Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Randy T Says 748-F Better Than Expected  
User currently offlineER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2556 posts, RR: 7
Posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 25921 times:

From his blog today

http://boeingblogs.com/randy/

Good news for the program, it seems

127 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25910 times:

PR BS or truth?

Anyone with airline ops exposure care to comment?



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineRonaldo747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 389 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25855 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 1):
PR BS or truth?

Anyone with airline ops exposure care to comment?

Take a look at pprune.org it seems to be right.


User currently offline4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 3028 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25758 times:

Quoting ER757 (Thread starter):
From his blog today

I'm 46 years old, and I still chuckle to myself when I see the name of the guy who just signed the 1000th airworthiness certificate for the 777...  

I'm actually surprised that the B748F is exceeding goals. Which I weren't now trained to be so skeptical of what they say anymore...



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
User currently offlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 685 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25745 times:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/new...h-six-months-in-service-2012-04-04

Hello,

Here is some validation of that the program is going smoothly and performing up to par or beyond.


User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25712 times:

Quoting 4holer (Reply 3):

I'm 46 years old, and I still chuckle to myself when I see the name of the guy who just signed the 1000th airworthiness certificate for the 777...

Do share, do share



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently onlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1083 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25612 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 1):
PR BS or truth?

Anyone with airline ops exposure care to comment?

Here's one from ABC...

"We're so excited to take this airplane,” said Tatyana Arslanova, executive president, AirBridgeCargo Airlines. “We have been very pleased with the performance of our first 747-8 Freighter, and we are eager to have the second join our fleet."

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=2194



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3790 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25458 times:

Quoting Ronaldo747 (Reply 2):
Take a look at pprune.org it seems to be right.

I doubt you'll find any less biased information in there than here, to be honest.
The true picture of the aircraft's performance will be painted by the operators and the order book, as usual.

There's no reason it will be bad though. It was developed off an excellent platform and it will only get better with time.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineCM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25440 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 1):
PR BS or truth?

Cathay reported publicly (Australian Aviation Magazine, IIRC) that fuel burn on their freighters is better than spec. Apparently enough better they were anticipating Boeing would need to release a FMC software roll in order to more closely reflect actual fuel burn in the performance tool.


User currently offlinePIEAvantiP180 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 545 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25342 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So if they are beating expectations by a full percentage point now, i'm sure with the engine PIP coming from GE and weight reductions due from Boeing, later models will see another 1-3% improvement on top of what they have now. That should make the 747F and i that much more desirable to have. Hope this entices follow up orders from existing customers and new ones from those who have not signed up for one yet.

User currently onlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9665 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25343 times:

Quoting francoflier (Reply 7):

I doubt you'll find any less biased information in there than here, to be honest.
The true picture of the aircraft's performance will be painted by the operators and the order book, as usual.

I agree that it is very bias coming directly from him, but the order book right now likely does not necessarily reflect the airplane. Air Cargo is way down, so the market for freighters has shrunk. Very few airlines right now are ordering freighters at all.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineeaa3 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1015 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 25268 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 5):
Do share, do share

His name is Dick Bender.


User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3790 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25107 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 10):
but the order book right now likely does not necessarily reflect the airplane.

Actually, when I mentioned orders, I meant follow up orders, and I also believe the 748F did very good on sales so far.
In a difficult cargo market, it has proven that airlines still swear by the 747 when it comes to hauling boxes. And the noise so far does seem to be on the positive side regarding reliability and performance.

However I don't know the details and I did hear about payload/range performance shortfalls at first but I don't know how that translated to real life either.

The fact is: it's burning as much or less than a 744 for more payload, and since most operators are also 744 users, they can't feel unhappy about that!



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25046 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 1):

It's no longer about marketing promises or some rigged comparison between competitors, but in service performance. For Randy to claim something false would be stupid.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinenomadd22 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 1880 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 25047 times:

Wouldn't 12,000 lb higher GTW cut the payload gap between the 748 and the A380 in half? Or was that increase only for the F?


