Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing 777 Vs 744  
User currently offlinecx828 From Hong Kong, joined May 2007, 159 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 17594 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

With the success of Boeing 777, will Boeing 777 series, especially 777-300ER overtake 747-400 as the most popular and successful plane ever built??

57 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineescapehere From Canada, joined Jan 2011, 80 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17433 times:

I was not aware the 747 was the most popular and successful plane ever built. Wouldn't that be the 737?

User currently offlineKGRB From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 716 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17369 times:

If we define success by the number of aircraft built, several aircraft beat both the 777 and 744...

Quoting escapehere (Reply 1):
Wouldn't that be the 737?

In terms of sales, the DC-3 was more successful (especially if you combine DC-3 and C-47 sales), but the 737 is certainly the most successful jetliner ever built.

The DC-9 and its variants, as well as the A320 series have also outsold the above mentioned aircraft.



Δ D E L T A: Keep Climbing
User currently offlinecloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2454 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17343 times:

Define "popular" and define "successful".


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 offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6907 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17332 times:

Quoting KGRB (Reply 2):
In terms of sales, the DC-3 was more successful (especially if you combine DC-3 and C-47 sales), but the 737 is certainly the most successful jetliner ever built.

The DC-3 by itself did not sell all that many. The vast majority were C-47's.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineCharlieNoble From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17248 times:

Quoting cloudyapple (Reply 3):
Define "popular" and define "successful".

Exactly...I'd love to know which aircraft model or series has yielded the greatest return on investment in two different ways:

- Made most money for the manufacturer
- Made most money for the airline(s) that flew it.

Those, to me, are more relevant than number of frames produced.

Probably impossible to determine though.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6907 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 17124 times:

Quoting CharlieNoble (Reply 5):

- Made most money for the manufacturer

I would suspect that the 747 would be the likely winner; for a long time it had no competition, and Boeing was able to charge pretty much what they wanted for it.

Quoting CharlieNoble (Reply 5):
- Made most money for the airline(s) that flew it.

Since I believe that the total amount of profit earned by all airlines over all aviation history is zero, this is a difficult thing to establish. But the 737 is probably in strong competition, if only because one of the very few profitable airlines in history flies it exclusively.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineCharlieNoble From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 17073 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 6):
Since I believe that the total amount of profit earned by all airlines over all aviation history is zero, this is a difficult thing to establish. But the 737 is probably in strong competition, if only because one of the very few profitable airlines in history flies it exclusively.

True, true. I guess one could compare relative costs vs. revenue generation of current aircraft and extrapolate...but that would get messed up by airlines improperly matching routes to equipment and other factors that you couldn't really blame on the aircraft itself.

Seems that aviation at all levels is one huge cash sink (even the flight simulator on my computer, come to think of it). Fortunately it does have the useful by-product of getting people and cargo where they need to be, quickly.


User currently offlineGlobeex From Germany, joined Aug 2007, 742 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 16956 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 6):
Since I believe that the total amount of profit earned by all airlines over all aviation history is zero, this is a difficult thing to establish. But the 737 is probably in strong competition, if only because one of the very few profitable airlines in history flies it exclusively.



Or the A340-600 as LH is doing pretty good since the time they received theirs.......... oh boy, oh boy,.... I'll get flamed  



As you may presently yourself be fully made aware of, my grammar sucks.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30978 posts, RR: 86
Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 16918 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cx828 (Thread starter):
With the success of Boeing 777, will Boeing 777 series, especially 777-300ER overtake 747-400 as the most popular and successful plane ever built?

Boeing certainly seems to believe so. They are increasing production to 100 frames per year and they believe that they will continue to be producing it for another 15 years (through likely not at 100 per annum).


User currently offlineCharlieNoble From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 16896 times:

Quoting Globeex (Reply 8):
Or the A340-600 as LH is doing pretty good since the time they received theirs.......... oh boy, oh boy,.... I'll get flamed

No flaming here...I regret the fact that I will likely never get a chance to ride on one...


User currently onlinemacsog6 From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 531 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 16635 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cx828 (Thread starter):
the most popular and successful plane ever built??

