jimyvr
Posts: 1597
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:08 pm

747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:05 pm

So, a lighter 747-8I to please people and a solution to maintain 467-seat with 8300nm range....

Boeing looks at boosting composites to lighten 747-8I (13NOV06, ATWOnline)

Excerpt:
Emirates President Tim Clark indicated that the airline preferred the 747-8I's 8,300-nm. range over the longer fuselage and extra capacity that other carriers requested........

Those economics (the 467-seater opposed to 450-seater)are believed to have swayed Air New Zealand and Korean Air to opt for the 777-300ER rather than the 747-8I....
1000 - 01MAR07 | http://airlineroute.blogspot.com/
 
wjcandee
Posts: 5124
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:27 pm

Of course, the good news ignored here is that it looks like two more carriers will soon be placing orders for the 777-300ER, which should be fine by Boeing.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:32 pm

Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter):
So, a lighter 747-8I to please people and a solution to maintain 467-seat with 8300nm range

This appears consistent with 'half' of Boeing's recent $1B increase in R&D spending going to the 748 program. I wondered why and how that magnitude of resources would be spent, and this may be the answer  scratchchin 
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:33 pm

@Wjcandee
"Of course, the good news ignored here is that it looks like two more carriers will soon be placing orders for the 777-300ER, which should be fine by Boeing.
"

I did not ignore that point, but that is just another hurdle to see some customers for the B748I. More and more airlines are ordering the B777-300ER as the B744-replacement.
 
supa7E7
Posts: 1360
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 2:05 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:41 pm

Well sure, Boeing, build the best plane you can.

The 748 compares well against its competitor, the A380. Yes, they are direct competitors. Not equals, but the 748 can handle any mission the A380 can. Nobody is going to say, "if only the tiny 748 were a bit larger..."
"Who's to say spaceships aren't fine art?" - Phil Lesh
 
Ken777
Posts: 9021
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:22 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 4):
I did not ignore that point, but that is just another hurdle to see some customers for the B748I. More and more airlines are ordering the B777-300ER as the B744-replacement.

As long as it's not the XWB then Boeing is doing OK. What's the difference in price between the B777-300ER today and the launch price of the 748i? Just as important, what is the profit margins of the two planes.

Since the stretch was at the airlines requests (except for EK) and the extra range was what EK wanted the research into adding composites is a good move on Boeing's part. It they hit, or exceed, the 8,300 NM then they are making everyone happy. EK will order and the other airlines will get a plane that is even cheaper to fly than the one they wanted. Everybody wins.

Well, except for Airbus. It will be interesting to see how the Stretched 748i Lite compares with the 380 in the area of flight economics.
 
chiad
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 4:24 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:58 pm

Would it be possible to build the B748i "entirely" out of composites, like the B787?
Or is there a limit in in size to the composite technology now?

If possible it should take care of any weight issues and performance I think.
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2165
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:30 pm

Quoting Chiad (Reply 11):
Would it be possible to build the B748i "entirely" out of composites

In a word no, it's very possible to replace small sections of the frame with carbon fibre parts to save waste but the 787 fuse isn't just a 767 tube made out of CF it's a whole new design. So a fully carbon fuse for the 748 would mean essentially a new plane.

I'm not sure they should go chasing pax sales for this plane when it's selling just great as a frieghter.
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:32 pm

I would think Boeing has some 748I customers in the bag to justify the additional expense.

If they don't, then just stay with the 748F as is, and spend the R&D on lightening the 773ER and make it even better.
 
OHLHD
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 6:02 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:38 pm

So basically Boeing is only concentrating on EK and forgetting about the rest of the airlines like LH?
or are they building 2 variants like the B748I (a) and the B748I (b)

one longer and shorther range or one shorter with longer range?
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:45 pm

Justloveplanes
"If they don't, then just stay with the 748F as is, and spend the R&D on lightening the 773ER and make it even better"

-Exactly !!!!

 Smile
 
2wingtips
Posts: 487
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:42 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:54 pm

Johnny,

several points:

(1) the 748I is still not fully defined. Changes can be made until the cinfiguration is firmed some time next year.

(2) no matter what EK wants, there will only be one fuselage length of the 748I

For EK to get the required range, the plane has to be lightened. How much lightening is required to get the 300nm range is not clear to me.
Boeing and the airlines may be of the opinion the 467 seat version of the 748I with 8,300nm range may be the best compromise.
Let's wait and see, but I'm very confident the 748I will see some good sales in the coming months.
 
SailorOrion
Posts: 1959
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2001 5:56 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:32 pm

They want to increase the range from 8000nm to 8300nm by reducing the weight. That's a 3.75% increase. For this, you need an estimated 5 tons OEW reduction, or about 2%. Not easy, but doable.

