Boeing Launches New 747-8 Family

[echster 1]

Looks like China will buy 70 737 airplanes. Good news for the boys in Seattle.

The Chinese always seem to buy Boeing aircraft when someone high up in the US government visits. It's a sham to keep the press off them for the high trade deficit we continually run with China (last I checked it was $175+ billion).

[echster 1]

Qantas has already ordered a heap of the new double decker Airbus so why would they order the new Boeing ??.

Bigmike.

By new Boeing, I take it you mean the B787. For one thing, the A380 is a hub-to-hub or slot-restricted airport aircraft. This is going to be the type aircraft you can really pack with bodies and fly major city to major city (ala SIN-LHR, LHR-NYC, SYD-LAX). In other words, using industry slang, the A380 "will haul the mail."

 

The B787 is generally designed to be a long-range aircraft that carries roughly 200 less passengers. In other words, it's the type of aircraft that will fly SYD-NYC-SYD. You could fly an A380 that route, but you couldn't put 500 passengers on it 7 days a week. You could, however, fill a 300 seat B787 7 days a week for this route.

[Samsonite 181]

I respectfully disagree.

I respect your respectful disagreement, but I respectfully disagree with your disagreement.

From what I've been reading about the A380 the design does not lend itself well for the purposes of hauling cargo. Where it will do well is with a customer that moves volume, but not bulk or weight, e.g., FedEx or UPS.

As I've said, it will be very interesting to see how this all works itself out over the next few years.

Personally I don't care for more creature comforts on a passenger jet. I just want to get there faster. Unfortunately, I doubt very much that will happen in my lifetime.

You are correct about incorporating what they have learned from the 787 program into the new 747-8, which is why it going to take so long to bring the 747-8 to market, almost 4 years. If it is going to take that long they might as well do the entire fuselage in composites and save enough weight they can fly it not only farther, but faster.

[echster 1]

If it is going to take that long they might as well do the entire fuselage in composites and save enough weight they can fly it not only farther, but faster.

Maybe they could get some loans from the EU!

 

[Samsonite 181]

Maybe they could get some loans from the EU!

 

Good One!!!!

 

Speaking of the EU I just read a few minutes ago that the C.E.O. of Air France has stated the delivery of their first A380s has been postponed another 6 months for a total of delay of One year.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Maybe they could get some loans from the EU!

 

Or plunder their employees' pension funds.

[echster 1]

Speaking of the EU I just read a few minutes ago that the C.E.O. of Air France has stated the delivery of their first A380s has been postponed another 6 months for a total of delay of One year.

Not at Airbus' doing, though. The 6-month delay has pushed Air France's delivery to the autumn. That is their slow period and they don't want to get them at that time. Air France is volunteering to pushback delivery another 6 months til April 2008.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

echster,

 

Sometimes I think that the airline industry marketing people have lost the plot, where a postponement becomes a delay and an option becomes an order etc .....

 

I live about 20 minutes from Broughton where we make the wings for the A380 and the guys reckon that a significant factor in the overall six month production delay was that airlines ordered the plane and then thought about how they wanted it set up. There is obviously no preferred fit for the aircraft and no airline wants to be seen as the first to be going much over the 550 pax configuration but want to retain the option built into the aircraft. I'll probably treat myself to a seat in Raffles with SQ from LHR when the aircraft does enter service just to see if it lives up to the hype and before they start increasing the pax loads on the thing.

 

Tom

[echster 1]

Part of the initial delay was SQ wanted an interior that essentially didn't exist. It's taken a lot of work to get what they want and how they want it. The main delay, IIRC, was weight and flight test related.

[Samsonite 181]

Not at Airbus' doing, though.  The 6-month delay has pushed Air France's delivery to the autumn.  That is their slow period and they don't want to get them at that time.  Air France is volunteering to pushback delivery another 6 months til April 2008.

Just a thought, pure conjecture on my part, that Air France might be "moving over" so an airline that placed a larger order can get their planes earlier?

Edited November 24, 2005 by Samsonite

[CheshireTom 1,377]

The Chinese always seem to buy Boeing aircraft when someone high up in the US government visits.  It's a sham to keep the press off them for the high trade deficit we continually run with China (last I checked it was $175+ billion).

echster,

 

It looks like the Chinese must run a major deficit with the Europeans as well. Seventy A320 to be ordered this week .......... good news for the guys at Broughton.

 

Tom

 

China to Order 70 Airbus

Edited November 30, 2005 by CheshireTom

[The Mook 105]

http://747.newairplane.com

 

this may get some flyers excited; works for me, as I hope to enjoy the same benefits I have experienced in the economy section of the 777-300ER replicated on the new 747-8's

Edited December 3, 2005 by themook

[Samsonite 181]

http://747.newairplane.com

 

this may get some flyers excited; works for me, as I hope to enjoy the same benefits I have  experienced in the economy section of the 777-300ER replicated on the new 747-8's

Thanks for the great link.

I've always been, obviously, a big fan of the 747 and think it is the smoothest flying aircraft I have yet to experience.

