Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No 747-330s For Lufthansa?  
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7057 posts, RR: 4
Posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3898 times:

I was wondering since LH got a second batch of 747-200 only a short time before their first 747-430s arrived why didn't they order 747-300s instead ?

Also other airlines like KLM and AF have stretched the upper deck of some of their 747-200s
why was this never an option for LH ?


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDesediez From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3787 times:

This batch was a number of nine A/C.

4 Combis (LN 614, 617, 633, 663)
2 All-pax (LN 639, 665)
3 Freighters (LN 625, 660, 706)

this already reduced the number of possible -300s down to six divided into two missions (high pax load / high freight load). This IMO would have been a really niche fleet within the existing fleet of those times. Also, if you look back on their former 727-200 and 737-200 fleets you will see the same kind of late orders to fill up some needed capacities.
I remember one of the statements of LH against the purchase of the -300 was the lack of any new technology compared to the -200.


User currently offlineDtwclipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3785 times:



Quoting Columba (Thread starter):
AF have stretched the upper deck of some of their 747-200s

I know KL had the SUD, but are you sure AF had the -200 SUD?


User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8284 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3736 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Lufthansa didn't order the 747-300 because the stretch upper deck caused a range penalty compared to the 747-200B. LH needed the all the range it could get. LH had sveral aectors requiring 14 hours of flight, the -300 had a liit of about 13 hours.

User currently offlineDesediez From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3704 times:



Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 2):
I know KL had the SUD, but are you sure AF had the -200 SUD?

They inherited them from UTA


User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1288 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3596 times:



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 3):
Lufthansa didn't order the 747-300 because the stretch upper deck caused a range penalty compared to the 747-200B. LH needed the all the range it could get. LH had sveral aectors requiring 14 hours of flight, the -300 had a liit of about 13 hours.

I even think Sabena should have passed on the B747-300. They sometimes had to stop in CPH on the way back from NRT to refuel. B747-200B would probably not have encountered that kind of issue. At the time Sabena was putting 395 passengers onboard, but I'm not sure they really needed that bit of extra capacity provided by the SUD.



I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8284 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3551 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting BrightCedars (Reply 5):
I even think Sabena should have passed on the B747-300. They sometimes had to stop in CPH on the way back from NRT to refuel. B747-200B would probably not have encountered that kind of issue. At the time Sabena was putting 395 passengers onboard, but I'm not sure they really needed that bit of extra capacity provided by the SUD

Sbena has 2 743's, used them to JFK, JNB, Kinshasa in teh Congo and NRT. They may have had to stop in CPH, this could be since Sabena had Combi 747's which were heavier then the full pax ones. JAL used 743 from NRT to CDG and LHR, 13 hours across Siberia from Japan.


User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1288 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3381 times:



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 6):
Sbena has 2 743's, used them to JFK, JNB, Kinshasa in teh Congo and NRT. They may have had to stop in CPH, this could be since Sabena had Combi 747's which were heavier then the full pax ones. JAL used 743 from NRT to CDG and LHR, 13 hours across Siberia from Japan.

Although we're veering off topic and into technical stuff here, Sabena was definitely using the B747-300M as full pax to NRT, and yes Sabena had 2 of them (OO-SGC and OO-SGD I think). Would that aircraft have structural differences that would create this condition even when in full pax configuration?



I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3740 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3287 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 6):
Sbena has 2 743's, used them to JFK, JNB, Kinshasa in teh Congo and NRT.

And Atlanta (ATL).

Quoting BrightCedars (Reply 7):
(OO-SGC and OO-SGD I think).

Exactly.
OO-SGC was delivered in 1986, and OO-SGD was delivered in 1990. OO-SGD was the last Classic 747 that was built. OO-SGA and OO-SGB were the two 100 Series Sabena had since 1971.

Ben Soriano



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7057 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3105 times:

Okay, thanks I figured that it had to with range but thought that a few -300s would have been nice to flights were the -200s range was not needed but would add some more capacity like JFK.


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
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...
Why No 747 For AA? posted Mon Apr 5 2004 06:00:23 by Aa777jr
Why No US-immigration For Diverted Flights? posted Mon Aug 4 2008 08:00:40 by 2travel2know
Why No Tu 154s For Interflug? posted Mon May 12 2008 04:31:13 by Columba
Why No 2-Liter Bottles For Beverage Service? posted Thu Apr 3 2008 04:43:32 by Luv2cattlecall
Why No International Website For US Airways? posted Wed Jan 9 2008 15:30:07 by Gilesdavies
Why No First Class For US Airways Express CR9's? posted Sun Jan 6 2008 20:23:13 by AA767LOVER
Why No 747 Super Rainmaker In Socal? posted Mon Oct 22 2007 12:53:52 by SCUMBAG
Why No Tu-204s For Aeroflot? posted Sun Aug 5 2007 19:05:22 by PillowTester
AI 772 In CDG Today 03/12, Why No 747? (pics) posted Sat Dec 2 2006 17:18:14 by Stevens91
Why No Leather Seats For BA Long Haul? posted Wed Sep 6 2006 19:23:42 by 8herveg