Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 355 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 39157 times:
Just read that the first section of the 747-8 (L/N 1420) was put into its jig last week to begin assembly (on the way to final assembly) on that airplane. We've heard a few months back that production has started on parts, but this event marks the first step towards assembly of major components for the -8. LN 1420's section 41 (which includes the upper deck) is made by Spirit in Wichita and is usually the first part of the fuselage to be built.
Don't have a public link for the article yet, but seems to be good news for the program...
Kappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 39139 times:
Quoting Pianos101 (Thread starter): Just read that the first section of the 747-8 (L/N 1420) was put into its jig last week to begin assembly (on the way to final assembly) on that airplane. We've heard a few months back that production has started on parts, but this event marks the first step towards assembly of major components for the -8. LN 1420's section 41 (which includes the upper deck) is made by Spirit in Wichita and is usually the first part of the fuselage to be built.
Awesome, can't wait to see this baby fly!!
Good news all around, parts production for the a350 started and now this. Now only for first flight of the 787 and it's a good year for new programs!
Ecb747 From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 37 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 39108 times:
Good news indeed!
Assembling the 747-8 should give Boeing less problems than the 787, and therefor should not be a victim of great delays.
What are the next parts arriving and who builds theses parts (major components that is)?
Khobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 38720 times:
Major assembly began last August with the wings. What they are doing now is final assembly which, according to AW was supposed to happen in "early 2009." Holy cow, it would seem something finally happened on time!
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 5853 posts, RR: 39 Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 38617 times:
Quoting Khobar (Reply 6): Holy cow, it would seem something finally happened on time!
Let's not forget that Boeing has a long history of delivering on time and beating expectations. Just because they fell flat on their faces with the 787 does not mean all of that history is out the window. They can (and hopefully will) pick themselves up and recover.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
Gsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 38424 times:
Well, it is really not on time (it is only "on time" in the sense of the revised timetable), but welcome news to an industry that needs some good news. Hopefully the industry has learned that no matter how much management and marketing push and spin are applied, the engineering and production folks have the final say when things are done.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 22941 posts, RR: 78 Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 38334 times:
I know Spirit built the 747-400 Section 41, as well, but I seem to recall that was a collection of panels and spars and such that were then assembled in jigs at Building 40-21 in PAE?
Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 355 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 38323 times:
Quoting Khobar (Reply 6): Major assembly began last August with the wings.
Let me be more clear: this marks the beginning of FUSELAGE assembly, on the way to final assembly. This event does not mark the start of final assembly, which is where all of the sections are joined together and the wings and body are joined. That will come in about a month or two.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 22941 posts, RR: 78 Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 38239 times:
Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 10): This event does not mark the start of final assembly, which is where all of the sections are joined together and the wings and body are joined. That will come in about a month or two.
I was under the impression Boeing was going to spend a few months between the last 747-400 and the first 747-8 to reconfigure the line. Is this no longer the case?
I know there was a plan to convert the 747 assembly process from a static line to a moving line, but when I last looked a few months ago (on the tour), it still looked like a static line (at least in terms of assembly jigs and such). With the new wings, can all of the existing 747-400 assembly jigs be used?
Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 355 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 38167 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 11): I was under the impression Boeing was going to spend a few months between the last 747-400 and the first 747-8 to reconfigure the line. Is this no longer the case?
I'm not sure about "months" but there's definitely a longer period of time after L/N 1419 that the line will be free of aircraft to get the tooling up and ready for 1420. Not exactly sure how long it'll be, but i think its around two months.
I haven't heard about a 47 moving line, but that (obviously) doesn't mean the rumor's out there. The new wing is longer i think (with the tip extensions) so i doubt that the same tooling could be used. On top of that, the wing is being built differently anyway. Parts that were built up in everett (e.g., fixed leading edge) are coming in as end-item assemblies from the suppliers. That should save some time in final assy...
Quoting Stitch (Reply 9): Is this what is happening with the 747-8?
Well other parts of the wing are made by Spirit (tulsa) and KAL, among other suppliers. Not sure which (if any) are made by Boeing-proper.
ANITIX87 From Switzerland, joined Mar 2005, 3039 posts, RR: 16 Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 38082 times:
A couple of questions come to mind whilst reading this.
1) I see it is line number 1420. Assuming this is the same as the C/N, how come they don't start with 1? I are they continuing it as if it's just another 747? Does that mean some last new-build 744s will have later C/Ns than some 748s?
