Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jayunited
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Fri Aug 20, 2021 10:10 pm

This is sad news.. I still haven't flown on a 747-8i and I've only flown on an A380 once. Once the recovery really begins I have to get on both these aircraft, they are quickly becoming an endangered species. A world without quads just seems wrong damn you Boeing and your 77W, it is what started this whole mess. :cry: :lol:
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26765
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Fri Aug 20, 2021 10:29 pm

MoonC wrote:
N14AZ wrote:
AA737-823 wrote:
Hopefully, ALL of the KE/OZ four holers find new lives with pax airlines, so that I can continue to enjoy flying in them.

Maybe the 748i‘s will find a second life and become VVIP-aircraft, after conversion, e.g. in BSL or the other location I just forgot (somewhere in Texas?). History keeps repeating itself, the same happened to several 747SPs.

There's a BBJ 747-8I sitting in BSL since 2012, eating dust. Was planned to go to the Saudis but the customer died, and not many seem to be rushing to get it, so I kind of doubt many customers will be found for 9 more ex-Korean Air 747-8s turned VIP.

Indeed, very few customers for VLA bizjets. Most HNWI don't need to tow around that big an entourage and would prefer a smaller jet that can use short runways yet still fly higher than most commercial airliners so they are more likely to buy high end narrow body bizjets. I think the A380s will end up as scrap and the 748s have time to see how things will play out but most likely be scrap too rather than bizjets or P2F feedstock.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 16068
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Fri Aug 20, 2021 10:41 pm

Revelation wrote:
MoonC wrote:
N14AZ wrote:
Maybe the 748i‘s will find a second life and become VVIP-aircraft, after conversion, e.g. in BSL or the other location I just forgot (somewhere in Texas?). History keeps repeating itself, the same happened to several 747SPs.

There's a BBJ 747-8I sitting in BSL since 2012, eating dust. Was planned to go to the Saudis but the customer died, and not many seem to be rushing to get it, so I kind of doubt many customers will be found for 9 more ex-Korean Air 747-8s turned VIP.

Indeed, very few customers for VLA bizjets. Most HNWI don't need to tow around that big an entourage and would prefer a smaller jet that can use short runways yet still fly higher than most commercial airliners so they are more likely to buy high end narrow body bizjets. I think the A380s will end up as scrap and the 748s have time to see how things will play out but most likely be scrap too rather than bizjets or P2F feedstock.


My guess would be freighter conversions since the B744 conversions out there will be ripe for replacement.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 3421
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Fri Aug 20, 2021 10:56 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
MoonC wrote:
There's a BBJ 747-8I sitting in BSL since 2012, eating dust. Was planned to go to the Saudis but the customer died, and not many seem to be rushing to get it, so I kind of doubt many customers will be found for 9 more ex-Korean Air 747-8s turned VIP.

Indeed, very few customers for VLA bizjets. Most HNWI don't need to tow around that big an entourage and would prefer a smaller jet that can use short runways yet still fly higher than most commercial airliners so they are more likely to buy high end narrow body bizjets. I think the A380s will end up as scrap and the 748s have time to see how things will play out but most likely be scrap too rather than bizjets or P2F feedstock.


My guess would be freighter conversions since the B744 conversions out there will be ripe for replacement.


I could easily see no conversion house taking on the cost of creating a freighter conversion program for 36 aircraft. But, possible if Boeing doesn't come up with the rumored creative solutions in a potential 777X freighter.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14196
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Fri Aug 20, 2021 11:07 pm

ZK-NBT wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?

You're surprised that a thrice-warmed-over 1969 design is uneconomical in today's world, while freely admitting that a 2005 design is?

I'm struggling to find the logic behind your statement.

Curious, what do LH have to say about that?

I don't know. Nor do I know what you're even seeking to gain in response, with this question-- are you attempting to imply that a single airline's choice for a stopgap VLA is reflective on the economic efficiency of the two as a whole?

Especially when the oddball that they chose (which could've been for any number of reasons, e.g. more available pilots/parts/spares, lower capacity, etc) is by far the one to garner lesser market appeal overall.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 8042
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 1:33 am

LAX772LR wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
You're surprised that a thrice-warmed-over 1969 design is uneconomical in today's world, while freely admitting that a 2005 design is?

I'm struggling to find the logic behind your statement.

Curious, what do LH have to say about that?

I don't know. Nor do I know what you're even seeking to gain in response, with this question-- are you attempting to imply that a single airline's choice for a stopgap VLA is reflective on the economic efficiency of the two as a whole?

Especially when the oddball that they chose (which could've been for any number of reasons, e.g. more available pilots/parts/spares, lower capacity, etc) is by far the one to garner lesser market appeal overall.


Yes the 747 has had its best day long ago, Is the thrice warmed over 1969 design uneconomical today though? Possibly, in some cases, depends on a number of things as you say, however the A380 hasn't exactly been a hit with many airlines and some were dropping them pre covid.

Who brought the 747-8 as a stopgap?

The 737 is from what 1967? Is it uneconomical today?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14196
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:03 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
however the A380 hasn't exactly been a hit with many airline.

Indeed, but guess what model did far worse, in every measurable standard of comparison?
Hence, again, not really even sure what you're trying to get at with any of this.


ZK-NBT wrote:
Who brought the 747-8 as a stopgap?

First, I'll point out that it wasn't me who said anything about "bought as"

Rather, my statement was "choice for," since its likely replacement is already on order; despite that (it being a replacement) not being the case at the time.


ZK-NBT wrote:
The 737 is from what 1967? Is it uneconomical today?

