SCAT15F
Topic Author
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:15 am

OK, so EK wants the 748 to fly Dubai-Dallas/FW with 400 passengers and baggage (year round?).

According to the 748i airport compatibility brochure, the 748i (as proposed, without any weight reduction improvements) can fly 400 passengers 8500NM at 210lb per passenger. EK said that before any of the weight reduction strategies, the 748i's range needed to be increased by 500 NM, implying that with Boeings standard load of 467 pax at 210 lb, the range would need to be 8500nm

1) how far in nautical miles is the actual route?

2) what is EK's reference for weight per passenger (including baggage)?

3) Obviously OEW weight needs to be reduced substantially. Would reducing MTOW (like back to 960k lb from 970k lb)help as well?

Why doen't boeing just re-offer the 748i at the original, shorter, 12 ft stretch; since with the upper galley space it could seat 462. I doubt Lufthansa would complain about the loss of 3 seats and a little square footage, especially with improved operating economics.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:53 am

I doubt EK wants the 747-8I. They could fly the A380-800 to the West Coast of North America at will, and they probably would not need that many empty seats or LD3 positions to do it.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:47 am

Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
According to the 748i airport compatibility brochure, the 748i (as proposed, without any weight reduction improvements) can fly 400 passengers 8500NM at 210lb per passenger.

The brochure I'm looking at shows about 8300 nm, not 8500. Are you sure you're looking at the latest (September 2007) ?

Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
how far in nautical miles is the actual route?

The Great Circle Mapper is useful for this kind of question. It says that the shortest path between DXB and DTW is 8040 nm.

Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
Obviously OEW weight needs to be reduced substantially.

To gain an extra 500 nm via weight reduction only, the OEW would need to come down by about 8,000 kg.

Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
Would reducing MTOW (like back to 960k lb from 970k lb)help as well?

No, because that would limit how much fuel you could bring along. Increased MTOW is one way to add range.

Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
with the upper galley space it could seat 462

Galleys in the crown space would not help in any way to achieve weight savings (quite the contrary). Also, I doubt the shorter fuse plug would save anywhere close to 8,000 kg.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
They could fly the A380-800 to the West Coast of North America at will

If they could do that, then DFW would be easily within reach. DFW is closer to DXB than either SFO or LAX. Anyhow, they could start out with the 772LR before working their way up.
 
da man
Posts: 836
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 8:27 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:04 am

Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
so EK wants the 748 to fly Dubai-Dallas/FW



Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 2):
It says that the shortest path between DXB and DTW is 8040 nm.

Don't you mean DFW, not DTW? Dallas/Fort Worth and Detroit are very different
War Eagle!
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:10 am

Quoting Da man (Reply 3):
Don't you mean DFW, not DTW? Dallas/Fort Worth and Detroit are very different

Sorry, typo. I meant DFW.
 
SkyexRamper
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:17 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:28 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 2):
The Great Circle Mapper is useful for this kind of question. It says that the shortest path between DXB and DTW is 8040 nm.

You're wrong.

6987nm DXB to DFW.




It's 8040 statue miles, but 6987 nautical miles

[Edited 2007-10-20 21:30:20]
Good Luck to all Skyway Pilots! It's been great working with you!
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:46 am

Quoting SkyexRamper (Reply 5):
You're wrong.

Thank you, good catch. I was using the wrong miles  embarrassed 

I shall try to get more sleep henceforth  Smile

That sure puts it in a different light, doesn't it?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
They could fly the A380-800 to the West Coast of North America at will, and they probably would not need that many empty seats or LD3 positions to do it.

 checkmark  Now I understand your point. DXB-LAX should be a relative piece of cake for an A388, unless EK loads it down with a hot tub in first  Wink

So I'll join you in wondering why EK would ever need the 748 Intercontinental, other than possibly filling a capacity gap between the 773ER and the A388... and supposing they did need it, why would they lean so hard on Boeing to make an already great plane even better than required?
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:31 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 6):
So I'll join you in wondering why EK would ever need the 748 Intercontinental, other than possibly filling a capacity gap between the 773ER and the A388...

The 77L also has more than enough range. And of course, they could have already been flying to LAX with the A345. They talk about how they could easily fill the 748 if they had it, so one can assume they could also fill the 77W and leave behind the lowest yield pax, right?

