Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5634272/

Topic: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-13 02:53:33 and read 44904 times.

It is evident, there seem to be no trend of interest from airlines to even give the B748i a second look. The current preference has gone to the twins and the only quads getting orders is the A380.

Is Boeing just going to allow the B748i to meet a natural death? or there is no life to speak of to begin with since the Lufthansa B748i is not for the books, the number just does not put on any significance at all?

All the rumored potential B748i has just gone to thin air......this is quite alarming unless Boeing could not care less at all then that is another story  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-13 04:11:58 and read 44421 times.

The freighter still has a market, even though the global finances are in the trash can now, it will pick up some day and if they make freighters they can make passenger aircraft. Even though the 777-9X probably will kill the 748i for good.

They should have gone for a re engine on the 747-400F and stayed with that. Hindsight is as always..

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-13 05:00:41 and read 44056 times.

Given that the freighter is still a lifeline for the 7478F but I was referring to the 7478i, there seem to be no effort or a sense of loss for Boeing that all orders on VLA has unfortunately bypassed the 7478i.

Does anyone think that the 7478i is just a spill over of the 7478F program?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-13 05:56:35 and read 43641 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 2):
all orders on VLA has unfortunately bypassed the 7478i

Well, except for the 12 customers that did order it (as compared to 20 that ordered the A380). Hardly what Boeing was hoping for, I'm sure, but hardly *all* orders bypassed it. The difference between the 747-8i and A380 is much more in the number of airframes per order than in the number of orders.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 2):
Does anyone think that the 7478i is just a spill over of the 7478F program?

In hindsight, yes.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: dcann40
Posted 2012-12-13 06:01:20 and read 43547 times.

I echo others' sentiments: as long as there are freighter customers, Boeing can justify continuing the 748i program.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: PillowTester
Posted 2012-12-13 06:19:00 and read 43330 times.

Doesn't Boeing still make passenger 767 variants largely because of the tanker programme keeps the line alive? Freighters and passenger 747s are not made separately are they? What difference does it make if they don't make a passenger model for awhile... there's no need to "shut down the line"

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: IAHFLYR
Posted 2012-12-13 06:24:09 and read 43244 times.

Quoting PillowTester (Reply 5):
Doesn't Boeing still make passenger 767 variants largely because of the tanker programme keeps the line alive?


You are correct. I was at PAE a week ago for factory tour and the 767 line is still open.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: CXB77L
Posted 2012-12-13 06:25:41 and read 43252 times.

Quoting dcann40 (Reply 4):
as long as there are freighter customers, Boeing can justify continuing the 748i program.

  

I agree. The 747-8 is here to stay for quite some time, regardless of whether there are any passenger models being sold. So to answer the question, no, the 747-8i will still be around. As long as there are orders for the freighter (and/or VIP aicraft), the 747-8 line will remain open. It is not dependent on the sales of the passenger model.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: columba
Posted 2012-12-13 06:48:33 and read 42947 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
I bet Lufthansa got a major discount on their 748i just to give the programme some credibility. Those aircraft will probably be converted to freighters soon.

A major airline needs to be seen flying the latest equipment. Passengers will see an airframe they recognise as a vintage 747-400.

Doubtful, LH will fly them for a long time, only a few passengers have a clue what they are flying on anyway  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: 727LOVER
Posted 2012-12-13 06:54:35 and read 42854 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):

Vast majority of pax are NOT a.net nerds-------they have no idea how old an aircraft

@ TPA one day, an old lady was looking down to an aircraft. "OOOOOH, LOOK HOW BIG THAT PLANE IS, IT MUST BE GOING OVERSEAS!"

I chuckled silently------yep, that MD-80 is going overseas!

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: LGWflyer
Posted 2012-12-13 07:09:40 and read 42720 times.

Should Boeing have started thinking about building a newer aircraft i.e the 797 than re-doing an already successful aircraft... As it is successful already I doubt we would have seen airlines swap their current 744's for the 748. The 747 worked brilliantly over the years as we all know, but now with the new times and new rivals the 747 should have stayed as it was, and time to start looking to the future for new designed planes.

Boeing has the right idea building a new aircraft like the 787 rather than another 757/767. The 787 has done quite well so far and I expect it to do great in the future!

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 10):
Vast majority of pax are NOT a.net nerds-------they have no idea how old an aircraft
Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 10):
I chuckled silently------yep, that MD-80 is going overseas!

Haha.  Sure it wasn't an Airbus A747?   

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: SmittyOne
Posted 2012-12-13 07:32:09 and read 41965 times.

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 10):
an old lady

Well, she was just accustomed to DC-3s on the domestic flights  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: readytotaxi
Posted 2012-12-13 07:58:45 and read 41062 times.

Quoting columba (Reply 9):
only a few passengers have a clue what they are flying on anyway

Surley EVERY pax knows what types of aircraft they are flying on, they ALL read the Safety Card.           

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Triple7X
Posted 2012-12-13 08:19:43 and read 40402 times.

I felt like the B747-8i are aircraft designed to fit very 'special' markets, as the B747-8I is somewhat between the twin engine triple 7 and larger A380s as such most airline will rather go for the 777 or A380 instead

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: rbgso
Posted 2012-12-13 08:28:48 and read 40028 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
A major airline needs to be seen flying the latest equipment.

How do then explain the success of DL, who is the posterchild for flying old, and often orphan, aircraft types?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-13 08:33:14 and read 39869 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
I bet Lufthansa got a major discount on their 748i just to give the programme some credibility.

LH has long wanted a larger 747. If anything, they were the ones twisting Boeing's arm to build the 747-8 Intercontinental.


If Boeing was willing to give away 747-8's to secure orders, one would think they'd have more orders, wouldn't you?


I've long been on record as believe the 747-8 program was a mistake, but what's done is done. On the plus side, Boeing has lightened the structure by 2.5 tons and GE is continuing to work to bring the GEnx-2B to spec (or better) and Boeing is working to enable the tail fuel tank. All of this will reduce fuel burn and increase range at high payload weights, which is where the 747-8 has the advantage over the 777-300ER...

...though it's still at a fair disadvantage to the A380-800, which is the real problem, IMO. If you can justify a VLA, the A380-800 is the better VLA.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: JHCRJ700
Posted 2012-12-13 08:37:27 and read 39719 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
I bet Lufthansa got a major discount on their 748i just to give the programme some credibility. Those aircraft will probably be converted to freighters soon.

Do you mean convert their orders? or Actually convert the brand new 748s?

Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 10):
@ TPA one day, an old lady was looking down to an aircraft. "OOOOOH, LOOK HOW BIG THAT PLANE IS, IT MUST BE GOING OVERSEAS!"

I chuckled silently------yep, that MD-80 is going overseas!

LOL! I was down at BWI a few years back and a father was telling his son that every WN737 was a 747. Ordinarily I don't bother, but I informed him that they were indeed 737's and you can tell a 747 by the upper deck and four engines. Needless to say he wasn't too happy about being corrected.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: seabosdca
Posted 2012-12-13 08:38:22 and read 39638 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
Those aircraft will probably be converted to freighters soon.

LH has a history of flying the wings off its aircraft and will do so with its 748s. These are more capable and efficient than their A346, which won't be going away anytime soon either.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: maxpower1954
Posted 2012-12-13 08:38:39 and read 39635 times.

Quoting rbgso (Reply 15):
How do then explain the success of DL, who is the posterchild for flying old, and often orphan, aircraft types?

The DC-9-50, MD-80/90 series and arriving 717s are not "orphans". They are fully supported by Boeing.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: brilondon
Posted 2012-12-13 08:39:52 and read 39643 times.

Quoting Triple7X (Reply 14):
I felt like the B747-8i are aircraft designed to fit very 'special' markets, as the B747-8I is somewhat between the twin engine triple 7 and larger A380s as such most airline will rather go for the 777 or A380 instead

The 747 has been a staple at airports around the world. The A380 is Airbus's counter to the 747 and their answer to the market studies they did when they looked at markets and the forecast demand which did not take into effect the current economic climate which is in the toilet and waiting to be flushed. The 747 for the last 40 years has been queen of the sky and will probably be around for many years to come. The Airbus product is really a great product and if not for the current state of the world economy would probably have done much better than it has. Having said that, the A380 maybe more aircraft then what the airlines really need and due to economic reasons, may never have a need for. If you will, the Ford Edsel of the airline world.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Cargolex
Posted 2012-12-13 08:47:47 and read 39339 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
Those aircraft will probably be converted to freighters soon.

I can say with 100% certainty that they will not. There might come a day when the 747-8i has a conversion program, but that day is very, very far off. Expect LH to fly the 747-8i fleet for at least another 12-18 years, minimum.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
Passengers will see an airframe they recognise as a vintage 747-400.

Passengers see a brand new cabin on a brand new plane, and quite a nice one at that. Well done Lufthansa.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-13 08:50:02 and read 39270 times.

Quoting PillowTester (Reply 5):
Doesn't Boeing still make passenger 767 variants largely because of the tanker programme keeps the line alive?

They still *offer* 767 passenger variants because the line is open and the marginal cost to keep the option is low. They're still actually making passenger variants right now primarily to burn down the very small remaining backlog and to satisfy some orders placed to placate late 787s.

Quoting PillowTester (Reply 5):
Freighters and passenger 747s are not made separately are they?

They come down the same final assembly line and much of the tooling is common. However, there are some significant part differences (primarily in the hump, main deck floor, nose, and interior).

Quoting PillowTester (Reply 5):
What difference does it make if they don't make a passenger model for awhile... there's no need to "shut down the line"

There is cost to maintaining the capability to build the interior...as long as there is some demand it makes sense but they can't maintain 747-8i capability indefinitely without spending money on it.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):

I bet Lufthansa got a major discount on their 748i just to give the programme some credibility. Those aircraft will probably be converted to freighters soon.

Why on earth would they convert them to freighters? Twenty 747-8i's is a *lot* of lift...if LH needed that much freighter capacity, they'd have bought 747-8F's. The business case to convert new -8i's to -8BCF's would be absolutely atrocious.

Quoting JHCRJ700 (Reply 18):
LOL! I was down at BWI a few years back and a father was telling his son that every WN737 was a 747.

I had some interns on a flightline once who looked at a 737 and thought it was a 747. Yes, airplanes look bigger from the ramp, but still...

Tom.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2012-12-13 09:25:15 and read 38130 times.

Ignoring EK, the A380 isn't flying off the shelves either, despite the current rumour of a "significant A380" order being talking about.

The current economy and positioning of airlines has more to do with the lack of orders than either the A380 and B748 programs. This is a significant economic downturn and airlines will have to have much more confidence before committing to large jumps in capacity. I think we are going to see a lot more of airlines taking a piece of other carriers, mergers, and other market rationalization before we see huge leaps in capacity. The cross Atlantic co-ops, potential for cross-pacific co-ops, and other cross border co-ops have to start to shake out before we start to see significant new orders versus just modernization. Too much capacity has killed airlines recently and the shakeout is still being felt during these tough times.