SailorOrion
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:02 pm

Quoting SailorOrion (Reply 21):
For this, you need an estimated 5 tons OEW reduction, or about 2%. Not easy, but doable.

Thats interesting !! Maybe some of the sollutions from the 787 can be used on the 747-8 aswell as it is Basically taking the non-composite parts and making them lighter through use of lighter materials (such as titanium ) etc.

Quoting Justloveplanes (Reply 16):
If they don't, then just stay with the 748F as is, and spend the R&D on lightening the 773ER and make it even better

Why cant the do both ? replacing weight of some " noncritical structures " shouldnt be all that expensive as to leave boeing cash strapped so that they cant invest into a very profitable family of aircraft such as the T7. The T7 future roadmap is probably still under consideration (the 350-900,1000 are still 7-9 years into the future) and most likely involves weight savings aswell as cost savings through a moving line , shorter production cycle , higher rate of production and greater discounts !! What will be interesting is to observe the type of changes boeing brings about to the 747-8I interms of weight savings ! The 600 million dollars (over 2 years) that boeing is spending will easily pay off if the 747-8I alone can meet emirate's requirments ( and close to half of that has gone into the 787 program) .

Quoting 2wingtips (Reply 20):
the 748I is still not fully defined. Changes can be made until the cinfiguration is firmed some time next year.

True ! The design is not firmed up and fully defined , Boeing made changes to the 787 aswell before the design was frozen so this isnt really out of line .

Quoting 2wingtips (Reply 20):
no matter what EK wants, there will only be one fuselage length of the 748I

But emirate's main concern wasnt with PAX no. but with the fact that they wanted 8300 nm with a representative load which without the weight savings could only be met if boeing proposed the previous design .
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:09 pm

@Revelation
"You see, Johnny, you are missing the point. The 747-8i is a decoy, created merely to demonstrate how good an airplane the 777-300ER is! As soon as one customer begins to like the 747-8i, Boeing changes the configuration so the 777-300ER is more attractive!"


I think you are missing the point here!

MY point is that more and more airlines (also potential B748I-customers) are finding the B777-300ER more attractive than the B748I.
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:14 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 24):
MY point is that more and more airlines (also potential B748I-customers) are finding the B777-300ER more attractive than the B748I.

Although I agree with you but I think that There will be enough takers for the 747-8I to eventually make boeing decent money given the Development costs over and above those for the F version .
 
OU812
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:19 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:53 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 24):
I think you are missing the point here!

MY point is that more and more airlines (also potential B748I-customers) are finding the B777-300ER more attractive than the B748I.

Doesn't look like airlines are finding the A380 attractive either ! Which backs up Boeing's predictions , not Airbus's . The Airline Industry are opting for smaller , more flexible a/c ! Not VLAs' !
 
na
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:17 pm

I´m sure when the 748I is out flying finally it´ll put the 773ER in the shade (where it belongs). Boeings credibility is at stake and they won´t risk it, especially not on their long-time flagship.
 
NYC777
Posts: 5065
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:27 pm

Look if Boeing can lighten the 748I and give airlines 8,300 mile range with 479 passengers (using the crown area for the galley space) the nthe airlines win and Boeing wins. They are still developing the product and trying to meet customer demands.

I see nothing wrong with that and it will orders from customers who are looking for both capacity and range.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:27 pm

If Boeing can pull off a weight reduction on this scale, it would completely undermine the operating economics of the WhaleJet. Just speculating, I wonder if this might be a bluff by Boeing to keep anyone from ordering more WhaleJets for the next few years. I have some doubt that Boeing are willing to invest the resources needed for such a massive weight reduction.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 10):
Singapore,ANA,JAL,Air France, Cathay and possibly Korean, Air New Zealand, BA and LH all come in my mind.

Did you read the article? Geoff Thomas says that KE and NZ will order B777-300ERs rather than B747-8I SuperJumbos. JL and (especially) NH don't need an aircraft that large, so probably would never have ordered the SuperJumbo anyway -- though, if this plan comes to fruition, it might become attractive to JL due to the dramticallly superior CASM. SQ are not a plausible SuperJumbo customer because their new seats fit much better in the A350/B787/B777 and in the WhaleJet.

Quoting Chiad (Reply 11):
Would it be possible to build the B748i "entirely" out of composites, like the B787?

It would be possible to build an airliner this size of CFRP (just like the B787 but larger) though it would present engineering challenges (e.g. the largest autoclaves in the world). However, it would not be a B747. Boeing call this concept Y3.

