Well, let's see. I am sure some of the routes require the capacity of a B 747-400/400LR as Raychuang has said in another post. It is probably cheaper to fly one B 747-400.

You may be right. I may also be right. Let's see.  

Thanks for your comments anyway.

 

Widebody,

After all the unnecessary things he said about me, what'd you expect?

Shame on you.... 


Tupelov,

What kind of denial am I in? Just because I am actually right along with Boeing nut? The 747X is not cancelled, you're in a day dream. Everyone keeps saying that it is cancelled, PEOPLE, IT IS STILL OFFERED TO AIRLINES AS WE SPEAK. The process of building the plane slowed down for the time being, because Boeing still doesn't think that the time is right. Boeing isn't out of the war here guys, as most of seem to want it to be out. Why?


Boeing Nut,

I have already tried to tell them that, they just can't get it through their heads.

Tupolev154B2:

Oh yes indeed. They use the PW 4000. Oh I forgot.


Boeing747-400:

You are right. I think the B 747X has only been slowed down. There are still a lot of opportunities for this product.


Best wishes:
Des

The 747X isn't dead!
Its pining for the fjords!

MAC you asshole!

First of all, since you like to critisize just about everyone in these forums, I had to get that out.

The 747X isn't dead you idiot! The process of developing it slowed down, but did not stop. Boeing, which has logged no orders for the plane, thinks the timing isn't right, so they are going to wait until the time comes to build a larger 747, or a new 787-type plane to compete. You dreams of the A380 taking over the NLA market are so obvious. You are an asshole Airbus Lover who personally insults many Boeing fans. I don't work at a fast-food place, so you can just stick that quarter-pounder up your ass for all I care. What is the matter with you? You and others eem to think everybody's going to order the precious A380! Well, sorry, it is not going to happen. Many airlines are interested in both aircraft, but not seriously. Airlines such as Atlas, Cargolux, UAL, JAL, ANA, etc have looked and expressed interest in both of the planes. The 747X is slowed down, read the article carefully, it says they've slowed the process down to focus on another design at the moment.

GET IT INTO YOUR BIG HEAD:

THE 747X AND 747X -STRETCH ARE NOT DEAD, JUST "POST-PONED". BOEING HAS NOT STATED ANY PERMANENT CANCELLATION FOR THE NEW 747S.

I know you hate Boeing, it is very obvious. You seem to want the 747X program to die. Why?

Your dumbass dreams are enough for anyone to show how much you don't know about the aviation industry.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

This is comical, I had to cut it and paste it here in italics just so everyone could see it again.

Look, it's obvious you are completely blind (or is the word 'refuse' more appropriate?) to see the "writing on the wall" with regards to the 747X and your supposed "informed" opinion and rhetoric is going to be more than likely disproven by the market.

The 747X is DEAD-DEAD-DEAD!

If you are looking only at press releases and thinking what Boeing is saying in publioc as "scripture" then you seriously need to pull that head out from...somewhere and say the words "POP!" several dozen times.

If you cant deal with the obvious, well that's just too bad! Everyone is entitled to still believe in the Easter Bunny too.

BTW, I have a cart full of groceries, deli and seafood department stuff..so could you hurry up and 'check me out'? Here's my Preferred Shoppers Club card.. I chose your aisle because the cashier next to you was picking their nose, so please hurry up! I have to stop by the courtesy desk for some lottery tickets once you're done..

~~ALWAYS YOUR PAL!~~  

The MAC'ster

Sice you're so smart, I want you to find me a peice of info stating Boeing has cancelled the 747X. Go ahead, find it.

It is very comical you think the 747X is dead. When did Boeing say this? Or did Boeing back off on the project a little?

LEARN HOW TO READ MAC, ADMIT IT, YOU'RE WRONG. THE ARTICLE NEVER SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT BOEING CANCELLING THE 747X AND -STRETCH PERMANETLY.


So funny to see how immature you really are, personally attacking Boeing fans everywhere. Learn how to read MAC!

Boeing747-400, if I remember from a while back, you're supposed to be a trainee with United, yet above I read.."...I also talked to a friend of mine who works for United.....

Who are you actually training with, and how far along are you?

Regards,
WB.

No, I said a long time ago that I was close to being offered a job with United, but I didn't take it because it required me to move a great distance, and I wasn't ready. As of now, I'm not a trainee at United. I am saving up money so I can try to get a job with them again and then move. I have a couple of friends that do work there, some FA's, and some "desk working guys", etc.

