Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Forecasts Need For 900 747 Sized Aircraft  
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7924 times:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/3755801.html

"Over the next 20 years we see need for about 900 airplanes," he said, with 300 being freighters and the remainder for passenger use.

They're definately off to a lousy start then.

28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4311 posts, RR: 36
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7902 times:

900 airplanes is a bit spokesman-babble. He keeps in the middle if he means only for the 747-800 or for the whole 350-600 pax market.
I think they actually see the 747-800 as a niche aircraft and will be happy -and make decent a profit on it- with another let's say 200 to be built in the 2010s. But of course he can't admit on this moment that the 747 became a niche player and the 787 and 777 are their core long range aircraft.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineMarcoT From Italy, joined May 2005, 253 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7902 times:

Quoting TinkerBelle (Thread starter):
"Over the next 20 years we see need for about 900 airplanes," he said, with 300 being freighters and the remainder for passenger use.

They're definately off to a lousy start then.

To be fair it is not clear, even after reading the articles, if the Boeing rep was referring to 748 specifically or to the whole VLA market.
Either way it seems that Boeing estimated of VLA market are getting closer to Airbus one  

Last thing, the article mentioned the opportunity to fill the 200 seats gap between the A380 and the A346, 773ER and [bold]744[/bold] ?!

[Edited 2006-03-31 14:59:37]


Too short space for my favorite hopelessly long winded one liner
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7681 times:

Quoting MarcoT (Reply 2):
To be fair it is not clear, even after reading the articles, if the Boeing rep was referring to 748 specifically or to the whole VLA market.

I think he was referring to the 748 orders but I think he's quite optimistic.

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 1):
I think they actually see the 747-800 as a niche aircraft and will be happy -and make decent a profit on it

They sure can use at least one pax version order soon.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7622 times:

This seems optimistic to me. There are few situations where it would make sense to buy 2 JumboJets rather than 3 B787-10s.

User currently offlineBmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 7256 times:

I remember McDonnell Douglas having similar predictions about their MD-11 and we all know how that turned out....


The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 7124 times:

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 3):
I think he was referring to the 748 orders but I think he's quite optimistic.

It's far too optimistic. The only advantage Boeing will have is the costs of the project (from R&D to assembly, etc.). Since this is not a clean sheet design, but rather yet another improvement and redesign of a 1960's design, their breakeven point will be low, so Boeing can make money off it with fewer sales than one might expect or like to see.


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 7045 times:

I think this is not going to happen, the market wants more frequencies and more point-to-point flights with more fuel-efficient twinjets like the A350, not gas-guzzling four-engines-for-more-weight-planes such as the 747-8.

User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 7004 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
fuel-efficient twinjets like the A350, not gas-guzzling four-engines-for-more-weight-planes such as the 747-8.

Boeing has a point to point fuel efficient jet (actually, the most fuel efficient) jet similar to A350... And 747-8 isn't the only more weight 4 engine plane I can think of. I know of another company that makes atleast two of those....



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6990 times:

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 9):
Boeing has a point to point fuel efficient jet (actually, the most fuel efficient) jet similar to A350... And 747-8 isn't the only more weight 4 engine plane I can think of. I know of another company that makes atleast two of those....

Really? I thought they make only one since the other one died.

Besides, how do you know who is more fuel-efficient when they are not even existing yet?

Besides the besides, do you actually know what fuel-efficient means and what it is good for?


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6946 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
I think this is not going to happen, the market wants more frequencies and more point-to-point flights with more fuel-efficient twinjets like the A350, not gas-guzzling four-engines-for-more-weight-planes such as the 747-8.

This is true as far as it goes, but laughably one-sided. The A350 and B787 will together take a very big chunk out of the A340, JumboJet, and WhaleJet markets. That's progress and it's a good thing.


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6933 times:

Isn't this the same Boeing who said that a VLA market didn't exist?

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21496 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6918 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 12):
Isn't this the same Boeing who said that a VLA market didn't exist?

Isn't this the same type of ignorant statement from people with an agenda?

The answer to your question is, no, Boeing never said that. Ever.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6884 times:

Quoting Jaysit (Reply 12):
Isn't this the same Boeing who said that a VLA market didn't exist?

Please cite where Boeing ever said that. I don't believe they ever did. Every Boeing forecast I've ever read predicted a VLA market.


User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10677 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6824 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
I think this is not going to happen, the market wants more frequencies and more point-to-point flights with more fuel-efficient twinjets like the A350, not gas-guzzling four-engines-for-more-weight-planes such as the 747-8.

More frequency = More airplanes = more fuel = more noise = more crews to pay for = more risk of accidents = higher fares.
Hardly a recipe that works everywhere. And for aircraft of 747 size and bigger there are simply no engines available (or even planned) to build a twinjet.
Thanks, but I´ll take a quad over a twin everythime.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6719 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 15):
More frequency = More airplanes = more fuel = more noise = more crews to pay for = more risk of accidents = higher fares.

This doesn't always hold true. Sometimes more smaller planes use less fuel and makes less noise than one larger plane.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21496 posts, RR: 60
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6697 times:

I know when visiting my Mom in EYW, the private jets that landed disturbed everyone, but the frequent prop-jets that landed over the house were not very loud and had a smaller noise footprint, meaning you didn't hear them coming forever and hear them long after they passed.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6662 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
I think this is not going to happen, the market wants more frequencies and more point-to-point flights with more fuel-efficient twinjets like the A350, not gas-guzzling four-engines-for-more-weight-planes such as the 747-8.