Quoting OHLHD (Reply 18):
So basically Boeing is only concentrating on EK and forgetting about the rest of the airlines like LH?
or are they building 2 variants like the B748I (a) and the B748I (b)

one longer and shorther range or one shorter with longer range?

Did you read this article? It says that Boeing are rejecting the idea of two lengths for the B747-8I SuperJumbo.
 
mptpa
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:34 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:50 pm

Quoting Supa7E7 (Reply 5):
Well sure, Boeing, build the best plane you can.

I think it is a great strategy to get the weight down, and get the range up another 300nm to satisfy EK all the while keeping the same fuselage length common with F model. This is a good compromise which will be win-win, if they can win the order from EK!

Quoting OHLHD (Reply 18):
So basically Boeing is only concentrating on EK and forgetting about the rest of the airlines like LH?
or are they building 2 variants like the B748I (a) and the B748I (b)

I do have a feeling they have some orders in the bag contingent on getting the numbers straight. Remember Boeing is not Airbus and if they say they can build and deliver the numbers promised, they will, and on time. Atleast we hope.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22931
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:11 pm

One advantage of lightening the structure is it improves the 748F's advantage over the A388F and 744BCF even more, which should help keep those orders coming.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 10):
Indeed i made my statement due to some mistakes done by Airbus with the A350 AND by Boeing with the B747-500x/-600x or B767-400ERx.

I'm not sure what mistakes Boeing did with the 745, 746 and 764 programs. The 745 and 746 were done in by the "Asian Financial Flu" which hammered the earnings of the Asian carriers who could not afford a $250 million plane.

And the 764 was designed to perform missions more efficiently then a 777-100A could. Yes, it had it's hat handed to it by the A332, but there was not much Boeing could do about that. Just as there was not much Airbus could do about the A342 getting it's hat handed to it by the 772ER. Both models were just outclassed by their competition.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 12):
Good for the 773ER program, not so good for the 747-8 and possible Y3 program.

The longer Boeing can keep the 773 program going, the better for them, as Y3 is going to be a large drain on resources. So it is to Boeing's benefit to be able to push Y3 back as long as possible. Frankly, it's much the same for the 747-8I, as well, since Boeing probably needs to discount heavier on that model to match the A388's discounts more then they need to discount the 773ER to match the A346. And the 747-8F isn't under any pricing pressure at the moment, so Boeing is just cashing checks on that program.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 24):
MY point is that more and more airlines (also potential B748I-customers) are finding the B777-300ER more attractive than the B748I.

Which makes sense. Just as more and more airlines are finding it more attractive then the A388 and will especially find it so (for both the 748 and the A388) when the A35010 enters service.
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:51 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 1):
Oh Boeing...

Another change to the B748I to find some customers.

It's called listening to potential customers.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 1):
Boeing ,pls go back to the drawing board and develop something really new! Delay your EIS by another 2 years, invest some more money and come back with a really advanced composite airplane!

You got the extra billions to pass on to them so they can do this in a care free manner which you think they seemed to have on this? Nevermind the extra costs that would have to be passed on to the airlines. You really should think about what you are saying before saying it.

Quoting Chiad (Reply 11):
Would it be possible to build the B748i "entirely" out of composites, like the B787?

Of course it's possible, but the R&D costs would explode making the aircraft even more expensive.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 29):
It says that Boeing are rejecting the idea of two lengths for the B747-8I SuperJumbo.

From what I hear, Boeing hasn't flat out rejected the idea, they just aren't too "keen" on it.
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
Charger
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:20 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:56 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 24):
MY point is that more and more airlines (also potential B748I-customers) are finding the B777-300ER more attractive than the B748I.

But as stated in several other posts airlines are finding the 777-300ER more attractive than the A388 also.

I have a dumb question. When Boeing "lightens" the 748I can they also use the weight saving parts on the F model, thus making it also a better plane?
If so, it seems like it would definetly be worth it.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13754
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:09 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 24):
MY point is that more and more airlines (also potential B748I-customers) are finding the B777-300ER more attractive than the B748I.

As they should. The economics of the twin jet are much better than the quad.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
Alitalia744
Posts: 3777
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 8:22 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:18 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 1):
Oh Boeing...

Another change to the B748I to find some customers.

First stretching the fuselage and trading range for payload and now some composites to get the original range again.

What is next to get some customers? A further stretch? Some lighter interiors? Further changes to the wings?

I think for Boeing it was never been so hard to find launching customers for a new airplane.

Boeing ,pls go back to the drawing board and develop something really new! Delay your EIS by another 2 years, invest some more money and come back with a really advanced composite airplane!

Johnny

Johnny, your constant anti-Boeing comments are getting boring. Surely you can come up with better arguments.

