posted 2009-04-11 09:36:55 and read 6735 times.



Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 37):
Given the massive delays with the 787 (including the 9-series) and the renewed interest in the 767, particularly with Boeing offering them as a sacrificial appeasement, has any airline requested a 400-series 767?



Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
No. All the recent top-up orders for the passenger 767s have been 767-300ERs

The 764 is so closer to the 772 in terms of passenger capacity, and the 772 is more efficient (even more in range). This was a main reason that limited 764 production to just CO and DL frames.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-11 09:55:10 and read 6692 times.



Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 43):
The 764 is so closer to the 772 in terms of passenger capacity, and the 772 is more efficient (even more in range). This was a main reason that limited 764 production to just CO and DL frames.

Yup, it's pretty much a niche airplane. It's biggest advantage is it is lighter then a 777-200 (by around 32t) so it will fly a bit over 10% farther, but it carries 10t less payload doing so. So for most customers looking for a large medium-range aircraft, the larger 777-200 and A330-300 were just more effective - the A330-300 especially so.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Azhobo
Posted 2009-04-11 11:40:21 and read 6492 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 24):
Can you be more specific about how this works?

Sorrry i got that from an article, and forgot to credit and post a link. I found it interesting too, that is why i posted it.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: 2175301
Posted 2009-04-11 11:46:29 and read 6494 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 42):
While I know at least one person will not believe LH will take delivery of the 747-8I even after 20 to 40 of them are in daily revenue service with the airline, that Boeing and LH continue to cut contracts with suppliers (the recent one with Altitude for some First Class cabin fittings, for example) continues to convince me Boeing is going to build it whether or not they plan to make any money on it.

After all, they built the 747-400ER even though they only had interest from three customers (QF, UA and CX) and orders from only one (QF) - and that order was effectively one-fifth of the current 747-8I/747VIP order book.

Maybe it is a case of "hope springs eternal". Maybe the Board of Directors are holding absinthe parties and have lost control of their mental faculties. Or maybe it is a case of the 747-8I Product Team having some incriminating pictures of McNerney that they are using to blackmail him.

But maybe it's just a case that LH is considered an important enough past and future customer that Boeing is willing to do for them what they have done for many other such customers throughout their history and build them a special model of an existing family to meet their needs.

Some might say such sentimentality has no place in today's spreadsheet-driven world where the only thing that matters in making a decision is how much money you can generate from doing so. That a customer is only as important as the profit margin of their last order. That it is better to lose a percentage point of market-share then a percentage point of profit.

Well, you can't generate sales revenue if you don't have any sales...

Of course they will build the 748i - and I believe that Boeing will continue to offer it for the forseeable future.

I believe that the 748i is a strategic investment by Boeing. In part - it exist to counterballance the A380. In part - it exist to offer customers options that fly to the several hundred airports that cannot currently support an A380 in regular operations as well. In part - it exist just in case the A380 ends production in a few years (which I think is an actual possibility as while it is easy to see where the first 50 or so A380s can be used - there is a fair amount of speculation on where the next 50 goes - and it is very speculative on where they go after that). Remember, Boeing saw a small VLA market - that did not warrent development of a new VLA. Airbus saw a much larger VLA market and developed the A380. So far the orders for the A380 & 748i combined seems to much more closely match the Boeing perspective.

While it may be that Boeing - on an incremental basis after sunk cost - is not making much money (if any) on the 748i; I suspect the very same is true for the A380 at its current production rate (and Boeing and their contractors have far less sunk cost). However, from a strategic perspective it is important to complete the order and maintain the production line. The overall value to Boeing is not just in todays dollars from the production of the sold airframes.

I believe that the 748F will continue in production for another 10 - 20 years, if not more. Perhaps not in large numbers. But enough to keep the line open. Interestingly, the longer it remains open the more likely for more orders as there will be fewer good passanger conversion frames available (even if there are a good number of passanger conversion oportunities right now).

