Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 9021 times:
No, the A380F was (effectively) cancelled because it involved significant additional development beyond the passenger version, including a large increase in MTOW, and there was not the prospect of sales sufficient to cover the development cost. The additional development work beyond the 747-8F for Boeing to produce the 747-8I is negligible by comparison. The LH order alone more than covers the marginal development costs of the 747-8I. Boeing will make some money on the 747-8I even if the order count remains at 25.
Hirnie From Germany, joined May 2004, 596 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 9005 times:
Yes, the order is secure. LH wanted this plane since the mid 90s and now they get what they want. Boeing listened carefully to LH in the process of specifying the 747-8i. Emirates not ordering the 748i is a result of this, because Emirates would like to have more rage, LH not. So why should this order not be secure? I think in the mid future we will see a follow on order by LH.
At this time I think LH is the only operator that ordered the 748i (correct me if IÂ´m wrong). I think Boeing doesn't have to worry, orders will come, not that much like the 744 got, but enough to make money for Boeing.
Cloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8884 times:
If the deal was to be cancelled it would be Lufthansa doing so rather than Boeing. It would also be an economical decision rather than a technical one. The question is if Boeing fail to sell the -8I to another operator, would Lufthansa want to be the sole taker? What would the cost of any -8I specific spares be? How confident are they about the aircraft's residual value? If they run an economic model of the scenario of them being the sole operator, will the promised numbers still add up?
BestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7302 posts, RR: 57
Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8784 times:
Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 4): How confident are they about the aircraft's residual value?
I think that this is a key issue for other airlines. As LH retain their aircraft for a long period, it will probably not affect them. Airlines that flip their fleet over a short period may be concerned with low take-up.
Global Parts availability may become an issue however.
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7089 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8568 times:
Quoting Hirnie (Reply 2): I think in the mid future we will see a follow on order by LH.
That was recently stated by the head of the 747 fleet. He said LH could need up to 50 747-8I.
The order is secure as long as Boeing does not cancel the Intercontinental version which is doubtful.
LH always wanted the plane. One advantage of the 747-8I is that it carrys more cargo than the A380 which is an important factor for LH.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Airbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8656 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8242 times:
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 1): The LH order alone more than covers the marginal development costs of the 747-8I. Boeing will make some money on the 747-8I even if the order count remains at 25.
Sorry, I don't buy that. There's no way that 25 air frames sold at a very large discount to a launch customer would be enough to pay for the 748i program. If LH is the only carrier to ever order the 748i and Boeing goes ahead with it, it will make the A380 program look like a blockbuster success.
Fanfan From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 54 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8174 times:
Recall the great irritation at LH when Boeing cancelled the MD11F. This is a decision that Boeing (never in public) wishes they never made.
Besides irritating a good customer, they missed out on a lot of other orders as the MD11F is a great freighter. FedEx and UPS would have kept the Long Beach factory busy and we would likely not see as much interest in the A330F. Try finding an MD11 frame now. Those that have them won't give them up.
That said, Boeing's biggest problem now with the 747i is not customers, but delays - with three programs launching they do not have enough test pilots. Moreover, their engineers are scrambling - taken off the 747 to get the 787 out.
Airlines looking at this plane know that every day they wait, they will get a better discount from Boeing. Recall the A380 customers who went quiet until the delivery problems got sorted. BA took the A380 because their accountants said the deal was too good to refuse. Airbus was desperate then but no longer. Now you will Boeing get desperate - customers know this and afford to wait.
LH's order is safe because they know Boeing will not give up the VLA market.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31409 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8062 times:
Quoting Alessandro (Reply 5): I think LH is such important client that Boeing is willing to sell at a loss.
So are BA, SQ, and QF. If Boeing was willing to sell to LH at a loss, they would have been willing to sell to those three at a loss, yet they all decided to purchase additional A388s. And if EK was really serious about the 747-8I, they would certainly have bought some at a loss.
Ergo, Boeing did not sell the 747-8Is to LH at a loss nor were they willing to sell them at a loss to any other carrier.
Quoting Airbazar (Reply 13): Sorry, I don't buy that. There's no way that 25 air frames sold at a very large discount to a launch customer would be enough to pay for the 748i program.
First off, I don't buy the $4 billion development cost tossed around for the 747-8 program - at least as all of it applying for the 747-8. At most, we're talking $2 billion and the rest is from earlier developments (747-X, 747-X Stretch, 747-QXLR, 747-Advanced).
Now of that $2 billion, how much applies to the base airframe? Likely most of it. And that money had to be spent on the freighter, regardless of whether or not Boeing ever wanted to build a commercial model. And now the commercial model is the same length as the freighter, which shifts even more of the R&D costs to the freighter.
We know Boeing spent around an extra $300 million in R&D on the 747-8I, and that this cost came about the time LH likely decided to buy it (even if they had not yet made such a decision generally public). So it is likely Boeing spent very little money on the -8I when they began developing the program, with most of the money going to the base frame and the -8F. Once LH said "yes", Boeing opened the checkbook to make it happen.
So I'll be generous and say Boeing's spent $500 million directly on the -8I. Average list price for the plane is $278 million. LH's discount was expected to be 45%, which is in-line with what 747-8F's are going for. So figure $125 million per frame sale price. We will also assume the 5 747 VIPs went for that, but likely they sold for more.
Airbus claims they can build an A380-800 for $100 million. One expects Boeing can build a 747-8I for less thanks to both experience and most of their factory is already fully amortized where none of the A380's is. Still,
let's also be generous and say Boeing also needs $100 million to build each plane.
