entdoc
Topic Author
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:15 am

why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 6:47 am

as a follow up question to why BA didn't order 748s
I wonder why LY did not order any as successors to their 744s
surely they could have filled them to NY and the far east
are their costs vs efficiency so much lower than the 787 family?
for the NY runs where they routinely stuffed the 744s full does it not take 1.75 788s to equal the capacity of a 744 or 748?
and yet from what i can see they are not yet increasing the frequencies to NY
 
EL-AL
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 8:29 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:10 am

From the same reason no other medium size airline like El Al didn't buy the 748 – its too big for it. The global trend worldiwide in the past 10 years is to switch from hub-to-hub base to point-to-point base. For El Al, it means less capacity to JFK and instead opening new routes from Tel Aviv directly to other cities in North America. Since 2016 we saw opening or re-opening of LY flights to BOS, MIA, SFO & LAS, so those passengers no longer need to connect in NYC.

Also, apart from New York, El Al has no other route that can fill a 747-8 year round, and it is not profitable to maintain 2-3 aircraft fleet just for one destination. Keeping a fleet of only 737/787 (as 777s aren't getting younger too) makes more sense from maintenance and cost cutting point of view.

Using 787 only, El Al is operating 5 flights a day TLV-NYC (JFK/EWR) in the summer, and only 3 flights a day in low season, hence more flexibility operating smaller aircraft.

With most airlines in the world switching from large 4 engine airplanes to medium 2 engine airplanes El Al shouldn't be any different.
every day is a good day to fly
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12315
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:20 am

Flip the question: why WOULD they order that....

...it's a huge investment, on an aircraft that (for the overwhelming majority of carriers) doesn't perform any task particularly better than an alternative aircraft. Range, capacity, efficiency, etc.

As such, it's got the market reception to show for it. I mean, how many times have you seen a manufacturer come forward and affirmatively state to the public that they "don't see a future for this product?" The 748i's market reception was so terrible that it earned that distinction.

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ger-plane/
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
SXDFC
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:07 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:28 am

There was no need for it..

That’s the answer for why BA, AA, UA,DL, LY, TP, and any other airline that didn’t order the 748..

Here’s a bigger question..

WHY do we have these WHY threads on this site?
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 388
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:21 am

entdoc wrote:
are their costs vs efficiency so much lower than the 787 family?
for the NY runs where they routinely stuffed the 744s full does it not take 1.75 788s to equal the capacity of a 744 or 748?
and yet from what i can see they are not yet increasing the frequencies to NY


El Al are happy to reduce capacity and increase yields. They're also happy to fly to more cities (thus adding to their network and lessening the number of people that need to connect).

If they want bigger jets, they could get 787-10s. That jet could get to London, New York, Chicago, Atlanta, possibly Hong Kong and Beijing and Shanghai depending on the diplomatic relations/airspace-usage issues.

And yes, going all-787 would be far more efficient than adding 747-8i jets to a fleet composed of 767s, 777s and 747-400s.

The simple reality is that whilst the 747-8i is an incredibly sexy jet, it doesn't have very impressive CASM, and route fragmentation is the future. The 787 gives them modernization, commonality and low costs.
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 5071
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:11 pm

entdoc wrote:
as a follow up question to why BA didn't order 748s
I wonder why LY did not order any as successors to their 744s
surely they could have filled them to NY.

Even the Super 748 only had about a thousand mile range so there's no way it could have reached New York. Anyway, production stopped in 1988 before LY even received their 747-400s. I suppose they could have replaced with with used 748s but it would have been a helluva drop in capacity. Did LY ever operate twin turboprops?
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:19 pm

PM wrote:
entdoc wrote:
as a follow up question to why BA didn't order 748s
I wonder why LY did not order any as successors to their 744s
surely they could have filled them to NY.

Even the Super 748 only had about a thousand mile range so there's no way it could have reached New York. Anyway, production stopped in 1988 before LY even received their 747-400s. I suppose they could have replaced with with used 748s but it would have been a helluva drop in capacity. Did LY ever operate twin turboprops?

