Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Any News On 748 Delays From The Spies?  
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10062 times:

With the 787 schedule slip, and the amount of resources devoted to this program, it is likely the 748 program is now squeezed. Has Boeing mentioned anything about this program? I don't think cargo carriers care too much about a delay 2 years out if they know about it in time (as they can continue to fly the older planes for a month or two more), and LH has plenty of time to plan, but as an aviation fan, I'd sure like to know the status...


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 9842 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I have heard nothing from local Seattle media or local Seattle contacts. The first time I heard about it was from a fellow airliner.net member in one of the threads yesterday.

User currently offlineMop357 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 85 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9841 times:

When are they going building to start the 748? I can't wait to see actual pictures of the airplane instead of animations.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9841 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mop357 (Reply 2):
When are they going building to start the 748? I can't wait to see actual pictures of the airplane instead of animations.

Plan is next year, as I recall.


User currently offlineAlessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 9842 times:

My guess is that the technology the B748 share with B787 will be delayed?
Swedish media claim that parts from Honeywell has been delayed to the B748...

[Edited 2007-10-10 15:53:36]

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 9841 times:

Quoting Alessandro (Reply 4):
My guess is that the technology the B748 share with B787 will be delayed?

I don't see why this would be so. The engines are not delayed, the avionics don't seem to be the bottleneck in the 787 program, so not sure why the 787 technology would be delayed.

Also, Boeing already knows how to build 747s, the major work on the wings has been completed.

I would imagine the main reason for any delay is allocation of resources to other programs and lack of demand for the 748i model. I was just wondering if any insider types had heard about any delays. The 748i was already quietly pushed back by at least 1 quarter when they had no pending orders a year ago. It left more room for F deliveries, which were in demand.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 9841 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5):
I would imagine the main reason for any delay is allocation of resources to other programs and lack of demand for the 748i model. I was just wondering if any insider types had heard about any delays. The 748i was already quietly pushed back by at least 1 quarter when they had no pending orders a year ago. It left more room for F deliveries, which were in demand.

I don't recall the basis of the original rumor - was it that the 747-8 Intercontinental was to be delayed, or the entire 747-8 program (including the freighter) was to be delayed?


User currently offlineJRDC930 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 9491 times:

I think delays regarding the 748 (i) are a mute point, as a decision made by a large potential customer a while back, has made it clear no one else is going to buy that Lemon. As for the 748F, i doubt there will be much delay if any, the plane is essentially finished, and no industry sources I've read or heard from have lead me to believe otherwise.

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9489 times:

Quoting JRDC930 (Reply 7):
I think delays regarding the 748 (i) are a mute point, as a decision made by a large potential customer a while back, has made it clear no one else is going to buy that Lemon. As for the 748F, i doubt there will be much delay if any, the plane is essentially finished, and no industry sources I've read or heard from have lead me to believe otherwise.

So, you have no information and nothing to contribute. Sure is a round about way of saying it...

BTW - it's moot, not mute.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9490 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
I don't recall the basis of the original rumor - was it that the 747-8 Intercontinental was to be delayed, or the entire 747-8 program (including the freighter) was to be delayed?

I'm not asking about the original rumor. I'm asking about now, today, now that the 787 is officially delayed, if anyone has heard about the 748 being a casualty of this delay, since resources will remain devoted to the 787 6 months longer than originally anticipated.

The timely EIS of the 787 is far more important to Boeing than a 3 month slip in 748F certification (since the line would be nowhere near at max output and deliveries would not be delayed by much time, if any after the first few).

I was just wondering if there is any new buzz out there. So far, sounds like the answer is no.

And again, the 748i EIS slipped before and nobody even noticed, so it's not like the press and a.net are paying that much attention...  Wink

And just a heads up: a quick check of Boeing's website reveals that all EIS and certification information has been removed from the basic 747-8 informational pages. The projected timetable used to be listed quite clearly, and those dates were also included in descriptive paragraphs. Now the only thing detailed is the date of the first order for the plane and that Cargolux will take their first plane in "late 2009."

Things that make one go hmmm.......



