Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
748 Better Than Spec  
User currently offlineCosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24866 times:

It seems Boeing is confident that 748 will beat the current spec.

From http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...d-october-move-to-flight-line.html
Yahyavi says preliminary data also indicates the 747-8 potentially exceeding performance specs. "We really think the results of both airplanes - freighter and passenger - will be better than planned," he says.

I can't wait to see her in the air.

133 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDl767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24828 times:

It will be interesting to see how much better it turns out to be and if that translates in to more 748i orders (i'm not too hopeful but it would be nice to see more orders)

User currently offlineAA1818 From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24768 times:

It would be great for Boeing to beat specs on the 748 given the problems with the 787. Even if it doesn't translate into more orders for the 748, it will at least restore Boeing's credibility and ability to deliver on its promises.

AA1818



“The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it.” J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan)
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31433 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24718 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well it will certainly help the 747-8F, even in these lean times.

As for the 747-8, I think the only thing that will "save" it is if Economy traffic recovers strongly, but premium cabin remains weak. This could favor the 747-8 over the 77W due to more space (for more seats) and better range at MZFW.


User currently offlineCosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24600 times:

Even if from an airliner standpoint, the down time economics of a quad vs twin is the same, it is different from the passenger's perspective. Once on an airplane, an engine problem on a twin means diversion but on a quad, it can mean continuation onto destination.

For this reason, I always prefer a quad over a twin on long huals.


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24512 times:



Quoting Cosmofly (Reply 4):
it can mean continuation onto destination.

It can, but almost always it also results in diversion.

Quoting Dl767captain (Reply 1):
It will be interesting to see how much better it turns out to be and if that translates in to more 748i orders (i'm not too hopeful but it would be nice to see more orders)

Well, it certainly won't hurt the program. It can push airlines that were looking at it, to indeed order it. Let's hope so...  crossfingers 



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineJSquared From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24399 times:

Is EK still interested in the 748i? From what I remember, they were looking for a bit more range to do DXB-LAX... perhaps this could do it?

User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 24360 times:



Quoting Cosmofly (Thread starter):
Yahyavi says preliminary data also indicates the 747-8 potentially exceeding performance specs. "We really think the results of both airplanes - freighter and passenger - will be better than planned," he says.

Apart from some engine data and some weights, what else would he have to back up his claims when the first flight hasn't happened?



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31433 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 24106 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting JSquared (Reply 6):
Is EK still interested in the 748i?

I remain convinced that EK has never had any interest in the 747-8 and has only been using it to get Airbus to push improvements to the A380-800 quicker.

There is little an 747-8 can do that an A380-800 can't do better. The A380-800 offers more capacity, more payload and more range - all things that appeal to EK.


User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11459 posts, RR: 58
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 23976 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting Cosmofly (Thread starter):
Yahyavi says preliminary data also indicates the 747-8 potentially exceeding performance specs. "We really think the results of both airplanes - freighter and passenger - will be better than planned," he says.

That's interesting but i would raise the question of how better and if it's turn into a competitive advantage over other competitors.
I hope is enough to generate more orders.



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlineCOEWR From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 273 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 23946 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 8):

There is little an 747-8 can do that an A380-800 can't do better. The A380-800 offers more capacity, more payload and more range - all things that appeal to EK.

You are right to a certain end Stitch. However, higher capacity may drive down CASM but it will drive up overall cost. I would imagine (I do not have any hard evidence) that it would cost a significant amount more to fly an A380 than a 747. Same principle applies to narrowbody jets. The 737-800 has a lower CASM than the 737-700. The 737-700 costs less per departure than the 737-800 (mostly due to increased weight, added fuel, you get the idea). I would think that the same principle for the 747-8 vs A380 holds true.

That said, if EK can FILL those extra seats, its a no-brainer which aircraft to go for. But if those seats can't be filled then they become more of a liability than asset.

-C


User currently offlineUAEflyer From United Arab Emirates, joined Nov 2006, 1161 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 23902 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 8):

I 100% agree with you, EK never ever looked at the 747 program (passengers) seriously, all what Tim Clark was doing is to assure his presence in the media as things happen.
Yes, he was pushing Airbus by his press releases about the 748i.