All it really is a is a lot of hot air from EK saying they would love to fly to more USA cities, but just lack capable aircraft. Of course this is complete bunk, but it plays well for the press.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
fridgmus
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:28 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:24 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
I doubt EK wants the 747-8I. They could fly the A380-800 to the West Coast of North America at will, and they probably would not need that many empty seats or LD3 positions to do it.

Stitch,

What are LD3 positions?

Thanks,

Marc
The Lockheed Super Constellation, the REAL Queen of the Skies!
 
FWI747
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:11 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 8:18 am

Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
o EK wants the 748 to fly Dubai-Dallas/FW with 400 passengers and baggage

I've heard EK wants to fly 450 passengers on that trip.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 2):
Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
According to the 748i airport compatibility brochure, the 748i (as proposed, without any weight reduction improvements) can fly 400 passengers 8500NM at 210lb per passenger.

The brochure I'm looking at shows about 8300 nm, not 8500

SCAT15F point was with 400 pax which at 210lb per pax should be doable.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
The Great Circle Mapper is useful for this kind of question. It says that the shortest path between DXB and DTW is 8040 nm.



Quoting SkyexRamper (Reply 5):
It's 8040 statue miles, but 6987 nautical miles

Without adverse winds

Regards
 
FWI747
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:11 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:21 pm

Quoting FWI747 (Reply 9):
SCAT15F point was with 400 pax which at 210lb per pax should be doable.

I just check back the chart,I must apologize you were right.

David
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 1:47 pm

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 6):
So I'll join you in wondering why EK would ever need the 748 Intercontinental, other than possibly filling a capacity gap between the 773ER and the A388... and supposing they did need it, why would they lean so hard on Boeing to make an already great plane even better than required?

Honestly, at this point I would not be surprised if EK is using the 747-8I against the A350-1000 (which itself cannot fly as far as the 747-8I), as part of a likely initial A350 family order next month. They would love to have a 787-10 in the mix to beat Airbus down on the price of the A350-900, but I admit to being surprised EK is not constantly talking about a couple dozen additional 77Ls for that purpose, instead.

Quoting Fridgmus (Reply 8):
What are LD3 positions?

LD3 containers are used to hold bags and other cargo in the cargo bay. So each "position" can hold one LD3 container and an A380-800 has 38 positions (to the 747-8I's 40).
 
douwd20
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 3:45 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:13 pm

How much of this is real and how much of this is making sure they get the best deal out of Airbus is the question. British Airways was one of the airlines urging Boeing to move forward with the 748i and in the end said 'Never mind'. No buyer wants just one offer on the table.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:44 pm

Quoting Douwd20 (Reply 12):
How much of this is real and how much of this is making sure they get the best deal out of Airbus is the question.

I believe it is pretty much all about getting the best deal out of Airbus.

The "Joker in the Deck" remains LH. I can't believe they decided on their own - or conspired with Boeing - to "fake" an order to give the 747-8I more "street cred" as a weapon to lower the average price paid for an A380. However, considering just about everyone else in the industry is choosing the A380 - and the fact LH has standardized on Airbus - I remain surprised they bought the plane in the first place and even more surprised they continue to keep the order since the longer they wait, the more it will cost them to get out from under it (if they so choose). On the flip side, Boeing might very well buy LH out from the contract, but I expect 20 planes is enough to cover the development costs unique to the 747-8I and the mere existence of the plane continues to depress the RoI potential of the A380 program.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 3:51 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
I remain surprised they bought the plane in the first place and even more surprised they continue to keep the order since the longer they wait, the more it will cost them to get out from under it (if they so choose).

Depending on how things pan out in the next few months, Airbus probably has a pretty strong interest in "paying" LH (in the form of discounted A380 option conversions) to convert their order to the 748F. That would restore their pricing power in the passenger segment.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:08 pm

Quoting FWI747 (Reply 9):
Quoting SCAT15F (Thread starter):
o EK wants the 748 to fly Dubai-Dallas/FW with 400 passengers and baggage

I've heard EK wants to fly 450 passengers on that trip.

EK wants to fly to IAH, not DFW.

Quoting SkyexRamper (Reply 5):
Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 2):
The Great Circle Mapper is useful for this kind of question. It says that the shortest path between DXB and DTW is 8040 nm.

You're wrong.

6987nm DXB to DFW.