Andy Goetsch
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12697 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 24939 times:

Quoting 4holer (Reply 3):
I'm 46 years old, and I still chuckle to myself when I see the name of the guy who just signed the 1000th airworthiness certificate for the 777...
Quoting garpd (Reply 5):
Do share, do share

Randy sez:

Quote:

Boeing employee Dick Bender seems to have special relationship with the number 1,000. His job is to sign the certificate of airworthiness on our airplanes. He did just that for the 1,000th 777—as well as the 1,000th 747 in 1993 and the 1,000th 767 in 2011.

Bender joined Boeing in 1957 and guesses that he’s signed the final delivery document for a couple hundred airplanes. When his co-workers discovered that he’d signed for the 1,000th 747, they gave him the honor of signing the 1,000th 767’s final paperwork. So it was only fitting that he sign the 1,000th 777 paperwork too.

Damn, giggly name or not, if that's correct, the guy's been with Boeing for 55 years!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 24763 times:

Quoting mffoda (Reply 6):

Thanks. Good news then  
Quoting CM (Reply 8):

Hadn't caught that. Excellent.

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 11):

HAHAHAHAHA, seriously?!

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 13):

I was just being cautious. But so far, the evidence supports Randy's claims.
All the better for Boeing.  



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently onlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2153 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 24566 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 15):
Damn, giggly name or not, if that's correct, the guy's been with Boeing for 55 years!

He would be one of those guys who's "paying Boeing to work here" (would be earning more money retired than working) . . . or so they say.   

I've met two or three of those guys. My father in law in Everett told me about a gal who makes more money through interest, and stock dividend than her salary at one of Boeing's shop . . . but she's working on . . . into her 80's. They say that she goes to the share holder meeting in a limosine  Wow!

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5588 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 24478 times:

Quoting CM (Reply 8):
Cathay reported publicly (Australian Aviation Magazine, IIRC) that fuel burn on their freighters is better than spec.

Interesting. That clashes with the viewpoint expressed by a Cathay pilot who is prominent on this forum, who complained that the aircraft wasn't meeting promised payload-range because of high fuel burn.

It's nice, but I'm not sure that a 1% improvement is something that can change the disadvantage the passenger 748 currently suffers compared to the 388.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12158 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 24448 times:

Just 6 months ago everyone was saying the B-747-8F wasn't meeting specs. Even Cargolux delayed their first delivery with a dog and pony show.

But, now that CX has some B-747-8 initial numbers I am wondering if it will help them consider the B-747-8I, over the A-380, when they order their VLA.


User currently offlinejohnclipper From Hong Kong, joined Aug 2005, 851 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 23994 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 18):
Interesting. That clashes with the viewpoint expressed by a Cathay pilot who is prominent on this forum, who complained that the aircraft wasn't meeting promised payload-range because of high fuel burn.

It's funny, I have heard the opposite from another Cathay pilot...


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 23996 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 18):

That should explain why I dismiss most of the claims made by that member. It's 77W v A346 all over again.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13248 posts, RR: 100
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 23581 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From the link: And in every category - from in-service reliability, to fuel burn, to payload capability - the 747-8F is performing as well or better than we predicted.

While good news, it should say 'better than we promised.'

While this is great news, 'dispatch reliability targets' for year one are not the same as for a mature airframe.  


All of that said, I hope this means that the 748I proves to be a popular airframe.

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 9):
i'm sure with the engine PIP coming from GE and weight reductions due from Boeing, later models will see another 1-3% improvement on top of what they have now. That should make the 747F and i that much more desirable to have. Hope this entices follow up orders from existing customers and new ones from those who have not signed up for one yet.

The PIPs will come down the line, if only because the 787 direly needs them and the 748 will get them as a 'side effect.'

I hope the ol' Queen of the skies has enough life left to sell over a hundred passenger models. That is the minimum number for myself to have a good chance of flying one.    Well, I have a better chance, depending on what LH sends to LAX.   