It is also down to whether the Airbus or Boeing estimate of the market size proves true in the short term. Boeing has always estimated the market for VLA substantially lower than Airbus. So while Boeing likely would love more orders, they did the 748i because of their estimate of the market. The F version was always thought to be the sales leader version of the two with the i providing incremental orders.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2012-12-13 09:50:30 and read 37296 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
I bet Lufthansa got a major discount on their 748i just to give the programme some credibility. Those aircraft will probably be converted to freighters soon.

LH was the launch customer for the B-748i. From what everyone seems to think, LH is very pleased with the bigger B-747. It has a premimum service their A-380s don't have. LH flies their B-748s with some 365 seays, yet fly their A-388s with about 525 seats.

LH has options of 20 more B-748s, atop their firm 20. My guess is some of these options will be exercised.

Ther have been some 41 firm B-748i orders, LH = 20, KE = 5, VIP/BBJ = 9, W3 = 2, and CA = 5. UN has a LOI for 4 B-748Is, and there are still another 15 -8Is from a UFO from the PAS in 2011.

I would not be surprized for B-747-8i orders from BA, AF, VS, UA, QF, and DL sometime in the future.

There is wide spectulation the B-748i will be selected for the next Air Force 1, replacing two B-742s with 3 B-748s.

Do you think EK got a major discount for the 90 strong A-388 orders?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Luxair747SP
Posted 2012-12-13 10:06:01 and read 36848 times.

With more and more post going to be off-topic, can we please all go back to the topic the poster asked about?

Thanks and Rgds,

Johannes/Luxair747SP

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Wilco737
Posted 2012-12-13 10:32:14 and read 38391 times.

I just flew the 748i today. From the pilots perspective it is a great airplane.

Well, passenger indeed often doesn't know how old an airplane is. Maybe they see new seats, but most imporant for the most is: do I have a proper seat and are we on time?  

LH is quite happy with the 748i so far. Even without the stab tank (which we hardly ever need anyway) it performs well. Passengers are happy with the new cabin layout in C and F class. Good feedback so far.

wilco737
  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: tp1040
Posted 2012-12-13 10:47:16 and read 36892 times.

Aren't there already a number of discussions on this?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: tugger
Posted 2012-12-13 10:52:59 and read 37557 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Thread starter):
Is Boeing just going to allow the B748i to meet a natural death? or there is no life to speak of to begin with since the Lufthansa B748i is not for the books, the number just does not put on any significance at all?

All the rumored potential B748i has just gone to thin air......this is quite alarming unless Boeing could not care less at all then that is another story

To answer simply and completely, yes Boeing will allow the 747-8i to meet a natural death, but that is going to likely be many years off. This is because as many have noted the -8i does not need to be ordered to survive as long as the 8F is in demand. The -8i can slot in fairly easily when needed. So no, no the -8i potential has not gone into thin air, it can still be a sound option for airlines if needed.

And don't forget one of the most important elements about having the -8i around is that it helps Boeing by giving some small level of competition for the A380 which in effect puts a cap on the prices that Airbus can charge for the A380 (basically it has to be price competitive with the -8i even with its well know lower operating costs etc.).

Tugg

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: N14AZ
Posted 2012-12-13 10:55:20 and read 37364 times.

@ airlinebuilder: just one or two weeks ago we had a very similar if not identical thread. I am sure you still can find it if you look at page 2 or 3 of the civil aviation forum.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 3):
Well, except for the 12 customers that did order it (as compared to 20 that ordered the A380)

Well, 12 to 20 doesn't sound that bad. But as presented by KC135TopBoom it's 4 commercial airlines only compared to 19 commercial airlines for the A 380.

Quoting Wilco737 (Reply 25):
I just flew the 748i today.

   And you dare to post this here! Making us all jealous. I just had a day in the office today...

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: cosmofly
Posted 2012-12-13 11:10:55 and read 36832 times.

With the talk of 77X and an improving A388, IMHO the probability of finding a good business case to build a 748i fleet will be very low.

If the economy is cloudy, the 77X looks like a safer bet. When the economy looks positive, it will be easier to justify the A388s.

Bottom line, it is much easier for airlines to say goodbye to 748i.

Given that it is such a niche, I also wonder if financing/leasing the 748i will carry a premium cost, other than thru B of course.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ER757
Posted 2012-12-13 12:20:40 and read 34811 times.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 23):
I would not be surprized for B-747-8i orders from BA, AF, VS, UA, QF, and DL sometime in the future.

With the possible exception of DL, I sure would be surprised.


Quoting babybus (Reply 8):
I bet Lufthansa got a major discount on their 748i just to give the programme some credibility. Those aircraft will probably be converted to freighters soon.

No chance - LH gave up flying the 747F years ago and sees no need to bring it back.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-13 12:35:12 and read 34388 times.

Cost per seat of the 748i was close to the 77W I read, it can´t be that crappy? What it offer is space, way above the 777, 360 seats in a 748i is not as cramped as 360 seats on the 77W. Sure it has a lot more OEW to carry however.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2012-12-13 12:45:06 and read 33969 times.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 28):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 3):Well, except for the 12 customers that did order it (as compared to 20 that ordered the A380)
Well, 12 to 20 doesn't sound that bad. But as presented by KC135TopBoom it's 4 commercial airlines only compared to 19 commercial airlines for the A 380.

I did not list the freight airlines who ordered the B-747-8F, only the airlines that ordered the "I" model.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 22):
LH has options of 20 more B-748s, atop their firm 20. My guess is some of these options will be exercised.

Ther have been some 41 firm B-748i orders, LH = 20, KE = 5, VIP/BBJ = 9, W3 = 2, and CA = 5. UN has a LOI for 4 B-748Is, and there are still another 15 -8Is from a UFO from the PAS in 2011.

I could go ad list the freight airlines, too. But we all know who they are.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: danielkandi
Posted 2012-12-13 12:59:34 and read 33540 times.

PEOPLE stopped caring. Thats the truth. Thats why no one in masses demand a certain brand of aircraft anymore. I wish people would complain to airlines an yell that they wanted this 748 !

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: yyz717
Posted 2012-12-13 13:34:02 and read 32470 times.

Let's remember that a large number of 744 and 744F aircraft remain in service, most of which will need replacing increasingly as the decade progresses. So the 748i/F becomes increasingly attractive as this massive 744 fleet continues to age. It's reasonable/expected/logical that the 748i/F will replace a good portion of these. Yes, orders are light right now but the program could still see much success.

Having said this, Boeing does need 1 or 2 more "marquee" 748i customers on board soon to "soothe" the market place.

Any sudden increase in fuel prices and/or more A380 mx issues could also help.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-13 15:11:22 and read 30262 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 31):
Cost per seat of the 748i was close to the 77W I read, it can´t be that crappy?

I'd like to know what the trip costs comparisons are like - not just to the 77W, but also the A388.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: NWADTWE16
Posted 2012-12-13 16:42:16 and read 28488 times.

Why did Boeing develop this 748-I without a stretch upper deck? Ive always wondered..it makes it look like an old model, and being so long its just not pretty on the eyes...

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: 7BOEING7
Posted 2012-12-13 16:52:02 and read 28227 times.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 36):
Why did Boeing develop this 748-I without a stretch upper deck? Ive always wondered..it makes it look like an old model, and being so long its just not pretty on the eyes...

Then it would be just another boring airplane--eye of the beholder.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: denverdanny
Posted 2012-12-13 16:59:10 and read 28138 times.

If it cut into airbus' profit margin on the a380 while selling some frames on the side, seems like it was a good idea to me. looks cool, so we'd bereft without another model to see and ride on. who knows what the future will hold for it, especially if the economy recovers and booms, though that seems unlikely in the immediate future. there's so many topics on this.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: kanban
Posted 2012-12-13 17:25:00 and read 27701 times.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 36):
Why did Boeing develop this 748-I without a stretch upper deck? Ive always wondered..it makes it look like an old model, and being so long its just not pretty on the eyes...

take another look, the 8i has a stretched upper. or are you questioning why it doesn't run to the tail? now that would be ugly.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-13 17:27:07 and read 27716 times.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 36):
Why did Boeing develop this 748-I without a stretch upper deck?

The upper deck was stretched 4.1m compared to previous models.

The upper deck was not stretched the length of the fuselage because it likely would have required extensive structural rework and likely would have required recertification of the airframe.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-13 17:28:23 and read 27726 times.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 28):
Quoting Wilco737 (Reply 25):
I just flew the 748i today.

   And you dare to post this here! Making us all jealous. I just had a day in the office today...

So did Wilco737...his office just has a better view than ours.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 36):
Why did Boeing develop this 748-I without a stretch upper deck?

The 747-8i does have a stretched upper deck...that's one of the differences between the -8F and the -8i.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: MD-90
Posted 2012-12-13 17:34:31 and read 27446 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):

The upper deck was not stretched the length of the fuselage because it likely would have required extensive structural rework and likely would have required recertification of the airframe.

And probably another emergency exit door.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: NWADTWE16
Posted 2012-12-13 17:58:45 and read 27048 times.

I definetely was not referring to an extended deck to the tail..upon second glance at LH 747 it clearly is beautifully extended. I guess i just saw so many of the cargo and BBJ pics recently i forgot it was extended in the passenger/Commerical airline version. I wonder why the BBJ would not opt for fully extended..i understand cargo clearly being weight and its unnescasary...

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: seabosdca
Posted 2012-12-13 18:14:02 and read 26896 times.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 43):
I guess i just saw so many of the cargo and BBJ pics recently i forgot it was extended in the passenger/Commerical airline version.

All of the 748 BBJ pics I've seen so far show the normal passenger 748 upper deck... here are four separate BBJ frames with it.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Lars Hentschel
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Royal S King


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Manny Gonzalez - Thrust Images
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Royal S King

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: NWADTWE16
Posted 2012-12-13 19:37:22 and read 25604 times.

Clearly im losing my mind then sorry  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: flightsimer
Posted 2012-12-13 20:56:00 and read 24607 times.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 45):

Remember, the BBJs won't be flying with any meaningful cargo. I'm sure the cargo holds can be used as additional living space as it is done with both VC-25s. Plus the BBjs have the skyloft as well, which give you more living space. However, I believe the skyloft can only be used between takeoff and landing. At least that was what was going to happen with commercial operators with the skyloft.

Even with the smaller floor plan, the 747BBJ has outsold the A380BJ 9:1, which will eventually go to 12:1 with the VC-25 replacements.

On a different note, remember, Boeing has turned down orders for the 747-8i because the airlines wanted them too cheaply. Given some time, Boeing might be able to go back and still get those orders possibly if the airlines have not orders anything else.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2012-12-13 21:06:53 and read 24595 times.

Quoting Wilco737 (Reply 25):

I just flew the 748i today. From the pilots perspective it is a great airplane.

Go ahead. Rub it in.  

Wilco, I've heard that the 747 cockpit in general is noisy. Is that the case on the -8?

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 41):
So did Wilco737...his office just has a better view than ours.

Yes, but most of us don't have thrust levers on our desk.  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: zippyjet
Posted 2012-12-13 21:16:09 and read 24374 times.

Quoting LGWflyer (Reply 10):
Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 10):
Vast majority of pax are NOT a.net nerds-------they have no idea how old an aircraft
Quoting 727LOVER (Reply 10):
I chuckled silently------yep, that MD-80 is going overseas!

