Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
First Dark Clouds For The 747-8?  
User currently offlineKaneporta1 From Greece, joined May 2005, 740 posts, RR: 12
Posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 36699 times:

From The Seattle Times:

And on a teleconference to discuss the earnings, Chief Executive Jim McNerney also
revealed that another major airplane program besides the 787 Dreamliner is in
trouble: the 747-8 update to Boeing's iconic jumbo jet is costing more than expected
and the delivery schedule is under pressure.
On the 747-8, McNerney said "We're not particularly proud of how that is sorting out,
but we'll get that program done. ... It suffered from a few misassumptions that we've
caught up on now and we're going to get fixed."


Even though there are no details here, my personal translation to this is: "The composite wing is much heavier and difficult to build than we thought". I'm also wondering if there's an issue with the efficiency of the engines.

One question I have to ask is, has the 787 eaten into the 747-8 resources, hence causing potential delays?


I'd rather die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather, not terrified and screaming, like his passengers
220 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 36698 times:

No mention is made of a weight issue. I have to wonder if the problem(s) aren't supplier related.


Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12466 posts, RR: 37
Reply 2, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 36619 times:

Just the first? The fact that the pax model has failed to gain any new customers (since Lufty) in several competitions against the A380 count as "dark clouds" in my book!

Was also very surprised to note that the range of the 747-8F is also a few hundred nms shorter than the 747-400ERF and slightly shorter than the 777F as well.


User currently offlinePianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 36555 times:



Quoting Kaneporta1 (Thread starter):
One question I have to ask is, has the 787 eaten into the 747-8 resources, hence causing potential delays?

That has been known for a long time now. 87 workers were *supposed* to be let go to return to 47-8, but with the slides in the 87 schedule that never happened. That cause a lack of workers on the 47-8, and a truckload of contractors was brought in to fill the gap. I worked on the design of part of the wing, and we were not that far behind schedule, and from what I know the suppliers are doing ok.

Quoting Kaneporta1 (Thread starter):
"The composite wing is much heavier and difficult to build than we thought"

 Wink


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 36558 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 1):
I have to wonder if the problem(s) aren't supplier related.

No mention was made of this either, so why do you wonder if it's the 'cause'? Other than a reason not to 'blame' Boeing of course.


User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 36452 times:



Quoting Kaneporta1 (Thread starter):
Even though there are no details here, my personal translation to this is: "The composite wing is much heavier and difficult to build than we thought". I'm also wondering if there's an issue with the efficiency of the engines.

So, when he specifically says it is costing more to develop than Boeing would like you assume there are weight and efficiency problems? Now, I'll give you that every new program tends to run a little over-weight, but that is almost always fixed before the first one or two types are actually built. So where does your assumption come from?

As Pianos101 already mentioned, with the well-documented problems the 787 is having, Boeing is paying for more outside help on the 747-8 than they expected and/or wanted to. That is one major cost right there. There are others, but that is one of the major ones.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
Just the first? The fact that the pax model has failed to gain any new customers (since Lufty) in several competitions against the A380 count as "dark clouds" in my book!

Then you'd be mistaken. If Boeing wants to blame anybody for the lack of sales of the pax model, they need only look in the mirror. The major reason they have been unable to secure new pax 747-8's is not the A380 - it's the 777-300ER. And, with a PIP for that airplane on the horizon, I'd imagine this will only get harder. However, if Boeing can build it to their intended specs, you should see sales start to pick up. If it performs as intended, the 747-8 should have the lowest CASM of any plane available.


Regards,

Hamlet69  profile 



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12466 posts, RR: 37
Reply 6, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 36326 times:



Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 5):
Then you'd be mistaken. If Boeing wants to blame anybody for the lack of sales of the pax model, they need only look in the mirror. The major reason they have been unable to secure new pax 747-8's is not the A380 - it's the 777-300ER. And, with a PIP for that airplane on the horizon, I'd imagine this will only get harder. However, if Boeing can build it to their intended specs, you should see sales start to pick up. If it performs as intended, the 747-8 should have the lowest CASM of any plane available.

I agree that the 777-300ER has undermined the 747-8's attractiveness to some extent, but in fairness, it has to be pointed out that for many customers, the competition for a VLA has been between the 747-8 and the A380. Certainly, those carriers like the ANA, BA, JAL, EK and SIA, which already had significant 777 fleets, the -300ER was pretty much a dead cert, which probably didn't help the 748.

Let me say that I hope sincerely that the 748 has some luck, because as someone who considers the 747 THE greatest aircraft in commercial aviation history, I'd like it to go out with a bang, not a whimper. It deserves no less - but, of course, such sentiments will be of little interest to airlines, particularly in the current trading environment.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10024 posts, RR: 96
Reply 7, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 36175 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Kaneporta1 (Thread starter):
"The composite wing is much heavier and difficult to build than we thought".

Does the 748 have a composite wing?

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 1):
No mention is made of a weight issue

Boeing have already publicly acknowledged the weight issue, and stated that they would hold the EIS date rather than wait till the weight issue was fixed...

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 5):
So, when he specifically says it is costing more to develop than Boeing would like you assume there are weight and efficiency problems?

See above. Don't know anything about engine efficiency

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 5):
The major reason they have been unable to secure new pax 747-8's is not the A380 - it's the 777-300ER. And, with a PIP for that airplane on the horizon, I'd imagine this will only get harder. However, if Boeing can build it to their intended specs, you should see sales start to pick up. If it performs as intended, the 747-8 should have the lowest CASM of any plane available.

Not only is this patently incorrect, it's actually self-contradicting.