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9489 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JRDC930 (Reply 7):
I think delays regarding the 748 (i) are a mute point, as a decision made by a large potential customer a while back, has made it clear no one else is going to buy that Lemon.

[b]Carls[b] is reporting that EK is taking 10 of them, along with 50 A350s, at the Dubai Air Show here Emirates To Announce 100 A350 And 20 747-8 (by Carls Oct 10 2007 in Civil Aviation)

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 9):
I'm not asking about the original rumor. I'm asking about now, today, now that the 787 is officially delayed, if anyone has heard about the 748 being a casualty of this delay, since resources will remain devoted to the 787 6 months longer than originally anticipated.

Got it. Nothing here in Seattle or Everett.


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9604 posts, RR: 69
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9490 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

I think you will find the current worry, after the 787, is the 777F, not the 747-8.

User currently offlineJRDC930 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 9489 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
BTW - it's moot, not mute

Ha Ha...  butthead  I dont know how many people here work for boeing or any one else involved in the program, are going to break silence, so i dont know who you want to get info from. My contribution is the one person I know working at boeing has not mentioned any delays or foreseeable delays based on info he has available... but i have noting to contribute, so go ahead.


User currently offlinePatroni From Luxembourg, joined Aug 1999, 1403 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8991 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Thread starter):
I don't think cargo carriers care too much about a delay 2 years out if they know about it in time (as they can continue to fly the older planes for a month or two more),

Why should there be a difference between cargo and passenger airlines? Both will have to develop their fleet plans (e.g. sale of to-be-replaced aircraft) and network (e.g. keeping the "older" aircraft and using them on new routes etc.). Do you think that cargo carriers use less time to plan the deployment of their most expensive assets? If so - why?


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8992 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 11):
I think you will find the current worry, after the 787, is the 777F, not the 747-8.

What's her problem? You'd think they'd have that one under control...


User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1446 posts, RR: 12
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The first time I heard about it was from a fellow airliner.net member in one of the threads yesterday.

The fellow was slz396 who apparently heard it from Zeke. Put the rest together.



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8992 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Norcal773 (Reply 15):
The fellow was slz396 who apparently heard it from Zeke. Put the rest together.

Yes, they make it quite clear who they believe is the best company out there, but I value much of what Zeke says because he has the operational background to back it up. As for Slz396, I figure he just likes to tweak the noses of the Boeing Boosters who like to tweak his (and other Airbus Aficionados') noses. It's a little dull, but it's harmless fun.

So I would not expect Zeke to just make it up. And now Clickhappy is mumbling about the 777F being a concern at Boeing.

Who knows, maybe Boeing is done for and we're looking at "Airbus Ascendant". *shrug*


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8993 times:

Quoting Patroni (Reply 13):
Why should there be a difference between cargo and passenger airlines? Both will have to develop their fleet plans (e.g. sale of to-be-replaced aircraft) and network (e.g. keeping the "older" aircraft and using them on new routes etc.). Do you think that cargo carriers use less time to plan the deployment of their most expensive assets? If so - why?

Because cargo cares less about product rollout and being in the newest planes, and 2 years is PLENTY of time to move to plan B. No cargo carrier is going to order a new model without having a contingency plan for delays, are they?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1446 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 16):
I value much of what Zeke says

Zeke in most cases knows what he's talking about as biased as he is.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 16):
And now Clickhappy is mumbling about the 777F being a concern at Boeing.

Now, That would be a problem.  Sad



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineCygnusChicago From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
Because cargo cares less about product rollout and being in the newest planes, and 2 years is PLENTY of time to move to plan B.

Well, that would be pretty worisome - hopefully plan B is NOT switching to 777Fs. I cannot wait to see the 748F, she is sure to be a graceful lady.

As an aside, what was the planned roll-out? 7-4-8 (07-04-2008)?  Big grin



If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
User currently offlineFWI747 From France, joined Jul 2007, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

From ATW (Paris Air show -Le Bourget)

http://www.atwonline.com/news/topic.html?topicID=43

Quoting :
"...Boeing expects to gain between 100 nm. and 200 nm. in range from some weight reduction studies that could take range to 8,200 nm..."