Rgds,

B744

Boeing 747-400 wrote:

'So funny to see how immature you really are, personally attacking Boeing fans everywhere.'

Ever notice how it's always you who's being attacked? Gee, I wonder why...

No, it is not always me Juul. I don't really care whether I get attacked. Here we have an example of MAC, who seems to be very happy that "the 747X is dead." This is what is annoying. Boeing never stated that they are cancelling the aircraft. There is no reason for attacking me when I state this FACT.

Boeing 747-400:

Indeed, OFFICIALLY, the 747X is not dead. It was just 'shelved', 'slowed down', or whatever fancy name they give it. But if you read between the lines, it's pretty clear that there's now a fat chance that this thing will ever fly.
Remember how a few years ago Boeing 'shelved' the 747-500X and 747-600X, or how Airbus 'shelved' the A330-500 a few months ago? These projects were NEVER officially cancelled, yet it's pretty obvious they'll never fly.

Greetings 

Boeing is going to compete against the A380. They will either build the larger 747s or a new large aircraft. The 747X may never fly. True. Boeing has changed their mind about the timing. You want to know why they slowed down the process? Because theyw ant to see if the A380 gets anymore orders. Boeing is being smart about this. They haven't been aggresivly selling the aircraft because they are unsure about the time and market value. They will start being serious with the new 747s when they think the market has a good potiental for the aircraft. I do think it will fly, Boeing stated numerous times they were going to start seriously selling it when the time comes.

Wouldn't it be pretty stupid to wait a few more years and let potential 747X customers order the A380? I mean, from what you're saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) I understand that Boeing will only pursue the 747X if the Airbus A380 becomes a hot seller...
That way A LOT of potential 747X customers will already have signed up for the A380. Now they're not just going to cancel their orders in favor of 747X, so those customers would be lost to Boeing.
That just doesn't seem like smart thinking to me...

Greetings 

747-400..

Let's face "facts", If Boeing went out and held a press conference tomorrow saying "The world is flat, the sky is tye-died and the moon is made of green cheese", you'd be parroting off this same line off 5 minutes later and defending it as "fact" too.

Have you ever considered studying the subject of "critical thinking". It could be quite useful. Any company can say what they want in a press conference or press release.

What you are failing to see is the "big picture" in all of this. Boeing has offered a 747X or 747-500/600 derivative at least *twice* in recent years and they have not found a *single* customer for it.

They engaged in an 'ersatz' marketing effort to say they "really were" offering something, while attempting to talk the market for a VLA down, re-defined their own market analysis a few times and then all of a sudden they shelve this 'project' again (2nd time) and announce to the world the Yellowstone effort, which they believe will sell in a few years.

The bottom line is, when does the obvious sink in?

Do you base your opinions on press releases or a combination of looking at press releases, and other sources, and being aware of market reality, arriving at a pragmatic judgement that indeed it does look like the derivative Boeing 'offered' isnt going to happen and they are going forward with what they feel is a better option.

Boeing doesnt have the money to do all these fancy projects all at the same time. You -refuse- to confront that reality too.

Yellowstone will easily cost around $9 billion, the 747X figured around $4 billion (conservatively), the 767-400ERX a few billion more, and then we get to start talking about a *completely NEW* 737 replacement which will probably run between $5 and 8 Billion easy.

So figure around $20-22 billion to do all of this. All while restructuring a company, moving its headquarters and production lines to Wichita, Kansas.

-Can you tell me, where is Boeing's "money tree" planted?

-Do they have a "Daddy Warbucks" waiting in the wings to write the check?

-Are they going to lobby and pressure politicians and the Administration in Washington to have the taxpayers "foot the bill" via "Corporate Welfare" (Again!)

I have yet to get an answer on these. *Not one*.

MAC

Boeing747-400,

Firstly thanks for the United explanation......

Secondly, of course I'm happy the 747X/Stretch has been shelved (cancelled in my opinion), it is sad for Boeing, however it now gives the A380 a better chance of succeeding, and as I personally will probably spend the rest of my days working with Airbus related companies, this is good news for me.......

Thirdly, as said above, the A330-500 was shelved, however we all know it was cancelled...

Fourthly, the Boeing press release said that customers did not need the 747X/Stretch at that time, it did not say they did not need a VLA.....

Fifthly, if Boeing has to wait to see does the A380 get any more orders, as you said above, then they really haven't done their research on the VLA market......what you said effectively means Boeing has not asked the airlines do they need a VLA, and need to see customer response to their decison to suspend the 747X/Stretch before deciding how to proceed....

