Boeing 747-8I

[TexasGuy]

interesting info......



Boeing gears up for passenger-variant 747-8 Intercontinental sales drive
By Guy Norris
Manufacturer decides to standardise on freighter fuselage stretch for passenger version as it seeks first airline orders
Boeing is intensifying its efforts to secure a launch customer for the passenger version of the 747-8, following the manufacturer’s decision to standardise on the freighter version’s longer stretch.

Boeing denies that it has settled on the 76.3m (250ft)-long body length of the 747-8F for the -8 Intercontinental passenger variant, but industry sources have told Flight International the manufacturer has decided to develop the two models with the same fuselage length.

Boeing briefed Asian carriers on the 747-8’s latest specification last month during an update meeting in Hong Kong, as part of its efforts to add passenger airlines to its growing list of cargo customers (Flight International, 22-28 August). Additional orders for the freighter are imminent, say sources, but the manufacturer is now redoubling its efforts in the airline sector with Korean Air and Qantas seen as among the leading candidates to place launch orders.............


http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/20 ... sales.html

[smokejumper]

With the latest A380 delay, Boeing has a real opportunity to sign 747-8i orders. I do not think A380 customers will cancel (since after penalties, they'll end up with a very inexpensive wide-body). However, potential new A380 customers may now look at the the 747-8i since it will use less fuel (lower weight) and can be deliverered sooner (2009-2010). The A380 delay presents Boeing a real opportunity.

[CX]

I think Qantas will order a whole bunch, they have 747-300s to replace as well!

I don't know but A380 is a brand new plane, while the 748I is just an iteration of a 30year old model -- yes its performance is comparable, but old is old! An airline might buy a 748I, and then 10, 15 years down the road they'll probably replace them with A380s anyway when there will be some improvements.

Interestingly Cathay still has no intention to replace its 744 fleet, or are their 19 773ERs going to replace some of their 744s? An insider has told me that CX is considering more about its medium-sized plane renewal, and said will not do anything with the A380 until the delays are over (and he very correctly told me something like 3 months ago that the A380 delay will surely stretch beyond December this year, and i argued that i was sure the first A380 will be delivered to SIA this December... )

[cageyjames]

...the 748I is just an iteration of a 30year old model -- yes its performance is comparable, but old is old!

While I do prefer A320s, the 30+ year old 737 has great economics and has been giving the A320 a hard time. I don't buy the old airframe argument. The fact that the width of such aircraft has not changed is irrelevant. New wings, engines and electronics is what is important. I can't for the life of me explain how people can be so against the A330-200Lite and buy 737NGs.

An airline might buy a 748I, and then 10, 15 years down the road they'll probably replace them with A380s anyway when there will be some improvements.

Or whatever Boeing next generation model will be. Honestly airlines can't worry about what might happen in those 15 years because who knows what the marketplace might look like. Heck they might buy their 747/380 replacements from Embraer by then.

[smokejumper]

I don't know but A380 is a brand new plane, while the 748I is just an iteration of a 30year old model -- yes its performance is comparable, but old is old! An airline might buy a 748I, and then 10, 15 years down the road they'll probably replace them with A380s anyway when there will be some improvements.

This assumes that the A380 is in production 10 to 15 years from now. Unless the plane spectacularly exceeds its contract performance guaranties, there might not be enough demand to keep it in production, especially after Airbus' credibility issues. Airbus is reportedly selling the plane at about $135-150 million (as opposed to the $200 million list price) and with the penalties, airlines under contract now may get them for about $100 million. Such a loss can not be sustained, unless the shareholders and affected governments pony up lots more money.

[RC20]

I believe the “official” list price for the A380 is 305 million.

That means incredible discounting gone on (a 747-8 list for 225millin or so).

The phenomenal thing about the 737 is that it is more efficient than the A320 despite its handicap of the original faired engine configuration, low landing gear and pylon issues that they are held to.

Fuselage does not have a huge amount to do with the efficiency its mostly the wings and engines.

[earthman]

I believe the “official” list price for the A380 is 305 million.

That means incredible discounting gone on (a 747-8 list for 225millin or so).