You don't hear from him nowadays  Wink


User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2755 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 23891 times:

Let u hope this translate into more orders Smile From a non technical standpoint, I have always loved the iconic airplane.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 8):
There is little an 747-8 can do that an A380-800 can't do better.

On what mission profiles would a 747-8 makes more sense? Where there are 50-100 less passengers depending on configuration?



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 23846 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 5):
It can, but almost always it also results in diversion.

Is this 100% accurate? I've heard plenty of stories from my father about shutting down an engine and continued the flight as filed.

As a matter of fact, not just on the DC-8, but on MD-80's as well. Perhaps we just don't hear about these instances so we don't know they occur.



757: The last of the best
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31433 posts, RR: 85
Reply 14, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 23729 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 12):
On what mission profiles would a 747-8 makes more sense?

Any city-pair where a 77W is currently payload restricted a 748 shouldn't be thanks to it's greater range at MZFW and maximum structural payload.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26021 posts, RR: 22
Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 23665 times:



Quoting Cosmofly (Reply 4):
Even if from an airliner standpoint, the down time economics of a quad vs twin is the same, it is different from the passenger's perspective. Once on an airplane, an engine problem on a twin means diversion but on a quad, it can mean continuation onto destination.

And costs and downtime after a diversion can be significantly lower for a quad, since the quad can do a 3-engine ferry to a maintenance base rather than possibly having to ship a GE90 to a remote airport on a chartered freighter, and sending a crew of mechanics to do an engine change in difficult conditions, probably in the open air in every kind of weather.

For example, AC had 2 77W diversions to Alaska last year (one to ANC, one to FAI) after an engine had to be shut down on flights to Asia. Both required a replacement engine to be trucked almost 4000 miles from YYZ to Alaska. In one case the aircraft was out of service about 2 weeks waiting for the engine to arrive, and then doing an engine change in the open which took several days and required a crew of a dozen or so AC staff. There have been a few other 777 (and other twin) diversions where an engine change was needed, including a QR 777 to Gander where they must have had to fly in a replacement engine.

Had those aircraft been 747s they would have either continued to destination with an engine shut down, or if they had diverted, done a 3-engine ferry to their major maintenance base and likely been back in service a couple of days later, with much lower costs and much less lost revenue and passenger inconvenience due to cancelled and/or rerouted flights while the aircraft were out of service.


User currently offlineFlyglobal From Germany, joined Mar 2008, 613 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 23441 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
Well it will certainly help the 747-8F, even in these lean times.

As for the 747-8, I think the only thing that will "save" it is if Economy traffic recovers strongly, but premium cabin remains weak. This could favor the 747-8 over the 77W due to more space (for more seats) and better range at MZFW.

I second that and it is also my none representative opinion and forecast.
I do not believe that the time for VLA's is over, just because we have some months or a few weeks some downturn.

I believe that some companies now trying to delay their deliveries will bite themselves in the  butthead  for having done so in a few months or in 2 years.

Regarding VLA's, I believe more the Airbus market forecast then Boeing's and the 748i will have its 'fair share'.

regards

Flyglobal


User currently offlineEgcarter From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 23425 times:

The 748i can serve far more markets than can the A380, due to the necessary airport upgrades.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31433 posts, RR: 85
Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 23379 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 15):
Had those aircraft been 747s they would have either continued to destination with an engine shut down, or if they had diverted, done a 3-engine ferry to their major maintenance base and likely been back in service a couple of days later, with much lower costs and much less lost revenue and passenger inconvenience due to cancelled and/or rerouted flights while the aircraft were out of service.

I'm confident in believing that AC would have spent significantly more money operating the 744 over the 77W during that year then they would have saved on those two diversions.


User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1585 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 23340 times:

Lets wait for it to get into the air before we declare it better than spec, the 787 is good on paper too.


BV
User currently offlineExcalibur From France, joined Dec 2007, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 22579 times:



Quoting Egcarter (Reply 17):

Almost every major international airports have or are about to have their installations upgraded.
So, IMHO, this point is irrelevant. The 748i must have some better arguments. The one that comes to mind is that it fills quite precisely the capacity gap between the 77W and the A388.