2) How much of the 748 is shared with the 744? Anything? Is the cockpit section the same? Rear? Anything? Or is this a completely new aircraft, like the 744 was, that has simply retained the 747 name for ease of certification?
TIS
www.tisdigital.com, www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-40
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 22941 posts, RR: 78 Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 37540 times:
Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 13): How much of the 748 is shared with the 744?
A good bit. There are two additional fuselage plug extensions (one forward and one aft of the wing). The wing has been re-profiled and is bit longer thanks to raked wingtips instead of upturned winglets. And it uses the GEnx powerplant.
Adam42185 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 386 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 37319 times:
Quoting Ecb747 (Reply 2): Assembling the 747-8 should give Boeing less problems than the 787, and therefor should not be a victim of great delays.
We can only hope, it is still a new plane. I cant wait for it though, all of the new planes, 787, 748i/F and A350 are all going to be beautiful in the skies
Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 355 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 36434 times:
Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 13): 1) I see it is line number 1420. Assuming this is the same as the C/N, how come they don't start with 1? I are they continuing it as if it's just another 747? Does that mean some last new-build 744s will have later C/Ns than some 748s?
By C/N i'm guessing you mean MSN (i.e., serial number)? If so, then yes, the MSN has nothing to do with the line number. Within Boeing we use the line number to talk about certain aircraft because that's the literal order that they are on the factory assembly line. Serial number doesn't mean much for us in manufacturing, but it does for the airline and those of us that are tracking aircraft once their in a fleet.
For example, L/N 1420 (the first 747-8) has MSN 35808, while the fourth and fifth (all for CLX) have MSNs 35806 and 35807, so it's a little out of order. That tells us nothing about build order so that's why L/N is more important from the manufacturing/design side of things (along with airplane effectivity).
Since the 747-8 is more of a "derivative" than a new airplane, the line is moving on and not starting with "L/N 1." The 747-8 is considered a "minor model" and that is why they're continuing with L/N 1420.
There will be no more 747-400s built, so the absolute highest line number that a 747-400 will have will be L/N 1419. Does that clear things up?
Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 13): 2) How much of the 748 is shared with the 744? Anything? Is the cockpit section the same? Rear? Anything? Or is this a completely new aircraft, like the 744 was, that has simply retained the 747 name for ease of certification?
As Stitch said, MUCH of the airplane is the same, especially the fuselage. The wing went through an entire redesign, though much of the profile remains the same as the -400. That said, I think that most of the qualification for parts will be done via qual by sim (qualification by simlilarity). At least that's the last I heard...
Khobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 35270 times:
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 7): Let's not forget that Boeing has a long history of delivering on time and beating expectations. Just because they fell flat on their faces with the 787 does not mean all of that history is out the window. They can (and hopefully will) pick themselves up and recover.
No no no, not forgetting anything. It's just such welcomed news when something happens on time these days, regardless of who is doing it. For so long it was delay delay delay, etc. That's all.
RobK From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3746 posts, RR: 20 Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 33960 times:
Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 16): There will be no more 747-400s built, so the absolute highest line number that a 747-400 will have will be L/N 1419. Does that clear things up?
I think what he was asking was will the 744s end up with a higher msn than the 748s, and the answer to that is no.
The highest msn 744 model will be 37304. The lowest msn 748 model would appear to be 35306 from the data that is currently known.
Nomadd22 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 1286 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 33878 times:
How much of the jig building and tooling could they have done off the line? What kind of line changes are they making that would take so long and couldn't have been done in advance?
Is there a pool going on when Keesje will chime in with his Lufthansa prediction?
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 22941 posts, RR: 78 Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 31531 times:
More and more I think it was a mistake to launch the 747-8 program, but what's done is done and Boeing just needs to try and make the best of it.
