Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13630 times:
24 October 2006:
...Emirates would prefer Boeing to build the shorter, longer-range variant it originally proposed.
...We have made it clear to Boeing that we prefer the [original] stretch because of its greater range at maximum payload," he [Tim Clark] says, adding that he has suggested to Boeing that it should consider building both versions "to increase the product spread within the family..."
...Boeing does not rule out studies of auxiliary fuel versions for range-challenged carriers, but says "right now the focus is on how to get the lowest operating costs and the best economics while fulfilling a normal range of 8000nm..."
Looks like Mr. Clark is looking for Los Angeles/Dubai "with a meaningful payload."
Additionally, FI reports that Boeing's original delivery schedule has slipped: final configuration of the 747-8I is due to be frozen in mid-2007, with initial deliveries in mid-to-late 2010, rather than April 2010, thought the 748F remains on track for the first delivery in October 2009.
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3259 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13620 times:
Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter): Additionally, FI reports that Boeing's original delivery schedule has slipped: final configuration of the 747-8I is due to be frozen in mid-2007, with initial deliveries in mid-to-late 2010, rather than April 2010, thought the 748F remains on track for the first delivery in October 2009.
Pretty accademic realy as there's currently going to only be one plane (the Qatari government) delivered.
Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter): he [Tim Clark] says, adding that he has suggested to Boeing that it should consider building both versions "to increase the product spread within the family..."
Someone needs to order the India version before they consider offerring it in two versions.
Bringiton From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 866 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13526 times:
Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1): he [Tim Clark] says, adding that he has suggested to Boeing that it should consider building both versions "to increase the product spread within the family..."
Very wishful thinking indeed on his part . I guess boeing has gone in with a configuration which according to them and their clients appeals to the widest possible market . The I isnt going to sell in huge no.s anyways so making 2 versions is pretty much out of the window . making the strech adds savings as the aircraft increases commonality with the F version which will be the real money maker for boeing !!
AirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2779 posts, RR: 42 Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12783 times:
Clark is the most exposed of all of the Airline CEOs to problems with the A380 since his company has more then 40% of the backorders for the platform. Anything that competes with that from his point of view, or that gives his competitors a CASM advantage is going to be a threat from his point of view.
Not that I think there is much of a market for either the 747-8i or the A380 in the first place.
SparkingWave From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 668 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12761 times:
Suspiciously, this sounds like posturing by EK to gain more leverage against Airbus and the A380.
After all, why is it that EK is so gung-ho about the A380 and its max. passenger count, and yet when it comes to the 747-8, it shifts gears and goes for range over pax?
Let EK put its money where its mouth is and actually offer orders instead of just making things "clear" to Boeing. An order for, perhaps, 43 of the original sized 747-8s?
SparkingWave ~~~
Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
Halls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12689 times:
Quoting Mdorbust (Reply 6): Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
...Emirates would prefer Boeing to build the shorter, longer-range variant it originally proposed.
Then they should have ordered it while it was offered.
Good point. Makes the current comments from Emirates ring hollow.....
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26907 posts, RR: 83 Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12596 times:
Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1): Pretty academic really as there's currently going to only be one plane (the Qatari government) delivered.
Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 8): But the design has yet to be frozen. Would competent airline management do this?
Boeing is going to build the version that has the most interest. If EK is the only one of the 25 (?) airlines said to be "interested" in the 748I that desires the one with more range then payload, unless he's ready to order a few dozen (or score), Boeing is going to tailor the model to the "majority opinion".
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12589 times:
Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 5): Let EK put its money where its mouth is and actually offer orders instead of just making things "clear" to Boeing. An order for, perhaps, 43 of the original sized 747-8s?
EK has made a significant firm order for 748Fs, hasn't Mr. Clark earned the right to publicly comment on his preferences for the nascent 748I.