Haha. Sure it wasn't an Airbus A747

No, I believe that was a Lockheed Constellation DC-7!   

Regarding the 747-8, I guess Boeing was trying to evolve the Baluga jumbo like with the 737. This way, Boeing could fill the gap until they roll out their Blended Wing Hypersonic 800 series bird that does to commercial aviation like the 707 did back in the late 50's. One can hope and dream.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: 7BOEING7
Posted 2012-12-13 21:16:43 and read 24417 times.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 36):
Why did Boeing develop this 748-I without a stretch upper deck? Ive always wondered..it makes it look like an old model, and being so long its just not pretty on the eyes...

I'll rephrase my reply--the 747-8F is almost as ugly as the Armstrong Whitworth Argosy, but the 747-8I is a thing of true beauty.

Quoting denverdanny (Reply 38):
If it cut into airbus' profit margin on the a380 while selling some frames on the side

From the beginning I as well as many of the people I worked with felt that this was part of the equation--it was a "place keeper" -- it was put in "place" to "keep" AB from running away with the market and the A380 becoming their cash cow as the 747 was at Boeing. That combined with the large quantity of 744's out there that will need replacement--might be a few $$$ to be had.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Wilco737
Posted 2012-12-13 22:43:37 and read 23604 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 47):
Wilco, I've heard that the 747 cockpit in general is noisy. Is that the case on the -8?

The -400 is pretty loud up there indeed. You cannot sit there without the headphones on. The -8i is a little quiter as the engines are quite far away and you barely hear them, but the wind noise is still there, so still pretty lound and still sitting there with the headphones on the whole flight - noise cancelling headphones.

wilco737
  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: n729pa
Posted 2012-12-14 00:10:22 and read 22539 times.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 22):
Ignoring EK, the A380 isn't flying off the shelves either, despite the current rumour of a "significant A380" order being talking about.

Just like the B747 did circa in the mid 1970s. Sales picked up from 1979/80 onwards and we started to see two things new orders from a fair number of the launch customers and perhaps more significantly, orders from new customers such as TG, SQ, CX, SV, NH, NZ etc . So time will tell, whether that may also mean that the 748 will pick up some more orders too, we'll have to wait and see.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-14 00:12:16 and read 22313 times.

I believe (marketing side) Boeing missed out on what Airbus was able to do with the A380 in particular through EK to create a somehow atmosphere of a "must have for an airline" jumpstarting a bandwagon

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-14 01:47:25 and read 21238 times.

Perhaps the B748i will just settle to be the "then" B743 story, there was not much sale and eventually super ceded by the B744. Meaning, the only redemption for the B748i is when Boeing can come up with a B74XX that can eclipse the former. Perhaps a bigger frame longer range and yes a bigger cargo volume to strike out the conflict with the T7 family.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Rara
Posted 2012-12-14 03:06:24 and read 20331 times.

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 34):
Any sudden increase in fuel prices

Wouldn't a decrease of fuel prices be much better for the 748i? I could imagine that an increase of fuel prices would favour the twins and perhaps the A380, while a decrease could favour the 748.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: FlyCaledonian
Posted 2012-12-14 03:25:47 and read 20270 times.

If I recall, the 747-8i isn't available as a combi is it? If it were I wonder if KL would have ordered some by now to replace someof its 747-400 combis.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2012-12-14 04:06:49 and read 20156 times.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 55):
If I recall, the 747-8i isn't available as a combi is it?

Correct. Certification requirements makes it impossible to load main-deck cargo behind a passenger compartment. Airbus could, theoretically, make an A380 combi with passengers on the upper-deck and cargo on the main-deck. But I suspect the market for such a product is virtually non-existent.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-14 04:11:33 and read 20162 times.

I have a question, why is the Boeing 748i not being taken on a tour like the industrious people at Airbus. The A380 for example is now in Hong Kong flew in from Hawaii. The 748i people are literally just taking thing seated down, waiting for their meals to be served on a silver platter......not happening at all!

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-12-14 06:12:33 and read 19818 times.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 49):
From the beginning I as well as many of the people I worked with felt that this was part of the equation--it was a "place keeper" -- it was put in "place" to "keep" AB from running away with the market and the A380 becoming their cash cow as the 747 was at Boeing. That combined with the large quantity of 744's out there that will need replacement--might be a few $$$ to be had.

Right. A lot of the decisions were made in the 2004/5 time frame, when the economy was still solid and when the 787s issues weren't known. Unfortunately, reality has set in on both fronts, and the 747-8 program itself didn't track to plan either, partially due to resources shifting back and forth between 747 and 787. I think at the time of their decisions the A380F was still an on-going program as well.

On top of this, I imagine Boeing thought it'd get at least one more big customer to replace 744s with 748Is, probably BA or QF. Neither will happen, IMHO. Add to this a slump in world air cargo and you end up with a disappointing program.

It's interesting to ponder if Boeing had a 'do over' and knew what we knew now about the 787 and the economy, would they have tried to do both 787 and 747-8? We'll never know, but I suspect with crystal clear hind sight they'd not have done the 747-8, all things considered, even if that meant trying to sell 744 to the freighter market to this day. I think they'd have used the engineering and production resources on the 787 and 777 instead.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-14 06:28:42 and read 19846 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 47):
Wilco, I've heard that the 747 cockpit in general is noisy. Is that the case on the -8?

It's noisy...less engine noise than the -400 but more ECS noise. When I flew the 747-8 (I did the F, never the i), I swapped out my Telex 650 for Bose noise-cancelling headphones. The poor guys on the main deck basically had to have noise-cancellers (with no interior and no cargo, it's an echo chamber).

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 57):
I have a question, why is the Boeing 748i not being taken on a tour like the industrious people at Airbus.

To do a sales tour, you need a free airframe. Airbus has some of the original A380's still in their fleet, much as Boeing does with the 787 (hence why ZA003 did the Dreamtour). All of the 747-8i's have owners who want them so there isn't a free 747-8i sitting around to take on tour.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-14 07:19:05 and read 19698 times.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 49):
From the beginning I as well as many of the people I worked with felt that this was part of the equation--it was a "place keeper" -- it was put in "place" to "keep" AB from running away with the market and the A380 becoming their cash cow as the 747 was at Boeing. That combined with the large quantity of 744's out there that will need replacement--might be a few $$$ to be had.

Such a plan would have been easier with the 747-400 since it was already paid for.

Also, if this was the real goal of the 747-8 program, why wait until 2005? They should have launched the 747X and 747X Stretch in 2001 (LH was ready to buy those, as well) so as to bleed Airbus on those initial 50 launch orders.

The true reason such a plan cannot work is the 777-300ER. If Boeing discounts a 747-8 too deeply to try and bleed Airbus on A380 sales they end up impacting the Average Sales Price of the 777-300ER.




Quoting B777LRF (Reply 56):
Certification requirements makes it impossible to load main-deck cargo behind a passenger compartment.

Certification requirements do allow new combi aircraft to be built, however they do not allow a carrier to adjust the ratios of passengers and cargo to meet per flight demand and the extra infrastructure make such platforms economically unviable.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: pnwtraveler
Posted 2012-12-14 07:39:08 and read 19569 times.

When threads like this show up so frequently when a simple search would show dozens of them, as a marketer I get very suspicious. Now no aircraft analyst worth their salt is gonna pay two wits attention to Anet when they are evaluating an airframe. However, you can influence a small amount of the public, the Anet community. And poor quality journalists have been known to be influenced by blogs rather than pure research. If we were talking a normal product, I would immediately assume someone is a paid blogger with the task of slogging the competition at every turn. But with an aircraft, hmmmmm?

Thankfully airlines and aircraft manufacturers have a longer viewpoint than some on Anet. For a company at this stage to think their product was dead. Boeing and the 748i for example, they would have idiots in their head office. The same with Airbus and the A380. Will their be 500 A380's eventually ordered and built? Will their be 500 748i and 748F built? Time will tell but the story for either is far from being finished being written.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: slider
Posted 2012-12-14 08:14:25 and read 19416 times.

What few people haven't really cited in their opinions or analysis of this is the matter of TIMING.

Timing is everything, as they say. And Boeing hit the worst possible timing in the life cycle of aircraft, economies, etc. They went with the 748i as a response to the A380, firstly.

But beyond that, the upgauge of that from existing 744s isn't ready to happen yet--some of those first delivery 744s were in (someone please verify here for me, just going from memory) 1989 or so, and depending on cycles and such (given long stage lengths, even older widebodies won't have the high cycles as narrowbodies obviously), they may not be at replacement age yet.

Also, the 777 program has legs. The -300 is a twin engine, can fit much of the mission profile that some 747 routes currently have, and Boeing has to be cognizant to not cannibalize themselves in such a way.

I think you may see carriers start to entertain it on their larger markets and perhaps an airline like UA as 747 replacements ultimately, we'll see. Pacific carriers took a high number of deliveries over the past decade plus as well, so the 748i is perhaps the right plane but at a wrong time and place for now.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: SQ773
Posted 2012-12-14 08:20:50 and read 19430 times.

I would not say good bye to the 748i so fast.
Remember the A330 ? It was a sleeping beauty for years. Look now the 333 and the 332..

Let´s wait the LH feedback

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-12-14 09:13:19 and read 19238 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 60):
Also, if this was the real goal of the 747-8 program, why wait until 2005? They should have launched the 747X and 747X Stretch in 2001 (LH was ready to buy those, as well) so as to bleed Airbus on those initial 50 launch orders.

Those would have been stretches with "wings based on 777" but not sure what engines would have been available in that time frame to make it worth bringing it to market.

Quoting slider (Reply 65):
Also, the 777 program has legs. The -300 is a twin engine, can fit much of the mission profile that some 747 routes currently have, and Boeing has to be cognizant to not cannibalize themselves in such a way.

Given the first 77W was delivered in April 2004, it was very much a known quantity when Boeing made the decision to go forward with the -8i.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2012-12-14 09:21:57 and read 19192 times.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 22):
The F version was always thought to be the sales leader version of the two with the i providing incremental orders.

That's not what Boeing was saying at the time. They were expecting 2/3 or so of the orders to be -8i's. I suspect that -8F orders have been below what they were expecting, and so on the whole it has been a disappointment. But the big culprit, as others have mentioned, is the 777. I suspect that were it not for the 777F, there would be more -8F orders. Oh, well, I'd love to see more 747's flying, but airlines have to buy what will work best for them. The 747 is caught between the 777 and the A380, and I see little chance for a lot of orders.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-14 09:22:27 and read 19179 times.

Quoting NWADTWE16 (Reply 43):
I definetely was not referring to an extended deck to the tail..upon second glance at LH 747 it clearly is beautifully extended. I guess i just saw so many of the cargo and BBJ pics recently i forgot it was extended in the passenger/Commerical airline version. I wonder why the BBJ would not opt for fully extended..i understand cargo clearly being weight and its unnescasary...

BBJ 748s are the passenger version. There is no option of the short upper deck. That's for the freighter only.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: art
Posted 2012-12-14 09:23:57 and read 19184 times.