25 YULWinterSkies: After all, weren't they supposed to get the A380F at some point? I can't recall why they cancelled it, whether only the delays were part of the story
27 PDXCessna206: They don't really need it that bad. They ordered 744s to replace all 741s and the 742s which are leaving this month. And they plan on expansion with
28 Zeke: Nope, late, the complete aircraft was supposed to be rolled out last year, and flight testing now, delivery later this year, none of that will happen
29 Rwy04LGA: How about from the USAF as an Air Force One replacement? The current VC-25s were delivered 18 years ago.
30 Stitch: Plenty of discussion on this topic in the Military Aviation forum.
31 PlaneInsomniac: Wow, if this chart is right, the plane would be about one year late already. Weren't the VC-25s all converted from used 747s? If that is the case, I
32 YXwatcherMKE: Regardless of the fact that the B748F is late or not, it is now on the line and that's a good thing for the program and Boeing. I am very happy to see
33 ANITIX87: The VC-25s were new-build aircraft, and the RFP issued by the USAF for their replacement also calls for new-build aircraft only. TIS
34 Stitch: One year late is about what it's expected to be - both the freighter and LH's Intercontinentals.
35 JRDC930: Just so you know this is an 748F not "I" being assembled. As one of the self described bashers who think one small airline order doesnt count as a suc
36 Tdscanuck: Based on the photos that have come out so far, it looks like Spirit is shipping complete assemblies (panels, flight deck, etc.) which are being assem
37 EDICHC: Who will that last 744 be going to upon completion?
38 Pianos101: I wouldn't expect the fuselage to be built up and assembled differently than before. However, when it comes to the wing i know for sure that the proc
39 Pnwtraveler: The chart provided above didn't take into account three later factors that influenced the "one year late". Firstly, there were additional 747-400F's o
40 WestWing: It looks like Boeing recently rolled out line # 1413 which is destined for Cathay Pacific. I had heard that the pre-strike plan was to produce the las
41 Khobar: AW said it was supposed to happen when it did, thus it was ON TIME as per my post. Your chart is woefully out of date.
42 ArabAirX: On post number 238 by Jacobin, Boeing seems to have issued a statement-of-sorts on the 747: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/rea
43 GBan: Correct, updating the targets is the best way to avoid delays
44 WestWing: My comment/question was deleted because it referenced a deleted post. So let me try again. It appears that Boeing have rolled out line # 1414 ( B-LID
45 Khobar: Well, that's one way. Another is to set the target so far out in the future that you can't possibly miss. And yet another is to simply deny a delay a
46 Stitch: Boeing can have up to four 747s in production at any one time - two completed birds in the front of Building 40-22, one having all of it's structures
47 NYC777: Saj over at Fleetbuzz has a great update on the 747-8 program going forward. Read it here: http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/2009/02/13/
48 EDICHC: Excuse my ignorance here, but those last 6 744s are they all 'Fs'? If so can anyone tell me who received the last pax 744 off the line?
49 Stitch: The last passenger 747-400 was delivered on the 26th of April, 2005 to China Airlines. All 747s delivered since then have been freighters.
50 HOOB747: For me, that is an impressive run for the 747 line of passenger aircraft. 35 years of 747 deliveries that started when I was born. There have been vo
52 PC12Fan: From what I understand, it's more than re-profiled, it's a new wing altogether.
53 Ikramerica: Reading the link above, it has become nearly an all new wing. That is one thing that has added to the delay in the program, as it meant slowing down
54 Stitch: I would expect if it truly was a new wing, it would be required to undergo a 150% load-limit test and to my knowledge no such test is planned and the
56 Tdscanuck: The 150% load test is an ultimate strength thing, not an aerodynamic thing...Boeing (and all the other major OEM's) are *very* good at doing strength
57 Ikramerica: This is why Boeing says that the wing will not need new static testing but that due to the massive aerodynamic changes, it will need to do a nearly f
58 Stitch: Which is what I am under the impression Boeing did, hence no test is needed and it's a "new wing" in some cases (aerodynamics), but not in others (st
59 Astuteman: To be honest, in my view it always was. And Boeing have in fact said this right from the start of development. Rgds
60 Travelhound: "Our goal was 12% better, and right now we think we're closer to 16%." "The margin improves with rising fuel costs; at $2.12 per U.S, gal., COC (cash
61 ArabAirX: guess only LH can tell us - however, I believe that they will configure their new 747-I's with much less than 467 seats. Think it was around 400 seat
62 Ikramerica: You didn't read the link. The wing was greatly modified in wind tunnel testing AFTER they had sold the concept to airlines. It wasn't as radically ch
63 Astuteman: Understand that, but at launch the programme manager himself described the development as "an essentially new wing"..... I believed him. He works for
64 Ikramerica: So do the people quoted in the fleetbuzz link above. http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/2009/02/13/ (although the link seems to be dead at the moment)
65 XT6Wagon: LH will not be a good example as thier A380 will use a much higher % of thier avalible space for Y class seats. To show why this makes it not an even
66 ArabAirX: Well, they are the only airline to have ordered both - but yes, I get your point about the higher quantity of Y seating.