I truely believe that Boeing is looking at the 747 with an eye for what could happen with it for the next 20 years. It cost them very little to do so - and the future payback is likely solid.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Ikramerica
Posted 2009-04-11 12:00:55 and read 6464 times.



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 46):
I believe that the 748i is a strategic investment by Boeing. In part - it exist to counterballance the A380. In part - it exist to offer customers options that fly to the several hundred airports that cannot currently support an A380 in regular operations as well.

And when customers just can't decide between the two, Boeing then says: "you know, we also have this 77W which most customers are using to replace 744s, and even A380 customers seem to be buying more of." Without the confusion in the A380/748 market, the A380 decision becomes easier. With the confusion? 77W orders sound safer. 77W sales definitely picked up once the 748 was on offer...

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-11 13:27:13 and read 6360 times.



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 46):
I believe that the 748i is a strategic investment by Boeing. In part - it exist to counterballance the A380.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 47):
And when customers just can't decide between the two, Boeing then says: "you know, we also have this 77W which most customers are using to replace 744s, and even A380 customers seem to be buying more of." Without the confusion in the A380/748 market, the A380 decision becomes easier.

I am inclined to think you may have hit on an interesting point there, Ikramerica.

Before the 777-300ER, Airbus had a nice little bracket on the 747-400: the larger, more economical A380-800 above and the smaller, more economical A340-600 below. Both offered more payload weight and payload volume then the 747-400, flew farther, and burned less fuel per seat.

The 777-300ER then jumped into the pool and literally made a great splash. It offered more floorspace and more payload volume then the A340-600 (though it did fall about 5t short on payload weight), flew pretty much just as far, burned less fuel per seat, and had very slightly better dispatch reliability.

Of course, it cut the 747-400 off at the knees, but it also decapitated the A340-600. And Boeing didn't have to discount it as nearly as deeply as they were probably offering 747-400s to try and win RFPs against the A340-600 and A380-800 combination.

I still believe the 747-8 Intercontinental is a "Hail Mary Pass" into an end zone well-covered with defenders (to use an American Gridiron Football colloquialism), and while I can't argue with the sales success of the 747-8F (prior to the global meltdown), I do remain somewhat skeptical Boeing really needed to offer it vis-a-vis a 747-400ERF with a bit higher MZFW and GEnx-2B67 engines.

Still, that's air over the wing at this point. What's done is done and they have to soldier on and hope for the best.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Parapente
Posted 2009-04-12 02:24:03 and read 5908 times.

"That's all air over the wing"

Quite right. It really is a wait and see situation. The cards have ben played -for better or for worse. In truth - right now it looks like both companies (in a business sense) have made a little bit of a fist of the VLA market. The only winners are the customers who have bought new planes a very compeditive prices, whilst both A & B have locked themselves into losses. Mind you even the airlines (right now) are probably regretting buying any of them!

It's a long term thing now IMHO. If theWorld economy really picks up in the next few years then the market for these VLA,s will reappear - if not they will both be scratching around to keep the lines running.

I guess we will have to see what gives Vs the 350-1000 and any improved 777-300.That is where the market is likley to be. But there really is a limit to how much good money after bad you throw in. Right now both companies have their hands full with getting the mid sector sorted.

The 787 is not by any means out of the woods yet -it seems to me reading all the articles that the plane has been modified in just about every major area. The 350 has all these problems still to come.

And all the time the pressure increases to do something soon on the 737/320 replacement -or they really will leave the door open to Bombardier at the lower end of this very large segment.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Baroque
Posted 2009-04-12 04:24:31 and read 5768 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 48):
I still believe the 747-8 Intercontinental is a "Hail Mary Pass" into an end zone well-covered with defenders (to use an American Gridiron Football colloquialism), and while I can't argue with the sales success of the 747-8F (prior to the global meltdown),

Does that mean the same as placing a forward short leg and then bowling a full length outswinger on off stump?  confused 

Whatever has happened to passenger demand, the amount of gore generated seems to be exceeded in the freight markets. The drop in exports from Japan for example is huge. No fishhooks reported there either.  cold 

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Cerecl
Posted 2009-04-12 05:02:05 and read 5705 times.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 47):
And when customers just can't decide between the two, Boeing then says: "you know, we also have this 77W which most customers are using to replace 744s, and even A380 customers seem to be buying more of." Without the confusion in the A380/748 market, the A380 decision becomes easier. With the confusion? 77W orders sound safer. 77W sales definitely picked up once the 748 was on offer...