If the 748i is going to have the lowest CASM of any plane available (which it won't), then it shouldn't be disturbed in the slightest by the 773ER.
Curious that the A380-800 with it's "alleged" (but not in a long time) worse CASM, doesn't seem to be affected.

So much for "the laws", I guess..

Rgds


User currently offlinePianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 36041 times:



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 7):
Does the 748 have a composite wing?

Not like the 87, but the wing tips are composite. The rest of the shape is like the -400 and most of the wing is metal, save for some composite panels.

I'll say that after about 90% of the wing was released to suppliers they had to go back and change some things...


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9097 posts, RR: 75
Reply 9, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 35988 times:

This is not news, the 748 was supposed to fly this year. I have posted that the aircraft has been delayed before. Deliveries were to start mid next year. I think from memory it takes about 5 months to build a 744 at the moment.

Part f the problem has been getting rid of the 744 backlog so the assembly line can be moved around/modified to fit the 748 in.




We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 35633 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
Was also very surprised to note that the range of the 747-8F is also a few hundred nms shorter than the 747-400ERF and slightly shorter than the 777F as well.

Why are you surprised? Look at the payload difference first of all. Secondly, the range on the F is somewhat a non issue. Other than being able to go HKG/NRT-ANC and then to the US or Europe to DXB/SHJ to Asia it's a mute point. Having that range is really wasted since the emphasis will be to maximise payload and settle for a one stop rather than max range for a limited payload.

Quoting Kaneporta1 (Thread starter):
Even though there are no details here, my personal translation to this is: "The composite wing is much heavier and difficult to build than we thought". I'm also wondering if there's an issue with the efficiency of the engines

The wing is not composite.


User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12466 posts, RR: 37
Reply 11, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 35394 times:



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 10):
Why are you surprised? Look at the payload difference first of all. Secondly, the range on the F is somewhat a non issue. Other than being able to go HKG/NRT-ANC and then to the US or Europe to DXB/SHJ to Asia it's a mute point. Having that range is really wasted since the emphasis will be to maximise payload and settle for a one stop rather than max range for a limited payload.

While I understand the need for more payload, I'd always expected to see a growth in range; being able to get from (for example) ICN to LHR, CDG etc, or various t/p routes (without having to stop at ANC) involves all sorts of savings, from fuel to crewing, landing charges, pressure cycles etc.

At the very least, the 744ERF gives you the option to trade payload for range, but the 747-8F does not currently do so.

I wonder how long we'll be waiting before Boeing touts the idea of a 747-8FER/LR, with range equalling that of the 744ERF.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19698 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 35049 times:

So basically it appears that the 787 may not fly for a long time now. Like perhaps another six months. And it appears very unlikely that Boeing will be able to meet their delivery commitments. If they can't ramp up production to the level they'd predicted, the schedule will continue to slip further and further behind until the last of the current orders is delivered with such a delay that there's no point in purchasing the plane in the first place.

And the 748 isn't going to be flying for at least 2-3 years.


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6449 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 34953 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
Was also very surprised to note that the range of the 747-8F is also a few hundred nms shorter than the 747-400ERF and slightly shorter than the 777F as well.

The range with max payload of a freighter is seldom a relevant figure. If you want to fly farther than that, then you just fill in more fuel and correnspondingly less payload.

What matters is the cost of bringing one ton of payload to your destination.

When the 748 has a shorter range with max payload, then it probably only means that it has a relatively stronger wing. The payload will always provide bending forces on the wing, while the fuel in the wing tanks do much less so.

Theoretically a freighter with unlimited wing strength should have a very short range with max payload since the only fuel you can load, when utilizing max payload, would be the difference between max take-off weight and max landing weight.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 34955 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 11):
At the very least, the 744ERF gives you the option to trade payload for range, but the 747-8F does not currently do so.

But no one is using the extended range because of the payload trade off. The ERF won't make ICN-LHR with a full payload and sufficient fuel.

As far as savings go, you don't save on crew since you'd have to have a double crew for the non-stop. The fuel savings are minimal since you're not flying a ULR/LR leg and don't have to carry fuel to carry fuel. What the 748F does is maximise cargo revenue rather than minimising operating costs. Don't you think if range was what customers wanted then Boeing would have given them what they want? On the F, range isn't a really big concern to the operators.


User currently offlineKaneporta1 From Greece, joined May 2005, 740 posts, RR: 12
Reply 15, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 34384 times:



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
Not like the 87, but the wing tips are composite. The rest of the shape is like the -400 and most of the wing is metal, save for some composite panels.



Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 10):
The wing is not composite.

I was under the impression that the 747-8 would feature composite covers and/or spars. I stand corrected.



I'd rather die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather, not terrified and screaming, like his passengers
User currently offlinePianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 34363 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
And the 748 isn't going to be flying for at least 2-3 years.

WHAT??? Where'd you get that from???


User currently offlinePlaneInsomniac From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 678 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 32674 times:



Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 5):
If it performs as intended, the 747-8 should have the lowest CASM of any plane available.

If I remember correctly, the seat-mile costs of the 747-8 are expected to be something like 5% higher than the A388's - IF it reaches its design goals.

And this does NOT factor in the fact that the A380 is actually exceeding its design goals, as reported by the operating airlines, and is expected to get even better as production moves along.

If I am not mistaken, at the moment the A388 has the lowest seat-mile costs of all planes (although the 773 does follow not far behind), and this should stay like that until the 787 and A350 arrive.

It is true that the A380 is not selling particularly well, but as far as being a sales failure is concerned, the 748i wins the competition big time. As mentioned before, it has lost every single of the few VLA competitions except the LH order to the A380.

EVERY SINGLE ONE.

By no stretch of imagination is a scenario likely in which that should change significantly in the future. As a matter of fact, it currently seems like the 748i might miss its performance targets, while the A388 is exceeding them, widening the gap in seat-mile costs even more.