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 23371 times:

Quoting Ronaldo747 (Reply 2):
Take a look at pprune.org it seems to be right.
http://www.pprune.org/freight-dogs/4...7085-747-8f-does-match-hype-2.html
"Most importantly......it makes money.
I've been flying it since November and it's burning 2-3% less fuel than Mr Boeing promised...and its my understanding that Boeing are taking more weight out of it?"


User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3680 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 23108 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 17):


I've met two or three of those guys. My father in law in Everett told me about a gal who makes more money through interest, and stock dividend than her salary at one of Boeing's shop . . . but she's working on . . . into her 80's. They say that she goes to the share holder meeting in a limosine  

My father worked for 51 years at Boeing and ended up a millionaire. Never did make management.


25 kanban : It's true.. Thai she used to work in the Delivery center.. There's another that installs blankets in the 737,
26 Post contains images nicoeddf : Which is in this thread of course your only concern! But yes indeed, that is what I am hoping for, too! Good for Boeing and their customers (at least
27 CX Flyboy : Presumably the same CX pilot who posts prominently on this forum who is very pro-Airbus and anti-Boeing?
28 Daysleeper : What I’m a little confused about is what expectations it has bettered, as didn’t Boeing “revise” what was to be expected due to under-performi
29 Post contains images airproxx : If this guy takes fuel for 2hours holding every time he flies, for sure he will find his plane doesn't meet expectations... But it will happen on eve
30 Focker : Without being biased this is definitely the thing I am interested in. Better than what prediction?
31 KC135TopBoom : That is true, but isn't CX one of the next airlines expected to order new VLAs?
32 na : Yes, its high time for them if they want A380s. If they choose the 748I though they´ll still be on time to receive them as replacements for their ag
33 CX Flyboy : A recent magazine article quoted CX's CEO as saying "Later this year" they will have another look at ordering VLAs. Pretty vague but something to go
34 Post contains links jonathan-l : "Better than expected"... but where is the reference? The MTOW is a full 13 tonnes higher than when the 747-8F was first marketed, with insignificant
35 CX Flyboy : There is speculation that the excuses given by Atlas as to the cancellation of those 748Fs were simply excuses in an economic climate where those new
36 KC135TopBoom : Well, CX has about 20 B-747-467s then that will need replacing, the oldest being about 23 years old now. If they ordered 20 B-747-867Is they could ha
37 CX Flyboy : Aircraft purchase plans are very fluid. The strategy these last few years that CX have made public, is to fly more frequent services with smaller air
38 na : Most 744s being "retired" so far were BCFs which now are flying for Air China. Which is the second pax-aircraft they retired? Must have been very rec
39 Daysleeper : Was that the case with Cargolux too? I guess it would make sense that if the freight market was down then none of the operators would want to invest
40 nicoeddf : Indeed. If the 748I is anything to go by as comparison to the freighter, fuel burn for the -2B is several percent below spec and promise according to
41 CX Flyboy : B-HKE left the fleet to fly for Orient Thai and B-HOO was scrapped last year in VCV. Every carrier is different. For CX, the freight market is a very
42 na : As much as I know it has been confirmed that this played a major role, it wasnt just a rumour. Atlas did get the 3 744Fs back from BA, and they recei
43 Stitch : Even if it's not as good as originally projected, the reports of double-digits reductions in fuel burn and increases in payload compared to the 747-40
44 Roseflyer : An airplane really has to fall short for that to happen. However CX kind of did that with the A346s.
45 trex8 : They leased 3 for a few years, before 77Ws were available, and found out later the 77W was better for them though by all accounts the A346 did exactl
46 Post contains images solnabo : A340 league: 340-200 340-200F 340-300 340-500 340-600 B777 league: 772A 773A 772ER 773ER 772L 772F Did I miss any ? //Mike