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 19):

I agree with you 100%! It still is to early to draw any conclusions about its future performance. I hope it will succeed! Good job Boeing!

Alex



McDonnell-Douglas MD11 - Boeing 747-400
User currently offlineFlyboy2001 From Canada, joined May 2005, 186 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 22124 times:



Quoting Egcarter (Reply 17):
The 748i can serve far more markets than can the A380, due to the necessary airport upgrades.



Quoting Excalibur (Reply 20):
Almost every major international airports have or are about to have their installations upgraded.

Ok, so this is the question I was going to ask... How many international airports cannot currently (or won't for the foreseeable future) handle the A380 and are they served by carriers who could use the 747-8I? Excalibur, what do you mean by "Almost every major international airport"?



And you... Revolution, or just resistance?
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21588 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 22055 times:

Even though it was also a derivative, the 77W turned out nearly 7% better at EIS than launch, and has improved another few percent since then.

I assume that some of those same "derivative enhancing technologies" would be applied to the 748, including the anti-tail strike technologies that allow for a more effective take-off rotation, the raked wing extensions, the improved avionics, etc.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTravelhound From Australia, joined May 2008, 1020 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 21188 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 8):
There is little an 747-8 can do that an A380-800 can't do better. The A380-800 offers more capacity, more payload and more range - all things that appeal to EK.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
Any city-pair where a 77W is currently payload restricted a 748 shouldn't be thanks to it's greater range at MZFW and maximum structural payload.

In the current Australian Aviation magazine the CEO of Cathay Pacific Tony Tyler states that the 777-300ER can do HKG - JFK where the A380 can't.

If the 748, at full payload has more range than the 777-300ER (at full payload) that would mean the 748 has more range than a A380 (at full payload).

His remarks are going against the grain here.

Other interesting aspects of the article are: (1) Tony Tyler doesn't see the A380 as being part of the Cathay Pacific fleet because their business model is based upon frequency; (2) Cathay Pacific has done extensive route modeling with the A380 and even though it has lower seat mile costs it would actually result in higher CASM costs (Cathay Pacific Specific) (3) RASM is an important aspect of the equation and has significant importance when considering aircraft types. (4) 747-8 could become part of their fleet in later years, but at this stage they are focused on the 777 as being the corner stone of their long haul fleet;  Smile

Sorry, no direct link available to the article, just the publication.

http://australianaviation.com.au/


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31433 posts, RR: 85
Reply 24, posted (5 years 3 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 20937 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Travelhound (Reply 23):
In the current Australian Aviation magazine the CEO of Cathay Pacific Tony Tyler states that the 777-300ER can do HKG - JFK where the A380 can't.

Well per gc.kls2.com, the distance between HKG and JFK is a bit over 7000nm.

The latest-spec 77W can move about 110,000 pounds that distance. That is about 71% of it's Maximum Structural Payload of 154,000lbs.

As of January 2008, Boeing projected that a 747-8 should be able to haul around 140,000 pounds that distance. That is about 83% of it's projected Maximum Structural Payload of 169,000 pounds.

According to Airbus, the A380-800 can move about 160,000 pounds that distance. That is about 80% of it's Maximum Structural Payload of 200,000lbs.

None of the above figures take into account winds aloft, but an A380-800 can lift comfortably more than a 77W and a bit over 10% more than a 747-8. Both the A380 and 747-8 should also be able to carry a full load of passengers and bags and have decent lift left over for revenue cargo.