Well, comparing both sales and higher-end performance to the A32N.... one could rather convincingly make that argument on a comparative basis.

But its economics are more than sufficient as a standalone in most route/mission profiles, for plenty of airlines, so there's that too.
 
Niloko
Posts: 74
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:43 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:40 am

lightsaber wrote:
Not a surprise, but as an enthusiast it is sad.

It looks like this is related to aircraft depreciation rates.

I'm not sure about 779s or another runway at ICN. I'm a fan of VLAs, but now is the time for airlines to be cautious (more frequency vs. gauge).

Sadly, until effective global vaccines are universally available... we have a ling road ahead.

Lightsaber

If KE can handle 2 dozen 77W, they can handle it's replacement with ease. Also, I didn't know 777 was considered a VLA. I thought 77W and 779 were just LA. Is 77W and 779 considered a VLA when they are configured with 10 abreast economy and just large aircraft with 9 abreast?
 
VV
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:57 am

LX321 wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?


If - in your opinion - the 380 is uneconomical so is the 747.



777-300ER, A380 and 747-8 Intercontinental are in the same ballpark from efficiency on per seat basis at similar pax density.

The biggest differentiayor is the size.

Most of the reason of the "uneconomical" argument is because they cannot put the right passenger density to the A380 or in lesser extent to the 747-8 Intercontinental.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 8042
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 5:38 am

LAX772LR wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
however the A380 hasn't exactly been a hit with many airline.

Indeed, but guess what model did far worse, in every measurable standard of comparison?
Hence, again, not really even sure what you're trying to get at with any of this.


ZK-NBT wrote:
Who brought the 747-8 as a stopgap?

First, I'll point out that it wasn't me who said anything about "bought as"

Rather, my statement was "choice for," since its likely replacement is already on order; despite that (it being a replacement) not being the case at the time.


ZK-NBT wrote:
The 737 is from what 1967? Is it uneconomical today?

Well, comparing both sales and higher-end performance to the A32N.... one could rather convincingly make that argument on a comparative basis.

But its economics are more than sufficient as a standalone in most route/mission profiles, for plenty of airlines, so there's that too.


To the first part my response was to the below quote, your first reply in the thread, KE and LH were the only 2 to buy the 748 and the A380, CA being the only other 748I customer, several airlines had wanted a larger 747 for a number of years including LH, however the 748 was smaller than some of the earlier proposals, along comes the A380 which takes what other orders the 748 might have got from other carriers. The A380 without EK would have been interesting if others would have ordered more. Reality most airlines went for the brand new A380 which has proved to big and inflexible for many. The 748I? Most bar 3 again went with the A380 of which 2 went with the A380 also.

LAX772LR wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?

You're surprised that a thrice-warmed-over 1969 design is uneconomical in today's world, while freely admitting that a 2005 design is?

I'm struggling to find the logic behind your statement.
 
Blerg
Posts: 5138
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:42 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 5:40 am

...and then in a year or two covid will pass, demand will recover and these two models will stay in the fleet until the very end.
 
Strato2
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 6:43 am

VV wrote:
LX321 wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?


If - in your opinion - the 380 is uneconomical so is the 747.



777-300ER, A380 and 747-8 Intercontinental are in the same ballpark from efficiency on per seat basis at similar pax density.


Is 10% in the same ballpark? 15%?
 
brindabella
Posts: 746
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 10:19 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
however the A380 hasn't exactly been a hit with many airline.

Indeed, but guess what model did far worse, in every measurable standard of comparison?
Hence, again, not really even sure what you're trying to get at with any of this.


ZK-NBT wrote:
Who brought the 747-8 as a stopgap?

First, I'll point out that it wasn't me who said anything about "bought as"

Rather, my statement was "choice for," since its likely replacement is already on order; despite that (it being a replacement) not being the case at the time.


ZK-NBT wrote:
The 737 is from what 1967? Is it uneconomical today?

Well, comparing both sales and higher-end performance to the A32N.... one could rather convincingly make that argument on a comparative basis.

But its economics are more than sufficient as a standalone in most route/mission profiles, for plenty of airlines, so there's that too.


To the first part my response was to the below quote, your first reply in the thread, KE and LH were the only 2 to buy the 748 and the A380, CA being the only other 748I customer, several airlines had wanted a larger 747 for a number of years including LH, however the 748 was smaller than some of the earlier proposals, along comes the A380 which takes what other orders the 748 might have got from other carriers. The A380 without EK would have been interesting if others would have ordered more. Reality most airlines went for the brand new A380 which has proved to big and inflexible for many. The 748I? Most bar 3 again went with the A380 of which 2 went with the A380 also.

LAX772LR wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?

You're surprised that a thrice-warmed-over 1969 design is uneconomical in today's world, while freely admitting that a 2005 design is?

I'm struggling to find the logic behind your statement.


:confused:

Your explanatory sequence appears to be back-to-front.

A simple Google search will reveal that the A380 first flew on 27 April 2005, while the B747-8 first flew on 8 February 2010.

The A380 did not "come along" and outcompete the existing B747-8 for sales; the 747-8 flew much later,

.

cheers
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 12262
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 10:23 am

Strato2 wrote:
VV wrote:
LX321 wrote:

If - in your opinion - the 380 is uneconomical so is the 747.



777-300ER, A380 and 747-8 Intercontinental are in the same ballpark from efficiency on per seat basis at similar pax density.


Is 10% in the same ballpark? 15%?

