Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Official Launches 777-200LRF  
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 10347 times:

here it is: http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/...05/photorelease/q2/pr_050524g.html


so no 747-400adv or 737-900X today....

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirWales From UK - Wales, joined Oct 2004, 453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 10321 times:

Bugger - i was really hoping for the 744adv.

Good news though!


User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10185 times:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2002286070_boeing24.html

mention of up to 50 commitments from AC/AF/Atlas/EK/EVA. Etihad,Cargolux,SQ and LH are also reportedly interested.


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 855 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10120 times:

I bet LH AC AF EK EVA CargoLux SQ Etihad gonna order 777LRF in near future, but I guess its bye bye 744ERF.  wave 

Just my  twocents 

Micke//SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10041 times:

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 3):
but I guess its bye bye 744ERF.



Quote:
Air Cargo Management Group's market forecast is based on an assumption that Boeing also will soon launch the new derivative of its jumbo, the 747 Advanced, and that this too will have a freighter version later.

If Boeing failed to launch that airplane — which would be a surprise — the market for the 777 freighter would be even bigger.

Both FedEx and United Parcel Service, the major express air freight companies, are committed in the next few years to expanding their MD-11 fleets by converting old passenger jets, Dahl said.

Roughly 160 MD-11s worldwide are slated for such conversions.

Once those are done, there'll be few jets of that size available, and the 777 freighter market should grow.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2002286070_boeing24.html

[Edited 2005-05-24 15:43:25]

User currently offlineFBWless From Sweden, joined Feb 2000, 197 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9964 times:

you mean "bye bye 747AdvF", the 744ERF is already in service

User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9896 times:

Quoting FBWless (Reply 5):
you mean "bye bye 747AdvF", the 744ERF is already in service

really, I would rather go with the seattletimes article than your opinion... sarcastic 


"Air Cargo Management Group's market forecast is based on an assumption that Boeing also will soon launch the new derivative of its jumbo, the 747 Advanced, and that this too will have a freighter version later"

"If Boeing failed to launch that (747ADV) airplane — which would be a surprise — the market for the 777 freighter would be even bigger."


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...aerospace/2002286070_boeing24.html



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 9844 times:

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 6):
Why building 747ADV-F when Boeing got 773ER and maybe (just maybe) a 773ER-F version, I´m sure its gonna compete with 747ADVF...

If you think the B777-200F will significantly impact B747Adv sales, then you are ignorant of the freighter market. They have different capabilities. If you think Boeing would ever build a B777-300F, then you are aggressively ignorant. In the freighter business, weight is much more important than volume. Your hypothetical B777-300F would carry less payload by weight than the B777-200F, burn more fuel doing so, have less range, and cost more to manufacture. Only package haulers like FedEx and DHL might have any interest. To a general freight company a B777-300F would be absurd.


User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 9836 times:

Why building 747ADV-F when Boeing got 773ER and maybe (just maybe) a 773ER-F version, I´m sure its gonna compete with 747ADVF...

no it won't, the 777-300ERF is, just like the A380F underpowered for big cargo stuff and therefore only good for package flights...


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 9687 times:

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 10):
no it won't, the 777-300ERF is, just like the A380F underpowered for big cargo stuff and therefore only good for package flights...

...and let's not forget the B747AdvF's front loading capability (which I assume it will have!) that allows it to carry outsized cargo that wouldn't otherwise fit through a side cargo door.

Quoting Beauing (Reply 4):
and that this too will have a freighter version later.

Wasn't there a rumour that the freighter version of the B747Adv was going to have an earlier EIS than the passanger version?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 9582 times:

Quote:
In recent news briefings about the 777 freighter, Boeing executives say they believe a fuel-efficient, twin-engine freighter that can fly between a variety of cities will be competitive in range and payload with the four-engine A380.

Payload???
Whoda thunk...


User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1597 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 9328 times:

Quoting SNATH (Reply 11):
Wasn't there a rumour that the freighter version of the B747Adv was going to have an earlier EIS than the passanger version?

Yes this was mentioned... I believe most likely to happen...


The 772LRF and the 747Adv has a KEY difference:

747 Advanced would be able to haul about 134 metric tons compared to 113 w/ the current 744.

777LRF would be able to haul about 100 metric tons... 34% less!