That is correct, and DXB-LAX is 7246nm, well within the range of the B-747-8i and A-380 (8300nm for the B-747-8, 8200nm for the A-380-800) now.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:18 pm

Quoting Fridgmus (Reply 8):

What are LD3 positions?

Those are the number and location of spots where you can fit an LD3 cargo container.

For the dimensions and uses of all the LD-x containers, wikipedia has a pretty good page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_Load_Device

For examples of LD3 positions, check out pages 8 and 9 of this PDF:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7478brochure.pdf

All those "half-width" containers in the aft cargo bay are LD3 positions.

Tom.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11734
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:40 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
They could fly the A380-800 to the West Coast of North America at will,

With winds, only SFO is possible with the A380 (I assume SEA will not upgrade to handle the A380). If only LAX was within range.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 2):

If they could do that, then DFW would be easily within reach. DFW is closer to DXB than either SFO or LAX. Anyhow, they could start out with the 772LR before working their way up.

I'm confused on the talk about DFW. Is there a link? With service already existing to IAH, is it worth it to open up such a nearby route? I would prioritize as follows:
1. West coast city (SEA, SFO, LAX. In that order due to the ranges and the fact it looks like LAX is *just* outside of A380 range once winds are considered). SFO will be... iffy with the A380 unless fuel burn is much better than the current promise (tough with the added weight). And since SEA isn't built to take the A380... that leaves the 772LR/748I.
2. More east coast cities: MIA, IAD. MIA would help seed south American routes.
3. Midwest hub: ORD, DTW (2nd due to large Muslim population).

In other words, I see a 748I fleet for EK being a very small sub-fleet. A subfleet that could be killed off if airbus to increase production fast and get the A388R out yesterday. But since that won't be happening, expect to see EK seriously consider the 748I. It will all be about payload/range and purchase price; I believe the 748I is attractive to EK only if they can depreciate it quickly (I admit to "shooting from the hip" on this). That said, with EK already having 748F on order, the cost to add the 748I to the fleet is trivial (there is still some added cost due to f/a training, etc.).

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
On the flip side, Boeing might very well buy LH out from the contract, but I expect 20 planes is enough to cover the development costs

You're neglecting the value of earlier delivery slots. As the launch customer for the 748I, LH will receive pretty much the best delivery timeframe that Boeing can offer. I believe this is one reason EK is looking into the 748I. Due to the vast majority of the engineering on the 747 being amortized a long time ago, Boeing should be able to offer 748I's at prices that are attractive to those airlines that historically depreciate their aircraft quickly. I expect *every* LH and EK 748I to be either sold off or a freighter by 2025.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:18 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 17):
With winds, only SFO is possible with the A380 (I assume SEA will not upgrade to handle the A380). If only LAX was within range.

At full load, yes. Then again, I am not sure how "minimal" EK's lowest-density three-class config will be in terms of range, so maybe not even then.

Also, I doubt EK will be able to get 450 seats into a 747-8I if the lowest-density A388 is around 465 seats unless they go with an inferior premium cabin that takes up less floorspace and I don't think EK is going to want to do that.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 17):
You're neglecting the value of earlier delivery slots. As the launch customer for the 748I, LH will receive pretty much the best delivery timeframe that Boeing can offer. I believe this is one reason EK is looking into the 748I. Due to the vast majority of the engineering on the 747 being amortized a long time ago, Boeing should be able to offer 748I's at prices that are attractive to those airlines that historically depreciate their aircraft quickly. I expect *every* LH and EK 748I to be either sold off or a freighter by 2025.

Fair enough. It does seem Boeing is only willing to go "so low" on the 747-8I and will not deliberately sign a deal below cost* to win an order. And while such a situation would normally favor an SQ 747-8I order, that they get the first five (more or less) A388s probably negates the depreciation advantage a bit.


* - Despite rumors to the contrary, I have it on good authorities that LH's discount was around 45%, which is "normal" for a 747 passenger or freighter model these past few years.
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:13 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 17):
With winds, only SFO is possible

I've always wondered why polar routes suffer from winds? Jet streams flow eastward, and DXB-SFO is always either due north or due south. The wind situation ought to be benign-- or isn't it?