You’re right, the 77W is far and away better than the A380/748 which is why it was successful and the others were not. :duck:
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 10061
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 10:47 am

VV wrote:
777-300ER, A380 and 747-8 Intercontinental are in the same ballpark from efficiency on per seat basis at similar pax density.


In which case a carrier will, unless significantly constrained by slots or gates, choose the smaller increment of capacity because the 500th seat is going to sell more cheaply than the 350th.
 
evanb
Posts: 963
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:26 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 11:19 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
VV wrote:
777-300ER, A380 and 747-8 Intercontinental are in the same ballpark from efficiency on per seat basis at similar pax density.


In which case a carrier will, unless significantly constrained by slots or gates, choose the smaller increment of capacity because the 500th seat is going to sell more cheaply than the 350th.


Indeed, and it's no accident that the airlines that will fly VLA's the longest are the ones with some of these constraints. BA with the significant slot constraints of LHR, LH with the FRA curfew and EK with the frequency constraints places on them in many of their important markets. KE just don't suffer from their constraints. They could, if necessary, replace the capacity of the A380s and B748s with a larger number of smaller aircraft with less risk and more flexibility.

Part of the disconnect between early VLAs (say B747-200) and current VLAs like the A380 and B748 is that the B747-200, while larger than their contemporaries, had very big range advantages over their contemporaries, something the A380s and B748s don't have. For example, the B747-200 could fly missions up to 6,500nm, compared to the L-1011-200's 3,500nm (they had to shrink the L-1011 to get it to 5,000nm) or the DC-10-40's 5,000nm. It was a similar dynamic for the B747-400 which was in a class of its own in terms of range until the 777-200ER came around.
 
VV
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 11:29 am

Polot wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
VV wrote:


777-300ER, A380 and 747-8 Intercontinental are in the same ballpark from efficiency on per seat basis at similar pax density.


Is 10% in the same ballpark? 15%?

You’re right, the 77W is far and away better than the A380/748 which is why it was successful and the others were not. :duck:


And the 777-300ER entered into service in 2004, much earlier than the A380 or the 747-8 Intercontinental did. LOL.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26765
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 2:51 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
I could easily see no conversion house taking on the cost of creating a freighter conversion program for 36 aircraft. But, possible if Boeing doesn't come up with the rumored creative solutions in a potential 777X freighter.

IMO it's still dubious. The conversion house would have to secure all the feedstock and pay to certify a P2F program then do all the labor to end up with a conversion less efficient than a factory freighter with four engines to feed and no nose door either. They'd be better off putting their money into 77W conversions, IMO. Feedstock would be more plentiful, results easier to sell IMO.

LAX772LR wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
however the A380 hasn't exactly been a hit with many airline.

Indeed, but guess what model did far worse, in every measurable standard of comparison?

If you're talking about A380 v 748, the A380 did worse on development cost, by far.

Strato2 wrote:
Is 10% in the same ballpark? 15%?

See the chart I posted earlier. Seems A380 is 2.6% more efficient per seat on fuel burn than 748i, but again, it's much harder to fill an A380 and typically yield goes down as you add more seats. 77W was not only smaller but also 5%cheaper per seat than A380, a death knell for both. LH said the A380 is only workable on the densest routes which is why it never took all the frames it ordered and why it's sold frames back to Airbus and why the rest are not likely to return despite any rumors to the contrary.
 
Ronaldo747
Posts: 414
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 4:58 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:46 pm

rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?


TBH, I would expect a similar date for the Lufthansa 747-8i.

And ... ten years is still a long road. Anything can happens.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2774
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:09 pm

Revelation wrote:
See the chart I posted earlier. Seems A380 is 2.6% more efficient per seat on fuel burn than 748i, but again, it's much harder to fill an A380 and typically yield goes down as you add more seats. 77W was not only smaller but also 5%cheaper per seat than A380, a death knell for both.

Fuel burn != cost, though fuel is certainly a large part of the costs.


Acquisition: at the seat numbers used by Leeham, the 77W cost $ 1.051M per seat, the A380 cost $ 0.849M per seat and the 748 cost $ 0.995M per seat (list prices 2018). This is countered by the poor resale value of the A380 (and 748), which drives up interest rates.

Crew: the 77W requires 52.6% more pilots per passenger seat.

Maintenance: difficult to quantify, but the 77W probably has an advantage due to fewer engines. The large worldwide 777 fleet should also help with economy of scale. In a direct compeition between A380 and 748, the 748i benefits from the large 787 GEnx fleet and the many 748F which have been unaffected by the pandemic. The GP7200 is a bit of an orphan.

Landing fees: advantage for either of the three aircraft depending on the airport in question.
 
Breathe
Posts: 861
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:06 pm

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:39 pm

Gosh! It only seems like yesterday I was in Everett and seeing a Korean 747-8i on the assembly line. Little did I realise then, that I was looking at one of the very last ever passenger 747s (of any variant) being made.

It does make me wonder how many (if any) passenger versions of the 747 will still be in use at the start of the 2030s.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 8042
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 8:07 pm

brindabella wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Indeed, but guess what model did far worse, in every measurable standard of comparison?
Hence, again, not really even sure what you're trying to get at with any of this.



First, I'll point out that it wasn't me who said anything about "bought as"

Rather, my statement was "choice for," since its likely replacement is already on order; despite that (it being a replacement) not being the case at the time.



Well, comparing both sales and higher-end performance to the A32N.... one could rather convincingly make that argument on a comparative basis.

But its economics are more than sufficient as a standalone in most route/mission profiles, for plenty of airlines, so there's that too.