A380 would be able to haul about 150 metric tons

So no, sales of the 747Adv should do well, as its more efficient and bigger that the 777... The A380 lacks key features to compete fully with the 747Adv, such as loading aspects...



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 9261 times:

50+ commitments for this program is outstanding. While I love the 747, the 777-200LR is really starting to grow on me.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9557 posts, RR: 31
Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 9027 times:

Good to see the go ahead for the 777LRF and I do think that the 747ADV Freighter will get the offical start as well this year.

The A380F has a big problem. loading the upper deck, which will be very difficult if not impossible with conventional, height adapted high loaders and loading outsize pieces. That will limit its operations hub to hub, good for integrators but look at the route structire of Cargolux, no way they can make full use of the A380 throughout their netowork. The can with the 744F and will be able to do so with the 747ADVF as well.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 8586 times:

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 8):
the 777-300ERF is, just like the A380F underpowered for big cargo stuff

not underpowered... just that it would be something of a deadweight, considering that the lighter -200 can still heft essentially the same payloads.


User currently offlineAirportGal From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 8570 times:

Quoting CX747 (Reply 12):
50+ commitments for this program is outstanding.

according to Airbus ACI-NA May 2005 pitch, (only) 27 firm orders and commitments for A380F... way to go, Boeing!


User currently offlineWidebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 67
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 8188 times:

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 11):
So no, sales of the 747Adv should do well, as its more efficient and bigger that the 777... The A380 lacks key features to compete fully with the 747Adv, such as loading aspects...

The 777F will have 15-20% better ton/mile economics than the current 747-400ERF. It will burn less fuel for a given payload and have longer range with a full volume or structural weight limited payload. This is significant as it will allow such routes as NRT-SFO with full payload and without a costly technical stop in ANC. 777F will be able to load 22 120 inch high pallets vs the 747-400F's 21. Despite the 747's nose door the advantage here goes to 777F because those pallets are too high to load through the nose anyway.

Fundamentally I do think there will be some impact on future 747F sales driven by operators who do not absolutely need the extra 20t of payload or two additional main deck positions that the current 747 offers, and who are attracted to the much lower operating cost. As far as the 747ADV Freighter goes, it will offer four more main deck positions vs the current 747 plus 12t more structural payload. The 747ADV proposal Boeing has released shows a slight increase in fuel capacity, so this combined with more efficient engines should keep range on par the the current 747-400ERF. Still, 747ADVF will be a much more expensive plane to purchase and operate than any 777F, and the advantages of operating 747F's are for carriers who specifically require it's unique capabilities. If operators are willing to trade a few less main deck pallet positions, for longer range and lower operating cost the 777F will be the choice more often than not.

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 8):
no it won't, the 777-300ERF is, just like the A380F underpowered for big cargo stuff and therefore only good for package flights...

Actually the problem with a potential 773F is that while you would gain an additional six main deck positions plus four on the lower deck, range with a similar payload to 772F would suffer dramatically. Power is not a problem, as GE90 power can easily be extended beyond 115,300lbs , but the structural capability of 773 can not be extended much over an allowable MTOW of 800,000lbs. This limits fuel load with a near maximum payload, and subsequently range. You would end up with an aircraft that could load just as much as a 747-400ERF structurally, but range would be as much 1,000nm less. So for the moment, a 773F not a very good idea.

-widebodyphotog



If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10766 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 8118 times:

zero surprise here.

That the 777LRF makes a great freighter (apart from its inevitably sky-high, and, therefore in some cases prohibitive, pricetag) and is the perfect replacement for all the DC-10F, MD-11Fs and part of the 747 Classic freighters in the the next decade is without a doubt.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 7964 times:

The 777LRF and 773ER effectively kill off the new 747 production, which of course is the plan for Boeing. They want to move on from the 747. They are basically now in the 747F conversion business, with most new "orders" for the plane as SF conversions.

The whole point of the 777F is that it will carry the same cargo pallets, have the same cockpit, and use the same pilots as the 744F,ERF,SF,ERSF, so it makes integration and transition easy.

Which would also indicate that any new freighter version of 74xadv, 797 would also share those same economies.