Quoting dcann40 (Reply 4):
I echo others' sentiments: as long as there are freighter customers, Boeing can justify continuing the 748i program

Even if orders (and deliveries) of 748i become extremely infrequent, I can see that the Boeing assembly line could handle such a situation. But how does that work for component suppliers?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Areopagus
Posted 2012-12-14 09:50:50 and read 19062 times.

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 48):
Quoting LGWflyer (Reply 10):
Haha. Sure it wasn't an Airbus A747

No, I believe that was a Lockheed Constellation DC-7!

Ah, well, my BIL once insisted to me that he had flown back from Spain on a B-1 Backfire airliner.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: 777STL
Posted 2012-12-14 09:51:25 and read 19091 times.

Quoting slider (Reply 65):
But beyond that, the upgauge of that from existing 744s isn't ready to happen yet--some of those first delivery 744s were in (someone please verify here for me, just going from memory) 1989 or so, and depending on cycles and such (given long stage lengths, even older widebodies won't have the high cycles as narrowbodies obviously), they may not be at replacement age yet.

The issue is more with the economics of the 744 than it is the age/cycles of older build aircraft. QF, SQ, JL, NZ and several other airlines are retiring 744s because they just aren't economical anymore with the ever increasing price of jet fuel. Not when a 77W or a 380 can perform the same mission much more economically, or in the case of the 380, as economically with increased payload.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ncfc99
Posted 2012-12-14 10:49:51 and read 18915 times.

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 22):
The F version was always thought to be the sales leader version of the two with the i providing incremental orders.

Boeing planned the ratio to be about 2:1 in favour of the 748i, IIRC. Various reasons have made that planned assumption incorrect. Again, we now have the wonderful benefit of hindsight.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 23):
LH was the launch customer for the B-748i. From what everyone seems to think, LH is very pleased with the bigger B-747. It has a premimum service their A-380s don't have. LH flies their B-748s with some 365 seays, yet fly their A-388s with about 525 seats.

The way you have written this reply implies that the 748 has a higher class of service than the 388, is this true? I would agree the 748 has a higher ratio of first/business seats to economy seats, but as far as I know, they are the same or very similar first/business class products. Very happy to be corrected on this point, I come to this site to learn afterall.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 23):
BA, AF, VS, UA, QF

As stated above, an order from these airlines would be a big surprise, to me anyway. An order for DL wouldn't, and I would like to see a DL 748 aswell.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 23):
There is wide spectulation the B-748i will be selected for the next Air Force 1, replacing two B-742s with 3 B-748s.

I would be greatly surprised if it wasn't.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: bmacleod
Posted 2012-12-14 10:59:15 and read 18940 times.

Does the President really need a 747? Wasn't the VC-25 built for a 25-30 year operational period? That's put it operating until around 2020, by that time Boeing's Y-3 will be a better fit....

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2012-12-14 11:22:46 and read 18897 times.

Quoting ncfc99 (Reply 73):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 23):
There is wide spectulation the B-748i will be selected for the next Air Force 1, replacing two B-742s with 3 B-748s.

I would be greatly surprised if it wasn't.
Quoting bmacleod (Reply 74):
Does the President really need a 747? Wasn't the VC-25 built for a 25-30 year operational period? That's put it operating until around 2020, by that time Boeing's Y-3 will be a better fit....

If the presidential aircraft get replaced in the foreseeable future (i.e. before about 2025) they will be replaced with 748's, period. Airbus has declined to quote, and it is likely there would be a massive protest about buying a "foreign" plane for AF1. With all of the ancillary personnel and communications equipment necessary when the President travels, I can see the need for the largest aircraft they can get. Plus, even though statistics say it is unnecessary, I suspect that the AF and Secret Service would prefer four engines. That does not leave many options. As to age, I do not consider it relevant at all. Having owned an aircraft built in 1962 for over 10 years, and having managed the local airport for two years and witnessed how my plane had far fewer problems than many much newer planes, I have concluded that aircraft calendar age is immaterial. It is all a question of maintenance and usage; just look at the B-52 fleet that is currently being flown by the grandsons of the original pilots. Considering how meticulously maintained the VC-25's are, and how little they get used compared to the commercial fleet, they could be flying the President in 2125 very easily. But the AF wants shiny new toys, and so they are making up stories about how hard it is to get parts for the 742. My heart bleeds for them (and the world's smallest violin is playing away.)      

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-14 15:09:48 and read 18399 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 67):
Those would have been stretches with "wings based on 777" but not sure what engines would have been available in that time frame to make it worth bringing it to market.

But if the goal was to cost Airbus money on A380 orders, it didn't matter how "good" the 747X and 747X Stretch would have been as Boeing would not have expected to sell them anymore than they would have expected to sell the 747-8.  
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 68):
That's not what Boeing was saying at the time. They were expecting 2/3 or so of the orders to be -8i's. I suspect that -8F orders have been below what they were expecting, and so on the whole it has been a disappointment.

While it is true Boeing originally expected the passenger model to be the bulk of sales (and likely launched the program on the assumption they would sell hundreds of Intercontinentals), once the program was launched and only the freighter model was securing orders, Boeing did stop development of the passenger model until Lufthansa placed their order.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: travelhound
Posted 2012-12-14 21:31:17 and read 17866 times.

Quoting 777STL (Reply 72):
The issue is more with the economics of the 744 than it is the age/cycles of older build aircraft. QF, SQ, JL, NZ and several other airlines are retiring 744s because they just aren't economical anymore with the ever increasing price of jet fuel. Not when a 77W or a 380 can perform the same mission much more economically, or in the case of the 380, as economically with increased payload.

I think the fuel efficiency claims of the A380 over the 747-8 is somewhat exaggerated.

Lufthansa claim their A380's deliver 3.4l/100 klm where as the 748i deliver 3.8l/100 klm. Using these numbers and based upon six 6000nm flights per week for fifty weeks of the year the 748i costs approximately $12,000.00 per year more per seat on fuel when compared to the A380. Their 748i's proportionately have a higher number of premium seats so this number is actually less.

The biggest advantage is up front purchase price. Using the manufacturers list prices less 40% the A380 costs 11% more to purchase over the 748i. In Lufthansa's seat configuration the A380 has 45% more seats.

In other words the 748i costs $582,431 per seat to purchase where as the A380 costs $444,753 per seat to purchase. Just for further comparison and using CX seat count of 297 seats the 777-300ER costs $668,182 per seat to purchase.

If we throw in financing the A380 has an effective operating cost per seat advantage of 14% with fuel efficiency representing approximately one third and purchasing price representing two thirds.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: flyingclrs727
Posted 2012-12-14 22:21:42 and read 17710 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 53):
Perhaps the B748i will just settle to be the "then" B743 story,

The 743 did its job to keep the 747 line moving while Boeing developed the 744.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: worldrider
Posted 2012-12-14 22:46:00 and read 17677 times.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 77):
The biggest advantage is up front purchase price. Using the manufacturers list prices less 40% the A380 costs 11% more to purchase over the 748i. In Lufthansa's seat configuration the A380 has 45% more seats.

do you really think LH didnt a a sweet price for the 748i? as a much needed launch costumer..?

Quoting travelhound (Reply 77):

Lufthansa claim their A380's deliver 3.4l/100 klm where as the 748i deliver 3.8l/100 klm. Using these numbers and based upon six 6000nm flights per week for fifty weeks of the year the 748i costs approximately $12,000.00 per year more per seat on fuel when compared to the A380. Their 748i's proportionately have a higher number of premium seats so this number is actually less.

and don't you think LH hasn't taken into account the higher proportion of premium seats on the 748I for their calculations, seriously?
come on, LH would neglect the facts..would they?  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: CXfirst
Posted 2012-12-14 22:59:31 and read 17664 times.

Quoting LGWflyer (Reply 10):
Haha.  Sure it wasn't an Airbus A747?

Reminds me of what a classmate presented in a economics class I was in. Her project was on the monopolistic market of aircraft producers and thought Airbus was a model built by Boeing. *Facepalm*

-CXfirst

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: travelhound
Posted 2012-12-14 23:11:22 and read 17602 times.

Quoting worldrider (Reply 79):

I'm not arguing against the 748i or Lufthansa. I am just trying to point out there are multiple aspects to an aircraft's economics with fuel efficiency being one of them.

If we looked at the revenue side of the equation we would probably get a different picture again.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: 747classic
Posted 2012-12-14 23:53:00 and read 17565 times.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 55):
If I recall, the 747-8i isn't available as a combi is it? If it were I wonder if KL would have ordered some by now to replace someof its 747-400 combis.
Quoting B777LRF (Reply 56):
Correct. Certification requirements makes it impossible to load main-deck cargo behind a passenger compartment. Airbus could, theoretically, make an A380 combi with passengers on the upper-deck and cargo on the main-deck. But I suspect the market for such a product is virtually non-existent.

This statement is NOT true, it's one of the A-net myths.

A 747-8I-combi could be certified today, but would probably need a redesigned (fixed) partition wall between the main-deck cargo deck and the passenger compartment. See also the certification effort for the 757 combi by precision conversions.

The main-deck (dangerous) cargo would have the same restrictions as the lower deck cargo carried in passenger aircraft.

AFAIK in the past the fleet development department of KL has considered the 747-8 combi, but the minimum required order quantity (to spread the certification costs) was to large for them. (IIRC 15-20 aircraft minimum order).

But the decision not to proceed with the 748-combi was taken with a different market outlook and it didn't went unnoticed that the KL 744-combi fleet performs excellent in the present extreme difficult cargo-passenger market , resulting that KL still performs HMV's (sadly not in house anymore) on the 744 fleet, when due.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-15 06:33:31 and read 17156 times.

Quoting worldrider (Reply 76):
do you really think LH didnt a a sweet price for the 748i? as a much needed launch costumer..?

Do you really think LH didn't get a sweet price for the A380-800 as a much needed launch customer?  



As to Lufthansa's reported fuel burn differences per seat between the A380-800 and 747-8, as travelhound noted, the 747-8 is a "premium heavy" configuration so the higher revenues cover the higher fuel bill.

Before settling on the final 362-seat configuration, LH considered a 405-seat configuration with a fuel burn rate of 3.5l per 100 passenger kilometers and a 420-seat configuration that would have matched the 3.4l/100km fuel burn of the 525-seat A380-800.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: neutrino
Posted 2012-12-15 09:52:47 and read 16902 times.

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 48):
Haha. Sure it wasn't an Airbus A747

No, I believe that was a Lockheed Constellation DC-7!

It could be a Comac Concorde  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-16 01:57:57 and read 16344 times.

Its not age for the presidents planes, its availability of parts that will force the change to a newer model. With time an older frame gets more expensive and harder to keep up with parts. Engines and electronics etc

And they wont scrap these frames, they will probably end up for the USAF in some role or another.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-16 11:14:42 and read 15895 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
I'd like to know what the trip costs comparisons are like - not just to the 77W, but also the A388.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 80):
Before settling on the final 362-seat configuration, LH considered a 405-seat configuration with a fuel burn rate of 3.5l per 100 passenger kilometers and a 420-seat configuration that would have matched the 3.4l/100km fuel burn of the 525-seat A380-800.

