Kevs From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 46 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1899 times:
I have read many threads that were saying airlines , like UA in the states,
are taking 777 as a replacement for 747
What is the philosophy behind 777 as a replacement of 744?
I can't understand, they are so different in term of capacity.
772/773 can carry around 300 to 380 pax in two classes setting,
while 744 can take, may be 380+ in a three classes setting, and
744 has a longer range than 772/773, except those newer 777 ER/LR
models.
Is it really more economical to operate 777 rather than 744
and these savings are good enough to cover the revenues loss with
less pax? How about ETOPS issue?
Cancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 13 Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1784 times:
2 engines vs 4. anyway, boeing originally developed the 747 for cargo, not pax. thats why its got the hump. im pretty sure that they are planning the 777 as a future eventual replacement for the 747, but i doubt they want it to be now.
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
Cmckeithen From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 617 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1757 times:
The 777 will never take the place of the 747. The 747 is an American icon. Many airlines might use the 777 more, but the 747 will never completly go away. Its Boeings baby!
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5340 posts, RR: 11 Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1739 times:
The real issue here is demand. Back twenty years ago United could fill two 747 flights per day between San Fran and Chicago. Then, the popular thing became to offer many flights a day- on smaller planes.
But now the issue is demand. With fewer flying (though the numbers are picking up) the 747 has been too big to fill for a few years. United and Northwest are the only two airlines that operate the 747 in the US. The rest got rid of theirs long ago.
Until hoards of people start flying, the 747 won't be so popular here.
752is From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 88 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1682 times:
At least on the cargo side of it the 747 is the king and for right now nothing is replacing it. I read an intresting article in Air Cargo News about Cargolux and they were asked if the Airbus 380 or 777 would be an option for them in the future and the answer was no unless there would be a nose loading option available on these aircraft. I agree because I've seen 20 foot ship containers miss their ship and been transferred to 747's, and that is impressive. So I think unless this option is available on other aircraft the 747 will be around a long time for the cargo side.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2430 posts, RR: 10 Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1591 times:
I usually hear about the 777-300 as a replacement for 747 Classics but the 773ER can and often is dispacing the 744, despite its' lower pax capacity. Able to carry more cargo and with loer fuel burn and maintenance costs, it's got to be more economical.
"Can A345/6 do the same job as replacement of 744?:
Just the A346, I'd think. A345, like the 772LR is for the lower capacity, ULTRA-long-range niche.
AA777MIA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 686 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1585 times:
Also what about landing fees? Would they not be higher on a 747 versus 777? Food for thought...
Flyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1856 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1549 times:
The 744 is different then earlier 747 models such as the 742, the 777 was made to replace those aircraft because obviously Boeing doesn't build them any more (this is the -300, and you could aculty count the -200) Although the 772 was aimed more at replacing DC-10 sized aircraft.
my views expressed here are my own, and do not represent any company or organization
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7694 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1497 times:
Actually, the 777-300ER is considered a 747-100/200 replacement because its seating capacity is almost identical, except the 773ER has the range more like that of the 747-400.
I personally think that airlines with large older 747 fleets like JL and NH may become candidates to buy fairly large numbers of 773ER's to replace older 747's in international service.
747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1280 times:
I would like to see Boeing build a super jumbo with four GE 90's Trident 895 or PW 4095. To bad there is not a market for such because it would make a better replacement for the 747 than a 777.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 46 posts, 
From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