To the first part my response was to the below quote, your first reply in the thread, KE and LH were the only 2 to buy the 748 and the A380, CA being the only other 748I customer, several airlines had wanted a larger 747 for a number of years including LH, however the 748 was smaller than some of the earlier proposals, along comes the A380 which takes what other orders the 748 might have got from other carriers. The A380 without EK would have been interesting if others would have ordered more. Reality most airlines went for the brand new A380 which has proved to big and inflexible for many. The 748I? Most bar 3 again went with the A380 of which 2 went with the A380 also.

LAX772LR wrote:
You're surprised that a thrice-warmed-over 1969 design is uneconomical in today's world, while freely admitting that a 2005 design is?

I'm struggling to find the logic behind your statement.


:confused:

Your explanatory sequence appears to be back-to-front.

A simple Google search will reveal that the A380 first flew on 27 April 2005, while the B747-8 first flew on 8 February 2010.

The A380 did not "come along" and outcompete the existing B747-8 for sales; the 747-8 flew much later,

.

cheers


I am aware of that, however if Boeing had launched a stretched 747 year around 1997/98 when they originally proposed then airlines May have ordered that, reality is they didn’t then the A380 came along and took most orders a larger 747 May have received, the market could have barely handled 1 VLA let alone 2.
 
User avatar
DL757NYC
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 6:07 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 8:57 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Indeed, very few customers for VLA bizjets. Most HNWI don't need to tow around that big an entourage and would prefer a smaller jet that can use short runways yet still fly higher than most commercial airliners so they are more likely to buy high end narrow body bizjets. I think the A380s will end up as scrap and the 748s have time to see how things will play out but most likely be scrap too rather than bizjets or P2F feedstock.


My guess would be freighter conversions since the B744 conversions out there will be ripe for replacement.


I could easily see no conversion house taking on the cost of creating a freighter conversion program for 36 aircraft. But, possible if Boeing doesn't come up with the rumored creative solutions in a potential 777X freighter.


There is a 747-8i for sale that includes a 747-400 cargo door installed states that freight conversion can take place an opportunity for cargo companies to get 747’s 10 years after production ended. I think if this is true all of them would be spoken for before retirement.


https://www.controller.com/listing/for- ... t-aircraft
 
jbs2886
Posts: 3421
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 9:08 pm

DL757NYC wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

My guess would be freighter conversions since the B744 conversions out there will be ripe for replacement.


I could easily see no conversion house taking on the cost of creating a freighter conversion program for 36 aircraft. But, possible if Boeing doesn't come up with the rumored creative solutions in a potential 777X freighter.


There is a 747-8i for sale that includes a 747-400 cargo door installed states that freight conversion can take place an opportunity for cargo companies to get 747’s 10 years after production ended. I think if this is true all of them would be spoken for before retirement.


https://www.controller.com/listing/for- ... t-aircraft


That post has been discussed before and is very skeptical. It’s highly unlikely you can just put a 744 cargo door on and call it a day.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26765
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sat Aug 21, 2021 9:22 pm

mxaxai wrote:
Maintenance: difficult to quantify, but the 77W probably has an advantage due to fewer engines. The large worldwide 777 fleet should also help with economy of scale. In a direct compeition between A380 and 748, the 748i benefits from the large 787 GEnx fleet and the many 748F which have been unaffected by the pandemic. The GP7200 is a bit of an orphan.

Yes, and I would think the heavy maintenance visits are where the MX cost issue is worst for A380. Think of the cost for the sheer number of man-hours to do all the things needing to be done on a ship that big. I'd also think an engine rebuild of GE90 or GEnX is less costly just because T900 and GP7200 spilt a relatively small market. Then if you want to redo the interior you hit all the issues with the customized interiors. This seems to be the point at which airlines ask themselves if it's worth keeping the A380. AF said no, the cost is too high and the ROI is too low. Others may say yes, or may just stretch out the hours till the next heavy MX and retire them off.
 
bob75013
Posts: 1092
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 12:48 am

Strato2 wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?


The A380 outsold the pax 748 by about 7:1. There's your answer which one is the uneconomical one.


An the 747-8 wlll be flying long after the last A380 has been torn to sheds in the scrap yards.. There is YOU'RE answer to which one is the uneconomic one.
 
USAirKid
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:42 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 1:09 am

DL757NYC wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

My guess would be freighter conversions since the B744 conversions out there will be ripe for replacement.


I could easily see no conversion house taking on the cost of creating a freighter conversion program for 36 aircraft. But, possible if Boeing doesn't come up with the rumored creative solutions in a potential 777X freighter.


There is a 747-8i for sale that includes a 747-400 cargo door installed states that freight conversion can take place an opportunity for cargo companies to get 747’s 10 years after production ended. I think if this is true all of them would be spoken for before retirement.


https://www.controller.com/listing/for- ... t-aircraft



That listing is a hoot.. Especially when it has the automatic consumer financing price of $488,900.40 per month for twenty as an option! (15% down with a 3.99% APR for well qualified buyers...)
 
iflyabunch
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:46 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 11:07 am

Here at Frankfurt this morning I counted 5 748s at the gates vs. zero 380s. It’s pretty obvious that the operators feel the 748 is the better option as of today.
 
LX321
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2021 9:26 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 11:25 am

iflyabunch wrote:
Here at Frankfurt this morning I counted 5 748s at the gates vs. zero 380s. It’s pretty obvious that the operators feel the 748 is the better option as of today.