Interesting about the latest AF/KL rumor huh?
Some see lines, others see between the lines.
 
CM767
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:58 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:19 am

We have got used to the idea of different lengths of the same model, but Boeing is doing the right thing here, remember that the market for it is quite small, finding one frame that could please all customers is going to be better to keep down R&D cost, even when additional resources will be needed to lower the weight and as noted before the F probably will benefit from the weight reduction also. I see that on this Boeing will go for one frame (well almost the same) for the I and F version, with better capacity, range and seat cost to nearly match the 380.

I will be patient with Boeing on this one; with customer input Boeing is going to deliver another killer product.


There is only one doubt on my mind and is with the intentions of EK. I am not sure that I would delay the program just to please EK; they are knee deep on 380s, why they would need the 8I also? Should not be better for them to misuse the 380 on some routes than adding another type?
But The Best Thing God Has Created Is A New Day
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:52 am

@ Charger
"But as stated in several other posts airlines are finding the 777-300ER more attractive than the A388 also"

Yes, for sure the B777-300ER seems to be more attractive than the A388 in terms of sales.

But now come the two big BUTs... :

-The A388 has sold already in comparison to the B748I (with exeption of some VIP-Airplanes)
-Most of the A388-customers ordered the B777-300ER or A346 as well...So your argument about preference from A388 customers for the B773ER doesn´t work...

Johnny
 
User avatar
flylku
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 10:44 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:58 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 1):
Another change to the B748I to find some customers.

Johnny: Could well be:

"Oh Airbus, another change to the A350 to find customers."

Let's face it, this is what ALL airframers do.
...are we there yet?
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:16 am

@FlyLKU

You are right.The A350-program really comes in my mind every single time when i read some news about another improvement or adjustment to the B748I !!!

The same mistake from both A and B to improve an offered airplane piece by piece. It is unbelieveable!

My points in this discussion are no fight against Boeing like some people here argue - it is simply a fight against the second best solution in case of the B748I, which could be far more advanced AND would gain some more interest!

Boeing has the masterpiece of todays longhaul-airplanes in its hands.The B777W! Why do they do a short-term solution in case of the new B748I?


Johnny
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22931
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:40 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 43):
Boeing has the masterpiece of todays longhaul-airplanes in its hands.The B777W! Why do they do a short-term solution in case of the new B748I?

Because Boeing doesn't feel that the VLA passenger market is large enough to justify spending $15 billion on a brand-new plane. Instead, they spent that money on the 772LR and 773ER (good return, least for the latter) and the 787 (fantastic return).

Also, it is quite possible that if Boeing had developed a brand-new VLA, most (if not all) of the current A388 customers would have chosen it instead, based on Boeing's experience with the 747 (so airlines would have been more confident in Boeing being on-time and on-performance) and the fact most of them already operate members of the 747 family.

So where would that have left Airbus? $15 billion out the door and little to no sales to show for it.  Wow!

Frankly, Airbus should be thankful Boeing just went for mild refreshes of the 747 that didn't really offer a strong challenge to the A388 progam.  relieved 
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:41 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 43):
Why do they do a short-term solution in case of the new B748I?

Probably because Boeing knows, along with everyone else, that this will be the last variant of the 747 line.  Sad If they spent to much time and money on this they may as well shit can the whole thing and start the Y3 program. The thing is, as the A380 and 748i have shown, there is very little to no market for a new VLA. As you have stated yourself, several airlines are crowning the 773ER as the flagship of their fleet and have no desire to go bigger at this time. The 748i is to replace some , not all of the 744's that are flying today. So tweaking the aircraft makes a lot more sense than an all new design - for now.
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
LMP737
Posts: 4800
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:21 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 1):
Boeing ,pls go back to the drawing board and develop something really new! Delay your EIS by another 2 years, invest some more money and come back with a really advanced composite airplane!

The market for that sized aircraft is to small to have two new build designs. Boeing would end up spending billions on a plane that they might never see a return on.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:18 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
Frankly, it's much the same for the 747-8I, as well, since Boeing probably needs to discount heavier on that model to match the A388's discounts more then they need to discount the 773ER to match the A346. And the 747-8F isn't under any pricing pressure at the moment, so Boeing is just cashing checks on that program.

There is an article in Aviation Week that speaks to this issue:

Quote:
Airbus officials blame aggressive Boeing pricing for the fact that the 747-8 has so outpaced the A380 Freighter. Buying the new 747 freighter is simply an easier choice because it fits airlines' current operating model, even though, in Airbus's view, the A380 offers higher performance. Over time, these officials insist, the A380 will establish itself as the industry benchmark. They are also adamant that the 747-8's weight problems are twice as bad as Boeing has suggested.