And sixthly, you have written many times about Boeing's strategy in letting Airbus spend 10 billion on the A380, not allowing Airbus to respond to any new designs Boeing brings out........I would guess the sonic cruiser will cost between 10 and 15 billion to develop, where do you think they will come up with the 4 billion for a 747X/Stretch in th next 15-20 years?

Regards,
WB.

As much I love talking about the 747, this post is becoming tiresome with the inaccuracies and character attacks.

I have serious doubts that the 747X will ever leave the drawing board as well. What we are debating about is the program, not the aircraft itself. If the program was dead, Boeing would not have hired more employees to work on it. If it was dead, Boeing would not have held a recent symposium with interested airlines. If it was dead, they wouldn't have redesigned the wing to have a 777 type airfoil. The 747X itself probably will never leave the design phase. But Boeing is leaving the door open for any airlines that are interested. It is possible because technically, it will be the only 400-500 seat aircraft on the market. A346 holding 380 passengers, and A380 starting at carrying 550+ passengers. The PROGRAM is still alive. Boeing 747-400, I think we are the only ones that understand the current, repeat current, status of the 747X.

So, at risk of sounding hypocritical,

MAC Veteran, in regards to this matter; your proctologist called, they found your head.

Let the soap opera continue.

Nut,

"Boeing 747-400, I think we are the only ones that understand the current, repeat current, status of the 747X"

I'd rephrase that to 'yourself and Boeing747-400 share the same opinion on the current status of the 747X'...........all you can do is guess what's going on in Seattle, the fact you think the program is still a possibility doesn't mean there's any truth to it.......for all we know, Boeing has no work at all done on the 747X, and it was all a ploy to screw Airbus; or perhaps they have the thing almost finished and will wait till Airbus sits back before launching it......or, perhaps it is finished, and they wouldn't give Airbus the satisfaction of sitting pretty......

Who knows, you don't, I don't......

Regards,
WB.

By the way, you can't just 'leave the door open' for any airlines that are interested, it will take a good number of airlines for them to invest $4 billion.......

......and it won't be the only aircraft in the 400-500 seat category, you'll have the 747-400, the -400LR and the A380-50......

Widebody, I do think that if just one airline orders the 747X or/and 747X Stretch, Boeing people may get off their butts and start selling the aircraft seriously, I think it could be just as good as successful as the A380. It isn't dead, it may die, but one airline may step in if they get a good deal, and the 747X will be set off just as A380 is right now. I have to disagree with Boeing this time, the time is now to sell the new 747s seriously, and to talk more about them to the public like Airbus is the A380.

Rgds,

B744

Where will they get the money for it? All their funds will be tied up in this sonic cruiser if they pursue it, and they won't likely plough $4 billion into something unless a large number of airlines want it.......

Anyway, we'll see......

Boeing747-400:

Boeing is indeed smart. They have the door open for the B 747X market. Nevertheless, they are not going to jump in and make a loss just to increase market share.


Widebody:

Secondly, of course I'm happy the 747X/Stretch has been shelved (cancelled in my opinion), it is sad for Boeing, however it now gives the A380 a better chance of succeeding, and as I personally will probably spend the rest of my days working with Airbus related companies, this is good news for me.......

Well.......... less job opportunities.  


Des

Not necessarily Des, in terms of Boeing, the Sonic Cruiser will require a good deal more engineers than the 747X/Stretch........in terms of Airbus, better chance of survival, more potential for future projects...

Rgds,
WB.

Widebody,

Thanks, I inconceivably forgot to include thee 744 in my 400-500 category of aircraft! Don't forget, the A380-50 hasn't been launched yet, so it might be a dead aircraft!!   Oh no, have I opened up a whole new can of worms here?!!   Sorry, I just couldn't resist.

Hey guys, let's keep this going. We're almost to 300!!!

Regards

Boeing nut:


Well, if the A 280-50 has the same features as the B 747-400, why not stick to what they have then? I am not sure whether or not A 380-50 will be launched. But it would affect the B 747-400 in a large extent.

 


Des

Widebody:


Thought you wanna work in the Superjumbo market.

 

Des

I agree united. On the other side of the coin, operators of the A380-100 could acquire both the A380-50 and A380-200 and keep the commonality of both aircraft. That would be an impressive heavy iron fleet!

Superjumbo market? Depends, engineers work on future projects, in the case of Europe, this is currently the A318 and of course the A380 (and I suppose the A400M).....as no more large scale projects/derivatives seem to be planned, the A380 will be the focus for the next number of years.....me, I think I'll concentrate on systems engineering, that is working on aircraft already in-service.......kinda like customer services...very interesting, and you can build up an incredible knowledge of the aircraft itself.......