The 748 in this case is the Boeing 747-8, not the Hawker Siddeley HS 748...
 
User avatar
FlyRow
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:05 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:44 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
PM wrote:
entdoc wrote:
as a follow up question to why BA didn't order 748s
I wonder why LY did not order any as successors to their 744s
surely they could have filled them to NY.

Even the Super 748 only had about a thousand mile range so there's no way it could have reached New York. Anyway, production stopped in 1988 before LY even received their 747-400s. I suppose they could have replaced with with used 748s but it would have been a helluva drop in capacity. Did LY ever operate twin turboprops?

The 748 in this case is the Boeing 747-8, not the Hawker Siddeley HS 748...


I think you missed the joke by a 1000miles. It's a Reductio ad absurdum in line with the many "why didn't a order b".
F70-F100-RJ85-RJ70-E190-319-320-321-733-734-735-737-738-752-753-763-764-772-744-380
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:49 pm

FlyRow wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
PM wrote:
Even the Super 748 only had about a thousand mile range so there's no way it could have reached New York. Anyway, production stopped in 1988 before LY even received their 747-400s. I suppose they could have replaced with with used 748s but it would have been a helluva drop in capacity. Did LY ever operate twin turboprops?

The 748 in this case is the Boeing 747-8, not the Hawker Siddeley HS 748...


I think you missed the joke by a 1000miles. It's a Reductio ad absurdum in line with the many "why didn't a order b".

Impossible to detect a written snarky joke, you never know what people really mean.

Of all the "why didn't a order b" thread, this is one of the few that makes sense since LY did operate the 744; so ordering the 748 would be a logical follow-up, similar to LH, KE and others.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:52 pm

Duplicate
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2432
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:56 pm

A grand total of 3 airlines have bought the 747-8i. Three. That's it. You might as well have asked why the rest of the world didn't buy it, and there are (at least) 4 good reasons:

1) Most of the airlines who bought the 747-400 did so mainly for range, and then took an impact on the yield to fill them up
2) For the past 15 years you've been able order twins which have equal, or better, range than a -400, thus eliminating the need to buy larger aircraft for the range
3) If you really need an aircraft with a 500 seat capacity, Airbus has a better proposal. Which don't sell particularly well either, due to points 1) and 2) above
4) B777-300ER. It has almost the same pax capacity, more cargo capacity, more range, lower acquisition- and much lower operating cost. El Al didn't spring for that one either, which tells you everything you need to know about why they haven't ordered any -8i's
Signature. You just read one.
 
N766UA
Posts: 8212
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 1999 3:50 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:23 pm

There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?
 
RainerBoeing777
Posts: 350
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:57 pm

If LY needs capacity the best option is the Boeing 787-10, routes like EWR, JFK, BKK and European routes of high demand would be ideal this model
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:10 pm

N766UA wrote:
There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?

These are the most irritating of threads on a.net. I know that moderators are ever more active in pruning posts that they consider off-topic, or anti-moderators, but why they continue to refuse to act on these "Why X did not do Y ...." threads is surprising, as it debases the overall quality of the a.net site

Both the ones about not ordered aircraft, or not operated destinations: does it take an enormous intellect to answer the question without polluting a.net for the average user? Airlines are commercial organisations, that's fundamentally the answer to all these threads!

This post will be deleted before tomorrow, I'm sure, if past experience is anything to go by
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:13 pm

B777LRF wrote:
A grand total of 3 airlines have bought the 747-8i. Three. That's it. You might as well have asked why the rest of the world didn't buy it, and there are (at least) 4 good reasons:

1) Most of the airlines who bought the 747-400 did so mainly for range, and then took an impact on the yield to fill them up
2) For the past 15 years you've been able order twins which have equal, or better, range than a -400, thus eliminating the need to buy larger aircraft for the range
3) If you really need an aircraft with a 500 seat capacity, Airbus has a better proposal. Which don't sell particularly well either, due to points 1) and 2) above
4) B777-300ER. It has almost the same pax capacity, more cargo capacity, more range, lower acquisition- and much lower operating cost. El Al didn't spring for that one either, which tells you everything you need to know about why they haven't ordered any -8i's


Maybe I am wrong, but the 747 is a symbolic airplane. All 3 customers were flagship national airlines.