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/new...t_story.jsp?id=news/aw111306p2.xml
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:17 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 29):
Boeing has the masterpiece of todays longhaul-airplanes in its hands.The B777W! Why do they do a short-term solution in case of the new B748I?

It isnt really about short term sollution or long term sollution . The 747-8I is a option that boeing has for its existing 747-400 customers who might not want to upgrade to a increased PAX capacity of the A388 as it is about 20% lgreater interms of PAX . The 777-300ER has taken the fragmentation orders away from the 747 in the past and will do it again yet there exists enough of those orders (in boeing's mind) to justify spending the extra money over and above the Freighter version which is selling very very well !!

Boeing will not drop 15 Billion dollars on a Composite VLA now because from all the evidence that they see the market present them they dont see a room for 2 players in the same segement therefore they will be quite happy to offer the 747-8F and I to take the freighter orders away from the A380 ( Eat into its potential market ) and take away whatever is left after the 747-4 users either fragment or switch to increased capacity . IMO a EK and BA order will pretty much turn out a +ve ROI for the I version over and above the F developmental price .

Boeing believes and preaches greatly about pocessing the right mix of Technology and Timing and how they cannot be independent of each other - A Technologically superior aircraft wont sell on technology alone , it has to be precise on TIMING aspect aswell similarly TIMING is nothing unless you offer something really superior interms of Technology . In reality it is all about A balance of Technology and timing , just look at the A350 , it will pocess a lot of dreamliners tech. and a case can also be made that Airbus because of being 5-6 years late can take their time and gauge what the response of airlines is to the tech. of the 787 however in all reality that technology and the ability to wait and see wont compensate for the LOSS OF TIMING which the 787 provided . In the end it is injecting the right technology at the right time that makes for a succesfull product . Had Airbus waited 4-5 years before launching the A380 and had a CFRP fues. would the CASM competitvness of the 747-8I or A350-1000 been an issue ?

IMO the only way boeing will spend billions and billions to enter into a ALL NEW 400+ aircraft market is if Technology exists which enables them to inject enough vigour into the aircraft so that it can hold its own despite of what similar technology insertions do to other aircraft families . IMO this will happen once a 400-500 PAX sized aircraft can be created light enough and the engine manuf. can come up with a way to increase thrust and eff. so that it needent use 4 engines but needs only 2 . It will be then and only then can the CASM advantage be so significant to rejuvinate the VLA market and reverse the current trend .
 
User avatar
glideslope
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 8:06 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:25 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 2):
This appears consistent with 'half' of Boeing's recent $1B increase in R&D spending going to the 748 program. I wondered why and how that magnitude of resources would be spent, and this may be the answer   

Agreed. Could be something very big around the corner.  yes 
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
 
YULWinterSkies
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:39 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 3):
I did not ignore that point, but that is just another hurdle to see some customers for the B748I. More and more airlines are ordering the B777-300ER as the B744-replacement.

Aren't airliners designed to satisfy the greatest possible number of customers?
If one develops a "random" design and size and tries to sell it after, chances are that the project will be suicidal.
When I doubt... go running!
 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:01 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 19):
If Boeing can pull off a weight reduction on this scale, it would completely undermine the operating economics of the WhaleJet. Just speculating, I wonder if this might be a bluff by Boeing to keep anyone from ordering more WhaleJets for the next few years. I have some doubt that Boeing are willing to invest the resources needed for such a massive weight reduction.

So now I'm confused. Not long ago you bashed me when I divided the 748pax and the 748F...you said it doesn't matter to Boeing which version is selling and which is not because it's the same frame (funny how this doesn't apply when comparing the A330/A340 to the 777). So why is Boeing doing this? The 748F is selling "good"...

Not to mention that Boeing's desperate fight for some orders proves that there is obviously a big enough market for two VLA's (let's face it the development costs for the 748 are much higher that we could call it a derivate)

Quoting FlyLKU (Reply 28):
"Oh Airbus, another change to the A350 to find customers."

Let's face it, this is what ALL airframers do.

Agree but the difference is that when Airbus changes the design you see bashing posts everywhere.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
Because Boeing doesn't feel that the VLA passenger market is large enough to justify spending $15 billion on a brand-new plane. Instead, they spent that money on the 772LR and 773ER (good return, least for the latter) and the 787 (fantastic return).

Well all those changes in the design and even further improvements could bring the development costs for the 748 above 6 billion (you stated yourself that it should be in the range between 4-6)...so 0 orders for the pax version and such high investments? Where is the justification for that?
 
Lemurs
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 5:13 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:11 am

Quoting Adria (Reply 37):
Well all those changes in the design and even further improvements could bring the development costs for the 748 above 6 billion (you stated yourself that it should be in the range between 4-6)...so 0 orders for the pax version and such high investments? Where is the justification for that?