How much weight do they need to save to reach this target ?
Is it possible without using large CFRP parts ?

I read in the introduction of the Airport compatibility brochure, that "the passenger version will have a passenger count of 465" . I wonder if it's related to the weight saving chase or if it's only a typo...  scratchchin 

David


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21476 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

Quoting FWI747 (Reply 20):
I read in the introduction of the Airport compatibility brochure, that "the passenger version will have a passenger count of 465" . I wonder if it's related to the weight saving chase or if it's only a typo...  

??

They have been saying this for quite a while. By putting non-revenue facilities in the crown over the main deck, they free up about 1.5 rows of Y space, or 15 seats.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineFWI747 From France, joined Jul 2007, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
By putting non-revenue facilities in the crown over the main deck, they free up about 1.5 rows of Y space, or 15 seats.

Yes, but it was before stretching the intercontinental version to match the length of the freighter model, which brought the seat count to 467 (from 450), as stated in the previous releases of Airport planing manuals.
My point was that from september edition, the passenger version lost 2 seats. Albeit insignificant this change may indicate that they are still struggling to give those 8400Nm to EK (and i hope they will)...


David


User currently offline797charter From Denmark, joined Jun 2005, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 11):
I think you will find the current worry, after the 787, is the 777F, not the 747-8.

What's her problem? You'd think they'd have that one under control...

I would like now that too, - Mr. King has been very precisely in the past!


I mean, - what can go wrong with this plane, "basically" a 772LR - well yes I know that is more than a cargo door they have to install - but anyway?


Regards

Steen



Keep it clear of the propellers
User currently offlinePatroni From Luxembourg, joined Aug 1999, 1403 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7480 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
Because cargo cares less about product rollout and being in the newest planes, and 2 years is PLENTY of time to move to plan B. No cargo carrier is going to order a new model without having a contingency plan for delays, are they?

Of course cargo carriers will have contingency plans, but I would think that pax airlines have these as well? If a serious cargo airline places an investment for a dozen or so new 747-8F, they certainly plan with the capacity. Maybe the cargo business is less "sexy" and tangible than the passenger side, but there is a market and there are actual customers whose demands have to be satisfied. Not to forget the investment in training, infrastructure etc. With a time horizon of two years I see no difference between a cargo and a pax airline.