Taiwan, South Korea, Germany militarily rely on the US at deep (historical) levels. The other countries in a similar category are Japan and Israel. And indeed, JAL and El Al had tremendous 747 association in their past. This is not entirely a coincidence.

I understand airlines do what works for them, except it's not entirely true always. Israel would be a market that could support a 748 fleet. If they had a desire to use it as a symbol, they could; and it would not have been a total surprise if they did.
 
EChid
Posts: 540
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:00 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:15 pm

N766UA wrote:
There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?

I swear we had this exact same question last week. Same airplane, same airline.
2018: DRW-PER-HKG-ICN-MEL-AVV-BNE-OOL-SYD-YYZ-YYZ-YUL-YVR-PDX-SEA-SFO-PEK-KIX-CDG-IST-NRT-HND-BKK-FAT; AC J-TK J-OZ F-DL F-TG J/F-NH J/F-CX J-VA J
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 5071
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:24 pm

sassiciai wrote:
N766UA wrote:
There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?

These are the most irritating of threads on a.net. I know that moderators are ever more active in pruning posts that they consider off-topic, or anti-moderators, but why they continue to refuse to act on these "Why X did not do Y ...." threads is surprising, as it debases the overall quality of the a.net site.

To be fair, I started a thread today - "Why did Loganair not order the B748?" - and it was quickly deleted.
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:58 pm

PM wrote:
sassiciai wrote:
N766UA wrote:
There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?

These are the most irritating of threads on a.net. I know that moderators are ever more active in pruning posts that they consider off-topic, or anti-moderators, but why they continue to refuse to act on these "Why X did not do Y ...." threads is surprising, as it debases the overall quality of the a.net site.

To be fair, I started a thread today - "Why did Loganair not order the B748?" - and it was quickly deleted.

TBH, if Loganair has self agrandisment plans, and wants to give it a go to fly from GLA to points > 3000 miles away, why not? Why is such a thread scrapped immediately, and all the other "why doesnt X do Y" threads persist?

Perhaps Loganair discovered that the Kirkwall runway was a bit short, or the Islay beech couldn't support a B478. Anyone flying to anywhere near Skye could fill a B748 and more every day in the summer months. Let's all be happy there are no suitable airports around!
 
Strato2
Posts: 423
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:29 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
ordering the 748 would be a logical follow-up, similar to LH, KE and others.


You mean Air China, Air China and Air China?
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:40 pm

Strato2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
ordering the 748 would be a logical follow-up, similar to LH, KE and others.


You mean Air China, Air China and Air China?

AirBridgeCargo, Atlas Air, Cargolux, Cathay Pacific, Polar Air Cargo, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Silk Way West Airlines and UPS Airlines all operates 747-400's and 747-8's. There is more to the 747-8 than the -8i...
 
User avatar
FlyRow
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:05 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:48 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
ordering the 748 would be a logical follow-up, similar to LH, KE and others.


You mean Air China, Air China and Air China?

AirBridgeCargo, Atlas Air, Cargolux, Cathay Pacific, Polar Air Cargo, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Silk Way West Airlines and UPS Airlines all operates 747-400's and 747-8's. There is more to the 747-8 than the -8i...


And if LY was a major cargo airline you might have a point. It isn't.
The 747-8i was the wrong plane at the wrong time and didn't sell well for a reason.
F70-F100-RJ85-RJ70-E190-319-320-321-733-734-735-737-738-752-753-763-764-772-744-380
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:54 pm

FlyRow wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Strato2 wrote:

You mean Air China, Air China and Air China?

AirBridgeCargo, Atlas Air, Cargolux, Cathay Pacific, Polar Air Cargo, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Silk Way West Airlines and UPS Airlines all operates 747-400's and 747-8's. There is more to the 747-8 than the -8i...