Where did you get that $6 billion number from? I've never seen a number stated, but that one sounds outrageously large...almost like you made it up to prove a point. The development budget for the 787 project is slated at only $8b...the idea that the modernization of the 748 project will cost 75% of an all-new airplane seems hard to believe. Please quote a source if you want to be taken seriously here.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
 
miamix707
Posts: 3848
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:22 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:36 am

Quoting Bringiton (Reply 34):
IMO this will happen once a 400-500 PAX sized aircraft can be created light enough and the engine manuf. can come up with a way to increase thrust and eff. so that it needent use 4 engines but needs only 2

Three engines would be ideal Big grin The structure of the plane gets more complicated with 3 engines though, but I hope we don't see engines as thick as the fuselage, that would be one hideous twin. The 777 engines already look enormous..

I thought the point of making an updated 747 was to carry as much passengers as possible, the most economical way, not to have ultra long range.. Airlines can buy 777LRs if they want that. So far, sales of the A345/772LR have indicated the market is small.

yes they may get EK's order, but other airlines might find it too "small" then. I don't know if EK will buy that many anyways, they are already getting more A380s than they can handle.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22931
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:56 am

Quoting Adria (Reply 37):
Well all those changes in the design and even further improvements could bring the development costs for the 748 above 6 billion (you stated yourself that it should be in the range between 4-6)...so 0 orders for the pax version and such high investments? Where is the justification for that?

Yes, I am on record as saying I believe the $4 billion figure tossed around for the 747-8's development, but only if that figure includes the development costs spent on the 747-500, the 747-600, the 747-X, and the 747-Advanced.

In no way do I believe that all $4 billion is just for the 747-8. That strikes me as ridiculous and I am sure Boeing wouldn't spent it since, let's face it, the 747-400F would still be selling if it was offered and the 747-8F wasn't.

And yes, Boeing is said to be spending upwards of an extra $500 million on the 747-8 program. So I'd buy somewhere around $1 billion to $1.5 billion for the program, including the 747-8I and 747-8F with this latest addition.

One can reasonably assume that in addition to improving the passenger model, this extra R&D money will improve the freighter model, as well. So it's probably money well spent.
 
iwok
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:35 pm

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:54 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
And yes, Boeing is said to be spending upwards of an extra $500 million on the 747-8 program. So I'd buy somewhere around $1 billion to $1.5 billion for the program, including the 747-8I and 747-8F with this latest addition.

Well, I hope they don't futz around too much with the 748 and waste too much money and time on it. There are other fish to fry, noteably Y3 and the 737 replacement.

iwok
 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:55 pm

Quoting Lemurs (Reply 38):
Where did you get that $6 billion number from? I've never seen a number stated, but that one sounds outrageously large...almost like you made it up to prove a point. The development budget for the 787 project is slated at only $8b...the idea that the modernization of the 748 project will cost 75% of an all-new airplane seems hard to believe. Please quote a source if you want to be taken seriously here.

it's rumours from a.net and it was discussed a while ago. The development costs for the 787 are much higher.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
Yes, I am on record as saying I believe the $4 billion figure tossed around for the 747-8's development, but only if that figure includes the development costs spent on the 747-500, the 747-600, the 747-X, and the 747-Advanced.

It's interesting that we don't have the number. So we cannot say if the 748 will be successful or if it is even going to break even.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
In no way do I believe that all $4 billion is just for the 747-8. That strikes me as ridiculous and I am sure Boeing wouldn't spent it since, let's face it, the 747-400F would still be selling if it was offered and the 747-8F wasn't.

So why develop a "new" VLA then?

You also have to mention the 747 conversions that will probably take place, so this too will eat up new 748 orders...
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22931
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:18 am

Quoting Adria (Reply 42):
It's interesting that we don't have the number.

Probably a thorough scouring of Boeing's financial statements will return the information.

Quoting Adria (Reply 42):
So we cannot say if the 748 will be successful or if it is even going to break even.

I imagine Boeing didn't launch it if they didn't have pretty strong confidence that it would, even if it's only freighter orders.

Quoting Adria (Reply 42):
So why develop a "new" VLA then?

It's not a "new" VLA. It's the final refinement of a proven design. Frankly, the only reason this one gained traction in the market is because of the technology transfers from the 787 program helped lower it's CASM through something other then sheer size (746/74X/74A).

Quoting Adria (Reply 42):
You also have to mention the 747 conversions that will probably take place, so this too will eat up new 748 orders...