I am having a hard time imagining many airlines would be "confused" by having two VLA to be selected. What you are suggesting is that airlines that wish to purchase VLAs end up buying a medium-capacity aircraft, which may or may not be the case.
IMHO, 77W sells well in recent years because 1) it is a great aircraft and 2) For long periods A380 was all but unmarketable and 748i was regarded as Boeing's version of A350 non-XWB.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Slz396
Posted 2009-04-12 05:59:15 and read 5614 times.



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 46):
I believe that the 748i is a strategic investment by Boeing.

So you've moved away from the very vocal 'it is already completely paid for' camp to the 'it needn't make any money since its part of a much wider strategy' camp now???
Right...  scratchchin 

Quoting Stitch (Reply 48):
I am inclined to think you may have hit on an interesting point there, Ikramerica.

The only noteworthy point is that it now seems to be widely accepted to formally label the 748i as a strategic plane here on Airliners.net, just like the 753, 764ER or 783 have been before...

Those were 3 very successful strategies for sure:
The 757-300 is already out of production
The 767-4ER hasn't seen an order for many years and its failure triggered the 787
while the 787-3 will likely never take to the skies even!
Yet now we have the 748i to add to this prestigious shortlist of strategic planes!
It isn't called the lemon strategy by any chance, is it?
 duck 

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 51):
What you are suggesting is that airlines that wish to purchase VLAs (and can't decide between the A388 and the 748i) end up buying a medium-capacity aircraft???

Hey, don't mind about those little details, will you?
It's part of a very clever much wider strategy from Boeing, remember?
 Wink

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-12 06:52:29 and read 5540 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 50):
Whatever has happened to passenger demand, the amount of gore generated seems to be exceeded in the freight markets. The drop in exports from Japan for example is huge. No fishhooks reported there either.  cold 

True, but it's a short-term phenomena. Which is why I am  confused  by statements made by some implying that Asian exports to North America and the European Union are now permanently crashed which means no more new-build very large freighters will be needed. These folks in their zeal to carol the death of the 747 seem to forget that without any exports, Asia won't see the economic and standard of living growth necessary to support those 1000 A380s they are convinced will happen.  Wink



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 52):
The only noteworthy point is that it now seems to be widely accepted to formally label the 748i as a strategic plane here on Airliners.net, just like the 753, 764ER or 783 have been before...

I would not know, Slz396, for I have never subscribed to that line of thinking.  no 

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Baroque
Posted 2009-04-12 09:54:17 and read 5346 times.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 53):
made by some implying that Asian exports to North America and the European Union are now permanently crashed which means no more new-build very large freighters will be needed

I too doubt they will be THIS down for long. The question is to what extent they recover and how quickly they do. One way and another, it seems likely that what emerges the far end will be different in some ways from what went into this recession.

While your point that what is bad for the 747 would also be bad for the A380 is generally valid and accepted, there are signs of a trend that for once may indicate a degree of differentiation of problems that would (or at least could) affect various sectors in different ways.

There may be more of a focus on more internal growth in Asian countries and less of a focus on exports. It has been noted that although it does not have a robust economy, Indonesia has suffered a bit less compared with some more stellar economies due at least in part to its lower reliance on exports compared with most of the growth tigers. One curious bit about the effect of the current economic conditions on Indonesia is that it has benefited from lower oil prices because it is now such a significant importer of oil - and of course its budge was being strangled by subsidies. A sometime OPEC country wishing for lower oil prices, what next?