Not to split hairs here, but getting out the clippers, the most popular and successful PLANE ever built is likely to be the Cessna 150/152 series.

Airliners are different story, but he did say plane.



Sixty Plus Years of Flying! "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Saint Ex
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6907 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 16606 times:

Quoting Globeex (Reply 8):

Or the A340-600 as LH is doing pretty good since the time they received theirs.......... oh boy, oh boy,.... I'll get flamed

But compare the total number of 737's to the number of 346's; or just compare SW's 737 fleet with LH's A346 fleet. I think it's hard to make a numbers case for the A346, even though LH has done very well with it.

Quoting macsog6 (Reply 11):
Cessna 150/152 series.

Hasn't the 170/172 series overtaken it?



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently onlinemacsog6 From Singapore, joined Jan 2010, 531 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 16584 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 12):
Hasn't the 170/172 series overtaken it?

SEPilot, You are correct. The 172 has overtaken the 150 series.



Sixty Plus Years of Flying! "I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things." - Saint Ex
User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 16502 times:

Quoting escapehere (Reply 1):
I was not aware the 747 was the most popular and successful plane ever built.

I think he means widebody. And he's correct in that.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 4):
The DC-3 by itself did not sell all that many.

607 DC-3s were made, I'd call that a modest success. Obviously the majority were C-47s but I think Douglas would have made back the programme costs on the 607 DC-3 sales alone.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 12):
Hasn't the 170/172 series overtaken it?

Yep.

And in response to the OP, I think the 777 will overtake the 747 in overall sales, but won't become the icon the 747 was. It won't be all that long until the 777 hits the 1,000 deliveries, and that'll make it only one of three WB's (747, 767, and then the 777) to hit the 1,000 mark. That is if the A330 doesn't get there first.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6907 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16426 times:

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 14):
607 DC-3s were made, I'd call that a modest success.

Yes, but that does not compare to the number of 737's. And to be fair, if all of those C-47's hadn't been built, a lot more (but not thousands more) DC-3's would have been.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineGlobeex From Germany, joined Aug 2007, 742 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16079 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 12):
Quoting Globeex (Reply 8):

Or the A340-600 as LH is doing pretty good since the time they received theirs.......... oh boy, oh boy,.... I'll get flamed

But compare the total number of 737's to the number of 346's; or just compare SW's 737 fleet with LH's A346 fleet. I think it's hard to make a numbers case for the A346, even though LH has done very well with it.



I wasn't really serious.

I would also think that the B747 might be the economical winner for the respective aircraft manufacture. Taking into account that the list price of an B747 is, and I would guess usually has been, around 4x time as high as of the 737, would take the volume (by $) to around the equivalent of 6000 737 sales (ca. 1400 747 sales). However, as mentioned before, the margin MUST have been far better for each B747 compared to sales of B737 as the Jumbo has never had any real competition (until the A380 emerged). The 737 on the other hand has always had an opponent, being the DC-9, MD80s and in recent history the A320.



As you may presently yourself be fully made aware of, my grammar sucks.
User currently offlineCOS777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 90 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 15634 times:

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 14):
It won't be all that long until the 777 hits the 1,000 deliveries, and that'll make it only one of three WB's (747, 767, and then the 777) to hit the 1,000 mark.

Maybe I'm missing something, but the Boeing website has 1044 orders for the 767, so it will hit the 1,000 mark (995 delivered so far). The 747 has 1,418 deliveries, so it has well surpassed the 1,000 mark. The 777 has 913 deliveries, and 1165 orders. Somebody probably has more accurate order/delivery numbers than I do (I did a quick custom search on Boeing's website), but it looks like all three WB's will hit 1,000 frames.


User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2896 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 15376 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Globeex (Reply 8):

It certainly wins one of the most disproportionate looking airplanes!