(is there a good reference out there on statistical wind averages?)
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:08 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 17):
(I assume SEA will not upgrade to handle the A380)

That is their official position at the moment, so A380's are limited to LAX, SFO, and YVR on the West Coast. Might change if a significant customer demands it but, given the difficult SEA had getting the third runway put in, I imagine any further infrastructure upgrade is going to be a long time coming.

Tom.
 
SkyexRamper
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:17 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Sun Oct 21, 2007 11:25 pm

Quoting FWI747 (Reply 9):
Without adverse winds

How do winds effect a straight line distance as a number?
Good Luck to all Skyway Pilots! It's been great working with you!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:02 am

While I do not expect SEA to add dual-level jetbridges and such, I imagine you could park an A380 at the South Satellite.

However, I don't see enough O&D demand between SEA and anywhere to support an A380. Heck, we don't even justify 747 service anymore outside of BA.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:11 am

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 20):
That is their official position at the moment, so A380's are limited to LAX, SFO, and YVR on the West Coast.

And ONT and SMF, IIRC. Not that you'll see them there.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:39 am

Quoting SkyexRamper (Reply 21):
How do winds effect a straight line distance as a number?

Winds don't affect the true distance, but they do affect the distance the aircraft has to fly relative to the air around it. Payload-range charts are distance in terms of what the aircraft has to fly, not physical distance from A to B, so winds will alter what routes the aircraft can actually do.

Tom.
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4946
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:26 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 19):
've always wondered why polar routes suffer from winds? Jet streams flow eastward, and DXB-SFO is always either due north or due south. The wind situation ought to be benign-- or isn't it?

An article in 2001 Aircraft Commerce magazine included a table with ESAD's for a number of city pairs. One pair was JFK-HKG which is trans-polar. The GC distance is given as 7139nm, the ESAD JFK-HKG is shown as 7415nm and HKG-JFK as 7244nm increases of 3.9% and 1.5% respectively. JFK-PEK is slightly lower. ESAD's for LAX-TPE and SFO-HKG are both shown as just over 7000nm but with GC's of just over 6000nm, a real healthy increase.
I frequently look on Flightstats.com at CX831 and CO99 out of NYC to HKG and note that their initial headings are about 360 plus or minus 5 degrees The wind triangle calculation on shows a ground speed of about 482k
assuming an airspeed of 485k and 50k winds from due west. So as you say it is pretty much benign.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 2426
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:13 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 22):
While I do not expect SEA to add dual-level jetbridges and such, I imagine you could park an A380 at the South Satellite.

You probably could, but it's more to do with the taxiways and other infrastruture allowing the beast to maneuver. SEA isn't ready and for at theast the foreseeable future has no plans to become so. As you said, the demand simply isn't there. It's a pity for us airplane junkies....no chance to see the A380 in person without making a roadtrip to SFO or YVR.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9020
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:15 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 6):
So I'll join you in wondering why EK would ever need the 748 Intercontinental, other than possibly filling a capacity gap between the 773ER and the A388... and supposing they did need it, why would they lean so hard on Boeing to make an already great plane even better than required?

I haven't been able to understand about EK preferring the "short" 748i over the fully stretched version. EK can put the lower number of seats they planned on for the short version into the longer version and provide more comfort in all classes. They will also gain by having additional container positions on the long version that can be profitably used when the pax version is not full.

Can the 748i make it to LAX if EK used the lower number of seats planned for the short version?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13749
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:20 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
and the fact LH has standardized on Airbus

I suppose, if one does not consider the 30 747-400s they operate.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
On the flip side, Boeing might very well buy LH out from the contract, but I expect 20 planes is enough to cover the development costs unique to the 747-8I and the mere existence of the plane continues to depress the RoI potential of the A380 program.

They have five 747-8i to build for various VIP customers too.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:30 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
I doubt EK wants the 747-8I. They could fly the A380-800 to the West Coast of North America at will, and they probably would not need that many empty seats or LD3 positions to do it.

Wouldn't there be a need for an aircraft with less than the capacity of the A380 to fly to the West Coast on certain routes? The 777 is capable but there is a ~150 seat capacity gap between the 777 and the A380. Not every A380 flight will necessarily be able to leave DBX loaded with passengers.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
The "Joker in the Deck" remains LH. I can't believe they decided on their own - or conspired with Boeing - to "fake" an order to give the 747-8I more "street cred" as a weapon to lower the average price paid for an A380. However, considering just about everyone else in the industry is choosing the A380 - and the fact LH has standardized on Airbus - I remain surprised they bought the plane in the first place and even more surprised they continue to keep the order since the longer they wait, the more it will cost them to get out from under it (if they so choose).