There is no doubt at all that if it were not for the freighter version (keywords: outsize cargo and floor load), the 748 would be one of the biggest commercial disasters in aviation in recorded history.



Am I cured? Slept 5 hours on last long-haul flight...
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30978 posts, RR: 86
Reply 18, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 32231 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 11):
While I understand the need for more payload, I'd always expected to see a growth in range; being able to get from (for example) ICN to LHR, CDG etc, or various t/p routes (without having to stop at ANC) involves all sorts of savings, from fuel to crewing, landing charges, pressure cycles etc.

Widebodyphotog showed that flying NRT-ORD non-stop in a 747-8F would burn 123t of fuel, whereas flying NRT-ANC-ORD would burn 120t - 3 tons less. This includes climb and descent at ANC. And in addition to burning 3t more fuel, the non-stop requires the payload be lowered by 20t to keep the plane below MTOW at full tanks. So you burn more fuel and generate less revenue with the non-stop.


User currently offlineNwarooster From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1088 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 31879 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The Boeing 747-8Fs biggest competitor besides the 777 is the coming availability of larger numbers of 747-400BCF converted freighters. These cost alot less than a new build 747-8F and are available almost immediately.  old 

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30978 posts, RR: 86
Reply 20, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 30928 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Nwarooster (Reply 19):
The Boeing 747-8Fs biggest competitor besides the 777 is the coming availability of larger numbers of 747-400BCF converted freighters. These cost alot less than a new build 747-8F and are available almost immediately.  old 

However, their lower total payload, lower payload density (which means certain items cannot be carried and loads need to be carefully located) and lack of a nose door mean they're not as popular with heavy cargo operators as dedicated new-build freighters.

They'll find homes with many companies, but there is a reason Boeing has sold hundreds of new-build freighters even with cheaper pax-to-freight conversions available for much of the 747's program life.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19698 posts, RR: 58
Reply 21, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 29786 times:



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 16):

WHAT??? Where'd you get that from???

Is there even a plane yet? They have a 2 year delay on the 788 and you think they'll have a 748 airborne in less than 2 years? It was supposed to fly this winter.

And they just started major assembly of the first airframe in August. You really think that with all their resources focused on the 788 troubles, the strike, and now the new wing issues they're going to have this plane in the air before mid-2010? I think not. Delivery was supposed to happen this coming summer.  rotfl 


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 29792 times:



Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Reply 17):
It is true that the A380 is not selling particularly well, but as far as being a sales failure is concerned, the 748i wins the competition big time. As mentioned before, it has lost every single of the few VLA competitions except the LH order to the A380.

You need to read Boeing's market analysis of the 748. Boeing doesn't think the 748 is in the same market as the 380. It, according to Boeing, is to fit the market between the 340 and 380 or the 777W and 380. The 748 is not a VLA. So, what you're doing is comparing apples and oranges.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10024 posts, RR: 96
Reply 23, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 29402 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
Not like the 87, but the wing tips are composite. The rest of the shape is like the -400 and most of the wing is metal, save for some composite panels.

That was my understanding

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 22):
Boeing doesn't think the 748 is in the same market as the 380

Most of the rest of the industry (and most of the rest of A-net for that matter) seems to think it is.  scratchchin 

Rgds


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 29350 times:



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 23):
Most of the rest of the industry (and most of the rest of A-net for that matter) seems to think it is.

I don't think the rest of the industry does, but you are correct on the comment about A.net.