The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
User currently offlinebrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3013 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 15228 times:

Quoting Globeex (Reply 16):
However, as mentioned before, the margin MUST have been far better for each B747 compared to sales of B737 as the Jumbo has never had any real competition (until the A380 emerged)

I would say that the first competitors for the 747 were the 772ER and A343. They were the first planes that could fly 744 type distances, with lower trip costs, albeit at lower capacity. But still up until then if you wanted to fly 6000+nm the 747 was your only option.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8372 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 14681 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting brons2 (Reply 19):
I would say that the first competitors for the 747 were the 772ER and A343. They were the first planes that could fly 744 type distances, with lower trip costs, albeit at lower capacity. But still up until then if you wanted to fly 6000+nm the 747 was your only option.

The 777 was built as the plane to fill in the crucial gap between the 767-300ER and the 744. Back in 1990 the A380 was only a French Fantasy. Back then Boeing was going to build a 747-500/600 and own the high end. Well things changed along the way, the 747 is collecting social security and no longer owns the high end. The A380 cane along for those wanting the biggest and left a nice big hole in the market. Airbus made the A340-600 but it hasn't dold well, but the 777 has grown into the 777-300ER.

For those wanting a none A380 sized 747 replacement the streched 777 has given airlines the right balance of capacity and efficiency. I mean YYZ and JFK to HKG nonstop is way beyond a 744's capabilities.


User currently offlineATA L1011 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1384 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 14452 times:

Quoting brons2 (Reply 19):
But still up until then if you wanted to fly 6000+nm the 747 was your only option.

Well the MD-11 could fly beyond 6,000 nm and it came out a year after the 744, the 767-200ER also albeit a much smaller payload but it could do 6,000 nm.



Treat others as you expect to be treated!
User currently offlinebrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3013 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 14275 times:

Quoting ATA L1011 (Reply 21):
Well the MD-11 could fly beyond 6,000 nm and it came out a year after the 744, the 767-200ER also albeit a much smaller payload but it could do 6,000 nm.

Substitute 7000nm then. The 767 and MD-11 could not do 7000nm. The point still being, that for a long time the 747 was the range king, whether you needed that amount of capacity or not. Nowadays there are many other options for longer range flight.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineATA L1011 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1384 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 14080 times:

Quoting brons2 (Reply 22):
MD-11 could not do 7000nm

True true it was, but the Later MD-11ER could do over 7,000nm as well. 7,200nm per Boeing/MDC with a full load. http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/mdc/96-320.html



Treat others as you expect to be treated!
User currently offlineAviationAddict From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 620 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 13503 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 6):
Quoting CharlieNoble (Reply 5):
- Made most money for the airline(s) that flew it.


Since I believe that the total amount of profit earned by all airlines over all aviation history is zero, this is a difficult thing to establish. But the 737 is probably in strong competition, if only because one of the very few profitable airlines in history flies it exclusively.

One of the Boeing press releases regarding the 1000th 767 mentioned that that type was the most profitable in Boeing's history - however, the press release didn't specify if that was in regards to Boeing or the airlines that flew it.