You mean the 3 - THREE operators who own the type?
 
smartplane
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 11:40 am

XT6Wagon wrote:
747-8F Makes this a certainty. Its already being seen as part of the reason the 748i is being retained longer for the airlines that fly it and the A380. Shared pilot and parts pool with freighters means cheaper costs in those areas. Expect the A380 to get real expensive real fast parts side as retirements hit leaving only a couple airlines operating them. EK likely will have already contracted the common parts needs, but anyone with a small fleet should really be running to a A350 or 777 fleet instead.

The market will be awash with new and used parts.

It's not as if this has been an orderly withdrawal from service, allowing OEM parts suppliers to scale back new and used inventories over many years. Quite the opposite.

In contrast, Boeing has had 748 suppliers activate exit provisions, some amicable, some not. Not all 748 parts currently have a designated supplier, as Boeing decides whether to manufacture in-house, place externally again, or simply stick with the remaining inventory.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 1312
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 1:29 pm

smartplane wrote:
XT6Wagon wrote:
747-8F Makes this a certainty. Its already being seen as part of the reason the 748i is being retained longer for the airlines that fly it and the A380. Shared pilot and parts pool with freighters means cheaper costs in those areas. Expect the A380 to get real expensive real fast parts side as retirements hit leaving only a couple airlines operating them. EK likely will have already contracted the common parts needs, but anyone with a small fleet should really be running to a A350 or 777 fleet instead.

The market will be awash with new and used parts.

It's not as if this has been an orderly withdrawal from service, allowing OEM parts suppliers to scale back new and used inventories over many years. Quite the opposite.

In contrast, Boeing has had 748 suppliers activate exit provisions, some amicable, some not. Not all 748 parts currently have a designated supplier, as Boeing decides whether to manufacture in-house, place externally again, or simply stick with the remaining inventory.

That's one concern that overshadows the entire debate of longevity of 747-8I.
We can preach the "common pilot pool", "simplified logistics" and other such, all the live-long day.
But if high demand for dedicated freight birds is here to stay (it wasn't a given 24 months ago, for example), and 747 supply chain is melting away already....
There will come a point, when these beautiful 747-8I will be looked at as flying spare parts warehouses. God forbid if something like ailerons or flaps on a 747-8f are in need of an immediate replacement, and the stocks are low... the temptation to cannibalize a pax bird will be strong.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26765
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 2:57 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
DL757NYC wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
I could easily see no conversion house taking on the cost of creating a freighter conversion program for 36 aircraft. But, possible if Boeing doesn't come up with the rumored creative solutions in a potential 777X freighter.

There is a 747-8i for sale that includes a 747-400 cargo door installed states that freight conversion can take place an opportunity for cargo companies to get 747’s 10 years after production ended. I think if this is true all of them would be spoken for before retirement.

That post has been discussed before and is very skeptical. It’s highly unlikely you can just put a 744 cargo door on and call it a day.

Yes, I agree, that was just a strange way to try to boost its attractiveness without pointing out what would be involved in getting approval for such a door.

Meanwhile, that very plane is on the move: https://twitter.com/propandkerosene/sta ... 6617309184

iflyabunch wrote:
Here at Frankfurt this morning I counted 5 748s at the gates vs. zero 380s. It’s pretty obvious that the operators feel the 748 is the better option as of today.

Right, but we do have to keep the pandemic in mind. 748i has a lot of premium capacity without as many economy seats as A380 and a lower trip cost too. Good for capturing the premium fliers who have to fly during the pandemic. A380's demise was already starting before the pandemic with EK and LH cutting orders and AF retiring theirs off but the pandemic has really accelerated it.

LX321 wrote:
iflyabunch wrote:
Here at Frankfurt this morning I counted 5 748s at the gates vs. zero 380s. It’s pretty obvious that the operators feel the 748 is the better option as of today.

You mean the 3 - THREE operators who own the type?

Not sure we have that many currently operating the A380.

Longer term, EK, BA, SQ and QF seem to be willing to keep them going post-pandemic. EK seems to be committed long term. The others make me wonder if they won't cut some or all the next time a heavy MX bill is due. This announcement puts an end date on the KE and OZ fleets. EY has made a similar announcement. LH has said return is unlikely. A pattern is being established.
 
2175301
Posts: 2142
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 3:49 pm

LX321 wrote:
iflyabunch wrote:
Here at Frankfurt this morning I counted 5 748s at the gates vs. zero 380s. It’s pretty obvious that the operators feel the 748 is the better option as of today.

You mean the 3 - THREE operators who own the type?


Yes! Please note that TWO of those operators have parked all their A380s. So they find the B748I more economical than using there A380's.
 
LX321
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2021 9:26 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 4:00 pm

Using a smaller plane is more economical? What a shocker!
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 10061
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 4:05 pm

LX321 wrote:
Using a smaller plane is more economical? What a shocker!


The discussion isn't on trip cost, it's CASM plus value of freight capability and declining avg value of fare with larger passenger capacity due to elasticity of demand.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15816
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 5:16 pm

These decisions are made by accountants using sophisticated computer programs, taking into account depreciation, tax laws, current and future operational costs, cargo capacity on pax planes, maintenance schedules, if an 'mx hog' with its costs, potential resale values and need for capacity.
Look a the bright side, it may mean some version of the 747-8 will be around for another 10 years, about 20 years after 1st deliveries of the sub-type and almost 25 for the A380 from 1st deliveries.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2638
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 7:19 pm

ltbewr wrote:
These decisions are made by accountants using sophisticated computer programs, taking into account depreciation, tax laws, current and future operational costs, cargo capacity on pax planes, maintenance schedules, if an 'mx hog' with its costs, potential resale values and need for capacity.
Look a the bright side, it may mean some version of the 747-8 will be around for another 10 years, about 20 years after 1st deliveries of the sub-type and almost 25 for the A380 from 1st deliveries.