25 AustrianZRH : Well, it's larger than what was until one year ago the largest pax airplane. I'd call that a VLA for sure. What is true is that it's smaller than an
26 Tdscanuck : If there is, then there would also be an issue on the 787...it's basically the same engine with a slightly changed fan and bleed ducts. On a volume b
27 NicoEDDF : Thats somehow funny. One year ago the 747 was the biggest commercial pax hauler in the air, being the sole proprietor of the VLA segment and suddenly
28 Rheinwaldner : But the 744 is? Or has the 744 stopped being a VLA? That indeed would be a sign of a tremendous shift to larger aircrafts!
29 JerseyFlyer : LH ordered 748s in addition to 380s, not instead of. No airline has ordered 748 instead of 380. Nor has any airline other than LH (yet) seen a need t
30 Robffm2 : So let's call the 748 a NQVLA (Not Quite...). Or what's about SStaVLA (Slightly Smaller than a ...).
31 TrentXWB : Good one. I don't understand the philosophy. 744 is a VLA and something in between the 744 and 388 is not?
32 NicoEDDF : No, because then it doesn't fit the Boeing philosophy of market development. And that would be sad, wouldn't it. But to be fair: Airbus would play th
33 PhilSquares : What don't you understand? I can't make heads or tails out of your sentence.
34 Scouseflyer : Personally I love the A380 but also think that the 748 looks like a great plane. I wonder if we might see the 748 flying before the 787.........?.....
35 Kaneporta1 : The "wing issue" was a personal assessment based on the mistaken assumption that the 747-8 will feature a composite wing. I don't think it is right t
36 Danny : Boeing's current market outlook refers to that category as "747 and larger" so they clearly think it is the same market. Market for 980 aircraft acco
37 Parapente : There are now two threads on this subject and both on the front page -so I guess its causing alot of interest.Looking at thread number 1 you can see w
38 Stitch : A 777-400 might be able to carry as many people and cargo (weight) as a 747-400, but it will fly hundreds of nautical miles less because that extra p
39 PlaneInsomniac : Pure semantics and completely irrelevant for the evaluation of the sales success. If the A380 didn't exist, the orders for the 748i would most likely
40 Cloudyapple : Thanks. History has shown that double stretches or double shrinks are unlikely to work. The baseline aircraft is where the optimization occurs. A str
41 PhilSquares : What is your point? How does it get killed by the 77W? As you point out it is a different market segment, with the 77W being "significantly smaller".
42 EBJ1248650 : I mention it only as a possibility. You assume I'm defending Boeing and your assumption is wrong!
43 PlaneInsomniac : That particular comment was in reference to a number of posts by various posters in this thread, not to you specifically. Which may or may not be tru
44 PW100 : Perhaps you may be able to surprise yourself again, by checking the 747-8F range with 744 payload . . . Regards, PW100
45 PhilSquares : That's like asking how long is a piece of string? It is a meaningless question. Market forces dictated the development of both aircraft. Just wait un
46 PlaneInsomniac : The immature way of conceding one is wrong. First you insist that A380 and 748i sales are unrelated, now all of a sudden the question is meaningless.
47 PhilSquares : When you ask a logical, relevant question I will answer it. But when you ask pointless, absurd questions, I will answer in kind. But again, I am not g
48 JRDC930 : Im BACK! and with some insights on this issue...first of all i love the 747 in any form (excpet frieghters...AKA garbage scows.)...Secondly im a reali
49 Stitch : If Airbus had never launched the A380, I tend to think Boeing would have eventually launched something like the 747-8I. There is market demand for a l
50 JRDC930 : This is now irrelevant...given that it was launched i think Keesje gives some very good reasons as to why the 748i will be a flop.
51 RedChili : So, when BA wanted to buy a VLA, and they went to Airbus and Boeing with RFP's for a VLA, what do you think Boeing did? Did they tell BA, "No, we don
52 Stitch : Of course it is irrelevant, but the man asked a question and I answered it. I expect it will be a "flop", as well, but it will still help make the 74
53 Tdscanuck : 27. Still not a very impressive number, but when BBJ sales make up ~25% of your orders you can't just ignore them. Tom.
54 Travelhound : I don't think we have any real concrete evidence to suggest this is true. Airliner and Airbus hype can be very different from what is actually happen
55 JRDC930 : I agree with this.. but what i wanted to point out is that some one as optimistic as you must now even realise no more than 2 or three airlines even
56 Astuteman : I'd agree with that.. All we currently have is a statement from Boeing that the 748F (note..) will be overweight when it enters service, with a weigh
57 DocLightning : Exqueeze me? Have you stood inside a 744? Have you stood next to one? Its bigger than your dream house. My whole apartment could fit into a 744 5 tim
58 Astuteman : Beautifully expressed my friend, with great style. I chuckled my way through breakfast on the strength of that post. My thanks Rgds
59 PhilSquares : It's my office! So you take it from there.
60 Astuteman : A fair riposte - me thinks... Rgds
61 PhilSquares : But, why don't you finish the rest of the quote. It's 1.5 tonnes overweight right now. As a percentage of MTOW, it's much less than the 380 was. In a
62 Astuteman : In my view, engineers tend to set themselves targets that can be hit. Therefore I would expect most other perfomance parameters to come on, or slight
63 DocLightning : Breakfast? I could use that. I'm drunk off my keister just home from the bar to a cold, lonely bed. 2AM here. Thanks for the thumbs-up. *looks shocke
64 Parapente : My God there are (effectively) now 3 threads on this one issue! The "interview" was interesting is the press now smelling blood? Certainly the evasive
65 AirNZ : No, I was asking you a direct and valid question. You clearly stated that that no mention was made of a weight issue then went on to state that you w
66 N14AZ : I read somewhere that LH sees this rather as an advantage as LH Technik offers maintenance works for a lot of other airliners and operators. They wou
67 Glom : This is such a tragedy. How did Boeing lose the ball so badly? The A team should be feeling very smug about this. If Boeing don't pull their act toget