[Edited 2009-09-23 16:09:42]

25 Nomadd22 : One big thing in favor of the 747 is the total weight. How much heavier on take does that 380 have to be to carry those extra 20,000 pounds of payloa
26 Adam42185 : Except land at several dozen more airports world-wide without spending millions to A380-proof it.... unless something has changed in the past few yea
27 MCIGuy : ATL, the world's busiest airport.
28 NewYorkCityBoi : I think there is one carrier that not many people talk much about them order 748i, that is TG. Compare to many carrier, giving this recession, TG does
29 Trex8 : IIRC doesn't the bigger wings on the 747-8 put it into the same restrictions as the A380 in terms of parking at least if not taxying??
30 Ikramerica : Not necessarily. It can involve repainting some lines and limiting the gate next door to a smaller sized aircraft. Boeing had an example diagram wher
31 Stitch : TG is committed to the six A388s they have on order as Airbus will not allow them to apply their deposits to another model, so it's take delivery of
32 Tdscanuck : "Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?" Engine data and weight are two of the three biggest factors (the third one being L/D) in
33 Gemuser : According to the CEO of SQ an A380 (early s/ns) has a trip cost 3% to 4% greater than a B744. The 748i should be able to better this, but so will lat
34 XT6Wagon : Its something I very much don't agree with but Airbus managed to convince most (all?) nations to allow A380 operations at any airport that can handle
35 RedChili : Which is a very important factor if you want to buy a VLA to fly it between Smallville and Evensmallerville. But honestly, if you would take a look a
36 Cloudyapple : Both aircraft are ICAO Code F therefore the rules are the same for both in terms of runway widths, taxiway widths/shoulders, separations, obstacle cl
37 Dennys : anyway I wish good hope for the 748 !!!! and more and more orders . dennys
38 Zeke : He is playing with words here, even the 77W leaves payload behind going to JFK/YYZ at the moment. I have seen it a number of times where they have de
39 N1120A : Actually, the 748 offers more range when fully loaded than an A380 does. Also, it may produce a lower CASM despite its smaller size. If anything, a b
40 Zeke : Think you have that backwards, the 748i does not goes further when full (MZFW), not full compared to the passenger A380. CASM wise, it depends on the
41 Post contains links Scbriml : They certainly seem to have no interest in it now: http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=17970
42 Gemuser : Frequent operation MAY require modifications! Not always, it depends! SYD did not have a major runway/taxiway upgrade, there was minor work done duri
43 AznMadSci : Sorry to be a bit slow, but what is MZFW?
44 1GR8AIRLINE : That's all well and good, but I'm more inclined to listen to a successful airline's CEO statements backed-up by his organization's no doubt thorough
45 Gemuser : MZFW = Maximum Zero Fuel Weight. The max weight of the aircraft including everything EXCEPT fuel. MZFW - OEW (Operational Empty Weight) = max payload
46 Post contains links Keesje : Personally I expected people here to be bit more conservative, the see first attitude I notice in comments on other new aircraft types, instead of jum
47 Stitch : He's achieved his goal of getting Airbus to improve the MTOW of the A380-800 which will now allow it to reach LAX and SFO with a greater payload than
48 YULWinterSkies : True. It is not a given that the A388 will be much costlier to operate. With swarms of both 77W and A380 (EK in the future), i see not much room for
49 Keesje : Previously he indicated Cathay would consider new versions of the A380. And it seem a logical choice looking at Cathay's network and volumes. After g
50 KC135TopBoom : I thought they both had the same 8000nm range, but the B-747-8I carries more cargo revenue. Correct BOS, ATL, DFW, DEN, as well as several over seas
51 Cosmofly : As long as 748i is equally economical to operate as A388, there are those who will only choose one of the two. CX may decide that a common fleet of 74
52 KC135TopBoom : If any US airline were to order the B-747-8I, my guess is with UA and DL (DL is a very big IF). Both operate current B-747-400s, and ATL cannot handl
53 Zeke : People like myself get updates from Tony internally all the time. We have all learned not to take everything he says at face value. He has his own ag