PS - what makes the MD11 such a great cargo plane compared to it's flopping as a pax plane? Is it the 3 engines vs. 4, but longer range than a twin aspect, or is there something else at work (or is it just that it's easy to get them?). I liked flying in the MD11 the one time i did so for all of 1 hour.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16308 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 7863 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 18):
PS - what makes the MD11 such a great cargo plane compared to it's flopping as a pax plane? Is it the 3 engines vs. 4,

Good question. Several reasons:
1. The M11 always had an F version on offer. Fedex was an early M11 customer, so its freighter capability was always proven.
2. The early M11 fell short of promised range/payload guarantees which lost it some passenger-version sales (in particular, SQ).
3. The A340 never had an F version, whether as a new build or as a conversion.
4. Fedex operates a huge portion of the worldwide M11 fleet, so it distorts the stats.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 19
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 7793 times:

Dam! I still wishing for the day the 747ADV is launched!

Are any other airlines intrested in the 777LRF except AC/AF/Atlas/EK/EVA/EY/Cargolux/SQ/LH?

Rob!


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 7671 times:

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 19):
Good question. Several reasons:

...course, you failed to give the primary (not to mention, most fundamental) reason-- namely, that the M11 has an enormous payload density factor that only the 777F can surpass (for relative size).

The A340 etc cannot match this for a 90-100T freighter, the 747 too large, the 767/A330 too small.


User currently offlineUltrapig From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 589 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6982 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Maybe someone can help me-I assume the capital cost of a 777lrf is much more than a used 747-400 converted to a freighter. Since the "passengers" on a freighter don't care about the age of the plane can the improved operating ecomics make up for the huge capital cost diffential-Is one of the reasons that large freighters unlike the small DC9 and 727 counterparts spent alot of time in the air?

User currently offlineDC10GUY From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4999 times:

Cool Airplane. Looks like the main cargo door will be behind the left wing like the 747 ...


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineBEG2IAH From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 973 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (9 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4913 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 11):
747 Advanced would be able to haul about 134 metric tons compared to 113 w/ the current 744.
777LRF would be able to haul about 100 metric tons... 34% less!

Not quite.

B772LRF would carry 25.37% LESS than B747Adv.
(134-100)/134 = 0.2537 [Base of comparison is B747Adv]

B747Adv would carry 34% MORE than B777LRF.
(134-100)/100 = 0.34 [Base of comparison is B772LRF]

BEG2IAH



FAA killed the purpose of my old signature: Use of approved electronic devices is now permitted.
25 Post contains images LHB727230Adv : Congrats to Boeing. Looking forward to LH Cargo buying it. Cheers, Alex
26 ChiGB1973 : So, in reference to my "Why no A-380 for DHL?" maybe this will be the plane for them? M
27 Post contains images Harry : interesting.... can't wait to see it in real life
28 Post contains images Ikramerica : just look at a 772LR, and imagine it with no windows and a big door.
29 AFROTC : And the Boeing family is growing growing growing..... Good news for boeing and the cargo industry, I hope this turns out to be a real money maker for
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will Boeing Let The 777 Die? posted Fri Oct 27 2006 04:13:11 by KSUpilot
Would Boeing Open 2nd 777 Line? posted Wed Oct 11 2006 04:37:58 by BoeingFever777
Boeing 787 & 777 Orders posted Sat Jul 1 2006 08:34:35 by Grantcv
Boeing 747/767/777 Could Carry Wing-mount Missiles posted Tue Jun 13 2006 06:27:20 by MD-90
Boeing - 20 Unidentified 777 Orders posted Thu Jun 1 2006 17:22:47 by NAV20
Boeing: Expect 20 777 Orders From China posted Wed Apr 12 2006 06:48:15 by PanAm_DC10
Boeing Officially Launches 747-8 Family posted Tue Nov 15 2005 08:13:21 by Trvlr
AC Notifies Boeing Of 787/777 Order Cancellation posted Sun Jun 19 2005 04:50:42 by Avek00
Which Is Better For Boeing 747ADV Or 777-400 posted Thu May 12 2005 22:32:07 by JAM747
UPS And Air France Launch Customers For 777-200LRF posted Fri Jan 14 2005 19:06:38 by FCKC