I am sure some of the printouts of the costs for a given frame will have lots and lots of red. It is a bad sign when it is more economic to have a $ 250M asset sit instead of flying. It says clearly that the variable costs do not look good, much less covering the financing cost.

It is looking likely that less than 100 A380's will be in service 5 years from now. Besides for the Hi-fly frame have any A380's been taken up in the resale market?
 
Texas77
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2019 9:42 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 7:23 pm

ZK-NBT wrote:
brindabella wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

To the first part my response was to the below quote, your first reply in the thread, KE and LH were the only 2 to buy the 748 and the A380, CA being the only other 748I customer, several airlines had wanted a larger 747 for a number of years including LH, however the 748 was smaller than some of the earlier proposals, along comes the A380 which takes what other orders the 748 might have got from other carriers. The A380 without EK would have been interesting if others would have ordered more. Reality most airlines went for the brand new A380 which has proved to big and inflexible for many. The 748I? Most bar 3 again went with the A380 of which 2 went with the A380 also.



:confused:

Your explanatory sequence appears to be back-to-front.

A simple Google search will reveal that the A380 first flew on 27 April 2005, while the B747-8 first flew on 8 February 2010.

The A380 did not "come along" and outcompete the existing B747-8 for sales; the 747-8 flew much later,

.

cheers


I am aware of that, however if Boeing had launched a stretched 747 year around 1997/98 when they originally proposed then airlines May have ordered that, reality is they didn’t then the A380 came along and took most orders a larger 747 May have received, the market could have barely handled 1 VLA let alone 2.


well, I thought your argument made sense- had the 380 not been built, Boeing probably would have sold more 748s. hindsight and all, but the market for VLA is the size it is, and that's not big enough for 2 models, especially at the exorbitant development costs. sure we can look now and say the 380 was a dumb decision, but if they had canned the idea and Boeing sold 350 748s with no Airbus response, we'd talk about how they were missing such a big an lucrative market segment...
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 1312
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 7:33 pm

Texas77 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
brindabella wrote:

:confused:

Your explanatory sequence appears to be back-to-front.

A simple Google search will reveal that the A380 first flew on 27 April 2005, while the B747-8 first flew on 8 February 2010.

The A380 did not "come along" and outcompete the existing B747-8 for sales; the 747-8 flew much later,

.

cheers


I am aware of that, however if Boeing had launched a stretched 747 year around 1997/98 when they originally proposed then airlines May have ordered that, reality is they didn’t then the A380 came along and took most orders a larger 747 May have received, the market could have barely handled 1 VLA let alone 2.


well, I thought your argument made sense- had the 380 not been built, Boeing probably would have sold more 748s. hindsight and all, but the market for VLA is the size it is, and that's not big enough for 2 models, especially at the exorbitant development costs. sure we can look now and say the 380 was a dumb decision, but if they had canned the idea and Boeing sold 350 748s with no Airbus response, we'd talk about how they were missing such a big an lucrative market segment...


Good old "size of VLA market" debate... Basically, A380-800 is a suboptimal design, a shrink if you will. A380-900 was to be the definite version, and A380-800 carried a lot of extra weight, reserved for that stretch. So it's not only eventual market size -- if CASK was lower on a more optimally-designed VLA, a business case for VLA would be less abysmal than it is now.

Basically, the industry had a single shot at this, and they blew it with two (one expensive, one not as expensive) shots that went wild...
It'll be a long time till a next attempt will come up...
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1404
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 8:59 pm

IMO Airbus building the A380 was an expensive mistake for Airbus. It was partially a grudge match with Boeing's 747. The only thing Airbus gained from the A380 was some new technologies which they are using on some of their aircraft they are now producing. Airbus built about 250 frames of which about 120 went to Emirates. The A380 is really on life support. Airbus had about a five year head start over the Boeing 747-8 and Boeing has currently delivered about 100 747-8F freighters, some may operate for almost thirty years, and maybe 47 747-8i passenger aircraft. Five are for Head of State aircraft. One each for Turkey, South Korea, communist China B-2479, along with the two being modified for replacements as Air Force One aircraft. No 747-8i will likely be converted into freighters as both Korean Airlines and Lufthansa own the majority of 747-8i passenger aircraft and both may fly them until they time out. It is possible the that the USAF may buy some low time 747-8i aircraft if they come on the market as replacements for some of the 747s that they currently own and operate. All the 747-200s the USAF operates when they are no longer needed will be scrapped for security reasons. The 777 will become a major 747 freighter replacement, if Boeing gets it right and untimely replace 747F freighters as they time out. The only 747-400s that may soldier on may those that have nose cargo doors that are really needed.
One final statement is what is the USAF going to do when the 747-8i in about thirty years are going to need to be replaced. Currently aircraft that are used as Air Force One have a requirement that they have four engines in case one needs to be shut down. A twin in this situation may be required to land in a less than desirable location if it loses one engine putting the President and the aircraft in a situation that could be problematic. :old:
 
2175301
Posts: 2142
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Sun Aug 22, 2021 11:30 pm

NWAROOSTER wrote:
One final statement is what is the USAF going to do when the 747-8i in about thirty years are going to need to be replaced. Currently aircraft that are used as Air Force One have a requirement that they have four engines in case one needs to be shut down. A twin in this situation may be required to land in a less than desirable location if it loses one engine putting the President and the aircraft in a situation that could be problematic. :old:


The requirement is not for 4 engines, and for landing purposes a 2 engine twin would work. Its actually a requirement for the substantial electrical generation for all the communication and security equipment that currently no current single engine can provide; but 2 current operating engines can provide that amount of electrical power.