I would also like to understand why the 748i is not selling better, I suspect it is mostly a B problem but would like to have that confirmed. What one can do to avoid the seating debate one can compare the fuel burn per flown effective m2 of the frames and then view 1m2 = 1 pax and seat. That gives a fair fuel cost burn per transported item, what one would like to add would be engine overhaul cost per flown m2 as well as this varies between and 4 holer and a twin.

Here first the fuel burn per effective m2:
The real effective areas of A380 and 748i was nicely calculated by signature OV-099 at Leeham, he had 748i at 415m2 and 380 at 545m2. The 77W I get to 338m2 (including tapered areas fore and aft). I then compensated the OEW of all frames for this reduced seating (1 pax per m2, a non seat = -63kg). This gives the following MTOW/OEW: 380 575t/279t, 748i 548t/213t and 77W 352t/166t. All are as if delivered 2014 (ie 748i has PIP and 5000lb lower OEW). With the given seating all are true 8000nm frames (the A380 8100nm), thus I run on them on this ESAD. The fuel burned per 1000nm and m2 is then: A380 50.6kg, 748i 52.4kg and 77W 52.3kg.

Conclusion is they are all very similar in fuel burn with the slightest advantage for A380 (+3.4%) when it is full.

From a thread by Oldaeroguy in TechOps I copy: http://69.64.153.208/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/308929

" From some work I once did for the 773ER, I believe it's operating costs and their approximate relative weights are as follows:
Fuel 60%
Flight Crew 12%
Cabin Crew 11%
Airframe Maint 5%
Engine Maint 3%
Landing Fee 4%
Control & Comm 3%
Ground Handling 2%
Total 100%
"
So if fuel is 60% or thereabouts we have captured the most important parameter, now engine maintenance is higher for a 4 holer then a twin, but it can only be max 5-6% of the operating costs, thus 1-3% higher cost item.

I can therefore only find that the 748i is very close to the A380 or identical for many parameters and that the engine deficit is in the order of 1-3% vs a 77W (not vs a A380), the total deficit is in the order of 2% (0.6*3.4%). For routes that can not quite fill the A380 the 748i should be a no brainer. I therefore think the biggest problem for the 748i is the 777 (especially with it's cargo upside) and not the A380 and that the early 777X discussion has not helped. All airliners with 777 in their fleets will now wait until B put down the foot on he -9X before deciding anything with re 748i, it is e.g. to be noted that LH is not a 777 operator.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: RayChuang
Posted 2012-12-16 12:19:43 and read 15780 times.

I think one airline could save the 747-8I production line: Cathay Pacific (CX). If Airbus cannot guarantee the current-production A380-800 can fly on a full pax/cargo load year-round westbound between LAX and HKG, then CX may seriously look at buying the 747-8I as part of the 747-400 fleet replacement---possibly as many as 15 airframes sold. They will be primarily used on HKG to SFO, LAX, YVR, maybe YYZ with some pax/cargo limitations and LHR.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-16 12:36:58 and read 15715 times.

The reason I am interested in the trip costs of the 747-8 compared to the A380-800 is that Boeing's head of the 747 program has stated that the 747-8 should appeal to 777-300ER operators who consistently see 100% load factors year-round since it can seat more folks, increasing revenues per trip.

However, if the trip costs between a 747-8 and an A380-800 are close, then an operator might as well chose the A380-800 because even if they can't consistently fill it, when they can they'll make more money than they would with a 747-8. And as the A380-800 offers almost 25% more floor space than the 747-8 (1) , that's a significant number of extra passengers to generate revenue from above and beyond what you would get from a full 747-8.

LH is a perfect example of this. Their A380-800 and 747-8 have the same number of First Class seats and effectively the same number of Business Class seats. However, the A380-800 offers 158 more Economy seats. So the A380-800 offers 45% more (mostly Economy) seats, but I am quite confident in believing that the trip costs are not 45% more. Even if the A380-800's trip costs were 20% more (2) , the A380-800 would break even with just 72 more Economy passengers (and if they sold those six extra Business Class seats, they'd probably need less than 50 additional Economy sales).

If I was Boeing, I'd do everything to make sure that India continues to deny foreign airlines the ability to fly the A380-800 into and out of the country as that may be the only situation where the 747-8 has a real chance to sell.  


(1) - Boeing gives the floor space of the 747-8 as 445m2 and Airbus gives the floorspace of the A380-800 as 600m2.
(2) - Boeing claims a 21% lower trip cost, but that assumes the 747-8 is in a 465-seat Boeing OEM three-class configuration which would never be used by any non-charter airline.




Quoting RayChuang (Reply 84):
If Airbus cannot guarantee the current-production A380-800 can fly on a full pax/cargo load year-round westbound between LAX and HKG, then CX may seriously look at buying the 747-8I as part of the 747-400 fleet replacement---possibly as many as 15 airframes sold.

The trick is, right now the range of the A380-800 is some 10% better than the 747-8 at MZFW and with the latest TOW boosts coming down the line, that advantage will probably increase (though bringing the GEnx engines to spec and adding the tail fuel tank will help with range). So at similar configuration densities, the A380-800 should have longer legs than the 747-8.

The only real advantage of the 747-8 that I see for CX is that they already have a decent fleet of 747-8Fs to help spread maintenance and spares costs over.

[Edited 2012-12-16 12:42:10]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: travelhound
Posted 2012-12-16 13:00:38 and read 15569 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 83):
I would also like to understand why the 748i is not selling better,

I suspect it has something to do with the success of the 777 and the price premium it commands in the market place.

As per Boeing's website the 777 specified as a 365 seat aircraft has a list price of $315 mil. The 748i specified with 467 has a list price of $351 mil. On a per seat basis the 748i is cheaper by 17%.

From a financial perspective it might be in Boeing's interests to sell 777's at a higher rate per seat than sell 748i's at a lower rate per seat. It also might be the case discounting the 748i to garner those elusive sales could undermine the value of the 777 and have a knock on affect on the purchase price airlines are willing to pay.

Boeing could also be playing the waiting game. With the 777 order back log currently standing at plus 350 aircraft and the 748i having available near term delivery slots, the underlying demand for aircraft in this size category might see sales pick-up in year 201?.

From my own raw back of the envelope numbers, I don't see the economics of the 748i being at a distinct disadvantage to the A380. I can only suggest other factors are at play.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: travelhound
Posted 2012-12-16 13:30:11 and read 15475 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 85):

LH is a perfect example of this. Their A380-800 and 747-8 have the same number of First Class seats and effectively the same number of Business Class seats. However, the A380-800 offers 158 more Economy seats. So the A380-800 offers 45% more (mostly Economy) seats, but I am quite confident in believing that the trip costs are not 45% more. Even if the A380-800's trip costs were 20% more (2) , the A380-800 would break even with just 72 more Economy passengers (and if they sold those six extra Business Class seats, they'd probably need less than 50 additional Economy sales).

... but remember the same (or very similar) maths can be used for the 748i over the 777 and the 777 is still winning the sales battle. My numbers suggest a 6% advantage to the A380 though.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-16 14:11:49 and read 15434 times.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 87):
but remember the same (or very similar) maths can be used for the 748i over the 777 and the 777 is still winning the sales battle.

The 747-8 is about 35% larger than the 777-300ER in terms of cabin floor area, which no doubt helps equalize the seat-mile costs between the two planes. Then again, Boeing is comparing seat-mile costs at OEM three-class configurations, so that is 365 for the 777-300ER and 467 for the 747-8, giving the 747-8 28% more seats.

However, Boeing has said the trip costs between a 747-8 and 747-400 are about the same. As I am confident the 747-400 has a higher trip cost then the 777-300ER, that would mean the 747-8 also has a higher trip cost. So an operator needs to sell a certain number of those extra seats just to cover the higher trip costs. Depending on how many they have to sell, the A380-800 probably looks to be the better option for going beyond the 777-300ER and a number of airlines around the world are doing just that (including SQ, BA, EK, QR, EY, QF, TG and AF).

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: mariner
Posted 2012-12-16 15:16:47 and read 15248 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 85):
If I was Boeing, I'd do everything to make sure that India continues to deny foreign airlines the ability to fly the A380-800 into and out of the country as that may be the only situation where the 747-8 has a real chance to sell.  

What a sad way to sell an aircraft.

mariner

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: travelhound
Posted 2012-12-16 15:24:41 and read 15208 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 88):

Using LH's fuel efficiency numbers and seat counts and assuming six 6000nm flight per week fifty weeks of the year, the 748i has operating costs of $68 mil and the A380 has operating costs of $84 mil. A difference of 17% (this is in the region of Boeing's 21% claim).

In LH's case for every economy seat they have to fill in a 748i they have to fill 1.63 seats in an A380. Even if we say the extra 0.62 seats only costs 70% of the 1 seat they still have to find demand for 115 seats for every flight or 34,500 seats per year. Multiple this by the number of aircraft in the fleet, the numbers start to become mind boggling.

I am starting to be of the opinion the centre of the A380 economics is not fuel efficiency, but purchase price. As such there will always be a price point where airlines will buy the 777, 748 and A380 or choose one over the other.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: art
Posted 2012-12-16 15:33:17 and read 15184 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 85):
If I was Boeing, I'd do everything to make sure that India continues to deny foreign airlines the ability to fly the A380-800 into and out of the country as that may be the only situation where the 747-8 has a real chance to sell.

Don't open that can of worms - next thing might be GOI banning all B748i's from Indian airspace until AI places an order.  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-16 18:12:22 and read 14941 times.

Was it ever 'hello"?

One airline, 16 frames.

It makes Concorde look like a best-seller.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: CXB77L
Posted 2012-12-16 18:23:56 and read 14929 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 92):
One airline, 16 frames.

How did you work that out? LH has 20 firm + 20 options, KE has 5, CA has 5, W3 has 2, along with 9 VIP customers, bringing the Intercontinental's order book to 41 + 20 options.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-16 18:45:49 and read 14892 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 85):
The reason I am interested in the trip costs of the 747-8 compared to the A380-800

Sorry, didn't get it first time around, here the trip fuel for the 3 frames: A380 222t, 748i 173t and 77W 131t. Now you come up with the price per ton of fuel and you have solved 60% of the trip cost problem  .

BTW I had a slight fault in my first post, the 77W has a fuel burn of 51.3kg per m2 and 1000nm.

[Edited 2012-12-16 18:47:39]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Cerecl
Posted 2012-12-16 19:33:04 and read 14751 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 94):
here the trip fuel for the 3 frames: A380 222t, 748i 173t and 77W 131t.

A380's fuel burn figure seems too high? Even Boeing only claims 21% fuel burn advantage 748i vs A380. SQ replaced 10 77W flights with 7 A380 flights and claimed significant savings. These figures directly contradict SQ's claim.
Or have I misunderstood something?

[Edited 2012-12-16 19:53:40]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-16 22:35:20 and read 14475 times.

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 95):
A380's fuel burn figure seems too high?