And if LY was a major cargo airline you might have a point. It isn't.
The 747-8i was the wrong plane at the wrong time and didn't sell well for a reason.

I believe the 747-8 as a whole was the wrong plane at the wrong time; especially for operators who did not have 747's before.

But, the 747-8 being a development of the 747 line, some airlines who operated the 747 (especially the -400) could legitimately have been interested in the -8 (due to fleet commonalities)... only to turn it down.

In any case, some airlines have made a business case of the 747-8; most have not.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 7:00 pm

Pretty hard to fill, and it can pretty much be used only to and from JFK and EWR, even if that is more than 1/3 of the entirety of LY's business all by itself. The question I have asked myself is why LY didn't consider the B78X as a worthy replacement for the B744, ordering about 4-5 (it would be very suitable for LHR, BKK, and JFK, replacing the B763s with B788s and then B789s to increase capacity. The B78Xs could have about 335 seats in them and save a lot in landing fees.

The only airline with a business case for the B748 is really LH, which flies a dense but premium-heavy configuration.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 10:24 pm

Strato2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
ordering the 748 would be a logical follow-up, similar to LH, KE and others.


You mean Air China, Air China and Air China?


I believe Transaero ordered them before the airline folded, no?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6466
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 10:37 pm

The answer to the original question is "because they didn't want to go bankrupt."

aemoreira1981 wrote:
The question I have asked myself is why LY didn't consider the B78X as a worthy replacement for the B744, ordering about 4-5 (it would be very suitable for LHR, BKK, and JFK, replacing the B763s with B788s and then B789s to increase capacity. The B78Xs could have about 335 seats in them and save a lot in landing fees.


This is a much more relevant question than the OP's and I suspect the answer is that the 787-9 was far more attractive from a pricing standpoint. Boeing has been dealing on 787-9s recently; not so much on 787-10s. I don't know if that's because of 787-10 production constraints in the near term, contractual arrangements with initial 787-10 customers, or for some other reason.

I still wouldn't be shocked to see LY order 787-10s in the future when the price is more attractive.
 
User avatar
FlyRow
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:05 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Thu Jan 24, 2019 10:50 pm

SurlyBonds wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
ordering the 748 would be a logical follow-up, similar to LH, KE and others.


You mean Air China, Air China and Air China?


I believe Transaero ordered them before the airline folded, no?

They did, but fleet management at transaero was based nearly on: ' Lets try to operate as many types and subtypes as we can'
F70-F100-RJ85-RJ70-E190-319-320-321-733-734-735-737-738-752-753-763-764-772-744-380
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:56 am

PM wrote:
sassiciai wrote:
N766UA wrote:
There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?

These are the most irritating of threads on a.net. I know that moderators are ever more active in pruning posts that they consider off-topic, or anti-moderators, but why they continue to refuse to act on these "Why X did not do Y ...." threads is surprising, as it debases the overall quality of the a.net site.

To be fair, I started a thread today - "Why did Loganair not order the B748?" - and it was quickly deleted.

You too? :biggrin:
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6261
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:02 am

N766UA wrote:
There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?


The other one we have a million of is “Could XX fly ABC-XYZ?”

Sure they could. They just don’t think it would be profitable to do so.

The 747-8 was not Boeing’s best move. At least the cargo version has a future. I wish it sold better, but that is not the business reality as others have noted.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1555
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:38 am

FlyRow wrote:
SurlyBonds wrote:
Strato2 wrote:

You mean Air China, Air China and Air China?


I believe Transaero ordered them before the airline folded, no?

They did, but fleet management at transaero was based nearly on: ' Lets try to operate as many types and subtypes as we can'


They were competing with TG as hard as they could.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN DEN DOH BLR MAA KTM YYZ MEX
 
EBJ68
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:54 am

As I rcall, 748 had a price tag of some 300 million and I'm reasonably sure that alone was a show stopper for a lot of airlines. If my memory is correct, the first production 747s, way back when, went for some 26 million and the airlines gasped! To make an airplane like the 748 or the A380 work, you have to have a network and customer base that needs what the new airplane will bring. Few airlines order for prestige; most order what's most practical and cost effective; both short term and long term.
 