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5207 posts, RR: 49 Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12557 times:
It's so funny..Clark demands all these custom made planes from Boeing (787-10, 747-8I) yet he has to pull he trigge. If he wants to buy the 747-8 then he should have bouht the version that Boeing originally offered when it was out there. Now he's saying Boeinghas to spend money to build two verisons for a niche market. Just this guy has to learn that it's not that easy to spend other people's money.
When he buys 100 787s then he could talk to Boeing about the 748I (original. Till then he's stuck with the A3late80.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26907 posts, RR: 83 Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12460 times:
Quoting Johnny (Reply 10): Three years after the EIS of the A388 - for a derivative of a late 1960s design. WHY?!?!?
Because it's a great freighter that is selling strongly and there is a potential market in the hundreds for it, even though it will compete against the A388, A350, A340, 787 and 777 in that market.
Quoting Leelaw (Reply 11): EK has made a significant firm order for 748Fs, hasn't Mr. Clark earned the right to publicly comment on his preferences for the nascent 748I.
Yes he has, but just like all the airlines and lessors that carped about the A350 not being "right", he should step-up and buy it if he wants it.
And that he wants range more then payload makes it seem likely to me that EK will be more likely to not buy the 748I as a hedge to the A380. It may be he desires more capacity and range then his 773ER fleet can provide him to open up some high-traffic routes that are not "A380-ready".
Johnny From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12420 times:
@ Stitch
"Because it's a great freighter that is selling strongly and there is a potential market in the hundreds for it, even though it will compete against the A388, A350, A340, 787 and 777 in that market."
That is the reason for the delay? Strange - they must feel very confident to secure a huge part of the market with the B748I.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21041 posts, RR: 60 Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12425 times:
Here's the thing.
Clark has the right to say what he wants.
But When proposed, Boeing offered a 450 seat jet with 8000nm range. The range only increased due to aerodynamics, to 8300nm, and that didn't lead to one firm order.
Now it's a 465 seat jet with 8000nm range.
They are offering the same performance as before, but with a bigger jet. This has always been EK's mantra. Size, size, size.
8000nm is the same range as the A388, and the original range offered.
While I still think they should be offering a 747-7i at 410 seats as well, Boeing seems to have target customers for the 748i and EK was not part of the group. Now maybe if EK were to cancel 25 A380s and order 30 748is, they'd change their mind?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3316 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12389 times:
I thought when Boeing made the decision to stretch the 748i, they said they were "listening to the airlines" and responding to their requirements. Did "airlines" they listened to in this instance not include EK? That would seem very strange to me.
Unless, Boeing were responding to specific airline(s) with the capacity to order a lot of them (i.e. BA).
PolymerPlane From United States of America, joined May 2006, 991 posts, RR: 3 Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 12289 times:
Quoting Johnny (Reply 14): That is the reason for the delay? Strange - they must feel very confident to secure a huge part of the market with the B748I.
No airlines has ordered the I, so it's not really a delay is it?
How does the 748 line do? With F orders coming by the dozen, when is the earlier anyone can take delivery of 748I?
Quoting Johnny (Reply 10): Three years after the EIS of the A388 - for a derivative of a late 1960s design.
WHY ?!?!?
Because... A388 was developed from 12 years ago, and B748 was conceived last year. That's 11 years difference. yet the EIS only 3 years apart
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26907 posts, RR: 83 Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 12242 times:
Quoting Johnny (Reply 14): That is the reason for the delay?
No, I imagine it's a delay due to Boeing not committing resources to the 748I program while it's sales remain slim so they can commit them to other projects with more immediate returns (787) as well as additional changes needing to be made now that the 748I is longer. They did the same thing with the 772LR after 9/11, moving resources to get the 773ER out because it had better immediate prospects.
As to why the 748's EIS is three years later then the A388's (assuming the A388 actually EIS' in 2007), since the 747-8 was launched in November 2005, I would expect it's EIS to be later then the A388's, which was launched in December 2000. Also, since Boeing had already sold out the 744 line till 2009, they had no reason to rush the program since production lines are not going to be sitting idle.