So 25 747-8I's will cost Boeing $2.5 billion to build. And they absorbed $500 million in R&D costs. So the total cost is $3 billion. 25 sales at $125 million a piece brings in $3.125 billion. So right now, Boeing is $125 million up on the program at a minimum. If Boeing could build a 747-8I for $90 million, spent $400 million in R&D, and sold each plane for $126 million, they would be up $500 million right now. And each new sale only makes that number look better.
Quoting SXDFC (Reply 18): Maybe WILCO737 will agree with me on this?
Does LH plan on looking at or getting the 748F? I am not quite sure how old the MD-11F's are but I am sure the 748F or maybe even the 772ERF will be a nice addition to the LH Cargo fleet?
Officially no plan yet from LH to retire the MD 11F but since the new joint venture of LH and DHL will get the 777F I can see LH Cargo get the 747-8F in a few years so that the two companies donÂ´t compete.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Boeing909 From Germany, joined Dec 2007, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7297 times:
I think the order is secure. The 747-8F and 747-8I use mostly the same structure and systems. So you can add the orders (> 100 planes). Additionally the -8 is only an update of the -400. Also the 747-8F/I are using the same engine and cockpit technology as the 787. So the developing costs are probably not extremely high. I think there are also chances for more orders.
However the 747-8-program might be also a strategy to stay in business and gain know-how for developing the future Y1/Y3-projects. The history shows building a new plane is not that easy. So it might be a smart move to keep up with the newest technology and start the future projects on more professional level ever.
Some MD11Fs are pretty old, some are pretty new, so no need to replace them soon. And I heard we have some kind of contract which says that we have to fly it until 2012 at least... So a few more years...
The NewCo has ordered 77Fs and they want to start in 2009. Maybe we get some of their routes or we can apply there to fly for them for a specific time... But nothing official now and I havent heard any rumours about it yet as well...
FlyingClrs727 From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 733 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6855 times:
Quoting Fanfan (Reply 14): Besides irritating a good customer, they missed out on a lot of other orders as the MD11F is a great freighter. FedEx and UPS would have kept the Long Beach factory busy and we would likely not see as much interest in the A330F.
Plus the MD-11 could have been available as a tanker to complement the USAF KC-10 fleet. The KC-767 is a better replacement than the KC-30 for the KC-135 fleet, but it isn't a replacement for the KC-10.
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13529 posts, RR: 100
Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6848 times:
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 7):
Are there any parts specific to the 747-8I that are not found on either the 787-8F or the 747-400? Yes, but not so many.
If I may nitpick...
The 748 is getting many good improvement. Everything from new computers (frees up room in the cargo hold) to a re profiled wing with new movable surfaces. Some of the big maintenance items are completely unchanged (landing gear & brakes, tires, doors, hydraulic distribution system), but some are changing (actuators in wings, the electronics bay, cockpit). But I'll agree with Zvezda, enough is in common that the added parts won't be expensive. I'm racking my brain for anything new in the 'fly away kit' and the only items that come up are engine/nacelle specific (filters, fuel injector, pins to lock out the thrust reverser).
Since the 748F market is so secure, I really doubt this order is in danger. What could LH get in time to supplement their capacity? Nothing else out there has enough surplus production except for the A330/A340 line; LH needs a little more lift and range than those provide.
Quoting Columba (Reply 19):
LH will get the A380 in 2009 and 747-8I in 2010.
Thank you. Very interesting... But the A388 delivery rate is going to be too slow for a follow up order until what... 2012 with A389's?
I am fascinated to see LH order both. We all know that as soon as they publish their annual per seat-km fuel economy numbers it will be a HUGE A vs. B here on a.net.
Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
: The 747 will have higher costs because it will have less seats then LH could put in. The big plus of the 747-8I for LH is the higher cargo capacity.
: I hope so, otherwise I cannot fly to NYC anymore Yeah, we will see on what routes the 748i will fly... The A380 will be on the high demand routes! I
: LH has already said they expect the A380-800 to burn 10% less fuel (3.0l per 100 passenger kilometers compared to 3.3l for the 747-8I), but as Columb
: Is EWR A380 ready ? It will be indeed interesting to see how LH will use both aircraft. I really believe that some cities will see both so you will h
: Good question, but I doubt EWR will see the A380, the 2nd FRA flight just got downsized from 330 to 737 BBJ by privatair... so I doubt they use the 3
: Not only that it seats 100 less passengers because it is a smaller aircraft but LH also puts about 25 less seats in it than they could. I believe the
: On what assumptions are you basing that assertion? Huh? As of the end of November, BA had not yet ordered the WhaleJet. Perhaps they did last month o
: I didn't think there was anything on the planet that could make that happen. Thanks for the numbers, I guess maybe Boeing has figured out how to buil
: I believe so. But she has decades to sell not only more A380-800s, but also other variants. Plus we don't know what figures Airbus is using when they
: As a reference, it cost $450m to develop the A332 from the A333 in 1998.
: The last number from Airbus was 420 but, following that, they said it was higher, and refused to say how much higher. Given the shiift in the dollar/
: If this cost $450m back then, the number for 748 should be way over $500m, even if the number went to $1bil that would only mean $9.5mil per plane ba
: If that's the case then the 747-8's sales life will be wrapped up and finished sometime in the next 3 to 6 months.
: I do not believe this will apply to the A380 because of her uniqueness and the inability or inefficiency of certain major airports to expand their mo
: the whole 747-8 programme has been put at 4 billion.