67 Ikramerica: Well, how the same airline chooses to use different planes can signal how they feel about the market for each. For example, if they can only utilize
68 Stitch: Based on LH technical documentation and press statements, they have (effectively) said they would seat around 420 in their 747-8 [i]Intercontinentals
69 Ikramerica: So that does indicate a step up in C demand expected by LH, a similar step up from the A346 to the 744.
70 Stitch: Yes, it does suggest a strengthening of C demand over that currently in the 747-400 (80) and A340-600 (60). It is also projected to be the highest Bu
71 XT6Wagon: No doubt, but some on this site quote LH's fuel burn per seat as THE metric to measure relative effeciency, when in fact its not very good at all sin
72 ArabAirX: Perhaps I;m wrong, but could the FAA change its mind and stipulate a wing test if the new/old redesigned 747-8 wing is as radically changed to what i
73 Stitch: I imagine they could, since FAA approval is required to certify the airplane, but I am guessing no precedent exists to do so.
74 Ikramerica: From what I gathered from the Boeing comments, Boeing is going to work with FAA as much as they can to use modeled calculations from old tests for st
75 ArabAirX: Hypothetical, but it sure would throw things into disarray if EASA demanded a full scale test as opposed to a modelled calculation.
76 Zeke: Which is essentially exactly what I think they have done, gear and engine location is the same, sweep angle is the same. The wing section has been re
77 Columba: Sorry if this has been asked before, but when can we expect the roll-out of the first 747-8F ? Is May too early ?
78 ArabAirX: From the link in post number 47, rollout is August this year.
79 Stitch: My data comes from the following: Slide 24 of LH's Investment Day Fleet Strategy Presentation from January 25, 2007 showed their current and planned
81 Ikramerica: This also seems to be part of the process as mentioned by Boeing in the link. They will work with the FAA to incorporate everything they demand into
82 Stitch: I found both of mine via Google searching, so at least at one time they were in the public domain. I probably did get them from an LH-branded website
83 ArabAirX: I suppose either or both the FAA and EASA could request a partial evacuation test of the longer upper deck.
84 Stitch: I suppose it depends on how many people are up there vs. what the certified evacuation limit for that deck is. The first SUD frame I believe was for
86 NorthstarBoy: just wondering, is the 748F actually going to have the stretched upper deck? or will it just look like a 747-200F with new wings and a slightly longer
87 AirNz: This 'working with' the FAA often bandied around on here is somewhat of a red herring, is it not? If the FAA want/demand something in the flight test
88 Pnwtraveler: You are correct just like a slightly stretched 747-200F or 400F but with different looking wings. The extra weight of the upper deck is unnecessary.
89 Ikramerica: 748I interior schematics have been updated at Boeing.com it seams. They include a 2-class high density configuration (38" F seating, 32" Y seating) 48
90 JoeCanuck: Not really. To me, it implies cooperation as opposed to blindly following an arbitrary process. The experts in the aircraft are the manufacturers, no
91 Ikramerica: No, it's just I think you don't understand the process. The FAA works closely with the manufacturer to design a flight test program. Because this is
92 ArabAirX: There was an article in the Times of India about the possibility of AI buying new 747's, perhaps you're onto something here?
93 Astuteman: To be fair, there will be so much expertise in Boeing that the FAA, or any other regulatory body, would be unwise to trample unilaterally across it.
94 Ikramerica: It's 81 more pax than the 744 in regional 2-class configuration, or 16% larger. Combined with lower trip costs, and there could be some real value th
95 Stitch: Japan proved it can work, however what is the infrastructure like at airports around major population centers in the outer provinces/states of China/
96 OldAeroGuy: No, because "new" regulations may often be impossible to meet if followed exactly. In this case, the OEM and the Regulator work together to develop a
97 AirNZ: Yes, I understand that and also perfectly understand the process involved. However, that is not what I was indicating. Whilst both the manufacturer a
98 Tdscanuck: That's true...ultimately, the FAA grants certification, not the OEM. However, thanks to delegated authority, that gets really really fuzzy in some ca
99 Rheinbote: Does the door have a double-lane slide?
100 Ikramerica: Never seen one deployed but I would assume so. It is the same width as all the other doors on the plane (42"), but the opening is 72" high instead of
