Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

B747-8 no future oders?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    I have to disappoint you, EK has NEVER since 1985 (EK has been established in that year) used triple3s. And what's the reason for that, they simply haver never owned triple3s.
    The only thing that I remember is EK 332s @ EDDL. (...)
    Dear LH-B744, the "A333" in my post was an honest typo. I know that Emirates doesn't have the bigger A330 variant in its fleet and I of course meant the A330-200.

    Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
    (...)But, when have you been the last time at EDDL, Mr Kesternich? (...)
    Since I am from the Cologne area, I of course consider EDDK my home airport, but with only about an hour's drive away from EDDL, I should tell you that I know my way around that airport perfectly. I fly into and out of EDDL several times a year and go there for plane spotting about twice every year additionally.
    I flew out of EDDL on the evening of 11 July and there was an Emirates 777-300ER parked at the C gates. I took my last picture of an Emirates A330-200 at EDDL in September 2009 (http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.p...688475&nseq=11). However, I don't know when Emirates switched the aircraft to the 777-300/-300ER.

    As for the possibility of 747 operations at EDDL, I merely stated the fact (which I am sure you are aware of) that JAL used 747s out of EDDL in the 1980s and that I don't think that the runway length at EDDL is a reason for not using 747s (of whatever variant) today. Neither is the amount of passengers the airport can handle. After all, it can handle Emirates 777-300 (380-434 seats depending on the seating arrangement) and Emirates 777-300ER (358-427 seats depending on the seating arrangement). Lufthansa's 747-400 have between 330 and 378 seats (all seating arrangements according to seatguru.com). Also, wingspan can't be the issue either. With a wingspan of 64,8m, the 777-300ER is 40cm wider than the 747-400 (at 64,4m).

    Please understand, LH-B744, that I did not mean any disrespect to what you consider your home airport. However, I think I am definitely knowledgable enough about operations at EDDL to contribute to the discussion here.

    Comment


    • #32
      My Friend works in the wing area of Engineering. He said its a new wing. But I guess Taliesin knows more about that than him.

      Comment


      • #33

        New wing design. The 747-8’s wing design provides additional performance with lower noise (see fig. 3). New features include:
        • Advanced technology airfoils for improved overall performance and greater fuel capacity.
        • Fly-by-wire spoilers and outboard ailerons to save weight.
        • Double-slotted inboard and single-slotted outboard flaps to improve low-speed performance and noise.
        • Advanced-technology raked tip to reduce cruise drag.
        • Aileron droop to reduce noise and provide improved low-speed performance.
        • Redesigned flap tracks with optimized flap-track fairings to improve low-speed performance and noise.
        • Redesigned Krueger flaps with gapped configuration to improve low-speed performance.
        Figure 3: New wing design enhances performance while lowering noise
        The redesigned wing on the 747-8 offers a number of benefits, including improved overall performance, reduced noise, and greater fuel capacity.

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • #34
          Now Now Gabriel, no fair posting facts. Taliesin obviously knows way way more than us whom work here.

          Comment


          • #35
            I am making no claim about "how new" the wing is. Obviously it's something in between a "completely new from scratch" wing and a "simply redecorated" wing.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              I am making no claim about "how new" the wing is. Obviously it's something in between a "completely new from scratch" wing and a "simply redecorated" wing.
              Its new

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by W7PSK View Post
                Its new
                That adds as much value as "it's a wing".

                "Hey guys, we'll make a new wing for the 747-8. The constrains are the usual ones for when we design a new wing, you know, best performance, minimum weight, great fuel capacity, airport constraints..., the usual stuff. I want to make clear that the previous design of the 747 wing is NOT a constrain. We are making a new wing from scratch"

                I'm quite sure that, had the above been the design inoputs for the "new wing", we would be seing a completely different wing.

                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                  I'm quite sure that, had the above been the design inoputs for the "new wing", we would be seing a completely different wing.
                  Yea, notably one with a lot less wing sweep.