They would have had to install a special turbine powered electrical generator to meet current AF1 power requirements if they were to go to a large twin like the 777. That would have reduced the interior space available as well. The decision was that the 748 was a better option at this time.

Perhaps the power requirements will decline substantially in 30 years, and perhaps not.

I do suspect that the new Presidential Planes will fly for at least 40 years.

Have a great day,
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 8042
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 3:32 am

Phosphorus wrote:
Texas77 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

I am aware of that, however if Boeing had launched a stretched 747 year around 1997/98 when they originally proposed then airlines May have ordered that, reality is they didn’t then the A380 came along and took most orders a larger 747 May have received, the market could have barely handled 1 VLA let alone 2.


well, I thought your argument made sense- had the 380 not been built, Boeing probably would have sold more 748s. hindsight and all, but the market for VLA is the size it is, and that's not big enough for 2 models, especially at the exorbitant development costs. sure we can look now and say the 380 was a dumb decision, but if they had canned the idea and Boeing sold 350 748s with no Airbus response, we'd talk about how they were missing such a big an lucrative market segment...


Good old "size of VLA market" debate... Basically, A380-800 is a suboptimal design, a shrink if you will. A380-900 was to be the definite version, and A380-800 carried a lot of extra weight, reserved for that stretch. So it's not only eventual market size -- if CASK was lower on a more optimally-designed VLA, a business case for VLA would be less abysmal than it is now.

Basically, the industry had a single shot at this, and they blew it with two (one expensive, one not as expensive) shots that went wild...
It'll be a long time till a next attempt will come up...


I am not even sure it is hindsight, the market particularly in the US had been going towards frequency for a long time before Airbus launched the A380, only UA and NW flew the 744, in the case of UA they ended up with 44 which was far to many given they also had a large 772 fleet by the early 2000s they eventually ended up with somewhere between 24-30 . NW needed the 744 initially because everything went to NRT, it was said they lost alot in the latter years, not sure if DL ever made money when they took over?

Anyway I wonder why Airbus so overbuilt the A380? Surely they should have taken it a step at a time and optimized the A388 first with the A389 optimized itself later. Maybe if the A380 had entered the market 10 years earlier it might have done quite a lot better taking alot of the late 90s 744 orders from the likes of SQ, QF, BA, LH etc and they may have then ended up with more than what they ultimately did. I still don't think it would have sold in the US.

Boeing got it right with the 787, Airbus eventually did with the A350.
 
User avatar
XLA2008
Posts: 440
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:53 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 5:37 am

[photoid][/photoid]
LAX772LR wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?

You're surprised that a thrice-warmed-over 1969 design is uneconomical in today's world, while freely admitting that a 2005 design is?

I'm struggling to find the logic behind your statement.


Pretty sure both Airbus and Boeing are selling thrice-warmed-over 1970’s products in today’s markets. Only NEW clean sheet designs are the A350 and 787… and the A220 but that wasn’t an Airbus product to begin with. So your point is pretty much mute. We are now on the twice warmed over 777 design, A330neo is basically an A300 as well as being a A340 at one point during its journey. Yet these thrice-warmed-over products seem to be doing just fine in “today’s world” that isn’t to mention the 737 and A320 models again seem to be doing just fine in today’s world. Also like to point out that the economics of the thrice-warmed-over 1969 design against the 2005 clean sheet product from Airbus doesn’t fall too far behind. So for a 50+ year old product against a 15+ year old product to be falling just shy is pretty damn good.

It is uneconomical in today’s world not because of type evolution, but because it has 4 engines competing against very similar products with 2 engines and better economics. Nothing to do with its evolution because for its type it’s far more economical against its predecessors. As for A380 vs 748i the A380 sold better for MANY reasons, economics, status symbol for some airlines, it is better than the 748 economically per passenger and has great capacity, however capacity and size ultimately is the types downfall. The 748 has commonality with its “thrice-warmed-over” 60’s design making it easier and cheaper training crews from the previous variants easier and cheaper on maintenance which goes in the 748’s favor and will play a role when factoring retirement, the type will also have a good aftermarket when it comes to retirement as it could potentially be sold on to become a freighter further down the line in a post Covid world. And don’t read into that as me saying they are holding onto them loosing money so they can sell them later on, I’m just saying that could play a factor in the decision making when it comes to retirement.

I don’t see why or how your point is even remotely relevant or accurate. I mean to be fair that’s what you say to others and now it’s being said to you, and we know you hate being called out so… here comes your argumentative and combative response… as no surprise.
 
VV
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 6:28 am

Breathe wrote:
Gosh! It only seems like yesterday I was in Everett and seeing a Korean 747-8i on the assembly line.
...


Gosh! It only seems like yesterday I was in Toulouse and watching the A380 took off for the first time.
 
User avatar
XLA2008
Posts: 440
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 8:53 pm

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 7:11 am

VV wrote:
Breathe wrote:
Gosh! It only seems like yesterday I was in Everett and seeing a Korean 747-8i on the assembly line.
...


Gosh! It only seems like yesterday I was in Toulouse and watching the A380 took off for the first time.


Agree with that, it’s hard to believe that it was 16 years ago!
 
blacksoviet
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:50 am

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 8:43 am

Will any of these 747-8is be converted into fire tankers to replace DC-10s?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14196
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 8:52 am

XLA2008 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
rj777 wrote:
What the heck? The A380s I get.... but why the 748s? Are they really that uneconomical?