As a launch customer -- and a very prestigious one at that -- I'm sure LH was made a very enticing offer. The fact that Boeing was looking to poach in Airbus' own backyard, I'm sure they made all the more certain that LH was given an offer they couldn't refuse. Boeing probably made the same offer last year to a few other A380 customers as they were hunting for a launch customer. So LH took the bait. Perhaps EK's public whining about lack of range is just their way of putting pressure on Boeing to offer the same deal to them as they did to LH.
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:33 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 28):
I suppose, if one does not consider the 30 747-400s they operate.

And 189 Airbus planes (including those on order to replace the 737 fleet).

Quoting Revelation (Reply 28):
They have five 747-8i to build for various VIP customers too.

I wonder if Boeing could use the freighter, since the cabin would be fitted via third-party.

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 29):
Wouldn't there be a need for an aircraft with less than the capacity of the A380 to fly to the West Coast on certain routes? The 777 is capable but there is a ~150 seat capacity gap between the 777 and the A380. Not every A380 flight will necessarily be able to leave DBX loaded with passengers.

I am sure EK's traffic growth plans are such that an A380, if it didn't fly at full-loads on "Inauguration Day" of the service, would be there within a few months.

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 29):
As a launch customer -- and a very prestigious one at that -- I'm sure LH was made a very enticing offer. The fact that Boeing was looking to poach in Airbus' own backyard, I'm sure they made all the more certain that LH was given an offer they couldn't refuse.

So why didn't BA order them? Why is NH now said to have ordered the A380? Surely Boeing offered them "pricing they couldn't refuse" if they offered it to LH.

Yet, it seems for Boeing, that "pricing" is still higher then Airbus' offer or not low enough to justify flying a design at the end of it's life.

Quote:
Perhaps EK's public whining about lack of range is just their way of putting pressure on Boeing to offer the same deal to them as they did to LH.

EK received their freighters at the same general discount rate as everyone else who ordered a 747-8F, which is the same general discount rate LH received for their passenger order, so I can only guess EK wants a price below Boeing's cost and Boeing would instead rather sell them 77Ws at a nice profit.
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4946
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:22 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 27):
Can the 748i make it to LAX if EK used the lower number of seats planned for the short version?

The DXD-JFK is a trans-polar route and probably the characteristics of the JFK-HKG route apply fairly closely since the initial headings are pretty close to due north. Thus I would expect the ESAD for DXB-LAX to be about 7500nm.
The preliminary payload range chart shows a payload of about 120000lb for a 7500nm sector. Assuming the passenger ready weight is as per the chart , with a 416 passenger load, there would be about 30000lb available for belly cargo.
E&OE...!!
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:57 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 29):
As a launch customer -- and a very prestigious one at that -- I'm sure LH was made a very enticing offer. The fact that Boeing was looking to poach in Airbus' own backyard, I'm sure they made all the more certain that LH was given an offer they couldn't refuse.

So why didn't BA order them? Why is NH now said to have ordered the A380? Surely Boeing offered them "pricing they couldn't refuse" if they offered it to LH.

What I'm saying is that Boeing was hunting for a launch customer last year. And perhaps they were a little more anxious than normal when looking for a launch customer, given that the year was rapidly drawing to a close. So maybe LH got an exceptional deal. Perhaps BA and NH, if they order the plane next, would get a sweet deal as well, but not as sweet as the one LH got for being the very first in a year that was drawing to a close.

As a side note, BA was probably not ready to order a VLA this time last year and neither was NH. (By the way, I wasn't aware that NH has already ordered the A380; I thought there was discussions between them and Airbus. Was I asleep at the wheel the last several days?)
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:57 pm

No, NH has not ordered any A-380s, they are in talks with Airbus, just as they are talking to Boeing about the B-747-8i.

There are still plenty of airlines out there that could use the B-747-8i, A-380-800, or both. For the B-747, NW,and UA will both need their B-747-400s replaced. The BA order for 12 A-380 does not mean the B-747 is out of consideration for a future order. JL, QF, VS, and KE are all prospective B-747 airlines of the future. I think NZ is out of the 4 engine business forever, now. Along with EK, there are several other middle east airlines (including El Al) that will consider the B-747.