The phenomenal thing about the 737 is that it is more efficient than the A320 despite its handicap of the original faired engine configuration, low landing gear and pylon issues that they are held to.

Fuselage does not have a huge amount to do with the efficiency its mostly the wings and engines.

Fuselage width is about passenger comfort. I'd take an A320 over a 737 any day. And the 737 is also quite a bit noisier than an A320, especially the NG's.

[cageyjames]

The phenomenal thing about the 737 is that it is more efficient than the A320 despite its handicap of the original faired engine configuration, low landing gear and pylon issues that they are held to.

Fuselage does not have a huge amount to do with the efficiency its mostly the wings and engines.

Right, which is why I think a A330-200lite would have been the smart way to go. Sure it wasn't sexy, but I bet you airlines would have still bought it and Airbus would have a steady stream of revenue in the future.

[CX]

The phenomenal thing about the 737 is that it is more efficient than the A320 despite its handicap of the original faired engine configuration, low landing gear and pylon issues that they are held to.

Fuselage does not have a huge amount to do with the efficiency its mostly the wings and engines.

Right, which is why I think a A330-200lite would have been the smart way to go. Sure it wasn't sexy, but I bet you airlines would have still bought it and Airbus would have a steady stream of revenue in the future.

But if they did went with the A330-200lite (i suppose you mean the original A350?), let's say they sell about 250 over 10years from 2010, delivered over 8 years let's say, and production goes until 2018... well will Airbus be able to build any 777 competing aircraft during that time? I mean their A330-200lite would just simply be a cheap choice over the 787.
The sweet spot i think is to have the XWB into production in 2010, but Airbus' mistake meant that this is impossible, but still it's not the end of the world, and i still think that they will build a smaller sized family of planes to actually rival the 787 in the future.

[cageyjames]

But if they did went with the A330-200lite (i suppose you mean the original A350?), let's say they sell about 250 over 10years from 2010, delivered over 8 years let's say, and production goes until 2018... well will Airbus be able to build any 777 competing aircraft during that time?

I think Airbus could sell much more that 250 given that Airlines are expanding now. Given that at best the A350 could enter service would be 2012 and most likely just before 2015, 10 years of an enhanced A330 would be worth it to Airbus and the Airlines who buy it.

I mean their A330-200lite would just simply be a cheap choice over the 787.

Now that just isn't fair. The A330 with a new wing and engines from the B787 would be much more than a "cheap" B787.

The sweet spot i think is to have the XWB into production in 2010, but Airbus' mistake meant that this is impossible,

It was impossible before the A380 crisis because Airbus couldn't make up their minds what they wanted the A350 to be. They should have stuck to their guns and gotten out an enhanced A330 to fill in the gap between now and when a new B777 arrives.

but still it's not the end of the world, and i still think that they will build a smaller sized family of planes to actually rival the 787 in the future.

The time is now, not in 5 years. Boeing has no more capacity left. Lets say US Airways needed those A350s in 2012? Well if they wanted to go to Boeing, they'd have to wait just as long. An enhanced A330 could have been here some time around 2009 and given that there are pretty much no open slots for Boeing probably would have sold very well. Not 1000 airframes, but enough to carry Airbus until their real A330/A340 replacement that would arrive in 2015. That aircraft would have probably forced Boeing to cut costs on their 777 or push up their new 777 replacement sooner.

[DFW]

I agree with everything Cageyjames said. Airbus should have kept with the original 350 as a good improvement of the 330 at a modest cost. Now, with both the 380 and the Power8 overhaul drawing away resources, the 350 will be late to market. That leaves the field to the 787 and 777 for several years.

[CX]

I don't know, it seems so easy to say that they should've stuck with the orignal A350, but back a few months all these major airlines were pushing for something new, or else they'll order a full fleet of 787s.

Well it was said that the A330 could be re-engined, let's hope that'll be reality.

[David747]

I think Qantas will order a whole bunch, they have 747-300s to replace as well!

In the Summer, (or winter if you are in Australia) Qantas did express interest for the 748I for its Sydney to Dallas Ft. route.

I don't know but A380 is a brand new plane, while the 748I is just an iteration of a 30year old model -- yes its performance is comparable, but old is old! An airline might buy a 748I, and then 10, 15 years down the road they'll probably replace them with A380s anyway when there will be some improvements.