68 AirNZ : Just as point of interest, which one are you referring to as which? And, before you say anything no, I'm not being funny at all, nor as an aviation e
69 Travelhound : Hold back there! All I am saying is that the airlines that operate the A380 have incentive to talk about the A380 in the best light possible. In mark
70 Astuteman : Who is? You can be pretty sure we know a hell of a lot more about the A380's performance than we do about the 748's...... Rgds
71 SEPilot : Even if no other airline buys the 748i (which is unlikely; some other airlines will sooner or later) it will not be that much of an orphan. The engin
72 AustrianZRH : I take it you mean a 748F, as I don't think B will go ahead soon with a 787F .
73 Astuteman : By the way, it would appear that you have a short memory. Tim Clark was extraordinarily scathing about the A380's excess weight (not to mention the d
74 Stitch : The only two airlines that have publicly disparaged the 747-8I are QF and SQ and I've heard talk from within those two companies that isn't their man
75 474218 : The A380's current performance numbers are not realistic, because Airbus is still providing introductory support. As the current operators receive mo
76 N14AZ : Aah, you are right, once the Airbus support persons sitting on the jump seats will be removed from all A380 flights the fuel consumption will decreas
77 Babybus : And the 747-8 will have to go through exactly the same process, if it ever gets off the ground.
78 JRDC930 : Care to explain which ones? as of now no airline besides LH has said any thing positive about the PAX version. I think if any airline was interested
79 Alessandro : Nope, A380 flew first time 2005 and commercially 2007. Superheavy today is either A380 or An-225 I guess?
80 AirNZ : A valid point, yes but that's not the point you were making, is it? Did you ever consider the operating airlines were stating facts.......or are you
81 Astuteman : Fortunately for the rest of us, Boeing take the A380's performance figures a lot more seriously than you seem to. That's not speculation, by the way.
82 SEPilot : You are quite right; my bad. I have no idea, but I suspect that if Delta or United decides they need to replace any of their 744's with a VLA they wo
83 Bmacleod : The only real dark cloud I ses for the 747-8 is lack of orders from major carriers. Global financial turmoil is grabbing the attention of most of the
84 JRDC930 : I would tend to agree, and very much hope so...but i was under the impression DL will eliminate the 744 they get from Northwest. DL doesnt seem to li
85 SEPilot : Well, they have bought some 77L's; which makes it likely that when they replace the 744's they will go with 77W's. But since it will probably be a fe
86 DocLightning : Seeing as how both operators already have 772's, my bet is on the 77W. The set of routes that they have that would support a 350+ seat aircraft is sm
87 474218 : All I am saying is that you are talking less than ten aircraft, flying only a few routes with full OEM support. That is not realistic.
88 YULWinterSkies : I've always been extremely skeptical about the realism of the 748. Will it ever fly? Before you bash me, here are my arguments: Airbus aircraft are in
89 JRDC930 : As well as to most here on Anet. I agree with everything you said. I guess the reason it will fly now, is only because their in to deep, not because
90 Travelhound : Sorry, AirNZ, not doubting what you are trying to say. I think it's clear by Boeings own market assessment that the 748i is not going to be the succe
91 Stitch : Boeing's first VLA - the 747-600X - was launched over three years prior to Airbus launching the A380. The former was launched in September 1996 at th
92 AirNZ : Cheers Travelhound, and no problems at all. Wait a sec here! Why are we suddenly getting this idea, and seems pretty particular to this thread? Sorry
93 Travelhound : The use of the word "hype" was incorrect. The dictionary definition of hype is to trick or misleading publicity. I was referring to hype as excitemen
94 DocLightning : Boeing didn't drop the ball. Boeing's position has been that there simply isn't enough of a market for VLA's to merit the development of the A380. So
95 Stitch : To my knowledge, the term "VLA" didn't really come into the aviation lexicon until airplanes with baseline three-class capacities of 500 or more peop
96 NicoEDDF : Yeah, thats what I wonder myself all through this thread. Does it help the 748 suddenly not to be considered as VLA? By no means! Its a marketing too
97 Tdscanuck : How do you figure? The 747-8i appears, at the moment, to maybe be off schedule by some months and off performance by perhaps a few %, at relatively l
98 Astuteman : Let me refresh your memory - he expected the A380 to be 20%-25% more fuel efficient per seat mile cost than the 744 (as SQ have already said they are
99 DocLightning : The A380 is inherently more efficient because of its cross-section and space utilization. Far better as a passenger carrier. The 747 airframe is inhe
100 PhilSquares : The 748 will have a raked wing and new TE flaps. Not really. Boeing looked at extending the upper deck the entire length of the aircraft and due to a
101 Post contains links Travelhound : I tried finding the technical details for the 748i on the Boeing website, but it looks like they have recently removed details for the 748i. I have o
102 Alessandro : Well, delivery time is one reason, use of already existing infrastructure of LH for the B747 and a bit of political reasons that Germany got such lar
103 SEPilot : When was the A346 launched? I thought it wasn't much before the A380 was launched. In that case, there would have been few cases where they would hav
104 Astuteman : I'm pretty sure there's a 748i R/P chart in that ACAP somewhere, that's just been added back in.. Pretty pointless until there is something to interp
105 Post contains links GBan : Full quote: Several derivatives are being studied to provide additional capabilities of the 747-8 family of airplanes. Future browth versions could a
106 Stitch : I am pretty sure that is boilerplate text at the end of all the ACAPs.
107 Post contains links ContnlEliteCMH : They are. The 748 wing's aerodynamics seems to share little in common with the 744. Indeed, one article quotes it as "all new". You can read more det
108 Post contains images RedChili : According to the official Boeing Market Outlook, there's actually no such thing as a VLA at all. The outlook only talks of "large twin-aisle passenge
109 Zeke : "Large Three class: more than 175 seats" ..... even a A321 and 757 fits in that bill VLA is a term used in the Airbus market outlooks and elsewhere i