54 Scbriml : Is it? What is your source for this information? As others have pointed out, both the A380 (no-dash) and 748i are in exactly the same ICAO category.
55 Post contains links XaraB : contradicts Obviously one of you is wrong. http://www.ucalgary.ca/eng/Civil/NLAircraft/Atrgpap.pdf Page 9 of this (fairly outdated) document shows so
56 Khobar : How is the "usable" floor space calculated? I saw one argument that used "simple" area for the comparison.
57 Stitch : That might be the case. If CX prefers more frequencies with smaller aircraft, then the A388HGW, A388R and especially A389 has no real appeal to them
58 Post contains images Cloudyapple : I only design airports. Any armchair CEO should know much more than I do.   [Edited 2009-09-24 09:54:10]
59 NorCal : The south runway of ATL is capable of landing and A380 (and obviously a 748 too), once it's on the ground, well that could get very tricky for both t
60 Par13del : We see a lot of folks talking about the seat count of the A380 and the B748, but Airbus designed the A380 to increase counts over the 747, the true m
61 Stitch : AF's first four birds are at 538 seats (449Y), which is more than Airbus now uses for their reference (525), Starting with I believe frame five, AF w
62 Scbriml : I believe the A380 has lower pavement loading than the 77W and 77L.
63 Gemuser : If it handles B747s, B77Ws & B77L, why? Does it have an absolute weight limited(AWL) structure? The A380 was designed and certified to use any runway
64 Ikramerica : Correct. But the 748 doesn't even have the AWL limit. That is part of the reason some airports can be 748 ready and not A380 ready.
65 XT6Wagon : Pavement loading isn't the whole story, as the total wieght matters in addition to PSI. So you have to deal with both when designing airports.
66 Zeke : He is correct to an extent. The PCN for Runway 9L/27R is 62/R/A/W/T, and for Runway 8L/26R the PCN is 62/R/A/W/T. The ACN for the A380 on a rigid pav
67 Post contains links Cosmofly : Boeing says 70 percent of the technology in the 747 is new. How do they come up with such number? from http://www.reuters.com/article/ousivMolt/idUSTR
68 Adam42185 : Ah, thanks for the clarification -- I was under the impression (as per what I read several years ago) that there were modifications needed for A380 b
69 Post contains images Zeke : No that is not correct, on pavement strength this is a Boeing comparison compared to similar aircraft This is a snapshot of US airports Boeing thinks
70 NorCal : The only landing runway that can accomodate the A380 besides 10/28 is 9R/27L which has a PCN of 68 and that runway can barely accomodate it. Does ope
71 Ikramerica : It depends on the airport. While certain members are trying to conflate the issue here, the A380 is a full 30 feet wider than the 748 will be and 40
72 Post contains links MD-90 : The A380's visit also took three years to get approved. Why Oshkosh is so awesome:
73 RedChili : Not very relevant, as no airline in their right mind would dream of starting regular flights to Oshkosh with any 747, 380 or 777 anyway. True, which
74 Zeke : The ACN is maximum when the aircraft is at its highest mass, i.e. takeoff, it would be well below the PCN for the other runways even at maximum landi
75 RedChili : Some of us are not able to make heads nor tails of that list. At first glance, it seems that airports such as JFK, LAX, IAD, IAH, MIA and EWR will no
76 Rheinwaldner : IMO a major disadvantage of the 748 that may contribute to the lacking market success more than we maybe assumed. E.g. it prevents the 748 to be used
77 Zeke : They could, but it would be under some for of concession, and the number of movements would be limited.[Edited 2009-09-25 02:29:27]
78 Post contains images Astuteman : According to the latest range/payload charts Max Structural Payload range for 773ER = 5 700Nm Max Structural Payload range for 748i = 6 200Nm Max Str
79 EPA001 : As always a very enlightening post Astuteman. I can only add that I fully agree with the numbers and the assumptions in your post.
80 Cloudyapple : This is getting so technical the thread is at risk of being moved to TechOps! And that I need to charge a.net for my consultancy service here! The con
81 EPA001 : @Cloudyapple: thanks for this very informative post. Very interesting to read.
82 NorCal : If you believe Keesje, DL is destined to order a ton of them and have a major operation out of the big hubs including ATL. I guess some of the foreig
83 Cosmofly : What would have happened if Airbus had built an optimized wing for A388 instead of A389