101 Revelation: Japan proved it could work, but it's a relatively affluent mountainous island nation.
102 OldAeroGuy: But it is rarely as black and white as you are implying. The Equivalent Level of Safety process allows many shades of grey, not to mention the Exempt
103 Stitch: In other words, the FAA can demand Boeing or Airbus meet a requirement to the letter of that requirement, but they don't if Boeing or Airbus can prove
104 ArabAirX: I guess Lufthansa is probably best placed to tell us its plans for the upper deck and whether or not Boeing intends to certify it with a greater numb
106 SEPilot: Do you have any particular accidents in mind? The only ones I can think of are the two that crashed because an inboard engine fell off, struck the ou
107 DocLightning: The image of the corporate fat cat that wants to compromise safety to save money doesn't apply in this case. Even if such fat cat had no morals at al
108 Ikramerica: I believe it's 628 pax on the 744 (+2 pilots and 13 cabin crew for 645 people), though the doors can handle 660. I doubt any airline would ever look
109 PC12Fan: Agreed. The only point I have is economy seating on the upper deck. By my rough calculations, the absolute max that could be seated on the upper deck
110 Ikramerica: But the door is certified for 110. The number of seats ahead of the door (only one legal exit) has not changed because the stretch is behind the door.
111 Zeke: No, and not just 747 ones. From memory the 747 was certified with people evacuating the upper deck via the internal staircase to the main deck doors.
112 Tdscanuck: Well said! This is why all the reports about bypassing safety in the name of cutting cost are so amusing...the OEM's are businesses. Doing it right (
113 Ikramerica: It may have been that by adding a 110 passenger door on each side with a double slide, and demonstrating that passengers can safely evacuate from tha
114 SEPilot: Since the last crash I know of where there was any question of design being partly responsible was the Alaska MD-80, and before that was the 737 rudd
115 Stitch: The aerospace industry and certification/regulatory agencies have long weighed the economics of preventing a crash against the economics of an occasi
116 SEPilot: Those calculations were done many, many years ago. And I am not aware of any airliner manufacturers engaging in them; the last one I know of was the
117 FrmrCAPCADET: The big argument for "is it cheaper not to fix it" is likely far more sophisticated. If we add all of the following what will it do to costs, and what
118 SEPilot: From what I have seen, whenever a hazard has been perceived the manufacturers and regulatory agencies pursue whatever practical means are available t
119 ArabAirX: Yes I remember that - I wonder whether EASA/FAA will require this to be done again despite Boeing showing no "increase" in passengers despite the lon
120 Stitch: If the FAA required it, I am sure it would already be acknowledged. And EASA will accept the FAA's certification decisions just as the FAA accepts EA
121 Osiris30: That is not entirely true. In the aerospace sector there are known risks which could still be mitigated. If that weren't the case every aircraft woul
122 SEPilot: Actually, you are right (as I pointed out in my subsequent post.) If the cost of removing a hazard is so high that it would substantially impact the
123 Nomadd22: It's not always that objective. Try doing a quick cost/analysis on inerting fuel tanks. The money spent compared to the potential lives saved comes to
124 Osiris30: It's been down... see A380 evac test. Comments for those involved in testing the upper deck slides included: "Wheeee!" and "Wow I wanna go again!"
125 Manfredj: Are we really contimplating the question: Do airlines know about potential problems that risk lives and choose to do nothing? If anything good has co
126 SEPilot: As others have argued this is not totally true. Prime example, if you believe that TWA800 was in fact brought down by the center fuel tank exploding,
127 AirNz: No, I am not inplying that it is black and white in the slightest and I fully understand leeway involved. In each of my posts I was clearly stating t
128 Manfredj: Yet the FAA would ground AA's entire fleet of MD-80's to fix a wiring harness that may or may not be mounted incorrectly? Such precautions alleviate
129 Travelhound: A prime example of where this collaboration may have gone wrong was with the cargo door on the McDonnell Douglas DC-10. Both sides probably learned s
130 Osiris30: Wasn't my point. They still aren't 100% failsafe. My entire point which you seem to have missed is that for everything there is a limit to how far we
131 JoeCanuck: What would make people drive more safely; an airbag in the steering wheel or a steel spike aimed for your heart? The more things appear safe, the more
132 ArabAirX: James Wallce has this tidbit of changes on the 747 management team: http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/archives/162748.asp
133 Nomadd22: Damn Canadian troublemaker. I mentioned the steel spike line, and we spent about an hour talking about the concept in a meeting. I know more than a f