Never know though, where ever the wind takes me....

Regards,
WB.

P.S. What are doing at university?

Well, if the A 280-50 has the same features as the B 747-400, why not stick to what they have then? I am not sure whether or not A 380-50 will be launched. But it would affect the B 747-400 in a large extent.

Sorry there are some typing mistakes. Should be:

Well, if the A 380-50 has the same features as the B 747-400, why not stick to what they have then? I am not sure whether or not A 380-50 will be launched. But it will NOT affect the B 747-400 in a large extent.


Airlines tend to trust more on what they have, which is the B 747-400. Besides, it makes sense to have something compatible with what they have.

Just my 2 cents.  

Widebody:


I plan to work in the airline field as well. I got accepted by quite a number of Universities like UNSW in Australia to do Aviation Management. But I have decided to do something more general first.

I am now doing Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) at The University of Hong Kong.

How about you? You studying as well?


Des

Nice, airline business gets more interesting by the day........me, finishing a 4 year Aero. Eng. degree in June, nice to get out, I'm getting sick of it....it did allow me 12 months in Toulouse though.......probably end up in BAE or Rolls......not too bothered which really, both seem interesting companies.....

Ah well, for another day, I'm off to bed....

Rgds,
WB.

So what do you guys have to do for your course? Would you mind telling me?

I mean...... What is it about?

Hope to hear from you soon!

 

Hey guys, let's keep this going. We're almost to 300!!!

Oh sure.  


So do you guys think whether or not the A380 will be launched? Any potential buyers?

Also, what are the potential buyers for the B 747-400LR?

Hope to hear from you guys soon.  

I think we can make it to 300!  

A380? Launched? Not a chance!! There will be no buyers. They will get no orders! OK, I got that out of the way.

To answer you last question United. I think anyone that currently operates the 744 is a candidate for the 744LR. Why wouldn't it be? Not only for the additional range, but the new interior along with the proposed overhead space utilization usage.

With the A380, I do have a problem. From the specifications given by both manufactuers, the A380 will only hold 4 more LD-3 containers than the 744. Are they expecting to hold 150 more people AND thier bags? I don't think they thought that through. They may be able to hold the bags, but say goodbye to any additional revenue from hauling cargo.

I personnally think that the 747X freighter still has a chance. It will be able to carry cargo that the A380 won't. But time will tell. Any thoughts?

Regards

This topic just got out of hand... a long time ago  

Sure we can make it to 300! That's our goal! YEAH!

Obviously, the B 747X Stretch Freighter can do a lot the A 380F cannot. For the B 747X Stretch, well... don't run it down yet. I still believe that there is a chance that UAL and JAL may launch it.

UAL and the B 747-400LR? Sure why not? It would be an updated version of the B 747-400.   I think many other airlines like Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, or maybe British Airways might go for some.  

A 380-50? I highly doubt that it will ever come out. Airlines would rather consider the B 747-400/400LR.

As Boeing has said, the B 747 will be in production for at least 30 years. And the future of B 747 is unlimited.  

Just my 2 cents.

I agree that the 747X will be able to haul cargo that the A380 can't, namely oversized items because of the second deck being out of the way. Then again, wouldn't airlines specializing in oversized cargo be opting for the A300-600ST?

This topic just got out of hand... a long time

Oh I am sure.        

Looking forward to seeing 300 replies.  

Then again, wouldn't airlines specializing in oversized cargo be opting for the A300-600ST?

Exactly! Actually which airlines own the A 300-600ST?

Boeing_nut:

One more thing, you on my respected user list. Check it out!

Des

All silliness aside, United Airline raised an interesting point re: the comparison of the A380F and B747XF (stretch).

Obviously, the B 747X Stretch Freighter can do a lot the A 380F cannot.

Now what exactly is it that the A380F can't do. I'm not very knowedgable on the specifics of the freighter model

Well, if freighters of Airbus are that good, why aren't there many A 300-600ST?

Besides, I think the B 747X Stretch Freighter can carry more. With higher payload...

 

Put it this way. I am NOT against the A 330-600ST, or the A 380F. They look cute ok?

I just think that the B 747X Stretch Freighter will do better.

Just my 2 cents.

 

A380F will have a payload of 331,000 lbs, how does the Boeing aircraft compare? They don't post the info on their site.

This makes me wonder - which topic on here got the most replies?