Thanks for the tip, I was a little bit unkind to the A380 as I did not lower the TOW to fly exactly 8000nm for the trip fuel (as it consumes 13t/hour one better be exact   ). If I do that and also start from a OEW of 275t (I started from 280t previously) I get the following figures: 213t trip fuel and 49.5kg per m2 and 1000nm.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Cerecl
Posted 2012-12-16 23:56:18 and read 14288 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 96):

Thanks Ferpe I would like to understand how you arrived at the fuel burn figures because that for A380 still seems too high. 7x213 is significantly more than 131x10. In the case of EK, even using their most generous 77W and the more cramped A380 configurations fuel burn per passenger is still higher in the A380 compared to 77W. If this is the case I failed to see why EK would purchase A380 at all given the fact that they are a big 77W operator.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-17 00:39:10 and read 14177 times.

Does 360 seats in a 748i leave cargo revenue to be added? Also was it only the freighter that had 2.5t of weight taken out of it?

If they get the 748 on weight target, SFC target with engines and with the added MTOW and fixed tail tank, it might be a decent plane, very short backlog and probably affordable price? It should have had the same fan as the 787 though, getting all future PIPs of the GEnx.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-17 01:21:10 and read 14087 times.

I believe more than anything else, the B747 line for passenger had its time already. The era for the VLA unfortunately is extremely limited that the A380 has gotten the lion's share effortlessly and these are the hard facts. The same manner the center of information here only pertains to passenger frames and cargo frames must be excluded in the discussion it can be a whole different topic trend.

Whatever improvement there is for the B748i leaves very very limited room, at the end of the day its maximizing capacity over the limited slots on prime lucrative destinations which puts the B748i out of the equation. There is a tremendous rise on the number of travelers and higher capacity aircraft will eventually be the norm.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: koruman
Posted 2012-12-17 01:23:34 and read 14113 times.

I withdraw my earlier inaccurate comments about B747-8i passengers sales.

It's obviously unfair to compare sales to Concorde.

In fact, sales are much more similar to the Convair 990............

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-17 01:33:11 and read 14089 times.

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 97):
Thanks Ferpe I would like to understand how you arrived at the fuel burn figures because that for A380 still seems too high. 7x213 is significantly more than 131x10.

I have a complete drag model which I then tune so that it fits the ACAP payload-range curve for each frame. The model is now so stable in the aero constants that I normallly only have to tune the TSFC to get a curve fit. Once you have this curve fit (it is 3 points that fit, max range at MSP, max fuel and no payload) you can then model almost all other cases by varying the TOW, payload, OEW if seating changes and so on. In the case of the A380 we are lucky, it is also available in PianoX, try it yourselves http://www.lissys.demon.co.uk/PianoX.html

If I run the same OEW and pax count in PianoX I get: block total 212.6t. Trip is 3t lower but does not include taxi out and in fuel which I include in my calculations for all frames.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-17 01:44:52 and read 14180 times.

The goal for the 748 is 10000 pounds of weight taken out, 5000 achieved so far. An engine PIP of above 1.6% and some software updates to the FMC. Is this better than spec in the end?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: andrewtang
Posted 2012-12-17 01:52:18 and read 14172 times.

B747-8 operators are still waiting for Boeing to solve the VNAV problem, aren't they?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-17 02:33:37 and read 14060 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 102):
The goal for the 748 is 10000 pounds of weight taken out, 5000 achieved so far. An engine PIP of above 1.6% and some software updates to the FMC.

This is correct according to this AW article which lists all these items and also defines when the VNAV will be solved (end 2013): http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....l/AW_12_17_2012_p34-527632.xml&p=3

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-17 02:50:07 and read 13924 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 104):

What do you think this "10000 pounds" does for the payload range? Or will it just be of use to up the efficiency? Less weight to carry on the same routes? More fuel? More payload?

It might end up being close to 77W on some routes?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Antoniemey
Posted 2012-12-17 04:19:11 and read 13688 times.

Quoting bmacleod (Reply 71):
Does the President really need a 747? Wasn't the VC-25 built for a 25-30 year operational period? That's put it operating until around 2020, by that time Boeing's Y-3 will be a better fit....

In day-to-day matters? No, he doesn't. For Air Force One's function as a mobile command center in a doomsday scenario, yes.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 72):

  

For Air Force One the USAF (And Secret Service) will want a few things:

-Engine redundancy. They want a plane that can lose an engine and not have to start looking for places to set down immediately. That means more than two, which means 747, A340, A380, an existing military transport, or a fresh design.
-Heavy lift capability (personnel-wise). This can be done with any number of planes, but the 747 already has it.
-A convenient place to put a communications center out of the way of the press and gaggle of diplomats that follow the president around. The upper level of a 747 is perfect for this.
-Proven technology. That means they're going to prefer a conversion based on an existing design over a clean-sheet design for the purposes of this very specialized transport.

Add all those together, and put in that an "American Built" plane will garner less protest from the uninformed citizens and politicians trying to get re-elected, and you've got a 747-8. 2020 or so would be just about right for the 747-8 to be considered a mature aircraft with proven reliability... Though, with the way the Air Force babies their two VC-25s, they could probably fly for a century without trouble.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-17 04:46:26 and read 13615 times.

Quoting koruman (Reply 100):
In fact, sales are much more similar to the Convair 990

The 880 and 990 almost bankrupted Convair and drove them out of the commercial business for good. That's certainly not the case for the 748.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-17 05:43:33 and read 13542 times.

on Ferpe's reply 104 re the link, makes me ask, why did the boeing 748i team not think of all those remedies from the very start?
By the time they get things right, the pond has already dried up, all the needed purchases for a VLA has reached a stagnation.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-17 06:07:30 and read 13515 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 105):
What do you think this "10000 pounds" does for the payload range? Or will it just be of use to up the efficiency? Less weight to carry on the same routes? More fuel? More payload?

Any empty weight decrease on a certified aircraft with a given MZFW and MTOW will increase either the maximum payload for shorter hops, ie the 748i can load 10000lb more cargo, or pax or it can be traded for fuel to fly longer. 10.000lb is 4,54t of fuel, with an average FF 10.5t per hour it gives you some 200nm more range.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2012-12-17 08:09:52 and read 13308 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 108):

on Ferpe's reply 104 re the link, makes me ask, why did the boeing 748i team not think of all those remedies from the very start?

They did. But if you waited to incorporate every single good idea the engineers have, you'd never deliver an airplane. Engineering always generates improvement plans faster than production can incorporate them.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-12-17 09:22:51 and read 13149 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 99):
the A380 has gotten the lion's share effortlessly and these are the hard facts.

Effortlessly? Anything but, says I. See the AvWeek article linked in #103 to get the run down. More than a few shaky orders in the books, cracked web feet, etc.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: kanban
Posted 2012-12-17 11:15:27 and read 12952 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 110):
They did. But if you waited to incorporate every single good idea the engineers have, you'd never deliver an airplane. Engineering always generates improvement plans faster than production can incorporate them.

Back in the 707/727 days we used to sneak into the Engineering Dept. and break all their pencil leads to slow them down so both manufacturing and service bulletin kits could catch up. after 3 such raids, they got the message and stopped putting "Urgent/Mandatory" on every brain fart

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Cerecl
Posted 2012-12-17 18:25:56 and read 12471 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 101):

Thank you again Ferpe. Now I understand your estimation is for a 8000nm flight. Will the picture change if one looks at a 5000-6000nm flight?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-19 07:33:07 and read 11798 times.

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 113):
Will the picture change if one looks at a 5000-6000nm flight?

I have run the exact same payload (which might be debatable but it makes the result comparable to the previous one) over a 5500nm still air leg, here the numbers:

77W block fuel 84t 45.1kg/m2/knm
380 block fuel 136t 44.9kg/m2/knm
748i block fuel 108t 47.0kg/m2/knm

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Cerecl
Posted 2012-12-19 17:26:19 and read 11362 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 114):

Hmmm...Thank you Ferpe!

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: SmittyOne
Posted 2012-12-19 17:28:22 and read 11380 times.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 72):
Considering how meticulously maintained the VC-25's are, and how little they get used compared to the commercial fleet, they could be flying the President in 2125 very easily. But the AF wants shiny new toys, and so they are making up stories about how hard it is to get parts for the 742. My heart bleeds for them (and the world's smallest violin is playing away.)

They will undoubtedly tout the replacement of the VC-25s as a 'green' initiative  

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-20 00:01:20 and read 11061 times.

with regard to all the exchanges of information and statistics share here, I would really like to somehow get an average take on how everyone in this forum really foresee the B748i to be in the next 5 years..

Will the B748i ever reach the sales that the A380 has achieved?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-20 00:14:07 and read 11039 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 114):

The most interesting comparison would be the 748 vs 744, do you have numbers about the 744 as well? I guess the 10 000 pounds will be perfect for the freighter, even though most freight is by volume really?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: travelhound
Posted 2012-12-20 01:46:12 and read 10963 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 120):

My take is the 748i has similar trip costs (Boeing claims the 748i's trip costs are 2% lower than the 744) to the 744. The advantage the 748I has over the 744 is revenue opportunity.

On the outer extremes of range where the 744 looses payload the 748i can still take a full payload, so I'd suggest on a trip cost basis this is the main advantage the 748i has over the 744.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 117):

I would hate trying to pick 748i sales in 5 years time. There are too many variables.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-20 07:00:49 and read 10634 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 117):
Will the B748i ever reach the sales that the A380 has achieved?

Absolutely no chance, IMO.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: 7BOEING7
Posted 2012-12-20 08:26:05 and read 10481 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 117):
with regard to all the exchanges of information and statistics share here, I would really like to somehow get an average take on how everyone in this forum really foresee the B748i to be in the next 5 years..

Will the B748i ever reach the sales that the A380 has achieved?

Not even Boeing expected to outsell the A380 on the passenger side--so that question doesn't even need to be asked.

However, assuming no economic implosion, I'll go with 100i/125F. AB will be stuck below 400.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: kanban
Posted 2012-12-20 09:50:33 and read 10328 times.

I think a longer window is needed say 10-15 years... there will be sufficient freighter sales to sustain the line.. and enough i sales to be interesting.

that said, we get a thread on this subject under various wordings about every 6 months.. so everybody save your final data points, and we'll revisit in May.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-21 02:49:50 and read 9845 times.

from another topic forum here, PAL is looking at the 773ER, 777X and the 789s so there it goes, supposedly the last straw for another B748i sale gone into thin air!

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ushermittwoch
Posted 2012-12-21 04:58:34 and read 9670 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 123):
from another topic forum here, PAL is looking at the 773ER, 777X and the 789s so there it goes, supposedly the last straw for another B748i sale gone into thin air!

Weren't they the front runner for the mystery A380 order according to you just last week?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: sweair
Posted 2012-12-21 05:11:03 and read 9659 times.

Why is LH almost alone flying the 748i, what is it that LH sees in this frame that no one else does? LH is a very profitable airline so it must have ok costs?

The 748i has one big fat advantage, a short backlog. And with all improvements until 2015 is might be a decent plane? 10 000 pounds of diet sounds a lot, but it is a heavy frame. Will any subsidiary in LH get the 748?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: art
Posted 2012-12-21 07:05:12 and read 9504 times.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 121):
However, assuming no economic implosion, I'll go with 100i/125F. AB will be stuck below 400.

I think you're wrong on A380 numbers. Apart from additional sales to new customers over the years and top ups from existing customers, I see re-orders from SQ and others as the time comes to retire their current A380's. If the economics of newer, smaller aircraft (eg 777X?) start threatening the A380, AB has the defence of doing an NEO or a stretch with NEO.