110 RedChili : I believe it's a typo. It should read 375. Note that the medium size is for 250 to 370 seats.
111 Rigo : I vote for FVLA (Former VLA)
112 SunriseValley : A senior manager at one A380 operator that I chatted to expressed more than passing interest in engine performance deterioration. The point was that
113 Astuteman : Presumably this is another A380 specific phenomenon which won't be repeated on the 787-8 and 748F/i, even though their engines will go into service w
114 Stitch : But the Trent design itself is, well not "ancient"...(ducks the tomato tossed by PM)...let us say "well-seasoned". As such, I would be honestly surpr
115 SCAT15F : Hey everyone, check this out from the Seattle PI. (10-29) I hope this is not true! (Ray Goforth, executive director of the Society of Professional Eng
116 Stitch : Well I know the SPEEA folk I talk to here and at PAE note that the Russian Design Center is not very good. As I believe they did a good chunk of the
117 SunriseValley : This comment was only A380 specific in so far as the engine is "young" by this person's definition and EIS is somewhat recent . I would expect that t
118 JRDC930 : Lets face it people the 748i will fly. How many airlines? Probably only one major airline (Arik doesnt count), silence speaks numbers. And this plane
119 Stitch : I know of at least one, but NDAs prevent me from mentioning their name or why they made the decision they did. I also have a good idea as to why QF a
120 Astuteman : Thanks for that, SunriseValley. From my seat, (and just to repeat an earlier comment, I guess), recognising that, as always, an older engine will not
121 Hamlet69 : OTOH, there are several former or current 747-400 operators I know of that have approached Airbus about the A380, and Boeing about the 777-300ER and
122 Astuteman : Well, in keeping with the nature of the original comment, since when did having an engine on a test-bed in lab conditions compare to having 20 of the
123 SCAT15F : Given the significantly better than expected performance of the 773ER and 772LR in both range and speed (mach .84 actual cruise vs mach .83 design cru
124 Baroque : I am not sure selling airplanes is quite the same as selling political parties????? You actually have to be able to demonstrate the performance not j
125 Post contains links Brendows : RR hasn't flown their test bird for a long time, but they may of course have been testing the Trent 1000 in other ways.
126 Post contains links Travelhound : After much thought and deliberation I am now in a position to publish my findings. Just remember my numbers are fairly crude, but they do give some s
127 SCAT15F : Interesting... what would those figures look like if you re-engined the 744ER with genx-2b67 engines? I think it could be a great idea if boeing can'
128 Post contains images Stitch : I do tend to think that instead of shooting for the 747-500X with the 747-8I, Boeing should have considered the 747-400QXLR, but with an MTOW around
129 SCAT15F : That would have been an excellent aircraft (and the proportions look great), you could then use the crown space galley option and add some more cabin
130 Post contains links Zeke : AFAIK that configuration applies to one aircraft only at the moment, AFAIK most are 14F/64J/265Y http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying/inTheAir/ourAir
131 RedChili : One of the many figures that don't make sense in your post: You're contradicting yourself. Is this number per passenger or per seat? There's a big dif
132 PhilSquares : The 744/744ER has no problems going LAX-MEL. The real problem becomes if you need an alternate. Normally, if you need one one for MEL, you can't use
133 Post contains links Travelhound : " target=_blank>http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying...744ER Note the 5th row. This is a 747-438ER equipped aircraft with the premium seats. I'd sugg
134 QFFlyer : All 3 class 744s will have the extra 2 seats fitted upstairs to bring J to 66 and reducing the size of the cupboard. I am surprised that this informa
135 WunalaYann : Actually, the 744 would be systematically payload restricted on LAX-MEL. Even the 744ER has to make occasional diversions to SYD when headwinds get r
136 Post contains links PhilSquares : But it can take a full pax load, both ways. As I wrote, the only problem becomes when you need a distant alternate for SYD or MEL. Then you have a pa
137 Astuteman : I'd be interested to know where these figures come from.... geniunely It has no problems flying LAX-MEL - it's a question of what it might be able to
138 SunriseValley : Phil, Would every LAX- MEL flight carry sufficient fuel for a BNE diversion ? If not what forecasted conditions besides fog would dictate the need to
139 XT6Wagon : Even better, the new wing should make for massive improvements in the climb fuel burn. Don't forget the 744 still had the same basic non-supercritica
140 PhilSquares : Hate to burst your bubble, but I have flown LA-MEL/SYD with a full pax load and 10 tonnes of cargo numerous times. So, I don't care what the publishe
141 Astuteman : I looked in my post for where I said you hadn't, but I couldn't find it...... Because it doesn't specify on what seat count basis the comparison is m
142 Stitch : With the extra payload the A380 offers? Why would they? I mean during much of the A380's delay, oil was not all that expensive.
143 PhilSquares : Have never said that. I have flown that route too many times to remember. Full pax is never a problem and in reality, your wind figures are too high.
144 Astuteman : At one stage this was more than supposition on A-net - it was a given, backed by "Laws", no less, which a large proportion of posters, including a nu
145 Travelhound : The numbers are best guess, so are fairly crude, but do give a fairly good baseline if we are using assumptions from the GD statement that the A380 i
146 Astuteman : GCM lists MEL-LAX as 6883 Nm or 7921 miles when I input it.. That may be a double-dip.... Airbus quote the A380 as being a 3l per 100 pax km plane. L
147 Travelhound : Don't worry, if it is a double dip, I've also dipped into the B744ER figures as well. Figures using the 3.5l per 100 klms. B747 (190,000 litres) - $1
148 SunriseValley : I almost hesitate to jump in on what has turned into a numbers game. Firstly, let me get my pet peeve off my chest; NO AIRLINE CARRY'S PASSENGERS ONLY
149 Travelhound : Using the new analysis: If the B744ER has a 100% load factor than the A380 still has to carry an extra 30 economy passengers or a load factor of 75%
150 SCAT15F : ...even more attractive - B744ER re-engined with GEnx