25 NRA-3B : In reply to the original question-(will the 747-8(either version) schedule be affected by the 787 realignment?) That question was one of those asked b
26 JTR : Stitch, you might want to go into 'Alliterators' Anonymous.
27 Zeke : The 748 and 787 do not share the same engine, different fan diameters, one bleed less one not, different electrics and hydraulics. The GE 747 test be
28 DAYflyer : Yeah, its such a lemon that a lowlife 3rd rate airline called Lufthansa ordered 20 and another loser airline called Emirates is buying 10-20 of them.
29 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Unfortunately Clickhappy knows his stuff....so I'm not going to doubt him on that end. However, at least with the -200F... 1)it has been progressing
30 Post contains images Stitch : Maybe it's just more efficient then expected.
31 Ikramerica : Is that what you are on about? It could just be a typo! And yet, this doesn't change anything I've said. The engines are not delayed, nor should we h
32 Post contains links Zeke : That is your opinion, it is not fact. The partial FBW for the 748 could possibly have the same problem as the 787, it is in some respects a little mo
33 FWI747 : Thank you Zeke for this link, it seems that they went back to their first proposal with a shorter fuselage (the forward plug is only 80 in long), henc
34 Jtdieffen : I'm confused by the link. You say this is the updated info, Zeke? Or is this the old one? The copyright says this is from 2006 and it shows the short
35 Stitch : The 747-8 Airport Compatibility Brochure I have is from October 2006. I'll need to compare the two once the second one downloads.
36 RIX : but which one ordered by LH? I don't think it doesn't matter for them whether or not they get what it was as of when they made their order.
37 FWI747 : BTW, I found Boeing presentation at Paris Air Show (sorry can't provide a link, it's a PDF doc) where it's stated that pax version would offer QC2 noi
38 Brendows : Not only the copyright, if you look at the document properties, you'd notice that the document was created in May 2006. This presentation is even old
39 JRDC930 : I was under the impression nothing firm has been reached on that... i would not call 40 aircraft a huge success, and im not denying the F version is
40 Stitch : There was some confusion as to which model Carls originally meant. It now appears that any additional 747-8s ordered by EK will also be freighters an
41 Cloudy : What kind of worry do you mean? Sales? Technical delays?
42 OldAeroGuy : I think the biggest worry for the 777F is the delay in 787 flight testing. Both airplanes will now be scheduled to flight test at the same time in 20
43 Post contains images Baroque : Tricky Ikra, he probably meant moot, but between not having any information, and if he had not being able to post it, mute got pretty close to it. Wh
44 RoseFlyer : That is wrong. The engineering drawings are no where near being 100% released. They won't be until next year. The 748 is still in a much earlier desi
45 Post contains images SCAT15F : I don't know about the drawings, but Randy Tinseth replied to my blog question a few days ago and said that firm configuration for the 748i is still
46 Norcal773 : Ouch....
47 Post contains images Slz396 : Nothing to "ouch" about really, Zeke made a very good and easy to understand point there actually: Is anybody able to dig up a link to a site of some
48 Stitch : So the absence of any news is now confirmation of bad news?
49 Post contains images Slz396 : The total and simultaneous absence of any news from so many different parties involved at leasts hints at a lack of progress... If no parts for the 7
50 Tdscanuck : They've got a quite a bit to go before 100% drawing release, so a lot of the stuff isn't fully defined yet. Can't produce until it's defined. I'm pre
51 Post contains links Stitch : Looking through Boeing's Press Releases, they have said essentially nothing about the 747-8I in 2007, other then an announcement on Rockwell Collins b
52 Cloudy : Yeps, but that is an inefficient process. You can't shuffle around people the way you can shuffle around money and materials and expect to get the sa
53 RoseFlyer : Firm configuration is different from drawing release. Drawing release is when the design is finished. But I do understand what you mean. Very true, b
54 Baroque : Did you mean that Stitch or that "I tend NOT to think Boeing...." ???
55 Slz396 : Maybe, but still it is strange Boeing suddenly reverses course and went from highlighting every small step in the 747 to absolute silence on the prog
56 Post contains links Stitch : Honestly, I looked back two years and saw very little about the 747-8 program other then order announcements and RFP submissions... Also, from the la
57 Stitch : Just got back from lunch, where some 747-8I engineers were taking the new guy (from Japan) out to lunch as a welcome. No mention of the program being
58 Post contains images Flysherwood : You will be eating those words regarding the 748-I very soon.
59 ERAUgrad02 : How can you claim something that is not built yet is a "lemon"? Lemon is a term used for something that breaks all the time etc. How can you claim su
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...
Any News On The Pinnacle CRJ 200 Crash From Last Year? posted Fri Oct 21 2005 02:57:27 by Nwafflyer
Any News On The Bombardier CSeries? posted Wed Sep 19 2007 01:16:15 by FighterPilot
Any News On The YYZ LAX SYD With AC posted Sun Jun 10 2007 15:21:53 by YYZACGUY
Any News On The A380 Assembly? posted Tue May 22 2007 10:01:42 by N14AZ
Any News On The New CX Cabins? posted Mon Jan 15 2007 23:39:10 by Kaktusdigital
Any News On The VS A340 HKG Tailstrike? posted Sat Dec 2 2006 17:40:15 by Baflyer
Any News On The New Bangkok Airport? posted Mon Jul 3 2006 03:16:08 by Aerokiwi
Any News On The 777LR? posted Mon Jan 23 2006 21:03:24 by Shabaz
Any News On The Saudi E170s? posted Sun Dec 4 2005 01:20:49 by HiJazzey
Any News On The A350? posted Wed Aug 10 2005 20:11:30 by Shamrock350