On the 748i - how much of a benefit would commonality give to a 748i +748F fleet rather than 777 + 748F?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-21 07:16:26 and read 9596 times.

Quoting sweair (Reply 125):
Why is LH almost alone flying the 748i, what is it that LH sees in this frame that no one else does?

LH operates their large widebodies in a three-class configuration (moving to four class), so they benefit from a larger 747 to serve as an interim step between their A340-600 and A380-800. As such, they have wanted a larger 747 for over a decade.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Aquila3
Posted 2012-12-21 08:59:00 and read 9407 times.

Quoting SmittyOne (Reply 116):
They will undoubtedly tout the replacement of the VC-25s as a 'green' initiative  

I tend to disagree, at least for the next few years. The current US President, signing the anti-ETS law as it was boasted here on a.net , have clearly said that they would not care less about "green"planes.
This in full agreement of the other friendly Big Powers, China and Russia if I remember correctly, so I do not believe that He would back step easily on "green aviation" .
But OK, maybe the next one the the US Citizens will elect.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: RickNRoll
Posted 2012-12-21 14:08:22 and read 9110 times.

This is why the 748i is finished. Boeing Books Orders For 30 777 (by KarelXWB Dec 20 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: 7BOEING7
Posted 2012-12-21 14:32:17 and read 9007 times.

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 129):
This is why the 748i is finished. Boeing Books Orders For 30 777 (by KarelXWB Dec 20 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Some of the 744's out there will be replaced by 777's some by 380s, but there's room in the middle. It won't be pretty but I think we'll be seeing 748i's coming off the assembly line for years to come. As for the 30 777 order, until we know who's buying them we won't know if these are even replacement aircraft.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-21 18:06:10 and read 8794 times.

ushermittwoch From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2830 posts, RR: 20
Reply 124, posted Fri Dec 21 2012 20:58:34 your local time (13 hours 3 minutes 15 secs ago) and read 1036 times:

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 123):
from another topic forum here, PAL is looking at the 773ER, 777X and the 789s so there it goes, supposedly the last straw for another B748i sale gone into thin air!

Weren't they the front runner for the mystery A380 order according to you just last week?

In reply to 124 post. - Philippine Airlines has 35 more aircrafts to go to top their 100 aircraft acquisition. If they indeed they are the suspected 30 frame 773ER order then you still have 5 left for an A380 so that still qualifies them front lining for the also suspected A380 order from Airbus during its Asian Hub trip recently.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Revelation
Posted 2012-12-21 19:25:21 and read 8720 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 127):
LH operates their large widebodies in a three-class configuration (moving to four class), so they benefit from a larger 747 to serve as an interim step between their A340-600 and A380-800. As such, they have wanted a larger 747 for over a decade.

It seems few followed them with their love of A340-600 and even fewer are following them to 747-8i, especially as there are no signs of current fuel and maintenance prices going anything but up.

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 129):
This is why the 748i is finished. Boeing Books Orders For 30 777 (by KarelXWB Dec 20 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Clearly customers are voting with their feet.

Quoting 7BOEING7 (Reply 130):
Some of the 744's out there will be replaced by 777's some by 380s, but there's room in the middle.

The problem is that middle position requires taking an aircraft with four engines, whereas there is a strong two engine contender quite near by.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Daysleeper
Posted 2012-12-22 04:09:19 and read 8344 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 83):
Here first the fuel burn per effective m2:
The real effective areas of A380 and 748i was nicely calculated by signature OV-099 at Leeham, he had 748i at 415m2 and 380 at 545m2. The 77W I get to 338m2 (including tapered areas fore and aft). I then compensated the OEW of all frames for this reduced seating (1 pax per m2, a non seat = -63kg). This gives the following MTOW/OEW: 380 575t/279t, 748i 548t/213t and 77W 352t/166t. All are as if delivered 2014 (ie 748i has PIP and 5000lb lower OEW). With the given seating all are true 8000nm frames (the A380 8100nm), thus I run on them on this ESAD. The fuel burned per 1000nm and m2 is then: A380 50.6kg, 748i 52.4kg and 77W 52.3kg.

Conclusion is they are all very similar in fuel burn with the slightest advantage for A380 (+3.4%) when it is full.
Quoting ferpe (Reply 83):
" From some work I once did for the 773ER, I believe it's operating costs and their approximate relative weights are as follows:
Fuel 60%
Flight Crew 12%
Cabin Crew 11%
Airframe Maint 5%
Engine Maint 3%
Landing Fee 4%
Control & Comm 3%
Ground Handling 2%
Total 100%

I must be missing something really big here, as I've seen Airbus claim that the A351 is going to have a 25% fuel burn advantage over the 77W. So if there is only a 3.4% difference between the 77W and A380 then doesn't that mean the A350 is going to be over 20% better than the A380?


  

Edit: I'm not too sure how Airbus has calculated the 25% improvement - However if it is something like trip costs or total cost of ownership then as fuel accounts for 60% of these combined costs the A350 would still be beating the A380 by 10% plus..

[Edited 2012-12-22 04:15:23]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: art
Posted 2012-12-22 04:21:55 and read 8298 times.

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 133):
I must be missing something really big here, as I've seen Airbus claim that the A351 is going to have a 25% fuel burn advantage over the 77W. So if there is only a 3.4% difference between the 77W and A380 then doesn't that mean the A350 is going to be over 20% better than the A380?

Will it soon be time to start another thread entitled "Is It Goodbye To The A380?"?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Aquila3
Posted 2012-12-22 05:08:15 and read 8258 times.

Quoting art (Reply 134):
Will it soon be time to start another thread entitled "Is It Goodbye To The A380?"?

Feel free to do it, of course. It is the dream of many, here.
However, it looks like the A380 has greater margins of improvement "if necessary".
The only reason that A. is not implementing them is that there is at the moment no serious concurrent in its market niche.
In other words, if you seriously need a passenger VLA , there is the A380. Full stop.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Cerecl
Posted 2012-12-22 05:27:26 and read 8215 times.

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 133):
I must be missing something really big here

To be honest I have the same doubt. The difference between 77W and A380 in this estimation is much smaller than what SQ and EK were reporting. As I said in a previous post, if this is the case I am not sure it made sense for EK to order A380 in the first place. Similarly, if the total trip fuel of 748i is >20% lower than A380 I find it hard to believe that there were not more orders for the 747-8i.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-22 06:01:36 and read 8105 times.

why must this topic be signficant? simply because, Personally it is not about A vs B, its more on how an iconic and technically reliable and beautiful aircraft has lost its sort of magic to the airlines.

That is why am asking, perhaps Boeing should give the queen a graceful exit and leave the VLA to the A380, I mean who could go wrong on a double decker with provisions for a longer version that can basically come up with the perfect formula of pax payload/ pax checked in luggages and cargo all together.

Perhaps that is why boeing is not making a funfare to boast up sales of the B748i, it is their dignified way of basically letting everyone just forget about it and when something is not being talked about it is as equivocal to non existent...... your thoughts?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Cerecl
Posted 2012-12-22 06:10:03 and read 8095 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 137):
perhaps Boeing should give the queen a graceful exit and leave the VLA to the A380,

Boeing is a business, it would be stupid to cede a market to its competitor. Even if 747-8i does not pick up orders it restricts how much Airbus can charge for A380.
I am sure Boeing will spare nothing trying to sell 747-8i to interested parties. Sentiments play no role here I would imagine.

As to a 5 year estimate of 747-8i orders, I would say 20-30 (net firm).

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-22 06:42:07 and read 8059 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 132):
It seems few followed them with their love of A340-600 and even fewer are following them to 747-8i, especially as there are no signs of current fuel and maintenance prices going anything but up.

Well consider who else flies A340-600s:

TG - The A340-600 is the second-largest plane in their current fleet (in terms of capacity) and they do fly it in three classes. Arguably the one other A340-600 operator who could conceivably use the 747-8 between the A340-600 and A380-800.

SA - The A340-600 is the largest plane in their fleet and they fly two classes, so a two-class 747-8 would be a huge step up in capacity.

IB - The A340-600 is the largest plane in their fleet and they fly two classes, so a two-class 747-8 would be a huge step up in capacity.

GF - The A340-600 is the largest plane in their fleet and while they do fly it in three classes, they don't appear to have the traffic to support a three-class 747-8.

HU - The A340-600 is the largest plane in their fleet and while they do fly it in three classes, they don't appear to have the traffic to support a three-class 747-8.

VS - Also operates the 747-400 in two classes, so they might actually be able to use the 747-8 even though they are an A380-800 customer.

EY - The A340-600 is the second-largest plane in their current fleet and they do fly it in three classes, however they have the 777-300ER (which they can go to 10-abreast to increase capacity) and will soon have the A380-800.

QR - The A340-600 is the second-largest plane in their current fleet and they do fly it in three classes, however they have the 777-300ER (which they can go to 10-abreast to increase capacity) and will soon have the A380-800.

MU - The A340-600 is the largest plane in their current fleet and they do fly it in three classes, however they have the 777-300ER on the way, which will allow them to increase capacity.

[Edited 2012-12-22 06:48:45]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: art
Posted 2012-12-22 06:59:19 and read 7996 times.

Quoting art (Reply 134):
Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 133):
I must be missing something really big here, as I've seen Airbus claim that the A351 is going to have a 25% fuel burn advantage over the 77W. So if there is only a 3.4% difference between the 77W and A380 then doesn't that mean the A350 is going to be over 20% better than the A380?

Will it soon be time to start another thread entitled "Is It Goodbye To The A380?"?

To answer my own question, no.

I recall reading again and again that the most Airbus could hope for the A350-1000 would be for its CASM to match that of the A380. I think that was based on the CASM of the A380 at the time. When the A350-1000 takes to the air the A380 will have seen many years of incremental improvements through airframe weight reduction, engine PIP's, aerodynamic refinements and increased MTOW which will have improved performance (range/payload/CASM) by several per cent.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2012-12-22 12:30:04 and read 7509 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 139):
VS - Also operates the 747-400 in two classes

Aren't all VS 744s 3-class - J, W (premium economy) and Y? Or are you ignoring premium Y?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-22 12:55:44 and read 7476 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 143):
Aren't all VS 744s 3-class - J, W (premium economy) and Y? Or are you ignoring premium Y?

Yes, I was ignoring premium Y, however that would improve the case for the 747-8 with them (as it would the A380).

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-22 13:43:55 and read 7385 times.

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 136):
The difference between 77W and A380 in this estimation is much smaller than what SQ and EK were reporting. As I said in a previous post, if this is the case I am not sure it made sense for EK to order A380 in the first place. Similarly, if the total trip fuel of 748i is >20% lower than A380 I find it hard to believe that there were not more orders for the 747-8i.

My modelling only supplies fuel burn, this is an important part for the cost side but you are forgetting the even more important revenue side. Re the accuracy of the fuel burn, it is within +-2-3% on a trip level, the per m2 costs are very much dependent on how you calculate the m2. I have found many totally faulty figures circulating here, the ones I used now are within narrow tolerances for the 77W (have measured myselves) and the best estimates I could find for the 748i and A380. Someone had really gone through the ACAP drawings and measured every bit even specifying whether staircases are included or not (the forward one is for both frames). The A380 consumes quite much fuel (yet is has the lowest fuel burn per m2 or pax of any frame before the 788 came into the market) but also have a huge revenue side, this is why it is not for everyone, if your traffic does not support it it will be a money eater, otherwise a money-maker.