And in a survey of one item, my wife bought a frying pan yesterday, and to our total amazement it turned out to be made in France and not China. Now there is a stunning statistic.  angel 

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: 2175301
Posted 2009-04-12 11:52:20 and read 5216 times.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 52):
Quoting 2175301 (Reply 46):
I believe that the 748i is a strategic investment by Boeing.

So you've moved away from the very vocal 'it is already completely paid for' camp to the 'it needn't make any money since its part of a much wider strategy' camp now???
Right...

I don't know where you got this from: I was never a believer of "Its already paid for" and cannot immagine myself making that kind of argument. I run a side business - I am well aware of the very real cost of changing a marketing stratagy or developing a new or revised product. The concepts of sunk cost, and incremental cost after you get past the sunk cost; and the concept of analyzing the cost of a project versus the likely result (including the cost of failure of the project).

The big difference between the 748 program is that it has always seemed likely - and still seems likely today to pay for itself (including development cost) as it is a derivitieve product - even if they only produce a few 748i as the 738F will be arround for a long time. Even if it dosn't - the losses will not be large. The same financial argument cannot be said for the A380 - and was in my mind questionable from the first time I heard of it and did some research on it. Imagine where Airbus would be if they had really focused on the getting the A350 right up front and getting it into production instead of the collosal financial disaster of the A380 - which is unlikly to ever pay for its large development cost.

While it can be said that hindsite is 20-20; there is also a case of really being very wrong on the foresight as well. Boeing has not always hit the nail squarely on the head - but they do seem to have a better history of predicting the market; and I think a better history of responding to the market. They did not build the fasted commercial jet - figuring that it would not be economical and cancled their SST. The Concord proved them right. They did not decide to build a completely new Very Large Aircraft - and I suggest that the sales information so far has proven them right as well.

Of course; Boeing did substaintially mismanage the risk of all the new technologies and production methods in the 787. In about the same timefram Airbus mismanged the A380 - which other than size is largely an older technology plane - and the A400M which it will be interesting to see how many countries are really willing to pay C-17 prices for a plane with substaintially less capability in order to fund the fixing of the A400M - and wait 5 more years to boot.

Overall - my observation some key countries in Europe seem to be more Ego driven than financial sense driven. Who cares what it cost as long as we can say that we buit the SST, and the largest passanger jet, and even a whole new military cargo plane... As long as we can construct a speculative argument on why it will be economical we will proceed. The fact that these speculation arguments behind such projects seems to avoid key facts seems to be repeated over and over. Boeing does not have that option. The result is that I see their projections a lot more realistic than what I see coming out of Europe.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Astuteman
Posted 2009-04-12 12:09:19 and read 5191 times.



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 55):
In about the same timefram Airbus mismanged the A380 - which other than size is largely an older technology plane -

A statement which is, of course, largely nonsense..  yes 

Quoting 2175301 (Reply 55):
While it can be said that hindsite is 20-20; there is also a case of really being very wrong on the foresight as well.

And there is no way that it is early enough to say that the "foresight" of launching the A380 was fundamentally wrong. The production delays are a different matter

Quoting 2175301 (Reply 55):
Boeing does not have that option. The result is that I see their projections a lot more realistic than what I see coming out of Europe.

And so A-net continues to drag us down to the lowest common jingoistic denominator....

Ah well. It IS A-net..  scratchchin 

Rgds

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Tdscanuck
Posted 2009-04-12 12:54:52 and read 5101 times.



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 55):
While it can be said that hindsite is 20-20; there is also a case of really being very wrong on the foresight as well. Boeing has not always hit the nail squarely on the head - but they do seem to have a better history of predicting the market; and I think a better history of responding to the market. They did not build the fasted commercial jet - figuring that it would not be economical and cancled their SST.

Although Boeing does have a pretty good record of reading the market on overall programs (some derivatives seem to have flopped), it's being extremely revisionist to suggest that the cancellation of the SST was some kind of Boeing foresight.

The SST was canceled by Congress...Boeing would have kept on building it as long as they were paying for it. They were so sure of the SST that the 747 was built to be a freighter from the get-go because Boeing assumed the passenger market would all go to the SST.