                  The topic at hand is the lack of 747-8 orders, now it's interesting to discuss why that is.
                  The cornerstone of aircraft sales is performance and the cornerstone of performance is weight. Airbus recently finished a weight savings program for the A380 that reduced weight by 700kg. This demonstrates that every kilogram counts. Not redesigning the wing and keeping the wing sweep saved Boeing over 1 billion dollars, but it costs the 747-8 several tons in weight.
                  This is obvious to everyone who, despite sympathies for one side or another, has kept his or her objectivity.

                  Now we can have an educated discussion about the reasons for the lack of 747-8 sales or we can shake our fists at the cruel, cruel world that wont buy 747-8's despite their awesome sparkly new technology and voice our collective disbelief.

                  I for one vote for the educated discussion

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                    That adds as much value as "it's a wing".
                    If you put it with the post I made above it, its of much value. I work in Avionics, my friend works in the wind design area, he says its a new wing, thus I would assume, since he is part of the design group, that when he said new wing that means its a new wing. That along with the New engines, completely resdesigned interior, new avionics and control systems, and Longer, makes it pretty much a new airplane with a similar familiar design. This is not an upgraded 747-400. Its meeting its design criteria on all facets, and will be even better with the Engine upgrades. As far as weight savings, the A380 is trying to cut weight because I believe it was way over its original promised design weights to begin with. We are within ours and making the savings as promised. In fact our customers seem to love the airplane so far.

                    As far as to why its not selling, I dunno, much like the A380 isn't selling. You would have to ask the airlines.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      As I've said, it is DEFINITVELLY NOT a "completely brand new wing from scratch". Would you reject that? Obviously, it's not just the old wing with a new fuel cap either. In this context, saying "new wing" falls short of value, because "new" can mean so many things...

                      I would also object your comment that it is "a new airplane with a familiar look". It's still a 747, not only because it has the numbers "747" pained on it, but because Boeing is using the "previous type certificate" privileges to bypass things that would not be allowed by the current standards, if it was a new.

                      I'm quite sure that if Boeing would have said "let's make a new plane" it would have lloked so different to the 747 and so much more alike to the 787. Extensive use of composites, fully fly by wire, bleedless, more span, less sweep, longer legs to allow a bigger, more efficient fan, etc, etc, etc...

                      The 747-8 is not revolutionary, it's evolutionary from the 747 family.

                      And I love it!

                      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                        As I've said, it is DEFINITVELLY NOT a "completely brand new wing from scratch". Would you reject that? Obviously, it's not just the old wing with a new fuel cap either. In this context, saying "new wing" falls short of value, because "new" can mean so many things...

                        I would also object your comment that it is "a new airplane with a familiar look". It's still a 747, not only because it has the numbers "747" pained on it, but because Boeing is using the "previous type certificate" privileges to bypass things that would not be allowed by the current standards, if it was a new.

                        I'm quite sure that if Boeing would have said "let's make a new plane" it would have lloked so different to the 747 and so much more alike to the 787. Extensive use of composites, fully fly by wire, bleedless, more span, less sweep, longer legs to allow a bigger, more efficient fan, etc, etc, etc...

                        The 747-8 is not revolutionary, it's evolutionary from the 747 family.

                        And I love it!
                        I agree 100% on that, so I guess we are saying the same thing , not being a structures guy, I'm sure there are guidelines you need to follow so yes, its not a totally new wing, as in its got to follow constraints, but he said it was a new design, so I thought new wing. as far as composites, well that's a rather large body to make and autoclave for, but they are being used through out the airplane . And I do love my -8I and -8F.

                        And Time will tell whether the airlines will come back to the Large Aircraft, both 747-8 and A380. The world economy in the crapper, I think airlines are holding their cards tight right now to see what Fuel costs will do and whether the fuel seat per mile makes them a profit. I think as we meet our numbers and things are looking better with the upgrades coming, some current 747 owners will look to the -8I to replace aging 400s.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Taliesin View Post
                          (...)