EBT
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2018 1:04 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:00 am

Flighty wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
A grand total of 3 airlines have bought the 747-8i. Three. That's it. You might as well have asked why the rest of the world didn't buy it, and there are (at least) 4 good reasons:

1) Most of the airlines who bought the 747-400 did so mainly for range, and then took an impact on the yield to fill them up
2) For the past 15 years you've been able order twins which have equal, or better, range than a -400, thus eliminating the need to buy larger aircraft for the range
3) If you really need an aircraft with a 500 seat capacity, Airbus has a better proposal. Which don't sell particularly well either, due to points 1) and 2) above
4) B777-300ER. It has almost the same pax capacity, more cargo capacity, more range, lower acquisition- and much lower operating cost. El Al didn't spring for that one either, which tells you everything you need to know about why they haven't ordered any -8i's


Maybe I am wrong, but the 747 is a symbolic airplane. All 3 customers were flagship national airlines.

Taiwan, South Korea, Germany militarily rely on the US at deep (historical) levels. The other countries in a similar category are Japan and Israel. And indeed, JAL and El Al had tremendous 747 association in their past. This is not entirely a coincidence.

I understand airlines do what works for them, except it's not entirely true always. Israel would be a market that could support a 748 fleet. If they had a desire to use it as a symbol, they could; and it would not have been a total surprise if they did.


Ah, "flagship national airlines", that nostalgic phrase. Let's be clear - LH and KE are businesses run separate to government. Air China is still a "flagship national airline", but so are China Eastern and China Southern, which to a large extent take the aircraft that the government tell them to take.

Korean Air took 748s because its aerospace division makes structures for the aircraft, so they were supporting that programme. Really they would have done better to grow out the 77W and A380 fleets - and the latter is highly unlikely given how they operate them.

Lufthansa, it seems, wanted an option where they could operate a jet with fewer economy seats than their A380s but similar sized premium cabin, and Boeing gave them that.

Air China, likely political posturing at the time, and it was a very limited deal compared to their 77W fleet.

Bottom line - buying an aircraft as a "symbol" is an expensive exercise, and hard to justify to shareholders who want to see returns on invested capital. If there are aircraft out there that offer higher returns on the spreadsheet modelling, those are the ones that end up as mainstays of the fleet. Thus endeth today's lesson.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:19 am

EBT wrote:
Flighty wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
A grand total of 3 airlines have bought the 747-8i. Three. That's it. You might as well have asked why the rest of the world didn't buy it, and there are (at least) 4 good reasons:

1) Most of the airlines who bought the 747-400 did so mainly for range, and then took an impact on the yield to fill them up
2) For the past 15 years you've been able order twins which have equal, or better, range than a -400, thus eliminating the need to buy larger aircraft for the range
3) If you really need an aircraft with a 500 seat capacity, Airbus has a better proposal. Which don't sell particularly well either, due to points 1) and 2) above
4) B777-300ER. It has almost the same pax capacity, more cargo capacity, more range, lower acquisition- and much lower operating cost. El Al didn't spring for that one either, which tells you everything you need to know about why they haven't ordered any -8i's


Maybe I am wrong, but the 747 is a symbolic airplane. All 3 customers were flagship national airlines.

Taiwan, South Korea, Germany militarily rely on the US at deep (historical) levels. The other countries in a similar category are Japan and Israel. And indeed, JAL and El Al had tremendous 747 association in their past. This is not entirely a coincidence.

I understand airlines do what works for them, except it's not entirely true always. Israel would be a market that could support a 748 fleet. If they had a desire to use it as a symbol, they could; and it would not have been a total surprise if they did.


