Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
777; Is It A Replacement For The 747-100/200?  
User currently offlineAirmale From Botswana, joined Sep 2004, 377 posts, RR: 1
Posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3769 times:

Many airlines have replaced their 747s with the 777, is it really a replacement for the type, i thought a 747 carried more passengers and definitely looks bigger so how can the 777 be a replacement maybe for the DC-10 and L1011 but not the 747 Confused


.....up there with the best!
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFlight152 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 3394 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3710 times:

The 777-300 is a good replacment for 747 classics (747-100/200) but not for the 747-400.

User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 2, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3691 times:

Boeing certainly hopes that airlines will look to the 777 as a DC10/MD11/L1011/741/742 and even A300/763 replacement over the coming years. The 777 family is growing, with the longer-range models coming, so Boeing will have something for everybody as far as capacity and range combinations in the 250-350 seat category.

Airbus is, of course, doing the same with its A330/340 family.


User currently offlineChepos From Puerto Rico, joined Dec 2000, 6214 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3683 times:

In my opinion the true replacement for the 747 comes from the A340-600.They have a similar passenger capacity a large under floor cargo area and a similar range. The 777-300 is also a pretty good replacement.
Chepos
Puerto Rico



Fly the Flag!!!!
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8002 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3665 times:

I think the Boeing 777 is marketed in this fashion:

777-200 series: DC-10 and L-1011 replacements.

777-300 series: 747-100/200 series replacements. The 777-300ER can be used as a substitute for the 747-400 on some routes.


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3657 times:

I agree with RayChuang. When the 777 was in it's conceptual stage, it was intended to be a replacement aircraft for United's DC-10's. It grew to do that as well as L-1011's. It then grew into replacing the MD-11 for economical reasons. However, over time, it has been discovered that the 777 is an excellent aircraft to exchange with the 747-400 on routes that have thinned out over time. But as many members have stated, it is NOT designed to replace the 747-400. That is an airline decision if it does. Then the stretch version was marketed as an excellent 747-100/200 replacement. I also agree with Chepos. The A340-600 is also a good candidate to replace the 747-100/200.

Regards


User currently offlineGOT From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 1912 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3633 times:

In the early days of the 747 many airline bought it because of the range, not the number of pax carried. And some airlines still do, but with the 777ER airlines can get the same range but without the overcapacity.

GOT



Just like birdwatching - without having to be so damned quiet!
User currently offlineGregg From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 327 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3584 times:

The B767-400 is sized to replace the DC-10 and L-1011.

B777-200 is sized like the MD-11

B777-300 is almost the same size as the B747-100/200

Gregg


User currently offlineBoeing747-400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3588 times:

The 777-200 was originally designed to:

A. Fight A340 in sales for that seating range
B. Replace aircraft like the MD-11
C. Introduce a whole new aircraft in that seating range for airlines

United replaced some of their 747-200 routes with the 777-200 to lower capacity on those routes.

-------------------------------------------------

The 777-300 was originally designed to:

A. Replace 747 Classics
B. Fight the A346 in sales.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure this is how it is.


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3571 times:

Everyone here is correct. Though I remember a PBS special on the 777 called "21st. century jet," which stated that back in the 80's, American Airlines told Boeing they needed a plane sized between the 767 and the 747. Since then of course the 777 has filled diferent markets.

As of replacing the 747, maybe the 747-400's only competition will be the A380; in which I read in a recent Aviation Week article that someone thought up of a super-stretch version of the 777 (a 777-400?) to compete with A380.

Please correct me, but I'm sure this is it



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineFlyTriStar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3547 times:

Airlines replacing the Boeing 747 'Classics' with the Boeing 777 just don't need the capacity. After all, in a time of softening economy and sky-rocketing fuel prices, it is better for airlines to be more flexible with their planes. The smaller 777 can be placed on many routes to make money, but the 747 can only be placed on trunk routes.

The larger Boeing 777-300 definitely is a good replacement for the Boeing 747 'Classics'. All Nippon Airways for example has replace a few Boeing 747SRs serving domestic routes with the type. More are planned to follow when the economy improves.The also have six Longer-Range 777-300s (LRs?) on order to replace the remaining 747-200Bs, and possibly some 747-400s, which will converted to -400D stadard for domestic trunk routes. Japan Airlines was the launch customer for the Longer-Range 777-300, with an order for eight, and these will directly replace a number of aging 747-200Bs.

FlyTriStar


User currently offlineTupolev154B2 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1332 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3544 times:

Why can't the 773/773ER replace the -400 if they can replace the classics?

User currently offlineEjaymd11 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3520 times:

hey what up
Boeing 747-400, originally the 777-200 was not designed to replace the MD-11 it was designed to compete with it. The 777, and MD-11 was a response to airline demands but sadly one did not cut it econmically. At least to some pax airline standard.

Ejay MD-11


User currently offlineBoeing747-400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3516 times:

Tupolev154B2,

Why can't the 773/773ER replace the -400 if they can replace the classics?

I have a few reasons for you:

A. The 747-400 still has more capacity and range than the 777-300ER.
B. The 773/ER can replace a 742, but not a -400, because the 742 doesn't have the range of a 773ER, and it is not nearly as efficient.
C. The 773ER is no more efficient than the 744 (both are more efficient than the other on particular routes, B747-437B explained this well)
D. The 744s DO NOT need to be replaced, they are too young, and since Boeing recently started a whole new 744, you won't be seeing any retired or replaced 744s for a long time. Airlines may switch some routes with the 744 to a 773 or so, but they won't get rid of them.
E. Until the year 2020-30, we will worry about today's 747-400 retirement.