47 solnabo : Sheiz, it should be 340-200, the freighter version is 332F Mea Culpa
48 trex8 : an A340 freighter?? maybe one day but not yet!
49 Post contains images glideslope : I'd wager so.
50 KC135TopBoom : As far as I know, no one is talking about an A-342F. There is some talk about an A-343F, with no side cargo door installation, elevators will lift ca
51 CM : Randy's comments are great for pumping up the fan base, but the only spec which matters is what is promised to an airline. When you read CX saying pu
52 Daysleeper : I wouldn’t. They showed no interest in it before Boeings downwards revision of the fuel burn, so why would they want it now when they know that it
53 Roseflyer : Wait a second. Where did you find the information that it is not achieving the figures Boeing/GE promised? What figures are you talking about?
54 mham001 : Do you know what Boeing/GE promised CX?
55 Daysleeper : Why would I need such information? Prior to the 748 entering service the only data available to potential customers would be Boeings projections, whi
56 Post contains images sweair : Lots of sour grapes Sweet!
57 garpd : Yet here is Randy and his customers telling us otherwise. I think you need to take your anti-Boeing shades off for a minute and properly explain your
58 Post contains links Roseflyer : The thread provided an article from Boeing stating that the 747-8 has better fuel burn than expected. You then make a statement that you know that Bo
59 Daysleeper : I’m not being anti-anything, why does everything have to be a war on here? All I am saying is that I don’t understand what all the fuss is about,
60 Post contains links Roseflyer : I assume you are referring to the speculated 2.7% shortfall that was behind the Cargolux delivery delay. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...ehind
61 Daysleeper : Very simply, my understanding was that the 748 upon introduction did not meet its design specification, both in terms of fuel burn and weight. The we
62 CX Flyboy : Where did you get that CX is not interested in the 748i? CX have been delaying a decision on buying VLAs because they are not needed in our fleet yet
63 Daysleeper : A blatent lie? Why is everyone so worked up over this? By interest i meant an order or MOU - id imagine all airlines are "interested" in all new airc
64 Post contains links and images lightsaber : The 748 was missing payload/range at EIS. So I do wonder what changed. However, I'm not surprised. I have friends who transferred over to 748 flight t
65 Post contains images Daysleeper : Thank you. So going on the information in this article my original assumption was correct, in that the 748 has not managed to beat its original speci
66 flightsimer : Cx have said the A380 is too small for their cargo needs... The 747-8 will carry more cargo than the a380 will with full pax which is why the smaller
67 Stitch : The trick is, the 777-300ER does better in cargo volume than both the A380-800 and 747-8 and the 777X will allow more of that volume to be used as tr
68 CCA : CX flight plans like all airlines in various forms have a drag factor and a fuel flow factor, it's a percentage like +2.8(%) to be reflected in the FM
69 Post contains images astuteman : I think the question that some of us (quite objectively) are struggling with is "does that mean the 748 is now only 1.7% off spec, as it was previous
70 Aircellist : Amen Amen Amen
71 Qfflyer : Eloquently and clearly put......with no slant.... No, unlike this CX pilot whose dislike of Boeing products is very clear, your posts are equally cle
72 Post contains images sweair : It is sad if someone spreads false information just because they dislike a company and its products. One just have to learn to take everything with a
73 Post contains links 747classic : Some History of the 747-8 program : - Early in the 747-8 program a usual issue was noticed : Operating Empty Weight (OEW) was above design target. The
74 yeogeo : Bravo, 747classic! Thank you for that! yeo
75 RWA380 : Giggidy.
76 trex8 : I think it would be more accurate to say his dislike of any 777, he seems very attached to the 744!
77 nomadd22 : No kidding. One post of actual facts in several pages of semantics, blind speculation and conclusion pulled out of darkness. Along with Ferpe on the
78 Daysleeper : Unless the A380 is payload limited then this is incorrect; Boeing states that the 748I has a total cargo volume of 161.5 Cu M, Airbus lists the A380
79 trex8 : I believe the issue is available cargo space after pax baggage space needs and as the A380 carries more pax, it eats into the available space for car
80 KC135TopBoom : The airplanes they currently have on order are, for the most part smaller than either the A-388 or the B-748, they are B-77Ws and A-358/9s. See 747cl
81 Post contains images CXB77L : By that definition, then CX weren't at all interested in the A380 either. The fact of the matter is that CX Flyboy is right. To my knowledge, CX will
82 na : Thanks for the short summary. Fully agreed. Cargo space in pax planes isnt everything, also CX has a nice dedicated cargo fleet. Fact is, the A380 an
83 Daysleeper : I have, it confirms what I suspected was the case all along in that the 748 has not met its original fuel burn targets, it just hasn’t missed them
84 Roseflyer : I think that you proposed a very valid question rather than making statements that are confusing. The information from the Boeing press releases a fe
85 Stitch : The A380-800 offers 38 LD3 positions compared to the 36 of the 747-8 and 32 of the 747-400. The A380-800 and 747-400 should generally offer a similar
86 Post contains images Revelation : How about someone who loves a company and its products? I'm speaking of Randy T. I'm quite unhappy with the dissembling he's doing here.
87 Daysleeper : The confusion was a consequence of a lack of information provided by Boeing. “Proof of Performance” with follow up comments such as “the in-ser
88 Revelation : A) I know you said you ignore Randy T, but I think his dissembling is doing Boeing a disservice. B) According to the 2nd article Lightsaber linked to
89 CM : Yes, an interesting term. Particularly since the word "commitment" is attached. By definition, catalog performance is not a commitment. 25 years work
90 rj777 : Let's just hope that the -8I will do just as good with Lufthansa when it enters service.
91 CCA : Remember the crew rest area needs to be considered for the A380 when considering cargo space, it doesn't affect the 748I
92 lightsaber : Unfortunately, it rears its ugly head too often (not you, in discussions). Bravo. Well said. That is my impression. However, I know of significant wo
93 sweair : The GENX2b engine is very good compared to the old one on the 744. I can imagine what it would do for a A330neo as well. Within a year or so it should
94 Stitch : The GEnx2B shipped with the changes GE incorporated into PIP1 for the GEnx1B. GE has subsequently produced PIP2 for the GEnx1B and is working on PIP1
95 Post contains links and images KC135TopBoom : No, the baggage loading is not linaer. Bags are loaded into LD3s for international traffic. The A-380 requires more LD3s with just baggage than the B
96 Post contains links CM : Not true. I know there is a lot of bad information on the web from non-official sources (I found 960k and 970K when I Googled "747-8 MTOW"), but the
97 Stitch : When Boeing was pitching the 747 Advanced, the MTOW was 930,000 pounds (as of August 2004). I have not found an official Boeing statement, but I do be
98 lightsaber : That is an order we've been waiting a long time here on a.net. While I respect CX's frequency strategy, they will eventually benefit from VLAs on cer
99 Daysleeper : How have I “picked and chosen” specifications? My point was simply that the 748F has not managed to meet its original fuel burn specification, an
100 Post contains images 747classic : Original the 747-8F (then called 747EXF) started with a target 960.000 lbs MTOW After implementing many design changes (mission creep, especially the
101 Stitch : They actually entered into a sale and lease back with Dubai Aerospace Enterprises. So while they won't directly own them, they will still operate the
102 Daysleeper : I was aware that they were via a leasing company but thought they had cancelled all 10 in favour of the 777F. From a quick search it turns out that t
103 Post contains images neutronstar73 : Uh I don't know about that. 100 A380s already confirms to me that they are crazy, so who's to say they won't extend their crazy streak and buy 100 -8
104 Burkhard : Good news - but I wait for the day that Nico Buchholz says the B748I to be better than expected before I open a bottle of champaign.