However, that said, the most comfortable aircraft I've ever flown on was a Korean Air 777-200. Made the trip, SFO to ICN, twice and both times it was a very positive experience. Unfortunately, usually, Korean Air's schedule doesn't fit mine.

I'm looking forward to flying on a 777-300ER or a 777-200LR.

BTW, many airlines are refurbishing their older 747-400s with the new "Boeing Signature Interior" which is very similar to the 777 interior. All the new 747-400s, of which China Air (Taiwan) has taken delivery of 4 or 5 this year, come with the new interior.

Edited December 3, 2005 by Samsonite

[The Mook 105]

Samsonite: you're welcome; I would have to tell this, though. My flight earlier this week from TPE to LAX was the most turbulent I have ever been on. Even the flight attendants looked nervous. About 3 hours into the flight we get major league movement with zero warning from the flight deck. The most scary part was it's suddenness and the fact the intial movements were rhythmic. Made me think of mechanical failure. Never once throughout the numerous periods of bumps do they address the passengers. WTF? We had 4 more periods of shaking, but not as bad as the 1st one. I thought we were going down the first time; really. My guess is that very, very few planes go down as a result of turbulence; it doesn't make you feel any better when it's happening.

[too_mutt 10]

My flight earlier this week from TPE to LAX was the most turbulent I have ever been on.  Never once throughout the numerous periods of bumps do they address the passengers. WTF?  I thought we were going down the first time; really. My guess is that very, very few planes go down as a result of turbulence; it doesn't make you feel any better when it's happening.

Themook,

 

I didn't see where you said what the carrier was for this flight.

 

I agree that reassurance from the flight deck is quite important. Maybe they were concerned also. You know it is going to be bad when they say "flight attendants be seated". Flying out of HKG years ago it was turbulent for about the first 4 hours. After a while I sort of relaxed as I was getting used to it. For me the turbulence is the one downside of flying long distances.

 

Also, on the record setting flight of the B777-200 the pilot said it was "bumpy" across the Pacific. It must have been kind of bad if the lead pilot calls it bumpy.

 

Regards

Edited December 4, 2005 by SoCalGuy

[Samsonite 181]

A friend is a airline pilot who has flown L-1011s, B767s, B747s, A330s and A340s. He tells me Boeing aircraft have the reputation for being smoother flying aircraft. When I asked the reason, his answer stunned me.

He said, "Software."

After X number of minutes into the flight they turn the whole thing over to the computer and the computer flies the plane for most of the journey. Apparently Boeing's software does a better job of reacting to whatever is going on and making the proper adjustments.

I found that a little scary, but he insists it is safer that way. However, and I think this is the better philosophy, Boeing gives the pilot the "last say" over the computer. Airbus takes the opposite approach.

Edited December 5, 2005 by Samsonite

[CheshireTom 1,377]

And to think that you Boeing folks derided Airbus when THEY introduced "fly by wire"! How things change.

 

As we say in Europe, "Vorsprung durch Technik".

 

Is it true that the 787 is going to have a "Made in Japan" sticker on the arse end?

 

Tom

[Samsonite 181]

And to think that you Boeing folks derided Airbus when THEY introduced "fly by wire"!  How things change.   

 

As we say in Europe, "Vorsprung durch Technik".

 

Is it true that the 787 is going to have a "Made in Japan" sticker on the arse end?

 

Tom

FBW had been in military aircraft for Years before Airbus put it into a commerical aircraft.

 

DFBW, which is what is used today, was developed by NASA, an American Agency, in the 1970s and into the 1980s:

http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/technology_and_cu...guilmartin.html

 

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/history/pastprojects/F8/

 

This article at the following link, claims the MD-11 was the first commercial airliner to use FBW (True or not, I don't know). Apparently the A320 went into commercial service before the MD-11.

"The MD-11, a highly modified version of the popular DC-10, was the first commercial aircraft to adopt computer-assisted flight controls."

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Ev...ters/Tech37.htm

 

Then there was the time when Airbus took a large number of people up on a A320 "demo" flight. The pilot decided to fly low over the field for the benefit of the people on the ground. The computer thought he wanted to land, took control from the pilot, the pilot could not regain control and the computer put the plane into a forest killing 3 people. Fact not fiction.

Airbus has since made some "changes" to their FBW system.

And, BTW, The biggest manufacturing plant next door to the Airbus Headquarters in France is own by Goodrich, an American Company.

Edited December 5, 2005 by Samsonite

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Samsonite,

 

Jeez, you have to go back to 1988 to find an aircraft accident. Methinks you have just a little bit of a chip on your shoulder about our fantastic European aircraft. Still, I can understand that considering that we went from zero to market leaders in 15 short years. Do yourself a favour and jump onto a non-stop flight from NYC or LAX to BKK to appreciate technology that is here now ........ not X years down the line.