You're surprised that a thrice-warmed-over 1969 design is uneconomical in today's world, while freely admitting that a 2005 design is?

I'm struggling to find the logic behind your statement.


Pretty sure both Airbus and Boeing are selling thrice-warmed-over 1970’s products in today’s markets. Only NEW clean sheet designs are the A350 and 787… and the A220 but that wasn’t an Airbus product to begin with. So your point is pretty much mute.

First, the word is "moot." Second, no one was comparing entire product lines; it was simply remarking on the oddity of someone assuming that a multiple-derivative (which did absolutely terribly in the market) would boast an economic advantage over a relatively similarly timed clean-sheet (that also did quite poorly).

How you managed to turn that into an overall design philosophy debate, is anyone's guess.
 
TC957
Posts: 4145
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: KE to retire A380 in the next 5 years, 747-8 within 10 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 9:23 am

I wouldn't pay too much attention to what airlines say they want to do with their fleets in 5 let alone 10 years time. Far too many uncertainties in the world to plan that far ahead. No one really knows if air travel will boom or tank again.
 
brindabella
Posts: 746
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:23 am

Phosphorus wrote:
Texas77 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

I am aware of that, however if Boeing had launched a stretched 747 year around 1997/98 when they originally proposed then airlines May have ordered that, reality is they didn’t then the A380 came along and took most orders a larger 747 May have received, the market could have barely handled 1 VLA let alone 2.


well, I thought your argument made sense- had the 380 not been built, Boeing probably would have sold more 748s. hindsight and all, but the market for VLA is the size it is, and that's not big enough for 2 models, especially at the exorbitant development costs. sure we can look now and say the 380 was a dumb decision, but if they had canned the idea and Boeing sold 350 748s with no Airbus response, we'd talk about how they were missing such a big an lucrative market segment...


Good old "size of VLA market" debate... Basically, A380-800 is a suboptimal design, a shrink if you will. A380-900 was to be the definite version, and A380-800 carried a lot of extra weight, reserved for that stretch. So it's not only eventual market size -- if CASK was lower on a more optimally-designed VLA, a business case for VLA would be less abysmal than it is now.

Basically, the industry had a single shot at this, and they blew it with two (one expensive, one not as expensive) shots that went wild...
It'll be a long time till a next attempt will come up...


"It'll be a long time till a next attempt will come up..."
Sad but probably true.

However the (much missed) Matt6461 laid out a very
:bouncy: seductive :spin:
case for a 500-seater twin-deck optimised for the 80metre box ...

cheers
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 26765
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: KE to retire all quads in the next 5 years

Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:32 pm

ZK-NBT wrote:
I am not even sure it is hindsight, the market particularly in the US had been going towards frequency for a long time before Airbus launched the A380, only UA and NW flew the 744, in the case of UA they ended up with 44 which was far to many given they also had a large 772 fleet by the early 2000s they eventually ended up with somewhere between 24-30 . NW needed the 744 initially because everything went to NRT, it was said they lost alot in the latter years, not sure if DL ever made money when they took over?

767 played a big role in this. Had the range to undermine the 747 with decent payload so you could make money flying it. Two crew cockpit in the era where FEs were still a thing. Really took off when 763-ER became a thing. 777 started out trying to be a bigger 767. Some customers still don't seem to be quite comfortable with the options to replace their 767s. Some customers still putting money into frames in the neighborhood of 30 years old. Still good enough to be in production for freighters and military even though they have decades-old engine tech. Used frames being converted to freighter even ones in the neighborhood of 30 years old. Quite a thing, really.

ZK-NBT wrote:
Anyway I wonder why Airbus so overbuilt the A380? Surely they should have taken it a step at a time and optimized the A388 first with the A389 optimized itself later. Maybe if the A380 had entered the market 10 years earlier it might have done quite a lot better taking alot of the late 90s 744 orders from the likes of SQ, QF, BA, LH etc and they may have then ended up with more than what they ultimately did. I still don't think it would have sold in the US.

Look for Andreas Spaeth's upcoming book on A380 or his interview with Jurgen Thomas 'father of the A380'. A member here kindly translated the key parts of their interview from German to English but I can't find the thread. My comment on it is in viewtopic.php?t=1454433&start=50#p22527165

Bottom line: Airbus said they made the A340 too difficult to scale up, and they weren't going to make that particular mistake again, so they designed the -800 fully anticipating there would be a -800F and -900. As the saying goes, out of the pan and into the fire.

ZK-NBT wrote:
Boeing got it right with the 787, Airbus eventually did with the A350.

Boeing got it right with 767. Airbus got it right with A330. Boeing got it right with 787. Airbus got it right with A350.

We can go back further.

Boeing got it right with Dash-8/KC-135/707. Airbus got it right with A300. Boeing got it right with 767. Airbus got it right with A330. Boeing got it right with 787. Airbus got it right with A350.

That's as far back as I'm willing to go, the start of the jet era.

blacksoviet wrote:
Will any of these 747-8is be converted into fire tankers to replace DC-10s?

Almost certainly not. Big airplanes cause a lot of wake turbulence. It's already a problem with the current ones. 747 would be worse. Its swept wing means it does not like to fly slow so it would not be good for refuelling certain types. It's out of production. USAF already has a huge investment in KC-46. It'd make far more sense to just buy more KC-46 than adding a new type to maintain, even if that made for some occasional challenges with basing which can be handled different ways.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos