greaser
Posts: 1040
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:55 pm

744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 12:27 am

haha, i know someone has prob. talked abt this bfore, but, since i just joined in Jan, i wanna noe!
Is it a failure?
Sales less than 100 rite?
Is it more efficient than the 744?
Your Opinions


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Paulsen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Miguel Snoep




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Royal S King

Now you're really flying
 
Sabena 690
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 12:48 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 12:29 am

I would appreciate it when you would write in proper English...

A lot of non-native speakers like me have problems with trying to decode all this kind of chat-language.

Thanks
Frederic
 
UTA_flyinghigh
Posts: 6304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:46 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 12:34 am

Translation  Laugh out loud :
It looks like the Boeing 747-400ER is a failure from a sales point of view as less than 100 airframes have been delivered/ordered up to now.
is it really more efficient than the normal 747-400 ?
I would like your thoughts.

UTA, bored as a dead rat.
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
 
usnseallt82
Posts: 4727
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 12:38 am

From what I have heard, though I am no expert on the 400 model, it is a very good quality aircraft. I think the problem is that so many customers already have -200 and -300 models that are running just fine. The -400 system is too expensive to buy when you already have a fleet that is running good.

Although, I'm sure there is more to this, but I will let someone else venture there.  Big thumbs up

Cheers!
Crye me a river
 
LHR340
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 1:18 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 12:44 am

UTA, bored as a dead rat. That's a funny expression, surely if your dead you have nothing to worry about, especially if you're a rat!

LHR340
A340 LoVeR! EC-GQK - LHR The Bussiest International Airport & 3rd Bussiest In The World!
 
ORD2PHL
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 9:15 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 12:52 am

I think the question was more about the ER series of the -400 aircraft and not the entire -400 program, which has obviously been a success.


ORD2PHL
 
9v-svc
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 12:53 am

I don't considered it a failure because not many airlines required the capacity or the range or could be both.
Airliners is the wings of my life.
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 3:34 am

Oh God, not another is the XXXX a failure? thread.
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
BA
Posts: 10133
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 3:38 am

Not a failure at all.

Costs to develop the 747-400ER were very low as it only added an extra fuel tank boosting its range by 400nm, some components were made with some lighter composites and the engines were uprated to provide a 15,000lb. higher MTOW.

It really was a minor upgrade and as a result, development costs were very low.

It was specifically designed for Qantas' needs for its SYD-LAX flights which would periodically not be able to make the westbound route due to very high headwinds. That extra 400nm is just what they needed to ensure that the flight could make it non-stop everytime without an unscheduled fuel-stop.

Regards
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 5:12 am

S'ennuyer comme un rat mort...

Translation : to be bored like a dead rat...

UTA did you get this from this French popular expression... ?


The B744ER knows more success in its freighter version, as the range and playload are really increased compared to the -200F.
In its PAX version, it doesn't offer such an increased range compared to the -400 so where is the interests for an airline to buy it ?
the -400 was a real progress in terms of range, engines, electronics etc... compared to the old models -200/300. The difference between the -400 and -400ER is too insignificant...
 
PER744
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 11:38 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:31 am

For Qantas it has been quite successful, anything that allows them to carry more cargo between Australia and the US will quickly pay for itself.
 
TexAussie
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 5:26 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sun Feb 01, 2004 6:13 pm

I have been on the 747-400ER between LA and Australia; the Melbourne run from LA was the one most needing the ER on the westbound leg. Once, on the regular 744, we came in 15:30 after wheels-up. That must have been close to the range limit on the standard model. Usually if it looks like it will be that long you make a pit stop for gas along the way.

The interior of the 744ER is fantastic -- like the 777. It seems to climb out to altitude more quickly than the regular one. I was on a very full ER from SA - California">LAX to SYD recently and I believe the stair climb to cruise altitude was much faster than the standard model. I think the 744 is great for long hauls, and the new model is an improvement on a good original design.

I would think that if BA, CX, SA and SQ were still ordering 744s they would get some ERs, but since the future of the line is in question there probably won't be too many more orders in the passenger configuration.

 
thadocta
Posts: 389
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 9:44 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 2:46 am

TexAussie, I really couldn't see the airlines you mentioned - BA, CX, SA and SQ - ordering the -400ER unless it was priced the same as an ordinary -400.

For Qantas it made sense, since flights from the US to Australia were often payload limited (I have seen people bumped when there were still 40 or so seats left empty in order to get the weight down) due to the prevailing winds west-bound. The -400ER whilst not eliminating the need to limit the payload certainly reduced the amount by which it needed to be limited by.

The other carriers you mention do not seem to have flights which fall into this profile, so the ER does not really fall into their fleet planning "must have" list. Of course, if it was priced the sme they would take it, who knows when it might be needed. But it is not something worth spending extra on purely "on spec".

Dave
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 3:10 am

The 744ER is no more efficient than the 747-400, as it is, in fact, a 747-400.


Another addition to the 744ER is the trailing edge wedge, the first real aerodynamic improvement to the wing since a long time back.

N
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:00 am

Had a long chat with a QF pilot onboard a 744ER (he thought I was a Rolls Royce employee, which was hilarious considering the 744ER is QF's first ever GE powered 747), he said the extra tank makes a difference but the main advantage over the "classic" 747-400 is the extra performance from the engines.