Quoting Johnny (Reply 17): I think the main goal of the stretch was to bring down the seat-miles-cost of the B748 to the value of the A388.
If you believe Zvezda and Widebodyphotog(?), they already had that and a stretch should make the disparity even greater in favor of the 748.
I also believe some of the reason for the stretch is to make development and production easier since the plane frames will now be identical.
Poitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 12024 times:
Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter): .We have made it clear to Boeing that we prefer the [original] stretch because of its greater range at maximum payload," he [Tim Clark] says, adding that he has suggested to Boeing that it should consider building both versions "to increase the product spread within the family..."
I suppose if he firm ordered 45 copies of the "747-8 SP", Boeing would make them.
So open your check book Timmy and put your money on the table.
Baron95 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1335 posts, RR: 9 Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 11391 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 19): I also believe some of the reason for the stretch is to make development and production easier since the plane frames will now be identical.
Check again. The 748F and 748I frames are not identical. The 4.6m strech ahead of the wing are in different positions. On the I it streches the upper deck, on the F it does not and is behind the upper deck. The frames are no more common now then they were before the latest redesign of the I. From the wing back, they are the same, but they were the same previously as well. Ahead of the wing the two frames are different now, as they were before.
Regarding the "delay".... What delay. Boeing is delivering 744/744ERF till 2009, then they start delivering 748Fs already on order, then they can have some slots available in late 2010 and early 2011 for the 748I.
It would be stupid of Boeing to spend resources and freeze configuration on the 748I prior to the point needed to meet earliest possible delivery slots. Keeping options open until a decision is called for is smart business.
For example (and this is just to illustrate). If EK or LH or QF or BA or more than one of them comes to Boeing and say, we'll order 50 748I if it has a range of 8,500nm, you can bet that there will be an 8,500nm version built, and that may even be the new baseline (744 length with 8500 nm range).
As in any project, early customers will define what the 748I will be - money (orders) talks.
AirMailer From United States of America, joined May 2006, 413 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 11265 times:
AirMailer From United States of America, joined May 2006, 413 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10939 times:
Quoting Eatmybologna (Reply 8): Quoting Mdorbust (Reply 6):
Then they should have ordered it while it was offered.
But the design has yet to be frozen. Would competant airline management do this?
Have you ever heard of a little plane called the A350?
How many "orders" does that have again?
25 Scouseflyer: Sorry was reading a Dale Brown book last night where they referred to models of aircraft in the USAF with a letter using a word (Alpha, Bravo, Charli
26 N328KF: It's a common NATO thing. For example, The Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear F" ("F" being the variant) is often referred to as a "Bear Foxtrot."
27 Halls120: and bull**t - or in this case, hot air - walks.
28 BoomBoom: Airbus will deliver ONE A380 in 2007! You call that an EIS? For all of 2008 they will deliver only 13! WHY ?!?!?[Edited 2006-10-23 19:27:15]
29 Leelaw: The text of the Flight International article quoted in the threadstarter is now available online: http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...tes+questions
30 Ikramerica: At the time, they said airlines were in TWO camps: One wanted the same length and increased range One wanted the same range and increased length. It
31 SK736: What - Boeing is going to deliver an aircraft later than it promised? Oh no, it must mean that Boeing is about to go out of business. No doubt there
32 Johnny: @ SK736 This airplane reminds me more and more to the B747-500x and -600x. Endless talks with potential customers, more and more changes and at the en
33 Ikramerica: I still wonder if anyone is going to buy this plane. One thing to consider though is that over time, planes seem to get more range. The 777 is a recen
34 Bringiton: You do realize that since the launch of the 747 in the 60's there have been several follow up models ? Did you think that boeing has been working on
35 MIAMIx707: Good points. No doubt an important customer but I wouldn't trust the common sense of Tim Clark/EK when they have ordered 45! A380s. Have they ordered
36 B2707SST: Although this is pretty unlikely, a 747-7I with the same length as the -400 along with the longer -8I and -8F would be an interesting program, in tha
37 Stitch: Indeed. I wonder, however, if the non-personal-HVAC wiring, cabling and ducting runs below the upper deck would be identical across both models? Well
38 Autothrust: Funny one ! Im sure the 748 will be a very efficient aircraft altough that doesnt mean the A380 couldnt match his CASM. Airbus could upgrade the A380
