Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Weight And Schedule Challenges For 747-8  
User currently offlineScipio From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 831 posts, RR: 9
Posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 11734 times:

Highlights:

- 1% above weight target
- first delivery still scheduled for April 2009
- trade-off between reducing weight and sticking to schedule
- work has been "spread too far"
- A380 delays have led airlines to postpone choice between 747-8 and A380
- discussions ongoing with 14 potential customers

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ghts-1-weight-growth-on-747-8.html

102 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21472 posts, RR: 60
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 11689 times:



Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
- 1% above weight target
- first delivery still scheduled for April 2009
- trade-off between reducing weight and sticking to schedule
- work has been "spread too far"

Are we talking about the 787 here?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21472 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 11664 times:



Quote:
That means Boeing projects about 85 aircraft sales for the 747-8I, of which 26 are already accounted for between sales to Lufthansa and Boeing Business Jets.

That is right in the middle of the range I projected in the past (75-100). It only requires 1 more large customer and 2 smaller ones.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 11570 times:



Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
1% above weight target

Empty weight - 466,700 lb / (211,700 kg) = 4,667 lbs / 2,117 kg - thats just over two tonnes. Doubt it will be two tonnes overweight when they roll her out.

Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
first delivery still scheduled for April 2009

For the freighter obviously.

This must mean that they have the tooling and production lines ready and have taken delivery of a number of the long-lead items.

The engines are on the way too:

GENX-2B not started flight testing yet, although did well in ground testing and they probably have a lot of data about the engine through the similar version they have flight tested for the 787.

Source:

http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscenter/genx/genx_20080312.html

Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
A380 delays have led airlines to postpone choice between 747-8 and A380

...which can only be a bad thing for the 748i. As Astuteman says, there will never be a better time to order the 748i than for all of 2006, 2007 and now. The longer it goes on, the more compelling the A388 looks. The delays are over now and the standard has been set. Airlines who were waiting to see whether Airbus would deliver on its promises re range, fuel burn, reliability and comfort have been given their answer.

Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
work has been "spread too far"

What does this mean? Do they mean geographically as in an oblique reference to the Vought problems with the 787, or do they mean not enough manpower to cover what needs to be done, again because of the 787 problems?

Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
discussions ongoing with 14 potential customers

Of course they are. "Discussions" are what keeps the other guy honest on pricing.

I expect they are chatting informally to a load of airlines, but how many actually choose the 748i over the A388 remains to be seen. Perhaps some may choose it AS WELL AS the A388 - who knows? I certainly dont.

Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
trade-off between reducing weight and sticking to schedule

Hoep they get it right. I really do.

If they delay the 748i at all then i think it would probably sound the death knell for the passenger side of the programme if they fail to get any more orders.

If, come 2012, LH are told the first of their 748i's are overweight or delayed and they are the only airline customer for the pax version then they may want to walk away. I have to say that I think the 2009 EIS figure for the 748F sounds incredibly ambitious given the 787 delays. Announcing a delay now would be a tremendously damaging thing.

Fingers crossed Boeing learn from the 787 debacle and can get it out on time and not overweight. The press release implies it is a problem - i hope they can sort it out.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 11534 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
Are we talking about the 787 here?

LOL I thought that. I suppose with the manpower intensive problems with one programme were always going to affect the other.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 2):
Quote:
That means Boeing projects about 85 aircraft sales for the 747-8I, of which 26 are already accounted for between sales to Lufthansa and Boeing Business Jets.

That is right in the middle of the range I projected in the past (75-100). It only requires 1 more large customer and 2 smaller ones.

Circa 60 airframes, unless I've misunderstood you?

Thats three pretty large customers of 20 frames each.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8861 posts, RR: 75
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 11466 times:



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 3):

Empty weight - 466,700 lb / (211,700 kg) = 4,667 lbs / 2,117 kg - thats just over two tonnes. Doubt it will be two tonnes overweight when they roll her out.

The weights they normally are using when they uses these percentages is manufacturers empty weight, not OEW. FYI Steven Udvar-Hazy, said the 787 is around 14,000lb/6,350kg overweight, for the 748F to be 1% is fantastic.

I see a customer delivery of "April 2009" as being too ambitious, the original schedule has first delivery Q3/Q4 2009.

This was the original schedule




We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21472 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 11425 times:



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 3):
For the freighter obviously.

This is why I was confused. Delivery was scheduled for Q4 2009 for the F.

Delivery is April 2009 for the 787. That's why I think FI has mixed two stories?

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 4):
Circa 60 airframes, unless I've misunderstood you?

Large customers usually book follow-on orders, as I expect LH to do.

My guess would be something like this:
LH 20+10 follow on
XX 15+10 follow on
YY 8 total
ZZ 8 total

Then you have the VIPs, 6 so far, another 4 for the Air Force, and maybe another 4-8 VIPs over time.

Total: 30 + 25 + 8 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 4 = 85 planes



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineSpeedyGonzales From Norway, joined Sep 2007, 715 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 11371 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
This is why I was confused. Delivery was scheduled for Q4 2009 for the F.

Delivery is April 2009 for the 787. That's why I think FI has mixed two stories?

It could also be a mixup between Q4/2009 and 04/2009.

(Message too short...)



Las Malvinas son Argentinas
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21472 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 11308 times:



Quoting SpeedyGonzales (Reply 7):
It could also be a mixup between Q4/2009 and 04/2009.

It's too difficult to figure out which facts the press fails to check most of the time. We just have to assume that, once again, they didn't do their job. And yes, getting aviation stories right IS their job, as they are an aviation journal...  Wink



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3191 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 11301 times:

Not knowing which thread will live out of the two on this subject; here's my post on the matter from another thread:

Frankly, I don't see it as all that surprising. The 748i is a niche product, the same with the 388. Both have a very small number of cities they can serve where another airframe wouldn't be a better choice for (insert plethora of reasons here).

The one thing Boeing has going for them is that the 748f should be (and is showing to be) a very strong offering in the freighter market place, so 748i are really just gravy by comparison.

However, it should be noted that the 747 family has vastly exceeded it's original sales projections on numerous occasions, and who knows what will happen in the next 20 years. There could be very well no 748i's or 388s sold in the next 10 years if the global economy takes one on the chin and airlines have to cut capacity.



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlineZuluLima From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 302 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11244 times:

Did anyone else notice the contradiction here?

Bogue partly blames the lack of additional orders on production delays for the Airbus A380. Those problems meant that several airlines decided to postpone purchase decisions for 747-200 and 747-400 replacements, he says.

At the same time, Bogue also believes that the 555-seat A380 and the 461-seat 747-8I should not be viewed by the market as competitive aircraft types. Rather, he says, the 747-8I occupies a standalone niche in the ultra-long range widebody market.

Boeing has lowered its market outlook for the 747-8 to reflect the decision by British Airways last year to order a batch of A380s.



I didn't get a 'Harumph' outta that guy!
User currently offlineJtdieffen From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11237 times:



Quoting ZuluLima (Reply 10):
Did anyone else notice the contradiction here?

It's actually not a contradiction as the two points are not mutually exclusive.



Regards! JDief
User currently offlineZuluLima From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 302 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11183 times:



Quoting Jtdieffen (Reply 11):
It's actually not a contradiction as the two points are not mutually exclusive.

Sure they are. He said they shouldn't be considered competitive types. He also said airlines are choosing between the two for 742 and 744 replacement. He even goes on to give a specific example of BA, who will not be buying (any/as many) 748s now because they have A388s.



I didn't get a 'Harumph' outta that guy!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21472 posts, RR: 60
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11170 times:



Quoting Jtdieffen (Reply 11):
It's actually not a contradiction as the two points are not mutually exclusive.

I guess not if you look at it as: all planes compete to replace old aircraft.

So what I guess he's saying is that the choice is to replace the 747s with similar 747s, or with larger A380s.

Which is like asking: do I replace my 767s with 787s or 777/A350s. Or do i replace my 757s with smaller A321/739 or larger 787/A330. Etc. That doesn't mean the 787-8 competes with the 77W directly or the A321 competes with the 787-3, etc.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9975 posts, RR: 96
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11171 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
1% above weight target

IMO this is in the weeds - it's probably within guarantees, and the engines will most likely eat the extra anyway.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 3):
Quoting Scipio (Thread starter):
work has been "spread too far"

What does this mean?

This statement is a little worrying.
I take it to mean that controlling the interfaces between an expanded design group, who may not be as familiar with the product as the core team, has been more difficult than the project team would have liked.
Problems here could manifest themselves in issues that put 1% overweight into perspective  worried .

Quoting Jtdieffen (Reply 11):
It's actually not a contradiction as the two points are not mutually exclusive.

I would agree with you.
But its an interesting juxtaposition to the "The 748i is gonna kill the A380" mantra on a-net that followed the 748i's launch.....  Smile

Regards


User currently offlineJtdieffen From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11159 times:



Quoting ZuluLima (Reply 12):

Sure they are. He said they shouldn't be considered competitive types. He also said airlines are choosing between the two for 742 and 744 replacement. He even goes on to give a specific example of BA, who will not be buying (any/as many) 748s now because they have A388s.

I still have to disagree. Though what was said is that the two should not be considered competitive types, that does not exclude them from competing with one another. The principle there is that they don't need to be viewed as one against the other (perfectly valid), but that they still may (and have - BA) end up pitted against each other in some fleet battles. That doesn't preclude orders like Lufthansa's, however, where the types are truly non-competitive and were purchased without a competitive bid process.



Regards! JDief
User currently offlineZuluLima From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 302 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11112 times:



Quoting Jtdieffen (Reply 15):
I still have to disagree. Though what was said is that the two should not be considered competitive types, that does not exclude them from competing with one another. The principle there is that they don't need to be viewed as one against the other (perfectly valid), but that they still may (and have - BA) end up pitted against each other in some fleet battles. That doesn't preclude orders like Lufthansa's, however, where the types are truly non-competitive and were purchased without a competitive bid process.

I can see your logic here. They are not "direct competitors", but Bogue doesn't say "direct". The simple fact is that the types compete regardless of niches. What aircraft can't be seen to occupy a niche really?



I didn't get a 'Harumph' outta that guy!
User currently offlineJtdieffen From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11069 times:



Quoting ZuluLima (Reply 16):

I can see your logic here. They are not "direct competitors", but Bogue doesn't say "direct". The simple fact is that the types compete regardless of niches. What aircraft can't be seen to occupy a niche really?

No, of course I agree. All airliners compete in some sense of the word with all others. It's that some planes are really very different but end up in the same competitions by default. The A330 and 787 are very close in terms of capacities, but the 748 and A388 are not, but they end up in some fleet competitions because they're the closest things from each manufacturer to the stated RFP. Doesn't make them direct competition, but doesn't mean they won't compete, which makes both scenarios true (and hence, not a contradiction  Wink ).



Regards! JDief
User currently offlineZuluLima From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 302 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 11010 times:



Quoting Jtdieffen (Reply 17):
but doesn't mean they won't compete

My last thought on this matter which is eating up a lot of thread: If they compete, which they already have, then they are competitors by definition, therefore, contradiction. This is Bogue's fault, really. He says they shouldn't be "seen" as competitors even though they are. Capitalist execu-speak can be very hard to decipher!



I didn't get a 'Harumph' outta that guy!
User currently offlineHawkerCamm From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2007, 405 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 10968 times:



Quoting Zeke (Reply 5):
I see a customer delivery of "April 2009" as being too ambitious, the original schedule has first delivery Q3/Q4 2009.

Not even a 1% chance of a April 2009 EIS.
Not even April 2010.
April 2011 maybe........ That's my opinion!

The B787 will use all of Boeing's flight test resources (Pilots, Engineers, Telemetry centre, ground crew,etc) once all flight test articles are flying.

Do you think Boeing will allow the B747-8 to delay the B787?


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8861 posts, RR: 75
Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 10886 times:



Quoting SpeedyGonzales (Reply 7):
It could also be a mixup between Q4/2009 and 04/2009.

Maybe it should say first flight or rollout in April, both of those are more plausible. First flight was on the original schedule due for the end of this year (2008).

Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 19):
Not even a 1% chance of a April 2009 EIS.
Not even April 2010.
April 2011 maybe........ That's my opinion!

Whist I think there has been some slippage, the magnitude you are suggesting I think is not justifiable.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineHawkerCamm From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2007, 405 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 10829 times:



Quoting Zeke (Reply 20):
Whist I think there has been some slippage, the magnitude you are suggesting I think is not justifiable.

It is very likely that April 2011 could be little more than 18months after the B787-8 EIS.

My point is that I don't believe that the Boeing Flight Test department can do this much work.

Boeing Flight Test Department has a lot on its plate:

B787-8
B787-9
B777F
B747-8F
B747-8I
I wonder what the priority list looks like because all these new aircraft are starting to require FT very close to each other


User currently offlineTUIflyer From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 206 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 10790 times:

Found another article regarding the weight issues:

'US aircraft manufacturer Boeing has finally acknowledged that keeping the 747-800 Freighter original delivery schedule may result in the aircraft been delivered to airlines above the weight targets.

The first ever aircraft, which is scheduled for delivery in early April 2009, is around 1% over it's weight target according to general managers.

It is though that part of the weight increase has been caused by Boeing's decision to keep 747-8 deliveries on schedule, if deliveries were delayed engineers would have more time to tweak the aircraft design to save weight.

The announcement comes as airlines around the world are tightening their belts and cutting costs as they feel the squeeze of soaring oil prices.'

BOEING 747-8 SPECIAL REPORT: http://letsfindaflight.com/page_1181845192626.html

Will these be passed onto the passenger version?

TUIflyer



Don't just travel, travel with a smile. . .
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21472 posts, RR: 60
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 10771 times:



Quoting TUIflyer (Reply 22):
Found another article regarding the weight issues:

It's just someone who read the original article and stole things from it, with opinions added.

If it repeats the April 2009 claim, you know it's not a "new" article...  Wink



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8861 posts, RR: 75
Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 10704 times:



Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 21):
I wonder what the priority list looks like because all these new aircraft are starting to require FT very close to each other

I dont think it is as resource hungry as it could have been without the slippages on the 787/748. The 777F should be fairly simple and out of the way in the next 6 months, the 788 schedule from what I understand has been expanded to be somewhat more realistic, the 748F should be after the 787 flight tests, and the 748I a relatively simple change (in terms of flight characteristics, ground testing in my view would be more extensive than the flight testing) from the 748F.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
25 Rheinbote : Roll-out of the -8F is scheduled for Feb 2009 (quoted either by IAD787 and/or Pianos101 me thinks) Delivery of the 787 is 4Q 2009 at best. Delivery o
26 Flysherwood : It is not like the A388 is flying off the shelf now is it.
27 OA260 : Very true. I think the A380 has won the Jumbo race . I think that the 787 will win the next race though.
28 Post contains links Zeke : All of those aircraft were always supposed to have an EIS before the A400M, its schedule delivered were not due until the end of 2009 ( http://www.ai
29 Astuteman : Compared to the 748i? (which was supposed to kill it)............... Rgds
30 Flysherwood : More 747-8's sold than A388's in the last couple of years, however!
31 Astuteman : Which has about as much bearing on the 748i "killing" the A380 as my flatulence has on the weather........ Regards
32 Tdscanuck : That's about right for this point in the program. If a new aircraft is underweight early in a program, it's a sign that the design goals weren't aggr
33 Pianos101 : Well it's a combination of both. Large project management will always be a factor, but there is definitely a shortage of workers on the 47. There are
34 Osiris30 : Damn man you got some kinda gas!!!
35 Art : Indeed A380's are not flying off the shelf but I would not be surprised if quite a few do in July (Farnborough).
36 EA772LR : On a serious note, I hope we can get past the age of delays. The 380/A400M/787/748(most likely). Is it due to bad planning/over promising/mismanageme
37 Dalavia : I think another factor that will be worrying airline bean counters (who seems very influential these days) is the expected difference in depreciation
38 Charles79 : But couldn't demand for freighters help it in the long-run? Granted, most freight operators order the -F to begin with, but I can see cargo airlines
39 Zvezda : A senior accountant at LH would know that the 747-8I will retain good resale value because it can be converted into a freighter and sold for a good p
40 Scipio : Nonsense. The A380s will also be converted into valuable freighters (which is what they are designed for), operating alongside newly-built (albeit mo
41 FlyingClrs727 : That was the main reason why Boeing changed the 747-8I to be the same length as the 747-8F after wind tunnel tests showed the original 747-8I to have
42 Zvezda : ... as evidenced by A380F vs 747-8F sales.
43 XT6Wagon : I don't see the whalejet going anywhere as a new build freighter, but conversions might be an interesting possiblity. Its on that edge of performance
44 Scipio : Those sales figures are clear evidence that an A380F only has value as scrap metal.
45 Scipio : I do. There was demand for it, it offers capabilities that the 747-8F cannot offer and that appeal to some operators, and once it is resuscitated it
46 FlyingClrs727 : But they might have potential for conversion to VIP transports. Perhaps the extra weight of the early build A380's might require forgoing installatio
47 Cloudyapple : We are talking about 2025-2030 when the aircraft are "ripe" for conversion. Production of the B748 both pax and freighters will have ended or very cl
48 Zvezda : If the A350-1000 performs as well as expected, it will be sooner than 2025. For someone already offering a 747 conversion program, the development co
49 CHRISBA777ER : Respectfully, I'd suggest that if selling "only" 700+ A350s means they "lose" the race - it will be a lose that few of the EADS execs will be crying
50 Astuteman : David Sutton of FEDEX predicted 200+ A380F's going into service over the next 20 years, mostly pax conversions. I'm inclined to believe he has some k
51 Manfredj : I agree with the article, the 380 and 748 are not in the same size category and should not be looked at as competition for each other. I have said it
52 CHRISBA777ER : Zvezda is right - the A388 will likely not be the top CASM performer in 2025. The A389 will be EIS by then.
53 Liedetectors : Does anyone know when rollout of the first F will be?
54 Zvezda : It is far from certain that Airbus will ever build an A380-900. I suspect the probability is less than 50%. If Airbus do build an A380-900, there is
55 Revelation : Interesting admission of how Boeing really thought they'd bag the BA order....
56 Scipio : It is a near-certainty that Airbus will build an A380-900. It is the logical way to go, the A380 is designed to be stretched, Airbus has said many ti
57 Zvezda : We're in the biggest sales boom in the history of commercial aviation and the only segment with dismal sales (for both Airbus and Boeing) is the pass
58 Scipio : You don't need to sell thousands of them to justify the development cost. The 777-300ER is universally considered highly successful, yet its sales to
59 Astuteman : Or better still, the SUH version... You have indeed said this many times, but the current market does not seem to support your repeated assertion. Th
60 Scipio : I was being cautious. Any estimates that you're willing to offer?
61 Zeke : The boom is over, this year we will see a decline in sales. Care to wager which aircraft will get next VLA order .. the 748-i or A380-800 ?
62 Zvezda : I note that your assertion is presented with the same evidence and logic normally presented to support a religious belief i.e. none. Both your facts
63 Post contains links Scipio : Leahy thinks otherwise... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=aM2d92pds.Zk ''There isn't the same pace of letters of intent being sig
64 WingedMigrator : Ooooh nooo don't make me... must... not... go... off... topic One could theorize that nearly two years of program delays might have temporarily suppr
65 Astuteman : Possibly, but just because I didn't present it doesn't mean it isn't there (it is) - unlike your persistant denial of the likelihood of an A380 stret
66 Zvezda : The WhaleJet fan-boys predicted an explosion of sales right after EIS with SQ. Six months later, there is no evidence of an increase in sales, let al
67 Astuteman : You're entitled to have a view. I 100% disagree with it. Too many predictions of doom and gloom have been made (by specific people) regarding the A38
68 Zvezda : Au contraire, the track record is very much on the side of the skeptics. The A380F is dead. One may hope that it may one day be revived but, as of no
69 Art : I would have to dispute your $60 billion figure. 200 x $300 million = $60 billion. Who has contracted to buy an A380 for $300 million? Wouldn't a bil
70 Zvezda : That's an advantage which is overcome in nearly all cases by the lower RASM that results from having more seats to sell. The slot advantage seems to
71 Post contains links Zeke : The Airbus COO has confirmed the A380-900, and has given a time frame. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...1085&sid=aFDn7WN3Sybc&refer=europe Airb
72 Zvezda : Saying it's part of the plan is not the same as committing to development and manufacture, which Airbus have not done. Posturing confidence in the pr
73 CHRISBA777ER : Zvezda - I admire your convictions in so much as you've been dogmatically repeating the same old tired mantra about how you believe the A380 is flawed
74 Zeke : That article says they have committed to development, and the time frame for that is starting in 2010. That is a lot more realistic/firm than what Bo
75 Astuteman : It is? I'm sure someone on A-net can claim authorship of :- "The 787 will spell the end of the A380". It hasn't "The 748i will kill the A380". It has
76 Rheinwaldner : The clear leader in that category is you my friend! The remark about the range is true but the conclusion about the success is false. Please prove th
77 Zvezda : I've just pointed out that passenger VLA sales remain close to zero and that does not portend well for future sales. Since you can't rebut the actual
78 Zeke : I am sure Boeing and Airbus will keep that in mind when they model future fleet demands on negative passenger growth. I am a reasonable person, and I
79 Rheinwaldner : I don't deny that fragmentation happened. But not at the cost of hub-hub-VLA traffic. You may prove that VLA share has decreased but not so much as y