Maybe, maybe not. A 744BCF is not going to be as effective nor as efficient as a 744F, to say nothing of a 748F. You may save $50 million on the purchase price, but you may make $100 million more over the life of the plane with a new-build.

Also, 744BCF conversions take time, especially with so many 744s still in revenue passenger service. While it may end up being the preferred option for the cargo arms of airlines that operate the 744 in passenger service, pure cargo carriers still seem to favor dedicated 747 freighters.
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:00 am

Quoting Adria (Reply 37):
748F is selling "good"...

- it's selling good without quotes.

Quoting Adria (Reply 37):
there is obviously a big enough market for two VLA's

- doesn't look so. Neither hundreds of A380s are sold, nor would I expect hundreds of 748I sold - rather dozens, if any. A380 may still be a very good seller (the question is, will it happen fast enough to make it profitable - you are in huge trouble if to reach a break-even point takes you decades, but this is a different issue), but then the whole game changes, then your statement above is correct, then, quite likely, Boeing thinks about its own all-new VLA - but only then. While as of now, "desperate fight for some orders" proves only that some money, as well as niche protection, as well as prevention of competitor market share expansion may be done by a small investment. Still to be seen whether it works - which denies any talks about "big enough market for two VLAs".

Quoting Adria (Reply 37):
when Airbus changes the design you see bashing posts everywhere

- bashing posts are bad thing, but the particular Airbus design change that is being discussed (A350) is something as important for Airbus as B777 was important for Boeing. Even if 748 was a total failure, with no orders even for F version, it would be still "very annoying" for Boeing at worst, as the whole 748 business is less important for Boeing than 345/6 was for Airbus. Now imagine same thing happening (10 or 15 years ago) to 777 - and this is how 350 is important for Airbus.
 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:22 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 43):
I imagine Boeing didn't launch it if they didn't have pretty strong confidence that it would, even if it's only freighter orders.

The same goes for Airbus and the A380, so this argument makes no sense...

Quoting Stitch (Reply 43):
Maybe, maybe not. A 744BCF is not going to be as effective nor as efficient as a 744F, to say nothing of a 748F. You may save $50 million on the purchase price, but you may make $100 million more over the life of the plane with a new-build.

Also, 744BCF conversions take time, especially with so many 744s still in revenue passenger service. While it may end up being the preferred option for the cargo arms of airlines that operate the 744 in passenger service, pure cargo carriers still seem to favor dedicated 747 freighters.

Well new freighters are expensive, that's why we see A310/300, B767/757 and also 747 conversions. I really don't know how much it costs to have a converted freighter instead of a new build one (and neither do you-so those 50/100 numbers are useless) but it is obvious that many airlines do convert pax to freighters and since there are so many 744s flying around today conversion may eat up 748F orders. So it is a question whether the 748 will be a success (especially since we don't have developing costs). At least the A380 is selling despite having so much problems.
 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:32 am

Quoting RIX (Reply 44):
- it's selling good without quotes.

Well no pax version has been sold so...

Quoting RIX (Reply 44):
- doesn't look so. Neither hundreds of A380s are sold, nor would I expect hundreds of 748I sold - rather dozens, if any. A380 may still be a very good seller (the question is, will it happen fast enough to make it profitable - you are in huge trouble if to reach a break-even point takes you decades, but this is a different issue), but then the whole game changes, then your statement above is correct, then, quite likely, Boeing thinks about its own all-new VLA - but only then. While as of now, "desperate fight for some orders" proves only that some money, as well as niche protection, as well as prevention of competitor market share expansion may be done by a small investment. Still to be seen whether it works - which denies any talks about "big enough market for two VLAs".

Boeing never really believed that there is no VLA market. They have been throwing out new offers since the A3XX saw the light. Just count all the different 747s Boeing offered in the past ten years or so. But you kind of contradict yourself, because if the VLA market is really so small, then why not focus on the 787 (and this point-to-point strategy) instead of loosing time and money with a VLA? They are eating their own words (as so many times in history) and this hurts...
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:32 am

Quoting Adria (Reply 45):
Well new freighters are expensive, that's why we see A310/300, B767/757 and also 747 conversions. I really don't know how much it costs to have a converted freighter instead of a new build one (and neither do you-so those 50/100 numbers are useless) but it is obvious that many airlines do convert pax to freighters and since there are so many 744s flying around today conversion may eat up 748F orders. So it is a question whether the 748 will be a success (especially since we don't have developing costs). At least the A380 is selling despite having so much problems.

the 747-8 allready has 40+ orders and counting , for the modest developmental cost (3-5 billion at most) they dont need huge sales to break even speacially when the 747-8F is doing so well against its competitor. Remember that the A380 was to cost 3 times more to develop and break even at 270 so its not hard to imagine that the 747-8 would need close to 100-120 orders to break even since Profit margins are high for the VLA's . The impact of the 747-8 Is multi dimensional , not only would it sell as a F and I varient but also erode into the A380 market , particularly for the F version !! The freighter market is going to see quite good growth according to both manufacterers.