134 JoeCanuck: Nah...I stole it first, fair and square, from some auto safety show years ago. Great line though, eh...?
135 SEPilot: IIRC the AA grounding was largely a PR ploy because the FAA had come under fire for being too cozy with the airlines. Anyway, who ever accused bureau
136 Stitch: Just a follow-up, Scott Carson noted at a JP Morgan aviation conference that the the 747-8 freighter is on track to meet its revised schedule to be de
137 Kbdude: When is the freighter's projected 1st flight? How long is the projected certification period ...8 months?
138 Stitch: As of late last month, Boeing spokesfolk were saying first flight of the 747-8 freighter would be by the end of the third quarter or beginning of the
139 Stitch: Once again, it looks like the rumors of the death of LH's order for the 747-8 Intercontinental and the 747-8 Intercontinental herself have been greatl
140 SEPilot: I have only seen those rumors expounded on this forum; the only substance to them that I have seen was when a Boeing official said that if this downt
141 Stitch: Well I cannot believe Boeing would issue a contract for 20 interiors for LH 747-8 Intercontinentals without assurances that there would be 20 LH 747-8
142 Ikramerica: Yep, it's quite popular here. I think it's payback for those of us who postulated that it might make sense for Airbus to shut down the A380 line. But
144 Par13del: A good way to look at it from your point of view is the two bodies in the US, the NTSB and the FAA. The NTSB is concerned with safety only, the econo
145 Isitsafenow: Stitch....I'll be up at Everett Friday OCT 9th.. Maybe......maybe...........maybe...... safe
146 Flighty: Do you think LH is going to like the modern stylized "LH Sucks" motif inside the cabin, designed by their friends at Air NZ? And doesn't LH have load
147 AirNz: Yes, I would wholeheartedly agree with you if it were true. However, most on here know full well the vast majority of it, unfortunately, wasn't remot
148 ArabAirX: Boeing did issue a statement after the earnings call to verify McNerneys comments: http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/2009/02/03/boeing747/ As you say
149 Columba: Indeed, did LH Technik made an offer to win this deal ? I can imagine that LH would have preferred an inhouse solution for the interior design. Maybe
150 Stitch: The contract with Altitude is for drinks cabinets, stowage units and closets in the First Class cabin of the planes. So there is plenty of work in bo
151 Burkhard: Her majesty the empress of the skies gives the honor of a welcome to the new queen and asks her to carry her luggage :lol: Good to hear positve news
152 Khobar: The cost is not very high for new builds (free, actually), and yes, it has been implemented on some new builds. http://www.seattlepi.com/business/372
153 Manfredj: I get very excited with this kind of news, I'm like a kid in a candy store. However, I'm not too knowledgeable about interiors. Sounds like this compa
154 N14AZ: Exactly, everytime this thread pops up at the top I quickly open it in order to see some pictures but obviously I am too impatient. Any new pictures
155 Stitch: A way to woo more First Class traffic? LH does have one of the weaker international First Class hard products since they use paired seats instead of
156 Astuteman: If that's me, I'm at home..... But I'm not sure why you ask the question. Do you mean to imply that because I'm an enthusiast of the A380 that I'm no
157 AirNZ: How on earth does setting a 'new target' avoid delays of whatever has already been delayed? In reality, it's actually nothing of the sort......it's o
158 Manfredj: Quite the opposite! I've always taken you for a romantic when it comes to timeless designs. You always seem to participate in a positive way in these
159 Ikramerica: GEnx 2B took first flight today on GE's testbed. True. 100% safe products would be impossible to build, and even if they weren't, they would cost so m
160 Astuteman: In which case, please accept my humble apologies for the misunderstanding, and accept my backing with pleasure of your conclusions. I actually think
161 Superfly: Finally a new Boeing variant I can get excited about! Glad to see the 747 continue! I haven't been this excited about any Boeing product since the 74
162 Travelhound: ............... which raises an interesting question. How much has the majesty of the 747 alone contributed to air travel? I don't know how you would
163 Superfly: A LOT! It was Airport 1977 that inspired my love for aviation a very young age. The 707, 727, L1011, DC-, DC-10, VC-10 and Concorde were also very ma
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 355 posts, 
From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, 
From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 37 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jun 2006, 2733 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Mar 2005, 3039 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3746 posts, 
From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2400 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