105 Post contains images Daysleeper : That's a fair point actually What's just as crazy, is although its still very early they do seem to be able to find suitable routes for them all..
106 CM : Thanks for that. I was not aware of the 747-8F ever being offered at 970K. If this change was post-drawing release, as you say, I stand corrected. So
107 zeke : Any quotes that the aircraft is exceeding fuel burn specs is only partially correct. The specs that I referred to are the specs that were guarenteed
108 sunrisevalley : The statement I saw in conjunction with this fuel flow said that the aircraft was at 380 or 385t. It was not clear what this weight related to or whe
109 CX Flyboy : ...and just to complete your sentence, costing more to operate but at higher MTOWs, presumably the revenue goes up as well. You make it sound like th
110 Daysleeper : How is it performing in relation to the 744F? Boeing is quoting a “double digit” percentage improvement, do you know if it’s actually achieving
111 zeke : Out of courosity I went and had a look at the Aircraft Performance Factors & Preference List from ops eng (CFD/Useful links) none of the 747-8 we
112 KC135TopBoom : The reason for the weight increase was the engineers found the B-787-8 actually had that much more performance and capability. Boeing only adjusted t
113 XT6Wagon : Proof? Proof? PROOF???? You best be finding some if you want to directly refute what multiple sources within the industry is saying about thier own a
114 Daysleeper : I understand that one source is an article written by an Australian magazine which had a reporter on board a 748F flight, but what are the other “i
115 tdscanuck : That one's easy...it's right in the FCOMs. Tom.
116 srbmod : This is the one and only warning that will be given. Please stay on topic in this thread and do not take this thread off-topic or it will be locked. I
117 Post contains links zeke : I have difficulty believing this number, that represents about 190t of payload and fuel. I just pulled up one flight plan and looked at the fuel flow
118 CX Flyboy : Well yes IF it is lifting a 744 load but why compare it to a 744? If a company operates DHC-8-100s then buy DHC8Q-400s, you cannot really compare the
119 Post contains links zeke : Because that is the payload being lifted, normally in the 100-110t range. I think you are understating the capability of the 777F somewhat, have a lo
120 CX Flyboy : As you know, there are a limited number of choices to an airline like CX in terms of future freighters. The choice they have made in terms of new fre
121 CCA : Here are some stats for the -8 on a 9 hour flight the -8 flight was actually 5min longer. -400ERF vs -8F both had exactly the same fuel burn for the t
122 zeke : No I think we need both ! And maybe also something smaller, and better air/road/rail/sea cargo access, that is for another thread. I think the 77F wi
123 sweair : Maybe the 747-8F was underestimated and the 787-8 was overestimated? If they get the engines to spec and get some weight out of the 748 it will shine
124 CCA : I still don't think you are a pilot with CX, you may have a pilots licence but doubt you fly wide body A/C.
125 RickNRoll : This is an interesting topic, please don't get it locked.
126 CX Flyboy : Oh I agree there are places both east and west of HKG suited to both the 777F and 748F and other carriers from other countries fly both these types i
127 srbmod : Since some of you do not want to follow the requests made by a Head Forum Moderator, this thread is now locked. From the Forum Rules: It's extremely t
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...
767 Winglets Better Than Expected posted Thu Oct 15 2009 15:34:06 by Tommytoyz
748 Better Than Spec posted Wed Sep 23 2009 09:36:11 by Cosmofly
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
Boeing Reports Better-Than-Expected 2Q Results posted Wed Jul 25 2007 18:59:02 by Bbobbo
Randy Says: 748 To Have Lowest Casm Period posted Wed Nov 16 2005 00:55:32 by Lumberton
FR Posts 'better Than Expected' Profit. posted Tue Aug 2 2005 13:07:34 by 7LBAC111
Leahy Says A350's Better Than 787 Or 777 posted Fri Jun 3 2005 12:32:19 by Kalakaua
A380 Fuel Burn Better Than Expected posted Wed May 25 2005 08:41:11 by Jacobin777
Snba Posts Better Than Expected 1st Q Results posted Fri Jun 11 2004 13:35:28 by Scorpio