Ejaymd11,

Thank you for your correction!  Smile


User currently offlineSSTjumbo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3504 times:

Yeah, you guys didn't remember that the 772 was intended to compete with the MD11 like Ejaymd11 said? Airmale, this is the bottom line: according to Boeing's website, the 772LR is to be the longest range aircraft in the world, therefore competing with the longest ranged A340, and the 773LR will quote-unqoute be a perfect replacement for early model 747s while upgrading the airline's current 777 fleet.

User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 15, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3497 times:

Also remember that the manufactures now offer more alternatives and options to their customers, so that they can keep their customers happy. The 777 is available in 2 sizes with 3 or 4 different range/payload options for each size, not to mention engine choices. The same is true with Airbus 330/340.

The business plan is that an airline that initally ordered the 772ER to replace its DC10s can go on the 773 to replace its 747 Classics, and maybe order some basic 777 models later on to replace the 763 or A300 on growing routes, etc, etc.

That is also why there is overlap in the Boeing model line-up: the 739 and 752 are pretty close in capacity, as are the 752/753 and 762 and even the 764 and 777 can be compared. I understand that all of these aircraft have different ranges and features, but the idea is to have a product to cover the needs that the airlines may have. Keep your customers happy.

Examples: Alaska probably would not have purchased 752s, but the 739, as an extension of the 737 family, made sense. NW just purchased the 753 to replace some DC10s, since NW is a 752 operater, it made sense but it would have been unlikely for NW to purchase the 762 for this mission.


User currently offlineAA767Boy From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 101 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3490 times:

The Boeing 777 is a a/c is settled inbetween is High captacity 747 Jumbo and the the 767. the 777 was targeted as a replacement for ageing DC-10s and Tristars.

I personally believe that most airliners will replace there 747 with 773 and 772. Instead of buying,say, 10 A380s they will buy 15 773. Just as an example. the 777 is a GREAT a/c!


User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 17, posted (13 years 1 month 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3469 times:

Tupolev154B2,

If a carrier is experiencing low load factors on certain routes, replacing a 747-400 with a 777-300ER is definitely a consideration. There is an approximately 50 passenger difference in capacity between the aircraft (416 vs. 365), therefore, if the airline needs the capacity, then the 744 wouldn't go anywhere. However, given our current and forecasted economic situation, that capacity isn't always going to be needed. The situation becomes even more complicated when you consider the 773ER carries a little over 1,000 cubic feet more cargo than its Everett sibling (7,080 vs. 6,025). The range difference is virtually negligible (8,430 miles for the 744, 8,350 miles for the 773ER). In fact, this will probably be erased with a rumored MTOW increase for the big twin. A final selling point for the 773ER would be the inherent efficiency of running 2 engines vs. 4. To accomplish its mission, which comes down to more pax, less cargo versus the 773ER, the 744 burns a maximum 57,285 gallons of fuel. The 773ER, carrying fewer passengers but more cargo, burns nearly 10,000 fewer gallons, at 47,890. In so doing, it makes the 777 considerably lighter as well, with a MTOW of 750,000 lbs. vs. 875,000 lbs. for the 744.

The final point to raise, therefore, is the question of timing. As Boeing747-400 already pointed out, the 744 is not all that old, comparatively. The first aircraft was delivered to Northwest in January of 1989, and we all know how Northwest feels about renewing their fleet.  Laugh out loud However, when one looks at an airline such as Singapore, whose first 744 entered the fleet 2 months later, you do begin to wonder. Flight International already ran an article, stating that SQ was considering replacing some early 747-400s with the 777-300ER. There have also been persistent rumors from both British Airways and United Airlines about doing the same. Time will tell if it ever happens. Unfortunately, time is one thing the 744 does not have on its side.

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10694 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (13 years 1 month 18 hours ago) and read 3449 times:

All aircraft type/segments are overlapping each other. So its no wonder if some airlines consider the B777-300 or A340-600 to replace some older Jumbos or even 747-400s because of load factor-problems.
But don´t be surprised if some airlines replace 777s with A330s because of the same reason in a few years! And don´t be surprised if other airlines replace 777-300s with A380s in 10 years when traffic grows and grows. That´s just how the business goes.


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...
Has United Ever Flown The B 747-100/200 To Hkg? posted Mon Oct 22 2001 04:14:28 by United Airline
Is It Time For The 757NG And 767NG? posted Sat Feb 19 2000 13:55:29 by Jet Setter
Is There A Drop-Dead Date For The 747-8 Pax? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 20:16:09 by Bmacleod
Boeing Replacement For The 777. posted Mon Feb 21 2005 17:39:21 by 747400sp
What Is The Best Substitute For The 747-SP? posted Sat Sep 6 2003 17:33:17 by Pouyazad
How To Tell The Different Between A 747 100/200. posted Mon Aug 25 2003 23:59:02 by 747400sp
Is The 773ER A Good Replacement For The 744? posted Sat Apr 5 2003 09:14:32 by B747-4U3
Is BA Still Flying The 747-200? posted Tue Jan 28 2003 13:22:38 by Ryanb741
Cheap Routes For The 747 Or 777 posted Sun Dec 9 2001 08:13:53 by Dash8King
The Status Of UAL's B 747-100/200? posted Thu Mar 8 2001 18:37:28 by United Airline