In hindsight, it was an extremely good thing that they stopped the SST, but at the time I think you'd have been very hard pressed to find anybody at Boeing who agreed with that.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Stitch
Posted 2009-04-12 14:08:06 and read 4992 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 54):
I too doubt they will be THIS down for long. The question is to what extent they recover and how quickly they do. One way and another, it seems likely that what emerges the far end will be different in some ways from what went into this recession.

Likely so, but keeping shipping costs low is important so I believe there will be a call for new planes with lower operating costs. Yes, you save a good bit of money up front buying an older passenger plane and doing a conversion, but considering the years these planes serve in fleets, when you pencil everything out, I imagine the new-build generates a number "blacker" then the conversion.



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 57):
In hindsight, it was an extremely good thing that they stopped the SST, but at the time I think you'd have been very hard pressed to find anybody at Boeing who agreed with that.

While I don't believe it was brilliant foresight on Boeing's part that led the to cancel the 2707-300, neither do I believe they felt the future for SSTs in 1971 was so bright they had to wear shades.  cool 

The TATL market was never going to be enough to make SST's economically practical, and yet Concorde was being denied supersonic overfly rights across India (necessary to make South Asian and Australian operations workable) and populated areas in North America and Europe which pretty much restricted her to just TATL supersonic ops. NYC didn't want an SST even if it had been built in the Five Burroughs and other major world cities also expressed some issues with the noise during take-off and landing.

The larger size of the 2707-300 would have helped the CASM/RASM arguments, but they also resulted in a plane even louder then Concorde at both subsonic and supersonic speeds. I think it was becoming apparent to many in Boeing that the 2707-300 program would not be financially viable unless it was mostly funded by the government so when that funding evaporated with the Senate vote, Boeing did not want to keep funding R&D out of their own pockets and killed the program soon after.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Hotelmode
Posted 2009-04-12 14:42:24 and read 4935 times.

Interesting thread. Stitch in particular  bigthumbsup 

From my airlines point of view (as the largest long haul pax 744 operator) the 748i is dead in the water. To the point that we wont even spend a relatively small amout of money to upgrade the FMCs on the -400s (the current ones are out of memory for our network) to the 748i standard (the only option) as they think we may end up being the only operator paying Honeywells costs.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2009-04-12 14:44:24 and read 4931 times.

Some things work, some things don't. For aircraft, there is such a long lead time from concept to marketplace that any number of things can happen to scuttle once well laid plans.

It shouldn't be surprising in the least that not every plane made turns out to not be a winner.

The Concorde, for instance, went a long way in proving the passenger SST concept possible, but not really economically practical...at least on a large scale.

Sometimes you win...sometimes you lose...that's life, eh...?

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Baroque
Posted 2009-04-12 21:26:06 and read 4710 times.



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 56):
Quoting 2175301 (Reply 55):
In about the same timefram Airbus mismanged the A380 - which other than size is largely an older technology plane -

A statement which is, of course, largely nonsense..

Added to which the critical snag of trying to use CATIA4 and CATIA5 together in series/parallel (delete as appropriate) while it might not be thought of as cutting edge technology was probably novel in the sense that had anyone tried it before it seems unlikely that Airbus would have tried it again!  Wow!

But interestingly, the dreaded "Al" wires that were involved in that mess seem to have come through with flying colours and for those who remember the complexity of their design and execution they certainly seemed to mark a technical advance. So even the disaster was associated with a significant (and innocent to the problem) advance. And presumably those wires are up there in batches of 330 miles each saving weight in increasing numbers every day.

Topic: RE: Boeing Announces Changes To Wide-body Plans
Username: Swallow
Posted 2009-04-13 12:35:01 and read 4156 times.



Quoting Baroque (Reply 50):
Does that mean the same as placing a forward short leg and then bowling a full length outswinger on off stump?

Yep. The same as a no. 11 batsman at the crease with 10 runs required off 2 balls. Glenn McGrath bowling his last over with 3 slips and two gullies waiting for the inevitable catch [sledging not included]  pray 


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/