Yiou make me laugh Thorben. If we were talking about the Whalejet, I bet you would have said the same exact opposite of what you just did. LOL

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
I suggested deletion of the thread because the title is NOT what is said in the article by any means, and either TB didn't understand this or is trying to spark a fight.

What's with you and suggesting deletion of every other thread in here??


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6538 times:

Quoting Bmacleod (Reply 5):
I remember McDonnell Douglas having similar predictions about their MD-11 and we all know how that turned out....

I remember AIRBUS saying this about the A-380, and we all see how that is turning out. If lucky they will each sell 300-400 units over the next 20 years.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineLifelinerOne From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1919 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6208 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 19):
I remember AIRBUS saying this about the A-380, and we all see how that is turning out. If lucky they will each sell 300-400 units over the next 20 years.

Nonsense. I think the A380 is going to sell quite well, especially the A380-900. However, the WhaleJet is maybe a little early for the current aviation world. There will be a bigger market for the plane and when it grows, expect Airbus to be ready for it. I think nobody here believes the A380 which will be sold over 10 years from now will be the same like today. I think Airbus also invested in this VLA platform ready for adaption if the aviation scene demands it. Will Boeing be able to come up with another solution of it's B747 or will it come up with an all new VLA? That will be an interesting thing to see.

Cheers!  wave 



Only Those Who Sleep Don't Make Mistakes
User currently offlineFlyingHippo From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 683 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5775 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
I think this is not going to happen, the market wants more frequencies and more point-to-point flights with more fuel-efficient twinjets like the A350, not gas-guzzling four-engines-for-more-weight-planes such as the 747-8.

LOL... I gotta give it to you, you're one hell of an Airbus Cheerleader. The concept about point-to-point was brought up by Boeing when they introduced the 7E7, yet you used A350.

Four Engines for Long Distance was a concept celebrated by Airbus (And VS, A346, A388), and you use 748I as an example...

[Edited 2006-03-31 23:56:28]

User currently offlineRst033 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5743 times:

Is it fuzzy math or “cross your fingers forecasting.” Look at the facts: Korean Air has 40 744, KL 25, LU 30, AF 33, United 30, All Nippon 23 etc. Then you have the 741 at the end of its life cycle, coupled with a few airlines that will use either 4-5 748. Ok so maybe all airlines won’t replace their entire 744 fleet however 600 is not a huge number at all and Boeing should reach that target in 1 ½ to 2 years.

I do agree with the argument of 777 & A330 eating in the 748 market but 747 has proven to be a profitable versatile workhorse.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5706 times:

There might be a market for 1000 or so VLA with CASM lower than that of a hypothetical B787-11X, however, I don't see a market for more than 200 VLA with a CASM higher than that of the B787-10.

User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8505 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5583 times:

Quoting Rst033 (Reply 24):
Then you have the 741 at the end of its life cycle

741? I think that's a typo.

Quoting Rst033 (Reply 24):
however 600 is not a huge number at all and Boeing should reach that target in 1 � to 2 years.

600 is a HUGE number. That's probably the better part of two decades of production of both the A380 and 748.


User currently offlineDouwd20 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5562 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 14):
Please cite where Boeing ever said that. I don't believe they ever did. Every Boeing forecast I've ever read predicted a VLA market.

Exactly. They said it existed but it wasn't worth the costs of a completely new aircraft vs. benefit.


25 Ken777 : I think Boeing is probably in the ball park on their 20 year estimate - including the breakdown between pax & freighter versions. Right now it's a fli
26 FLY2LIM : My question is, how long would he have a job if he predicted that Boeing expects to sell "20-30 airplanes in the next 20 years"???? Spokespersons hav
27 VirginFlyer : This has been discussed over and over in the past. Since it seems some users are unable to discuss this without getting into a flap over "Airbus Cheer
28 Post contains images Poitin : Perhaps 20 years from now when all the airports have been rebuilt to handle it. But with the 60 or so Airbus is predicting in the next 5 or so years,
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...
Boeing Books Order For Five 747-400s posted Fri Apr 20 2001 09:53:21 by DeltaSFO
Boeing Considers Options For 747-8 posted Sun Jun 4 2006 20:20:53 by Leelaw
What Else Can Boeing Do For The 747? posted Wed Sep 4 2002 05:11:25 by Airmale
Boeing Going For The 747-400XQLR... posted Tue Feb 26 2002 08:41:47 by Hisham
Boeing's Next Number For An Aircraft... posted Sat Nov 17 2001 05:06:51 by Gmonney
Boeing To Receive 20 Orders For The 747? posted Tue Sep 5 2000 21:27:36 by CX747
Boeing Sees No Interest In 747-8I Upper Deck Sleep posted Tue Oct 31 2006 20:21:24 by NYC777
Is There A Drop-Dead Date For The 747-8 Pax? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 20:16:09 by Bmacleod
No Need For Aviation Magazines Anymore posted Wed Oct 25 2006 06:41:27 by Boeingforever
Need Help ID'ing Two Aircraft posted Wed Oct 11 2006 03:06:42 by Brenintw