Quoting Adria (Reply 45):
The same goes for Airbus and the A380, so this argument makes no sense...

That was before the Billions in delays , the Break even no. getting bumped up to 420 from 270 , the launch of the 747-8F and I and super effeceint aircrafts such as the 787 and A350 !! A lot of the analysts are saying that Airbus will find it hard to sell 500-600 Airbus A380's and if that is the case then they were simply wrong in predicting the market size (both Boeing and Airbus ) market demand , and ability of technology to lower CASM for other smaller aircraft .

Boeing was spot on about Twin engined aircrafts in long haul and have had huge success in bringing about the 777 to the market , they have predicted correct on the 787 (while airbus thrashed it as rubbish) therefore One does find much more comforting to allign onself with the view that boeing perhaps has the better feel of the Pulse of the market as compared to airbus managment!! Wink
 
bringiton
Posts: 763
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 10:24 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:41 am

Quoting Adria (Reply 46):
But you kind of contradict yourself, because if the VLA market is really so small, then why not focus on the 787 (and this point-to-point strategy) instead of loosing time and money with a VLA?

because they are trying to cash in on whatever is left of the VLA market particularly in the Freighter sector . Remember that boeing's view was that the market wasnt big enough for 2 players to exist and they were instead concentrating on a more bigger Point to point mid sized market with the 777 varients followed by the 787 dreamliner and they have been spot on by captering the market over the last few years . The 747-8 Is an evoultion of the 744 for those 747 users who want to stay with the 747 but upgrade , it is simply a case of boeing cashing in on a bunch of 787 dreamliner technology and injecting it to make the 747 better which is a very eff. use of research as it spreads the benefits over the entire lineup . I predict a 777W upgrade with some Dreamliner tech aswell going into the future . The 747-8 will be boeing's highest offering until perhaps the Y3 comes out (if ever) .

Quoting Adria (Reply 46):
instead of loosing time and money with a VLA?

Close to 40 orders in less then 1 year and they are loosing money? Boeing will most likely make a profit on the 747-8 because of the fact that they arent spending 15 billion dollars but spending more appropriate to the market size and demand.

Quoting Bringiton (Reply 47):
They are eating their own words (as so many times in history) and this hurts...

Eating their words would have been had they developed a 550+ 11 abreast seater which would have competed against he A380 however what they are doing is offering a niche product ( with much less development cost) for a market that operates 744 but doesnt want to upgrade to a A380 (which has 20% greater PAX then 748) nor downgrade to the 777W or A350-1000. A niche market for I but given the investment not a bad buisness strategy to keep customers !! The F version has its market and we can see that through its sales over the last 12 months !!
 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: 747-8I May Go On Diet First

Wed Nov 15, 2006 7:45 am

Quoting Bringiton (Reply 47):
the 747-8 allready has 40+ orders and counting , for the modest developmental cost (3-5 billion at most) they dont need huge sales to break even speacially when the 747-8F is doing so well against its competitor. Remember that the A380 was to cost 3 times more to develop and break even at 270 so its not hard to imagine that the 747-8 would need close to 100-120 orders to break even since Profit margins are high for the VLA's . The impact of the 747-8 Is multi dimensional , not only would it sell as a F and I varient but also erode into the A380 market , particularly for the F version !! The freighter market is going to see quite good growth according to both manufacterers.

yes and a lot of that will be conversions so...

Quoting Bringiton (Reply 47):
That was before the Billions in delays , the Break even no. getting bumped up to 420 from 270 , the launch of the 747-8F and I and super effeceint aircrafts such as the 787 and A350 !! A lot of the analysts are saying that Airbus will find it hard to sell 500-600 Airbus A380's and if that is the case then they were simply wrong in predicting the market size (both Boeing and Airbus ) market demand , and ability of technology to lower CASM for other smaller aircraft .

Boeing was spot on about Twin engined aircrafts in long haul and have had huge success in bringing about the 777 to the market , they have predicted correct on the 787 (while airbus thrashed it as rubbish) therefore One does find much more comforting to allign onself with the view that boeing perhaps has the better feel of the Pulse of the market as compared to airbus managment!!

Well the A330/A340 family still outsells the 777 so Airbus also has done a great job here and the decision to compete against the A380 has proven that Boeing was wrong with its "no need for a VLA" strategy and before making comments about analysts you should look into history books...then you'll see how "accurate" they were...