25 seabosdca : Personally, I don't think it's quite fair to combine 747 Classics and 744s. The 744 completely changed what the widebody could do, while the Classic
26 Globeex : What ("kind") hole do you mean? The one between the 777/747 and the A380 or the hole in Airbus' portfolio? Well the 762ER is kind of half the size. A
27 seabosdca : I don't know that it will at all. The A350 -- particularly the A359 -- looks to be an excellent aircraft. I do think, though, that the 789 absolutely
28 Globeex : It seems as if the B788 hit a sweet spot so far! However somehow I think that can very well change as I think the 789 might be the better optimized a
29 jfk777 : The hole the size of the 747, since the A380 is far larger. The 777-300ER is almost the size of the 747-400.
30 ATA L1011 : Well umm I did say with a much smaller payload........... We know that but dud or not it could fly the range for mentioned.......BTW its dang good fr
31 goblin211 : i know that when i've plane spotted in various airports i see sooooo many 737s. If there were sooooooo many 747s and 777s that yous say are the most p
32 SSTsomeday : However times changed and the 747 was eclipsed buy the 767 and other twin wide bodies, and it was dropped by many airlines over the second half of it
33 Flighty : The 747 and 777 were both A+ Boeing products that earned dozens of billions of dollars in revenue. They both were revolutionary products and grew to O
34 Eightball : It looks like EK is a good example of operating the 777 to its full potential in terms of long-haul flying.
35 davs5032 : I've never understood this...how can two planes be considered the "same" when one has two engines and the other has four. If this kind of logic is us
36 DocLightning : The MD-11 was promised for those sorts of distances... but it failed to live up to expectations. Had it performed as promised, it would have done ver
37 BOACCunard : Because they literally are the same except for the number of engines.
38 davs5032 : I don't know, maybe I'm just being stubborn...having 2 engines vs. 4 just seems to set them too far apart to still be classified together. Especially
39 Sparkingwave : What's the most profitable plane ever built? If that's too general, then how about the most profitable widebody jet ever built?
40 WestWing : My guess would be 767.
41 bueb0g : Well it can manage 7,000NM with the ER version, and a nice 6,300 in the standard. Although when it first flew it didn't meet expectations, within 2 y
42 Globeex : But if you don't count the A330 and A340 one family you can't count the 737 classic and the 737NG as one family. Just because they have the same fuse
43 SEPilot : It's how they were designed. They are both built from the same parts bin; the two engined plane has the mountings for the other two engines, the moun
44 trintocan : And the 727, let's not forget it sold 1831 units with 1 retained by Boeing. Perhaps also the TU-154, Russia's most produced jetliner. The A330 and A3
45 Globeex : Actually they do have the same cross section, as do the 707 and 727. The 757 just has a different section 41 (nose). However, that's not the point. T
46 Viscount724 : They share the horizontal cross section, not the vertical.
47 Globeex : Well the 737 and 757 have the same fuselage as far as I'm concerned. The rest (707, 727) share the cabin dimension but the lower (cargo) section is d
48 BOACCunard : No one ever said that it was a subtle difference, but then I would hardly call the difference between a 737-100 and a 737-900ER subtle either ... but
49 rwessel : The -3B variant of the Trident grew a fourth engine. The D and later models of the B-36 had an extra four engines. The E model of the CH-53 grew a fo
50 homsar : Would there be any benefit to the A330 if it had some of these A340 accommodations removed (i.e. lower weight)? Has Airbus ever looked at making such
51 BOACCunard : But these are all examples of adding extra engines later, along with other changes. It's not the same as designing an identical airplane from the sta
52 DocLightning : It surpassed range specs, but not efficiency specs. That was the trade-off. SQ had an order and canceled it for this reason.
53 Burkhard : Popular and successfull is a hard to quantify specification. Let me look from the aspect of "flag ship". What will the the big airlines have as their
54 Stitch : At a minimum, the 77W will be AA's flagship as they will order more than the two they already have.
55 Burkhard : If they do so then I agree completely. Just ordering two is a little odd, but has been discussed elsewhere.
56 CharlieNoble : Excellent point...and I hope that the 748i is a strong performer as the A380 is showing itself to be.
57 alwaysontherun : KL 747-8????? KL A380???? ###"I´m always on the Run"###
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...
SQ 777 Vs. 744 Vs. 345 posted Mon May 17 2004 01:34:59 by Soaringadi
BA Evaluating A350XWB Vs "Boeing 777 Plans" posted Thu Jan 31 2008 07:18:46 by Keesje
AirAsia X Boeing 777-300ER Vs A330-300 Selection posted Sat Jan 6 2007 00:39:18 by Keesje
Boeing 777-200LR Vs __________? posted Wed Feb 16 2005 00:26:06 by Aerlingus330
BA (744/777) Vs. AA (777) posted Mon Apr 5 2004 20:52:46 by MNeo
Boeing 767-400 Vs. Boeing 777 posted Tue Feb 8 2000 00:54:18 by DL 604
A340 Vs Boeing 777 posted Wed Jan 19 2000 07:40:16 by Victor A.
Boeing 747/777 vs A340/330 posted Fri Nov 6 1998 04:25:15 by CX747
Garuda Indonesia And The Boeing 777-300ER. posted Thu Jan 27 2011 21:59:23 by SexyAdonis
Video: Boeing 777-200LR's 2005 Record-Breaking Flight! posted Wed Nov 24 2010 13:06:26 by propilot83