The 350-1000 (if it comes in at spec ie OEW below 153t) has a 5500nm block fuel of 68t and a 37 kg/m2/knm. It will however only take some 300-350 pax and you gain 0 revenue for another 6 years, also please realise that the A380 is 10 years old when the 35J come to EIS, engine fuel burn improve with 1% per year so no wonder the m2 fuel burn is lower (you are thus comparing apples and oranges). If you have more traffic it is 777X, 748i or A380, of these the 777X will be similar in fuel burn to 350-1000 on a m2 / pax level (if done with a CFRP 71m wing) but you gain 0 revenue with the X for another 8-10 years.

[Edited 2012-12-22 13:57:40]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: RickNRoll
Posted 2012-12-22 16:06:32 and read 7182 times.

It's not just about fuel burn and CASM, the third major impetus for the A380 is landing slots. Politicians keep talking about Heathrow and Sydney, but everyone knows political impediments are such that the most likely outcome is the status quo. The A380 is a significant means of working around the external factors that no other plane can beat. Sydney has a significant A380 presence. Because the A380 is needed there, it is also encourages it's use at other airports that don't necessitate the A380, such as Melbourne, for commonality. It is also the logical upgauge for popular routes for long, fat like Sydney and Melbourne to LA.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: cerecl
Posted 2012-12-22 17:58:16 and read 7040 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 143):

Let me start by thanking you for a detailed post and your effort in injecting some quantitative data into this discussion.
I have not forgot the revenue side of A380 operation. However, there are two reasons why this does not materially change our discussion.
1. In threads like this one A380 21% More Economical P.seat Than 77W (by NA Jun 27 2009 in Civil Aviation). we were discussing the cost side of operation. According to your estimation on a 5500nm trip A380 burns 62% more fuel while having 61% more effective area (or 69% more seat per SQ configuration, EK configuration favours 77W more) compared to 77W. I realise fuel burn is not 100% of the cost but it is a big trunk of the cost. If the fuel burn difference is only 3% where did the 21% reduction in per seat cost come from? Per SQ 7 A380 has less flight crew but more cabin crew compared to 10x 77W.
2. I would assume that apart from the Suite (or equivalent products) on A380 the revenue per seat on A380 and 77W are similar. If the cost difference is only 3% per seat what is stopping EK from sending out 1.6 77W for every A380? They can probably carry more cargo this way too. Before they ordered A380 EK was already a big 77W operator. Would the 3% advantage be worth introducing a new type?

[Edited 2012-12-22 17:59:41]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-22 19:41:03 and read 6922 times.

Given the exchanges of information here, I would like to somehow find out on here if anyone can come up with a concrete number of a potential immediate order for the B748i and what airline would it be?

This will exclude the pending orders or mou's for the said frames.

Why the question? because almost most recent orders are on the T7s and A380s which from a previous reply its the T7s basically finishing off the 748is least potential in the market today.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: ferpe
Posted 2012-12-22 19:57:22 and read 6912 times.

Quoting cerecl (Reply 145):
In threads like this one A380 21% More Economical P.seat Than 77W (by NA Jun 27 2009 in Civil Aviation).

That was mid 2009, fuel was not 60% of the cost side back then, can someone remember the barrel price for 2009? I think it might have been half of what one assign for today's long range planning (about 100 $ or more).

Further I checked the thread you referenced, SQ run their 77W with 278 seats, this makes for .82 seats per m2 vs 0.86 (471/545). You can take my fuel numbers and divide with SQs seating and you get other numbers. Further, they make 7 A380 hops instead of 10 77w, what is the route, airport and handling charges for these 2 frames on the routes in question. If the fuel is 30-40% back then other things become more important where I think the differences are more significant given 7 times of this vs 10 times of that.

But I think the real killer is that the A380 fills better (which is not what you discuss, I understand that., but it is the main reason carriers like the A380), if I have to fly for 14 hours it is a no brainer what I will choose if there was a choice (and if I fly that long today I will care about what carrier and what frame type Big grin ).

[Edited 2012-12-22 20:31:49]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: cerecl
Posted 2012-12-23 04:53:23 and read 6641 times.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 147):
That was mid 2009, fuel was not 60% of the cost side back then, can someone remember the barrel price for 2009?

Jet fuel price reached a peak in mid 2008 and crashed early 2009, followed by some recovery throughout 2009. Given that SQ made the announcement in January 2009 I would imagine its data would include a range of fuel prices.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 147):
SQ run their 77W with 278 seats, this makes for .82 seats per m2 vs 0.86 (471/545). You can take my fuel numbers and divide with SQs seating and you get other numbers.
EK's 77W configuration is quite er..economical.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 147):
if I have to fly for 14 hours it is a no brainer what I will choose if there was a choice

We can definitely agree on this point 
Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 146):
I would like to somehow find out on here if anyone can come up with a concrete number of a potential immediate order for the B748i and what airline would it be?

I am not quite sure if you meant if someone had inside info on an imminent 747-8i order?
At any rate we can have a guess at which company may order 747-8i in the not too distant future.
CX-I remember Zeke once mentioned CX's internal review ruled out 747-8i. Notwithstanding that, you would think CX is the one airline that COULD place a new >10 order.
UA: Maybe, but they are reportedly looking to order A350-1000
DL: Maybe
VS: Who knows what they will do with the 6 A380s and their 744 fleet.
CI: Often touted as a strong candidate although the chairman stated in 2010 that it had no plan to order VLAs at least to 2015.
PA: Can see an order of 5
LY: Good chance of an order, probably less than 10 frames.

[Edited 2012-12-23 04:55:51]

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-23 06:41:54 and read 6541 times.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 146):
Given the exchanges of information here, I would like to somehow find out on here if anyone can come up with a concrete number of a potential immediate order for the B748i and what airline would it be?

As for an immediate order, I would say "none".

Airlines that I believe could effectively make use of a 747-8 include TG and VS.



Quoting cerecl (Reply 148):
CI: Often touted as a strong candidate although the chairman stated in 2010 that it had no plan to order VLAs at least to 2015.

And they just ordered the 777-300ER, which I expect will be used as a partial 747-400 replacement.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-23 08:36:55 and read 6360 times.

Japan Airlines, ANA, KLM, IBERIA, SAUDIA, SAA, AIR NEW ZEALAND, not entertaining the B748i (pardon me if these airlines were already discussed)

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: YYCspotter
Posted 2012-12-23 10:58:16 and read 6181 times.

Quoting LGWflyer (Reply 10):
Sure it wasn't an Airbus A747?

Either that or a Boeing A190

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Aquila3
Posted 2012-12-23 13:20:58 and read 6078 times.

What about TK?
Weren't they going to order some 748i? Or did they already?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-23 13:24:21 and read 6083 times.

Quoting Aquila3 (Reply 152):
What about TK? Weren't they going to order some 748i? Or did they already?

They had/have an RFP out with Airbus (A380-800) and Boeing (747-8), however they just ordered 15 777-300ERs and signed a lease for 7 more. As such, I don't expect them to still be shopping for a VLA.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Aquila3
Posted 2012-12-23 14:30:38 and read 5954 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 153):
As such, I don't expect them to still be shopping for a VLA.


I do .
They are growing so FAST that very soon they would need them to compete with EK & co on level field.
And I do not really remember why somebody told me that the 748i would be much preferred.
Maybe it is a * thing, maybe politics, or maybe the 748 is just a better machine for their needs.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-23 16:05:27 and read 5822 times.

Quoting Aquila3 (Reply 154):
I do . They are growing so FAST that very soon they would need them to compete with EK & co on level field.

The new Istanbul airport will need to be built, first. The 747-8 will be a tight fit in the current IST and the A380-800 even more so.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: cerecl
Posted 2012-12-23 19:02:41 and read 5648 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 149):
And they just ordered the 777-300ER, which I expect will be used as a partial 747-400 replacement

  
It will be a pity though if CI one day ceases to operate any passenger 747. CI's livery looks super sharp on it. Oh well, at least they will probably get 748F.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 150):
Japan Airlines

JAL got rid of all their 747. Will probably structure their fleet around 787 and 77X if they need the capacity.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 150):
ANA

A respected member of this forum divulged that ANA signed an MOU for A380. This was corroborated by some reports in Japanese newspaper but of course was never made public. So a 747-8i order is not impossible but unlikely

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 150):
IBERIA

They have an all Airbus fleet and you've got to think that BA's decision against 747-8i makes such an order even less likely. My prediction is that they will order A359 and A3510 to replace their A340 fleet in the future.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 150):
SAUDIA

Probably going the way of 77W

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 150):
SAA

Apparently they have neither the demand nor the resources for VLAs. Their A340 fleet is also relatively young.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 150):
AIR NEW ZEALAND

77W+787-9.

Quoting airlinebuilder (Reply 150):
KLM

Possible but probably another 777 story.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2012-12-25 20:39:28 and read 5089 times.

In relation to my previous post about Boeing not taking the 748i on a sales pitch tour; Had Boeing done an international tour flying the 748i to major airports and potential clients, do you think it would have changed their sales count to date?

If it was stated that there was no spare unit to do the tour, why didnt Boeing take the need for a revamped 747 frame on a tour?

thoughts anyone? Happy Holidays!

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: TrijetsRMissed
Posted 2012-12-25 22:08:45 and read 5011 times.

A 748I Air Force One order? I highly doubt it... There should be zero chance of this taxpayer investment; when at all time high in national debt...

To those who disagree: Do you have any idea how few cycles the existing 742s have???

Needless to say, (as someone who pays higher taxes), I sure hope a 748I Air Force One order is not in the works. It can be withheld for another 10 years, easy. The line will still be open due to one-off freighter demand and low production infrastructure costs. Trust me.   

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2013-01-03 07:52:33 and read 4072 times.

it is funny I came across a video of the inagural 748i Lufthansa flight with interview on Lund, and she was quite optimistic about significant sales shaping up by end of 2012, am I am not mistaken those pronouncement were post air china and korean air so am looking for those sales...... anybody knows if there is any on sight of sorts?

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2013-01-03 07:58:48 and read 4029 times.

LH 416's inaugural flight was 01 June 2012.

The only order placed in 2012 was the 5 for Air China, which was recorded on 06 September 2012.

Boeing announced a commitment for 15 747-8s at the 2011 Paris Air Show and it is believed that Hong Kong Airlines is the customer, but that MoU, if it exists, has yet to be firmed. Of course, HKA is effectively not allowed to currently add additional airplanes by the Hong Kong Civil Aviation authorities, so that may be the reason why the MoU has yet to be firmed.

Topic: RE: Is It Goodbye To The B748i?
Username: airlinebuilder
Posted 2013-01-03 08:08:37 and read 3965 times.

I really am hoping the sales for this beautiful aircraft picks up to a significant count wherein airlines can give it a second look and see its potential if any in comparison to the current aircrafts available right now


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/