84 Astuteman : Every time I write that I ask the same question. I can't help thinking history will show the A380 to have been overbuilt. I might be in a minority wh
85 EPA001 : The date is marked.
86 EPA001 : Unless we will see the launch of the A380-900 by 2015-2017 and the A380-1000 by 2022 or so.
87 SunriseValley : Seems to me we need to look at the 748i in the context of post-2012.If B can get the OEW down to about 460k pounds and the fuel burn is a little bett
88 MD-90 : I wouldn't be surprised to see the 748 at Oshkosh sometime between 2010-2012. I know one of the big issues at Wittman Field is making sure they have
89 Aaron747 : An excellent point - SFO, LAX, and MIA immediately come to mind. SFO in particular has restricted taxiway requirements in which two 747-400s cannot p
90 FrmrCAPCADET : A number of airports used/have used buses as a standard matter, Narita most conspicuously, in my experience. If a 380 or 748 happens to be substantial
91 Scbriml : Exactly. The A380 operating at airports isn't half the issue some people would like it to be.
92 Lightsaber : The FAA had a 'standard' for a 1M lbm runway. I know in the case of LAX's runways, the implementation (as at many other airports) had the approved we
93 Babybus : Wow! Well there you go, I didn't even know it had flown yet! Great news. It is a pity for Boeing the bottom has fallen out of the VLA market and so sa
94 Cosmofly : Not if Boeing can find ways to put more seats on the overhead space
95 Rheinbote : Like everything in aircraft design, the wing is a compromise. Optimization is purely academic. Only if you ignore the impact of landing and take-off
96 EPA001 : Very sharp Lightsaber. I did not pick this up earlier. Seems that Boeing learned from the B787 where the sequence was quite the opposite. Me neither,
97 Scbriml : Not going to happen. Boeing already touted this to the airlines and nobody showed any interest. It's noting but dead weight given that the space cann
98 747classic : New customers for the 747-8I ? Seen the new economic reality in the cargo business, maybe AF/KL could make a re-evaluation of the 748 combi concept. T
99 Cloudyapple : I thought we have already established (more than once) that new-build combis are now outlawed for safety reasons?[Edited 2009-09-27 05:04:40]
100 747classic : I missed the "outlawed". I thought it was more difficult. After the Heidelberg accident all combi regulations are more restrictive but not outlawed.
101 Gemuser : Only within FAA jurisdiction. What about other jurisdictions, do they have the same restrictions as the FAA? Gemuser
102 Cloudyapple : But surely no one would want an American built aircraft not certified by the FAA I'd have imagine. Also you'd severely be limited on where you can fl
103 Post contains links 747classic : I found the thread : KLM:747-800 Combi Order In Sight? (by Manfredj Dec 18 2007 in Civil Aviation) However it's no outlawed by the FAA. Maybe it's di
104 Cosmofly : Never say never. We are looking at the survival of 748 pax version. If even A.netters are sentencing 748i to death, Boeing may have no choice but to
105 Stitch : Well since the first 747-8 Intercontinental has yet to be built, one cannot say that it is not at spec OEW. Also, somebody posted in one of these thr
106 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : OSH got a FAA wavier for the WhaleJet for an airshow. I worked at DFW, on the airfield, and on managing airfield construction projects. DFW, DEN. ALT
107 PGNCS : I am pleased for Boeing that the 748 seems to be doing better than expected from an engineering point of view. However... I don't know that A.net carr
108 Tdscanuck : According to Boeing, OEW is below spec...engines are supposed to be as well. It can't be occupied by passengers...you can can have overhead crew rest
109 Post contains links Viscount724 : As they discovered on the A380s first visit to HAM earlier this month where several signs bordering the runway were damaged by jet blast, although HA
110 Gemuser : Why? For a discussion point, lets say it was certified by EASA. It could then be operated by any airline, from any country whose national airworthine
111 DocLightning : Essentially the same dead weight that you find in a 77W or a 744. And yet airlines bought that. I agree, overhead "economy beds" and lounges are not
112 Viscount724 : VIP aircraft carry so few passengers that they have more than enough room on the main deck, and I doubt overhead areas would be certificated for pass