Ah, "flagship national airlines", that nostalgic phrase. Let's be clear - LH and KE are businesses run separate to government. Air China is still a "flagship national airline", but so are China Eastern and China Southern, which to a large extent take the aircraft that the government tell them to take.

Korean Air took 748s because its aerospace division makes structures for the aircraft, so they were supporting that programme. Really they would have done better to grow out the 77W and A380 fleets - and the latter is highly unlikely given how they operate them.

Lufthansa, it seems, wanted an option where they could operate a jet with fewer economy seats than their A380s but similar sized premium cabin, and Boeing gave them that.

Air China, likely political posturing at the time, and it was a very limited deal compared to their 77W fleet.

Bottom line - buying an aircraft as a "symbol" is an expensive exercise, and hard to justify to shareholders who want to see returns on invested capital. If there are aircraft out there that offer higher returns on the spreadsheet modelling, those are the ones that end up as mainstays of the fleet. Thus endeth today's lesson.


You pointed out the worst mistake I made, which is that the 748 operator is Air China (like you say) not China Airlines, the Taiwan operator, and IIRC operator of the final pax 744s produced.

From your statement, only LH bought the 748I for apparently real commercial reasons (resale value is irrelevant to them anyway). Your take on S Korea isn't far off what I was trying to say, that Korea wants to do its part in a productive relationship with USA. I just thought maybe Israel would do that too - knowing the expense, but also knowing Israel might do it anyway, perhaps for "security reasons," or just because it would cut a certain profile at global airports. But, not the case.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1090
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:16 am

EBJ68 wrote:
As I rcall, 748 had a price tag of some 300 million and I'm reasonably sure that alone was a show stopper for a lot of airlines. If my memory is correct, the first production 747s, way back when, went for some 26 million and the airlines gasped! To make an airplane like the 748 or the A380 work, you have to have a network and customer base that needs what the new airplane will bring. Few airlines order for prestige; most order what's most practical and cost effective; both short term and long term.

Put everything in perspective: it looks like you are comparing 1970 airline cost to current catalog list price. So, basically, you're comparing apples to... I don't even know what.
747 EIS => 1970. $26 million in 1970 is $168 million in 2014
747-8i list price in 2014 => $357 million. Since it is usually admitted the airlines get 50% discount, then the 2014 airline cost would be $179 million, extremely close to the $168 million equivalent of the first 747-100's.
 
speedbird52
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 5:02 am

I think I owe an apology to everybody on this forum as it was me who dug these old threads back up.
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 5071
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:59 am

Revelation wrote:
PM wrote:
sassiciai wrote:
These are the most irritating of threads on a.net. I know that moderators are ever more active in pruning posts that they consider off-topic, or anti-moderators, but why they continue to refuse to act on these "Why X did not do Y ...." threads is surprising, as it debases the overall quality of the a.net site.

To be fair, I started a thread today - "Why did Loganair not order the B748?" - and it was quickly deleted.

You too? :biggrin:
:rotfl:
 
Aircraftlover1
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:35 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 9:55 am

Hi All, new to the airliners.net family so bare with me please.
If airlines can make the A380 work then why not the 747-8?
Thanks.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 8613
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 10:01 am

sassiciai wrote:
N766UA wrote:
There are like 9 of these pointless “why didnt X order Y” threads going at once. It’s a conspiratorial troll joke, right?

These are the most irritating of threads on a.net. I know that moderators are ever more active in pruning posts that they consider off-topic, or anti-moderators, but why they continue to refuse to act on these "Why X did not do Y ...." threads is surprising, as it debases the overall quality of the a.net site

Both the ones about not ordered aircraft, or not operated destinations: does it take an enormous intellect to answer the question without polluting a.net for the average user? Airlines are commercial organisations, that's fundamentally the answer to all these threads!