39 DAYflyer: Agreed. If he was all for it, then he should have bought it after the second A-380 delay was announced.
40 Ken777: To make money over the long term with a replacement plane for 747 fleets. It will be interesting to see, way down the road when the last 748 is deliv
41 Baron95: They haven't even gotten the A380 Mk1 out yet and you are already talking to an upgrade? And this for a plane that has not been getting any meaningfu
42 Justloveplanes: I think Mr. Clark would like a more exact alternative to the A380 to fill in the delivery delay gap. If EK was planning for a low density A380, could
43 SK736: Oh dear, looks like I rattled a few cages!
44 Travelin man: Only by being completely off-base in your "assessment".
45 EbbUK: Sounds like Boeing's got a touch of the 380itus! Seems neither manufacturer can stick to targets when it comes to the VLA market, although one has or
46 RAPCON: ...while agree with the lot of you in saying to Emirates to put your money where your mouth is, one always has to play at least "lip service" to your
47 Poitin: I am sure they have talked to him and asked him the magic question "how many?" and didn't hear a large enought number. If he said "40", then he's hav
48 N328KF: I think you are irreprehensibly misreading the situation. As someone else said (Zvezda?), the 747-8I issue is not technical as much as it is the fact
49 Ikramerica: No, you made a stupid comment and were called on it. Now, if Boeing announced the 748F would not EIS in Q4 2009 but instead in Q3 2010, you'd be on t
50 Flylku: Clark knows that what really makes their desires clear is a firm order for a significant number of hulls. Short of that and he is like one of us sayi
51 FlyDreamliner: Wow, if all of that happened, things at Boeing would be ..... still going better than at Airbus. God forbid that low budget overhaul of an aircraft t
52 Jfk777: If Emirates wants the short version and will buy enough airplanes then anything is possible. Emirates is the PAN AM is this generation, the worls is b
53 AirMailer: Ebb, Once again you hit the nail right on the head. Boeing keeps exceeding range/ payload commitments, and Airbus keeps exceeding delivery dates comm
54 Astuteman: And they almost certainly are. To act on it, or otherwise, is a business decision they'll have to make. A cheap, unworthy and inaccurate shot. Nicely
55 JAM747: Here it is again as I have mentioned in previous trends, the interest of an airline in a longer range version of the 747-8 with a shorter original 747
56 BA: Not really hard, but it would raise development costs. If having the two lengths would greatly increase the 747-8I's appeal among airlines, then Boei
57 Baron95: Also note that VIPs are delivered a bit differently in the sense that they are delivered totally green (no interior whatsoever) to a completion cente
58 KC135TopBoom: It could be. Maybe they were listening to BA, LH, QF, AF, NZ, NW, UA, JL, KE, and they all wanted a 467 seat airplane with an 8,000nm range. So, EK,
59 Leelaw: Boeing sees no interest in 747-8I upper deck sleeping cabins and refuses to rule out two lengths of the fuselage stretch http://81.144.183.107/Article
60 Keesje: The airlines are only interested . On the versions / lenght, Boeing is still not sure what to do, 2 versions? Boeing's Mooney did not rule out the po
61 Stitch: I think the quote from Mooney you did answers your question for you. Does the market justify two versions? If EK expresses interest for 10 748-I "sho
62 Leelaw: IMO, Airbus brought this unfortunate situation with Mr. Clark upon themselves by floating the A340E concept before the A340-600HGW had even entered s
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3259 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 668 posts, 
From France, joined Apr 2005, 412 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 2993 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