 

Anyway its nice to know that the A320 is so crap that AirAsia take delivery this month of the first of 100 of them to replace their Boeings and the Chinese have today placed an order for 150 ......... I guess they must know something we don't. The guys up at Broughton must be crying into their champagne!

 

Tom

Edited December 5, 2005 by CheshireTom

[Samsonite 181]

Don't have to go back too far to find an Airbus accident.

 

What was the outcome of the investigation of the A340 that went off the end of the runway a few months ago? The 6 or 7 cases where the front nose gear locked in a 90 degree position on landing?

 

Boeing has made their mistakes in recent years. They lost their will to be

innovative, they were content to rest on their laurels, and their attitude was to ignore the competition. For this they paid dearly. However, things are on the turn around and by the end of the year, in just a few weeks, Boeing will have out sold Airbus for 2005. Wednesday of this week there should be a major announcement both is size and importance.

 

As for Airbus themselves, I don't care for their aircraft. I find them noisy, especially when climbing to altitude, rough riding, and cramped. I have no way to know exactly, short of taking a tape measure along on the next trip, but my shoulders "tell me" the seats on an Airbus are even closer together than on a Boeing. Of course, it is the Airlines that choose the seats and where to install them, but in cattle class on an Airbus, my shoulders are wider than the back of the seat.

BTW, I recently flew on a A340 and thought Boeing should be flattered that Airbus thinks so much of Boeing's past designs they did such an good job of copying and enlarging the B707.

It is not always possible, but I try to follow the old adage, "If it isn't Boeing, I'm not going."

Me thinks you should re-read your past posts on this topic and see who is really totally lacking in objectivity.

Edited December 5, 2005 by Samsonite

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Samsonite,

 

I think your reading too many of these airline forums with all the other wannabe airline execs.

 

Boeing may well outrun Airbus in orders taken this year but the Airbus orderbook is full from its orders over the last five years when it has wiped the floor with Boeing on a regular basis. Our assembly lines are booked solid so I don't think we are going to worry too much at the moment about Boeing's orders for aircraft 5 and 6 years down the line. We're producing the things now.

 

As for seatwidth ...... what a load of nonsense. The airlines, not the aircraft manufacturers, decide on which seats they will put in an aircraft ........ you've obviously not flown with Thai or Emirates 777s lately! Anyway, its not our European seats that are narrower but American arses that are generally wider when converted to centimetres.

 

In the meantime, I'll stick to biz class in the A330s of Qatar Airways when flying to LOS and have a good chuckle to myself.

 

Tom

[Samsonite 181]

> I think your reading too many of these airline forums with all the other

> wannabe airline execs.

 

Nah, just wanted to be a pilot. Executives just fuck up good ideas.

 

> "Our assembly lines are booked solid...."

 

"Our assembly lines..."""

What do you do for Airbus, Tom?

 

> "...last five years when it has wiped the floor...."

 

Let's see....2003, Airbus delivered 19 more aircraft than Boeing. In 2004, Airbus delivered 35 more aircraft than Boeing. Hardly wiping anyones floor.

 

Yes, I noted that the airlines choose the seats fitted to their aircraft. Recent health studies have shown the British are major lard asses.

 

Here, as you are so unabashedly bias toward Airbus, I'm sure you will enjoy reading this:

 

http://www.thetravelinsider.info/2003/boeing1.htm

 

You'll especially enjoy sections 3 through 5. Should make your day.

 

Emirates has a very good reputation, but they don't service the West Coast of the United States. Their web site does not show a West Coast Airport as a departure point or destination.

 

Thai Air?! Joking, right?

Edited December 5, 2005 by Samsonite

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Samsonite,

 

Let's see....2003, Airbus delivered 19 more aircraft than Boeing. In 2004, Airbus delivered 35 more aircraft than Boeing. Hardly wiping anyones floor.

 

C'mon .... you know better than that. Aircraft orders for the period 2001-2004 (the stuff now being built) was:

 

Year ........Boeing........Airbus

2001 ..........314 ...........418

2002 ..........250 ...........348

2003 ..........250 ...........331

2004 ..........277 ...........447

Total .........1091 .........1544

 

As I said, Airbus wiped the floor with Boeing.

 

Emirates has a very good reputation, but they don't service the West Coast of the United States. Their web site does not show a West Coast Airport as a departure point or destination.

 

Thai Air?! Joking, right?

 

Why would I joke? Both Emirates and Thai manage to squeeze in 10 abreast on some of their 777s. As good a reason as any to avoid them.

 

Cheshire ain't very big (probably about the size of a US Walmart) but it is home to Rolls Royce, Bentley and Airbus UK so we do know a bit about engineering round these parts.

 

Tom

[Hub 203]

This is the first thread I've ever read where "my seat pitch is better than yours" are fighting words!!

 

Hub

[Samsonite 181]

I didn't post orders, I posted deliveries.

 

Airbus will deliver more aircraft again this year, but then their days in sun are over.

 

Oh, I was reading about the 150 A320 order. Seems they will all be stamped, "Made in China." As part of the deal Airbus will build a plant in China. This is going to be real interesting.