This post will be deleted before tomorrow, I'm sure, if past experience is anything to go by


And by pass experience you should know better and just report the posts rather than whining about it. Report the posts and we will review them and just to remind you the moderators are VOLUNTEERS i.e. we do this in our spare time and let me make it clear if some users made our role easier the things we want to do to enhance user quality such as adding reference guides we could actually get on and do it. Also please refer to comments about moderation to Site Related otherwise it will be removed
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20932
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:39 pm

Aircraftlover1 wrote:
Hi All, new to the airliners.net family so bare with me please.
If airlines can make the A380 work then why not the 747-8?
Thanks.

Operating large planes is difficult.

You must be able to consistently fill them with enough passengers paying high enough fares to bring in enough money to go past the (large) per-trip expenses and make a profit.

Not many routes can provide enough passengers that can pay enough to get a profitable operation.

As for A380 vs 747-8, here is one set of numbers to compare them by:

Image

We can see 747-8 has the worst fuel cost per seat mile.

Both 747-8 and A380 have worse fuel cost per seat mile than 777-300ER and 777-9.

Bigger planes usually need to have lower cost per seat mile than smaller planes to be successful, and 747-8 and A380 do not.

The only way to make more money for the bigger planes is to be able to command a price premium, which EK claims it can for A380.

But overall neither sells very well at this point in time, or at all in the case of 747-8i.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
bhxalex
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:40 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:13 pm

Why they didn't order the 77W is perhaps more of a mystery than why they didn't order the 748i. A handful of end of line triples for a good price to send to LHR, BKK & JFK would have made much more sense than a 748i order.
 
sixfootscream
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 2:23 pm

Too big!
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2371
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:01 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
FlyRow wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
AirBridgeCargo, Atlas Air, Cargolux, Cathay Pacific, Polar Air Cargo, Saudi Arabian Airlines, Silk Way West Airlines and UPS Airlines all operates 747-400's and 747-8's. There is more to the 747-8 than the -8i...


And if LY was a major cargo airline you might have a point. It isn't.
The 747-8i was the wrong plane at the wrong time and didn't sell well for a reason.

I believe the 747-8 as a whole was the wrong plane at the wrong time; especially for operators who did not have 747's before.

But, the 747-8 being a development of the 747 line, some airlines who operated the 747 (especially the -400) could legitimately have been interested in the -8 (due to fleet commonalities)... only to turn it down.

In any case, some airlines have made a business case of the 747-8; most have not.


Also the fact that it was years late due to the resources that had to be shifted to the 787 program, made it less desirable by the time it it finally became available. The passenger model had even more teething problems due to difficulties with the tail fuel tank that the freighter didn't have. The CASM improvement over 77W is small and not enough to compensate for the decreased flexibility of using a 748. The larger cargo bays of the 77W give operators more revenue potential.
 
LY777
Posts: 2508
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:58 pm

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:41 pm

bhxalex wrote:
Why they didn't order the 77W is perhaps more of a mystery than why they didn't order the 748i. A handful of end of line triples for a good price to send to LHR, BKK & JFK would have made much more sense than a 748i order.



Maybe because their 772s are RR-powered?
Flown:717,727,732,733,734,735,738,73H,742/744/748,752,762/2ER/763/3ER,772/77E/773/77W, 788, 789, DC8,DC10,E190,E195,MD83,MD88, L1011, A3B2,A319,A320-100/200,A321,A332/A333,A343,A388
 
bhxalex
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:40 am

Re: why didn't LY order 748s

Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:55 pm

LY777 wrote:
bhxalex wrote:
Why they didn't order the 77W is perhaps more of a mystery than why they didn't order the 748i. A handful of end of line triples for a good price to send to LHR, BKK & JFK would have made much more sense than a 748i order.



Maybe because their 772s are RR-powered?


I'm sure if they got them as cheap as UA are rumoured to have, then they could look past that factor. But yes, you are right.

The point I'm making though, is that asking why EL AL didn't order the 77W is a much more pertinent question than why they didn't order the 748i. Given the amount of frames built and number of operators of each, it's doesn't leave much guessing as to why the 748i wasn't ordered. As for the 77W, aside from engine differences, it's a much more intriguing questioning of 'Why not?' I believe.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Italianflyer, LGAviation, OKCDCA and 11 guests

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