                          I for one vote for the educated discussion
                          ... says the guy who has already decide who is educated and who isn't...
                          Last edited by Peter Kesternich; 2012-09-06, 17:56.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by W7PSK View Post
                            I'm sure there are guidelines you need to follow so yes, its not a totally new wing, as in its got to follow constraints, but he said it was a new design, so I thought new wing.
                            I'm glad we can finally agree on that

                            As for the 747-8 replacing older 744's, I think the 77W is going to get those. The 77W is very close to the 744's specifications in both pax count as well as cargo capacity, but at much better economic performance. I think the 747-8 is left to fend for herself, which doesnt help sales.
                            Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
                            ... says the guy who has already decide who is educated and who isn't...
                            Well it was easy with you
                            But go ahead and surprise me. Explain to me why the 747-8 doesnt sell when it is such a brand-spanking-new aircraft in all regards. The 747-8 is smaller than the A380, so it should have an easier time to sell, being less risky to operate and all. On top of this, it has existing 747-400 operators it could get replacement orders from.
                            Why does it sell less then?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Taliesin View Post
                              As for the 747-8 replacing older 744's, I think the 77W is going to get those. The 77W is very close to the 744's specifications in both pax count as well as cargo capacity, but at much better economic performance. I think the 747-8 is left to fend for herself, which doesnt help sales.
                              I agree with completely.

                              This industry has always been one that has been defined by efficiency. We moved from smaller jets to the Queen of the Skies, because she was, back then, larger, and more efficient.

                              I've read here that people are assuming, that when we recover from this economy, that we will return to the old logic, and old ideas. I do not believe that we ever can. The future that we will emerge into, will be one in which 777s provide just as much coverage (or, for the very least, as much as most carriers have agreed upon) and be more fuel efficient. The industry, at its current form, had been driven and formed by the past decade of fuel crisis and rising prices, by new ideas of comfort, and profitability, by new paradigms of safety and reliability. When we recover, I believe that we will hold strongly to these new ideas, and focuses. As can be seen by the airlines, the manufactures, service providers and oversight agencies - they have placed their bets on twins, on greater efficiencies, and this as our new future.

                              Boeing was intelligent, (or, as many of their critics would likely view them as - in this move, not inept) in not investing too much into the idea. Look at the costs involved, they can recover them after relatively few aircraft sales (compared to competitors). It was a great move, if only to shore up a part of their portfolio that they saw as not having much growth potential.

                              Do I think that the A380 will break even? Well, I am sure that Airbus will do what they must to bridge that gap as much as possible, and I do think that the potential is there for them to do so. But, it will be a hell of a fight, and a close call.

                              To sum up, I guess, look at the money being spent by the manufactures. EADS' money is being spent behind the A350. Boeing, the 787 and the upgraded 777 family.
                              Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Taliesin View Post
                                (...)
                                But go ahead and surprise me. Explain to me why the 747-8 doesnt sell when it is such a brand-spanking-new aircraft in all regards. The 747-8 is smaller than the A380, so it should have an easier time to sell, being less risky to operate and all. On top of this, it has existing 747-400 operators it could get replacement orders from.
                                Why does it sell less then?
                                Well - if you really read my previous posts, you would already know the answer I think that both 747-8 and A380 aren't selling well and I believe they never will. The main reason for this is that there are only so many routes where utilizing a very large aircraft makes sense.
                                The lesser size of the 747-8 doesn't mean it should be easier to sell. Airlines will chose their aircraft (among other criteria) on what size best fits their needs. Therefore it is not surprising that for example Lufthansa and Koreanair ordered both aircraft.
                                As for the 747-400 replacement, sooner or later the airlines will chose one and it's not really the A380 that competes with the 747-8 but the 777-300ER. However, in the current world-wide economic climate, they - especially the Americans - prefer to keep their current fleet of 747-400s flying.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X