113 JBirdAV8r : Umm...fixtures and accommodations cost weight... Weight is not nearly as critical in a VIP configuration, and space per passenger is not really a pre
114 XT6Wagon : I don't see why they wouldn't put staff bunks in the crown with access to the upperdeck in such a manner as to be legal for evac. The hired help need
115 Cosmofly : This is exactly what the 748i need to increase RASM and reduce CASM. Can Boeing lower the ceiling of the main deck to give more headroom and floor sp
116 XaraB : Thanks for providing a much more detailed post supporting your statements, rather than just "correct/incorrect". Much appreciated! I looked through t
117 Post contains links Zeke : While "fuselage length, which defines ARFF" is true in FAA land for domestic ops, under ICAO regulations, ARFF is a function of aircraft length and f
118 Scbriml : Not sure what you mean, no airline is flying pax in 77W or 744 crown space. Crew rest areas, and possibly galleys, but not pax, which was the suggest
119 KC135TopBoom : Correct, except that all US international airports that have ARFF Index E, really have triple or more capability that that. For example, DFW has four
120 DocLightning : VIP is all about luxury, anyway. Frankly, not even the POTUS really *needs* his own 747. A 787 is more than enough to carry a head-of-state and his r
121 Zeke : International operators go off the ICAO category for the airport, FAA operators go off the FAA designation. A FAA Cat E airport, is not also by defau
122 Cloudyapple : And I'd expect you to know very well that without the concessions, waivers, the conveniently created category for the B748 and the required safety as
123 Oroka : Oh god, is Boeing pissing in the wind again? Haven't they learned to keep their yaps shut till they know 100% they have beat (or at least matched) spe
124 Scbriml : OK, and maybe I didn't make my point clearly enough. My reference to "dead weight" was in the event that an airline did put in Boeing's SkyLofts, the
125 Stitch : Actually, one wonders if Sky Lofts might prove popular if Business Class travel demand stays low for an extended period of time, For a two-class oper
126 Keesje : At an airline I worked we did research on similar concepts, but already then passengers got a seat, bed, entertainment, laptop power, a phone and cre
127 EA772LR : Interesting concept Stitch. Although I know we're talking hypothetical here, what sort of numbers do you think and airline flying 2 class in a 748 mi
128 Pnwtraveler : Just to interject a bit of practical experience into the conjecture however educated . The A380's engines create a lot of FOD even on runways that are
129 Cosmofly : If Boeing lowers the ceiling of the main cabin, it will create entirely new upper deck space possibilities. I believe the ceiling can be lowered by a
130 Post contains images Keesje : I foresee serious hand luggage issues at both decks. Adding all the load carrying window frames for such an upperdeck seems an issue too. A new load
131 DocLightning : yeah. We agree. Passengers might appreciate the extra lounges, but unless those spaces directly produce revenue for the airline, they are dead weight
132 Post contains images Revelation : Wow, Keesje, how did you get my pictures of my last trip to Amsterdam? Such great service!
133 Cosmofly : Because there was no A380
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...
AW&ST: B747-8F - Better Than Expected Fuelburn posted Sat Nov 29 2008 14:31:00 by OyKIE
ATWOnline: GTF Better Than Expected Test Results posted Sun Jun 22 2008 23:53:46 by OyKIE
Porter EWR Flights Better Than Projected posted Tue May 13 2008 17:26:25 by STT757
On Boeings Figures 738 Better Than 320 posted Tue Jan 1 2008 14:20:27 by Ruscoe
CSA Doing Better Than OK posted Wed Nov 7 2007 07:31:36 by USADreamliner
Boeing Reports Better-Than-Expected 2Q Results posted Wed Jul 25 2007 18:59:02 by Bbobbo
Better Than A Raclette-Swiss Sky Thread 9! posted Wed May 9 2007 14:45:44 by RootsAir
BA Is 'getting Better' Than AF, In Some Way! posted Tue Apr 24 2007 19:23:00 by Musapapaya
Regional Better Than Mainline? posted Wed Mar 7 2007 22:32:34 by Alias1024
Better Than A Fondue! Swiss Aviation Thread 7! posted Tue Feb 27 2007 19:21:09 by RootsAir
Better Than A Raclette-Swiss Sky Thread 9! posted Wed May 9 2007 14:45:44 by RootsAir
BA Is 'getting Better' Than AF, In Some Way! posted Tue Apr 24 2007 19:23:00 by Musapapaya
Regional Better Than Mainline? posted Wed Mar 7 2007 22:32:34 by Alias1024