151 RedChili : But still, only one airline bought six copies of the 744ER. If your numbers are correct, why so few sales?
152 SunriseValley : Not too many carriers need the about 7400nm still air distance that QF needs for LAX-MEL.
153 Stitch : Only QF, CX and UA showed an interest. UA couldn't afford it and CX didn't have enough traffic 365-days a year to justify it for the HKG flights - th
154 Baroque : Not having a dog in this ding dong, I might be bold enough to suggest it is more an "anti-irrational arguments" position. Try heaping irrational prai
155 Astuteman : Depends on the definition of "full-load". Phil said This IMO fits pretty well with the R/P data that I posted (although he wasn't specific about whet
156 Post contains links Zeke : Beg to differ, the 744ER goes full fuel and reduced payload LAX-MEL a fair bit, and normally get about a dozen diversions a year even with the ER. Th
157 PhilSquares : Zeke they don't. I have flown both LAX-MEL and SYD and there is no real problem. Again, the winds aren't all that strong along the route to have a dr
158 Zeke : Well QF thinks differently, but what would they know, they only "occasionally" do the route. LAX-MEL is about 10% further than LAX-HKG nil wind, the
159 PhilSquares : Zeke, you don't seem to get it! Not every airline operates like everyother one. I am sorry if you think I, as the PIC can just designate an alternate
160 Zeke : Actually, you are the one who does not get it. We were talking about QF operating LAX-MEL in the 744ER, I have listed the QF alternates, and you are
161 PhilSquares : Sorry, but you don't get it! You're the one who started to speak specifically about QF. Up until you got in mid-stream the conversation had been a ge
162 Travelhound : Wow! That's suggesting that the A380 is hitting the mark and some more! Allowed $290.00 / Passenger for these charges.
163 Astuteman : Credit where credit's due, Phil....... Is where QF specific discussions began Wow indeed. And I think you're right to acknowledge the huge achievemen
164 Stitch : Well an LH spokeswoman recently noted that LH is "looking forward to the delivery of the 747-8", so it seems that LH just doggedly continues to want t
165 RedChili : That LH spokeswoman has apparently not read this thread! She would've found numerous arguments to say the exact opposite if she had listened to us!
166 Post contains links and images Stitch : That could very well be the case, RedChili.  I could not find the statement on a quick Google search, but since it was during the strike, it had to h
167 AirNZ : Sorry, and not wishing to butt in on a specific discussion, but out of curiosity what airline except QF flies/has flown LAX-MEL direct on the 744? I
168 Astuteman : And so they should! It'll be a great plane IMO Rgds
169 SCAT15F : Agreed. The A380 has exceeded expectations and it's a great aircraft, but based on the 773ER and 772LR results, there is every reason to believe that
170 Astuteman : Thanks for picking up on this, SCAT15F. I know I've spent half the thread praising the improvements in the A380, which raise the bar the 748i is aime
171 Post contains links SKY1 : Yes, Boeing does! Just look this: http://www.boeing.es/website_2/pages...age_27762/uploads/resumen_2008.pdf (in Spanish language, from Boeing.es) The
172 Post contains links Astuteman : And should almost certainly be read alongside this... http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/gmf/ it's Airbus equivalent, which is also interesting and c
173 BAW716 : This is not a good thing. If the range of the bird is not = or > than the 744ERF, then the F version of the 748 is going to be a bugger to sell. On t
174 Astuteman : I'd go so far as to say the A380 looks more like becoming the ULR bird anyway. It's still-air range at max. payload is already 500Nm more than the 74
175 Stitch : I am sure the majority of 747-400ERFs are bought for their ability to haul 126t at a shorter range, rather then match the 113t of the 747-400F while
176 Qantas744ER : UA And they will again Leo
177 SunriseValley : What has to change for this to happen ?
178 Astuteman : With a 744? Rgds
179 SEPilot : I am still hopeful that, just as the A380, the 77W and 77L have exceeded expectations, that the 748 will as well. The hump will still give the 748 an
180 JerseyFlyer : Does this eliminate the need for the proposed A388R?
181 PhilSquares : It is a new wing. No winglets, raked wing tips, double slotted flaps.
182 Zeke : Kind of, it has the same 744 plan form/dimensions (except for the wingtip extension) which makes it inefficient with todays supercritical airfoils.
183 Post contains links PhilSquares : I don't think I said, leading edge technology, but NEW. The "kind of" is like saying almost pregnant. It's either new or it's not. There is no such m
184 Stitch : I am beginning to think it does. An A380-800R will still likely be unable to fly SYD-LHR, both directions, 365-days a year, at maximum payload even w
185 SEPilot : But the wing structure is the same, which means the same sweep. My understanding is that with the advances that have been made they could achieve the
186 Columba : Any chance that thefirst 747-8I will roll-out in LH colors ?
187 Stitch : I don't see why it couldn't be, frankly, even if the first frame is not destined for them. There are four BBJ frames that were ordered earlier, but e
188 PhilSquares : Less sweep is also equal to lower IMN cruise and a whole host of certification/performance issues. The aircraft will have a new wing load test. That
189 WingedMigrator : First I've heard of this. I hate to play the snarky "got source?" game but I would really like to see where you got this. We've heard of the first 74
190 Post contains links Keesje : I have no source that certification will be grand fathered or not. But if we are taking different wing height, cord, profile, wingpylon loads (engine
191 PhilSquares : As Keesje pointed out, if it were the same wing, albeit beefed up, then there would not be the certification issue. The increase in MTOW, ZFW and MLW
192 Stitch : I'm just guessing here, but if Boeing was going to need to perform static tests on major 747-8 structures, wouldn't we know that already? I mean there
193 Charles79 : I find this very interesting, a great way to save money if it works out. When was the last time they built a prototype that was never delivered to an
194 Brendows : That was the 757, and the 767 before that. Yes, they're keeping the first A380 (cn 001,) and they did the same with the first A320 and first A343 too