There will be routes where an A-380 is to much airplane and the B-777 is not enough airplane.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11734
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:21 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
I wonder if Boeing could use the freighter, since the cabin would be fitted via third-party.

Interesting idea. The nose door can be cheaply disabled (and later re-enabled). The only real penalty would be the added weight of the cargo floor reinforcements. This would certainly help resale down the line... Which offers a segway to my next topic:

Relative to another customer ordering the 748 that will provide an option EK would like:

Boeing has committed to engineering the 773ER pilot rest compartment into the space at the tail of the hump/upper deck of the 748I and 748F as an option. Do I have a link? Nope. I couldn't even produce the document I was allowed to see. What document? It was a "commitment to offer" the 773ER style pilot berth for a one off 748 but to do the berth on a "production certificate" in a way such that the one off customer would not be charged more than a tiny amount of the engineering cost of the berth.

At that point I hit the boundary of my NDA.  flamed  This isn't even my normal job. But the company has a customer and my "obsession" with civil aviation is well known within the company, so I get to consult on interesting stuff.

However, I can also spill that Boeing is going forward with a few "ghost production slots" that haven't yet been made public. What do I mean by that? If you want to order 748's (in number or else you're a very special customer), there will be parts ready for added production (to be assembled by increasing the line's overtime). If no customer steps forward, Boeing will simply slow the acquisition of production parts and no one will know. But if my customer doesn't commit to the order soon, it wouldn't surprise me to find our amazingly near term production slot going to the next 748I customer.

Just to be clear, I'm consulting on a non-airline application. (Then I hit that darn NDA again.) And personally, I think our customer will most likely call a two year halt on the project. That's ok. I want the project delayed by two years so I can maximize my promotion opportunities.  Wink Our customer wants to wait to see if the swing tail can be added to their 748 anyway (really funky large custom "fittings" that need to be removed for service in the aft of the airframe). Oh, how did this "segway?" The customer hasn't yet chosen between a 748I with the freighter floor or the 748F. Yep... really funky "fittings."  spin 

But obviously my reputation on a.net is to make things up and thus you should ignore me.  Wink

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:45 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 34):
But obviously my reputation on a.net is to make things up and thus you should ignore me.  Smile

 Big grin

Sounds most interesting. I look forward to it either happening or, should it not happen, the NDA expiring so we can know "what might have been".  Smile
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Tue Oct 23, 2007 2:09 am

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 34):
The customer hasn't yet chosen between a 748I with the freighter floor or the 748F. Yep... really funky "fittings."

Would this possibly involve a "laser" ?

 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Tue Oct 23, 2007 3:21 am

And would it cost $100 billion dollars?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11734
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:19 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 36):

Would this possibly involve a "laser" ?

With my username? Obviously not.

...

...


Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:26 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 33):
No, NH has not ordered any A-380s, they are in talks with Airbus, just as they are talking to Boeing about the B-747-8i.

NH is doing it backward. The RFP comes in 12-24 months, but the planes are already ordered. That's the "rumors" around a.net, since the news reports clearly say the RFP is still at least a year away, quoting NH directly.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
And would it cost $100 billion dollars?

No, only $10 million.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 38):
With my username? Obviously not.

Nope. Star Wars used "blasters" and "weapons" and "guns" and "thermal detinators" but not lasers. Never heard them mention lasers. It was a "long long time ago" after all...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
SkyyMaster
Posts: 1082
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:34 am

RE: 748 EK Range Requirement

Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:28 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Honestly, at this point I would not be surprised if EK is using the 747-8I against the A350-1000 (which itself cannot fly as far as the 747-8I), as part of a likely initial A350 family order next month.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
I believe it is pretty much all about getting the best deal out of Airbus.

Granted, Emirates has deep pockets and no doubt aspirations of being the world's largest carrier someday. It would just be nice to see Airbus AND Boeing tell them for once, "look, this is the aircraft types we are offering...we'd love to have your business but you aren't the only customer we have and you don't dictate what we build". Yeah, I know it will never happen, but EK seems to think when they say jump, A & B automatically say "how high?" I've said it numerous times, but the next time the bottom falls out of the airline industry, and history tells us it will, EK is going to potentially be sitting on a lot of empty airplanes.

Who is online