I agree, which Boeing has not secured a pax customer, and IMO(and I hope I'm wrong) will not get a launch customer. I don't even think that Lufthansa would place an order for 748, even with the A380 delays.

Interestingly Cathay still has no intention to replace its 744 fleet, or are their 19 773ERs going to replace some of their 744s? An insider has told me that CX is considering more about its medium-sized plane renewal, and said will not do anything with the A380 until the delays are over (and he very correctly told me something like 3 months ago that the A380 delay will surely stretch beyond December this year, and i argued that i was sure the first A380 will be delivered to SIA this December... )

You mentioned medium-sized planes...Is the 787 a posibility? If Boeing were to launch the 787-10, I see Cathay interested in that plane. Second, I also thought that SIA will get its first A380 this year, so you are not alone CX....

[DFW]

I vaguely remember the development cost of the 747-8 being in the $2-3billion range. That would put the breakeven point in the 50-100 aircrafts delivered range.

With 41 on order in such a short amount of time, the 747-8 is well on its way to be profitable, even if they don't sell any passenger versions.

[cageyjames]

Fuselage width is about passenger comfort. I'd take an A320 over a 737 any day.

That is just an old wives tale.

Seat pitch and leg room are by far the more important considerations on the A320 vs B737 and those depend on the airline. I love A320s, but it isn't because they have that extra 2"+ of interior width.

[CX]

You mentioned medium-sized planes...Is the 787 a posibility? If Boeing were to launch the 787-10, I see Cathay interested in that plane. Second, I also thought that SIA will get its first A380 this year, so you are not alone CX....

Well you can pretty much be sure that Cathay will not LAUNCH a new plane, they never did. And the 787-10 will only serve as 772 replacements.

[PYX]

Well you can pretty much be sure that Cathay will not LAUNCH a new plane, they never did. And the 787-10 will only serve as 772 replacements.

CX,
You might want to read the following:

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/199 ... 0521b.html

[CX]

Well you can pretty much be sure that Cathay will not LAUNCH a new plane, they never did. And the 787-10 will only serve as 772 replacements.

CX,
You might want to read the following:

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/199 ... 0521b.html

Well in that case, they were also the first Asian carrier to operate the new age A340s (A346).

[earthman]

Fuselage width is about passenger comfort. I'd take an A320 over a 737 any day.

That is just an old wives tale.

Seat pitch and leg room are by far the more important considerations on the A320 vs B737 and those depend on the airline. I love A320s, but it isn't because they have that extra 2"+ of interior width.

That's a load of nonsense on that page. Seated eye height width!? Piece of Boeing marketing blurb. I don't sit on my eyes. I'm not talking about which cabin feels bigger when you look around, it's about whether you are pressed against the shoulder of the person next to you or not. I think I'll start to measure lateral seat pitch and distance to wall next time I fly.

Most comfortable seats I've been in so far are on the E-170. Nice and wide.

And don't get me started about the windows in the 737 where taller people have to practice yoga to look anywhere else but down.

[CX]

Fuselage width is about passenger comfort. I'd take an A320 over a 737 any day.

That is just an old wives tale.

Seat pitch and leg room are by far the more important considerations on the A320 vs B737 and those depend on the airline. I love A320s, but it isn't because they have that extra 2"+ of interior width.

That's a load of nonsense on that page. Seated eye height width!? Piece of Boeing marketing blurb. I don't sit on my eyes. I'm not talking about which cabin feels bigger when you look around, it's about whether you are pressed against the shoulder of the person next to you or not. I think I'll start to measure lateral seat pitch and distance to wall next time I fly.

Most comfortable seats I've been in so far are on the E-170. Nice and wide.

And don't get me started about the windows in the 737 where taller people have to practice yoga to look anywhere else but down.

Well both fuselage width and seat pitch contributes to comfort...
But for me, I am not concerned about how it feels looking around... Most recently I travelled on A330/777 and 747 within a few months, I don't feel myself being 'pressurised' in the A330 relative to 777, nor did i felt more comfortable in a 747 than a 777 (both SIA).