195 Astuteman : Depends what you mean. To make the respective specifications work, the 748i's Lift/Drag needs to be some 15% lower than the A380's. The 748i may inde
196 Post contains images Keesje : A few years ago Airbus was questioning what would be the next A380 version, the -800F, 800R or 900. I guess after your analyses and airline comments
197 Stitch : Could they just fly both segments eastbound? Well they've arguably already spent it, since I imagine the A380-800F work is enough. So I suppose if BA
198 Astuteman : The 600 tonner I guess needs the centre tank engineering work to be done. As far as I know, the wing upgrade, and brakes/LG engineering are done, bas
199 SEPilot : According to one of the members of this forum with inside information (I forgot who) the FAA has already signed off on the 748 wing without a load te
200 Post contains links PhilSquares : If anyone has a problem, then perhaps you need to speak with Boeing. I'm just passing along what is public. http://www.newairplane.com/747/747fe...ad
201 Post contains images Travelhound : The 748 is approx. 12% larger than a 744 in both freighter (858 (748) & 764 (744) cubic metres) and passenger (typical 3-class Boeing web site 467 (7
202 Zeke : Time an place to believe marketing claims, this is not one one of them, the 747-8 has a higher sweep angle than what a all new wing would have produc
203 PhilSquares : Zeke that is meaningless. The 748 will have a higher trip cost than the 744 and the 380 will have a higher trip cost than the 748. So what? At the en
204 Post contains links Zeke : Yes, and LH has already said the A380 is better. Pure B/S Phil, you can see the direct comparison on flight tracker between the A380 and 744 that QF
205 PhilSquares : Not when you start to put words I didn't write in my posts. " target=_blank>http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747....html Well, if you want to quibble
206 Astuteman : Artificially inflated seat counts are far more likely to skew the picture.... And they unquestionably do in this instance. On a like-for-like basis w
207 Rheinwaldner : That makes me curious. What plane do you fly now?
208 PhilSquares : Gee, thanks for your opinion, but what's your point? I have never said anything negative about any of Airbus' literature, either technical or marketi
209 RedChili : In reply 179, SEPilot said, "it would have been nice if Boeing had sprung for a completely new wing." When he spoke about a "completely new wing," I
210 Post contains links Mymorningsong : http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Boeing...-7478-Program-prnews-13571176.html Boeing Adjusts 747-8 Program Production and Delivery Schedule - Deliveries o
211 Post contains images Zeke : This confirms what I have heard elsewhere, however I understand the 747-8I will not be around until 2012. The original schedule, the slips are very a
212 NA : Thats sad to read. I am very disappointed that the delay is so substantial. I expected 3 or 4 months. The statement says in clear words that Boeing ad
213 RedChili : Deliveries were originally intended for third quarter 2009, so this is a whole year's delay. The original press release just said that the LH 748i "i
214 Zeke : I understand it was Q1 2010, don't know where Boeing got the "late 2010" from, that is not what they said when the order was announced.
215 WingedMigrator : Of course certification will be required, that's bleeding obvious. The question is whether it will be certification by analysis or certification by t
216 Astuteman : Once again, Phil, I have to declare myself lost by the direction of the response. My comments responded to yours regarding CASM/CASK. I'm fairly comf
217 Dennys : Would 777-400 be four engined ? dennys
218 Stitch : That would defeat the purpose. I expect there is not too much MTOW growth left in the 777 frame and the GE90-11xB has enough thrust growth to handle
219 Pnwtraveler : Can I presume that the same comments were made in another thread talking about the further slip in A380 delays in deliveries? I think quibbling over
220 SEPilot : There was a poster on this forum (I've forgotten who) who stated categorically that the FAA had accepted certification of the 748 wing by analysis. I
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 Room For The 747-8 At VS? posted Mon Jan 29 2007 06:02:54 by JAM747
Is There A Drop-Dead Date For The 747-8 Pax? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 20:16:09 by Bmacleod
25 Potential Customers For The 747-8I posted Mon Jul 17 2006 19:33:31 by FCKC
Why An Upper Deck For The 747? posted Sun Sep 11 2005 21:13:04 by Aman777
Should Airbus Hope For The 747 Adv? posted Mon Jun 13 2005 05:47:00 by A380900
Engines For The 747-X(500)'s? posted Thu Jul 22 2004 01:17:13 by VSXA380X800
Best Paint Scheme For The 747? posted Fri Dec 26 2003 01:09:29 by Thrust
The First Revenue Flight For The A380? posted Sat Nov 8 2003 08:46:42 by Ual747
What Is The Best Substitute For The 747-SP? posted Sat Sep 6 2003 17:33:17 by Pouyazad
What Else Can Boeing Do For The 747? posted Wed Sep 4 2002 05:11:25 by Airmale
25 Potential Customers For The 747-8I posted Mon Jul 17 2006 19:33:31 by FCKC
Why An Upper Deck For The 747? posted Sun Sep 11 2005 21:13:04 by Aman777
Should Airbus Hope For The 747 Adv? posted Mon Jun 13 2005 05:47:00 by A380900
Engines For The 747-X(500)'s? posted Thu Jul 22 2004 01:17:13 by VSXA380X800
Best Paint Scheme For The 747? posted Fri Dec 26 2003 01:09:29 by Thrust
The First Revenue Flight For The A380? posted Sat Nov 8 2003 08:46:42 by Ual747
What Is The Best Substitute For The 747-SP? posted Sat Sep 6 2003 17:33:17 by Pouyazad
The First Revenue Flight For The A380? posted Sat Nov 8 2003 08:46:42 by Ual747
What Is The Best Substitute For The 747-SP? posted Sat Sep 6 2003 17:33:17 by Pouyazad
Any New First Class Suites For LH's B 747-400s? posted Thu Sep 27 2007 10:58:49 by United Airline
Any Room For The 747-8 At VS? posted Mon Jan 29 2007 06:02:54 by JAM747
Is There A Drop-Dead Date For The 747-8 Pax? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 20:16:09 by Bmacleod
25 Potential Customers For The 747-8I posted Mon Jul 17 2006 19:33:31 by FCKC
Why An Upper Deck For The 747? posted Sun Sep 11 2005 21:13:04 by Aman777
Should Airbus Hope For The 747 Adv? posted Mon Jun 13 2005 05:47:00 by A380900
Engines For The 747-X(500)'s? posted Thu Jul 22 2004 01:17:13 by VSXA380X800
Best Paint Scheme For The 747? posted Fri Dec 26 2003 01:09:29 by Thrust
The First Revenue Flight For The A380? posted Sat Nov 8 2003 08:46:42 by Ual747
What Is The Best Substitute For The 747-SP? posted Sat Sep 6 2003 17:33:17 by Pouyazad