Btw Qantas also fly the 744ER to London, and is the machine of choice on their fourteen hour Antarctica sightseeing missions.

Also worth noting, the 744ER also has the 777 cabin - you knew the 764 had the 777 cabin, but I never heard the 744ER had it too til I got on one.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:19 am

Any Boeing widebody can be outfitted with the Boeing Signature Interior now... even CO's 762ERs had been.

N
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 6:20 am

Cedarjet,

Did you get the chance to check out the upper deck? I understand the interior has been vastly upgraded as well. Been hoping to see pics of it.

Regards
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
Paddy
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:03 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:34 am

Thadocta:
Respect needs to be earnt, and my point was valid.

Looks like you haven't "earnt" that much respect either, so I wouldn't be talking...
 
petertenthije
Posts: 3256
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:00 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:39 am

just to update you on KLM (copied from scramble.nl message boards)

The new KLM Cargo B747-400F PH-CKC will dep PAE on the 3rd of februari 1400 local with 40 tons of cargo and will fly then to YVR to pick up some remaining cargo. ETA at Amsterdam-Schiphol will be in the morning of the 4th of februari depends how quick the cargo will be loaded in YVR
Attamottamotta!
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2391
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 10:12 am

The 744ER as a model might be considered a failure if no more are sold, however it was launched with so few orders partly as a building block for the one proposed 747X. It has the stronger wings of the -400F and other structural enhancements. Presumably, if Boeing were to go ahead with the 747 Advanced proposal, the 744ER would serve as the structural basis for that model, as well. So in this context, if Boeing proceded with the new version, the 744ER could be considered a worthwhile investment.
 
melflyer
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:36 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Tue Feb 03, 2004 6:23 pm

Did you get the chance to check out the upper deck? I understand the interior has been vastly upgraded as well. Been hoping to see pics of it.

Was able to spend the best part of 14 hours in the upper deck recently. I certainly was impressed with the interior, especially compared with some of the older QF 744's, which are looking a little tired.

Cheers
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Wed Feb 04, 2004 12:28 am

Was able to spend the best part of 14 hours in the upper deck recently. I certainly was impressed with the interior, especially compared with some of the older QF 744's, which are looking a little tired.

Are the bins "777 style", or more like 737NG bins?
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Wed Feb 04, 2004 12:53 am

Are the bins "777 style", or more like 737NG bins?

All Boeing Signature Interior widebodies feature the articulating bins.

The 737 and 757 feature the "BigBins" that look more traditional.

N
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15214
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:16 am

"the 744ER is QF's first ever GE powered 747)"

QF has had GE powered 744s in the past...acquired from Malaysia (MH).
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:25 am

Are the bins "777 style", or more like 737NG bins?

All Boeing Signature Interior widebodies feature the articulating bins.

The 737 and 757 feature the "BigBins" that look more traditional.


This I know. What I'm curious of is, are there now 737NG type bins on the upper deck of the 744ER? Or does the upper deck have it's own design? The main deck looks exctly like a 777 interior.
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
BOEING747400
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 3:47 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:10 pm

Can anyone please put several cabin photos of the Qantas 744ER in this airliners.net site to demonstrate the interior improvements over the original 744s? I hope more Asian airlines order the 744ER so there'll be non-stop routes such as BKK-LAX-BKK, HKG-JFK-HKG, etc. Thanks.
 
9V-SVA
Posts: 1747
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 3:54 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:15 pm

QF has GE-powered -400s, from MH and Asiana. VH-OEB to VH-OED(?)

9V-SVA
9V-SVA | B772ER
 
N754PR
Posts: 2909
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 1999 10:03 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:34 pm

Are the three KLM 744 freighters ER's??. I thought they are normal 744F's.
Bush, your a sad, sad man.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 4870
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Fri Feb 06, 2004 10:27 am

Are the three KLM 744 freighters ER's??. I thought they are normal 744F's.

They are ER's!!

No the 744ER is not a failure IMO, while it hasn't had alot of orders as mentioned in previous threads it has enabled QF to operate MEL/SYD-LAX at full capacity year round, and also KE I think to remove techninal stops at ANC on some ICN-US freight services! So this aircraft has something to offer airlines that the 744 couldn't offer before.
 
trijetfan1
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 5:29 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Fri Feb 06, 2004 10:31 am

How many more miles can the 747-400ER fly compared to its competetors?
Earned PPL June 26, 2007
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Fri Feb 06, 2004 10:37 am

744ER still offers less range than the 772ER, Boeing's current flagship in terms of range.... not to mention others.

__________________
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
~ConcordeBoy
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5005
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sat Feb 07, 2004 12:34 am

744-ER: 800 km longer than 744!
Why call it ER then? Thats nothing, it would be a whole diffrent story if it was 1600 km, right???
*just my 5 öre*

Michael//SE
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:20 am

Why call it ER then?

...because it has higher fuel capacity than the standard model, as do all of Boeing's "ER" aircraft.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: 744ER A Failure?

Sat Feb 07, 2004 3:35 am

I didn't see the Upper Deck, but as said above by someone else, the main deck looks exactly like the inside of a 777.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], CHCalfonzo, Concorde2904, DSS787, ericm2031, FLJ, Miami, nitepilot79, OO-VEG, runway23, SCQ83, Yahoo [Bot] and 257 guests