80 CHRISBA777ER : With respect - your character is not being assasinated, and your reputation doesnt need to be - you are doing it just fine on your own. Your steadfas
81 Revelation : Given how the T5 introduction has gone, one wonders how long LHR will be viewed as a superhub. In what sense have they committed, beyond the verbal?
82 Stitch : Honestly, at this point the only thing left to debate is not if the A380 will be successful, but how successful it will be. And since it has decades t
83 Zeke : This is the normal Airbus style, look at the A330-200F, they basically had 20+ orders before it was launched, you can see similar comments about the
84 Scipio : Admittedly, the figure is at list prices. Since we can only speculate about actual prices using list prices seems to be the best measure to get a sta
85 Manfredj : Bottom line...the 748f is a success....hence the 748i is as well. As long as there is a freighter line, the 8i can be built just as easy. Even if the
86 Kappel : IIRC the opening of Chep Lap Kok didn't go so well either, but everybody's forgotten about that, since it's a great, smoothly working airport now. Lo
87 Astuteman : I don't see any way on earth that the 748i can generate any return whatsoever on sales of 1 per year . Don't fret. I think the 748i will do a bit bet
88 FlyingAY : If it was that easy, why do you think Airbus scrapped the A380F then?
89 Scipio : It only needs to pay for its marginal cost as a 748 derivative. Anything it earns above that will add to the profitability of the 748 program. And th
90 Astuteman : True, but 1 per year most certainly won't do that. Regards
91 Zeke : I think the 8 VIP aircraft would be worth the same or more to Being as the 20 aircraft to LH. The margins on one off orders are much better, and the
92 Stitch : Does Boeing perform the cabin installs on their BBJs? Or do they delivered the completed frame to the supplier, who then does the work? I would think
93 Zeke : Sorry, I don't know. I would think they would farm them out to partners, esp the wide bodies, it hakes a long time to do a custom fit, it would back
94 Brendows : No, that is (as far as I know) done elsewhere. These aircraft are rolled out and flown in a "green" condition (no interior installed) to the differen
95 Ikramerica : In the past, this was the case. Now that Boeing has added the widebodies to the BBJ division, it depends on the customer. My friend's brother works f
96 XT6Wagon : Given LH technik's involvement with many VIP programs and LH aquiring 748i, I'd guess european and middle-eastern customers might be going there for
97 SailorOrion : I quite agree with XT6Wagons. LH Technik will see all the VIP 748Is going through their hangars for "refitting" A VIP fitting for such an aircraft is
98 Post contains links LockstockNL777 : Boeing blames production delays to Airbus A380 for sluggish sales of its 747-8I By Stephen Trimble Boeing is partly blaming the production delays to t
99 LockstockNL777 : I really don't see the connection here, does mr Bogue say that if the 380 was not delayed that those several airlines would have picked the 748i??!!!
100 Revelation : CLK had the luxury of a clean sheet of paper to work with. Yes, the transition was flawed, but the flaws mostly impacted the frieght business, not th
101 Stitch : Boeing apparently didn't want the business as badly as Airbus did, so they decided not to go below whatever pricing floor they had in place when Airb
102 Ikramerica : In theory, that is true of every negotiation involving 3 parties. In practice there are of course other factors, but ultimately it comes down to pric
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...
Fares And Schedule For HKG-NRT And Back posted Fri Mar 9 2001 02:34:07 by Ryaneverest
More Il-96 And Tu-204 For Cubana. posted Mon Mar 24 2008 06:15:04 by SIBILLE
FEdex And UPS Apply For Additional Mexico Service posted Tue Mar 18 2008 20:17:06 by LAXintl
AI And 9W Negotiating For ~60 Boeing Widebodies posted Thu Feb 14 2008 06:12:12 by Stitch
KLM Baggage Weight And Piece Restrictions posted Thu Feb 7 2008 10:16:45 by Deaphen
AC YYZ-TLV-YYZ Weight And Balance? posted Tue Feb 5 2008 15:55:04 by ZBBYLW
Major DAB Schedule Changes For Race Weeks posted Tue Dec 4 2007 21:42:47 by Pilotboi
IATA: Challenges For Latin American posted Fri Nov 9 2007 19:37:05 by LAXintl
MD-11F And New Destination For Etihad Cargo posted Wed Oct 10 2007 08:03:26 by 777way
Another Month And Another Record For FLL posted Sat Sep 29 2007 03:11:49 by Njdevilsin03
AC YYZ-TLV-YYZ Weight And Balance? posted Tue Feb 5 2008 15:55:04 by ZBBYLW
Major DAB Schedule Changes For Race Weeks posted Tue Dec 4 2007 21:42:47 by Pilotboi
IATA: Challenges For Latin American posted Fri Nov 9 2007 19:37:05 by LAXintl
MD-11F And New Destination For Etihad Cargo posted Wed Oct 10 2007 08:03:26 by 777way