747 Why does continue the production of 747 ?

[humble_dor]

747 is awfully expensive to manufacture.

I won't be surprised if B announces this year that it will terminate 747 production.

[Wino]

It should be FAR cheaper to manufactur than the A380 as the developement costs are completely paid off.

So that arguement donesn't exactly hold any water.

The only reason the cost has been kept as high as it has is to not undercut the price of the 777

Cheers
Wino

[lead zeppelin]

Here's an interesting article on this subject....

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/boeingaerospace/2002161936_boeing27.html

[WHBM]

Lockheed had a rule-of-thumb that widebody production was not profitable once you fell below 2 a month. Boeing fell below this a while ago with the 747 (they only did 3 passenger 747s in the whole of 2004, although several more freighters).

However aircraft components are often ordered from suppliers in batches, and there may well be 10, or 30, or whatever number of sets of parts still in the pipeline, to be paid for on delivery but subject to penalties if cancelled. It's when the remaining number are sold that decision time will arrive. Plus Boeing presumably want to keep Everett going (it also does the 777 and he similarly-orderless 767) until the 787 production gets going.

[CarltonBrowne the FO]

Because it's a fantastic aeroplane and people still want to buy it? Admittedly, not as many as there used to be, but I know a man who'd like to buy 2 747-400Fs...

[Rainboe]

What a daft posting! Boeing is a commercial company (with shareholders to account to!). This is called a drive-by shooting- stirring trouble for trouble's sake. Why don't we put humble-dor and 747Focal in a room together and they can slug it out!
I think Rumors & News is the wrong place for this in that it is neither a Rumor nor News?

[Jerricho]

Yeah......send 'em both over to JB. 747Focal hasn't posted any porn over there for ages :E

[747FOCAL]

That is not entirely fair Jerricho.

:E

[Jerricho]

Not fair..................but true :p

[Lou Scannon]

Perhaps they still produce the 747-400 because they don't have an alternative on the blocks.

With the A380 about to fly it could take them three years to find a suitable design...and by that time it could be all over for Boeing's big bird.

[runway23andahalf]

Boeing still have at least 18 B747's with delivery positions
upto Feb 2006.

As far as I can make out they are...

Pax
......
Lufthansa x 4 (were due Dec 04 onwards - deferred?)
Malaysia x 1 Feb 2006

Freighters (some are ERF versions)
................
SIA Sept 05
Air France June 05
China A/L x 6
All Nippon Cargo x 2
Cathay Pacific x 1
Cargolux x 1
Korean Sept 05

In addition there are bound to be some undisclosed orders too.

R23+1/2

[rotornut]

-1

http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/index.cfm

[Packsonflight]

Boeing has bin keeping the 74 on livesupport fot quite a long time by scrapping the MD11F and refusing to build 777F.
It is just an end of an era the, 74 is dying and the 380 will take its place.

[Byrna]

I will feel very sad when the Jumbo is retired... *sniff* Just the talk of it makes me sad. I think it is a gorgeous plane and seems to handle very very stably.

Are there any pilots who have flown the Jumbo (and maybe the A340) who can tell me how these birds differ in their handling? I think this may be a rarity - to fly two heavies from competitors - but if there are any out there who have at least flown the Jumbo - say the 747-200 or -400 who can tell me if it is as stable and easy to control as I feel it is. My conclusions are from some forum postings and also some damn good products I have as "add-ons" to my Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 which, contrary to what some of you "non-simmers" may believe, has more realistic flight dynamics than one may expect from a desktop simulator.

The 747 is my favourite "fish" (I call the planes fish, not birds...go figure - I guess it's because of their slippery and smooth appearance and shiny bodies, more like what a fish looks like.) I find it handles like a dream, compared to the other planes I've flown.

John

[Rainboe]

The 400 is a generation on from the 200. Better more stable handling, easier in the 2 engines out on one side case, higher performance from more powerful engines. Modern large jets have a very stable feel to them- there doesn't feel much difference between a 737-400 and a 747-400. I haven't taken the comparison with flight sims very far- the interface is totally different. An enhanced joystick is very far from a large heavy spectacle. Maybe the difference between an Airbus with a joystick and the flight sim is far less because the interface is more similar. Using rudder as a twist of the handle is not satisfactory, but most home simmers wouldn't go to the trouble of heavy pedals for the infrequent engine failure case.

I once had a pre-teen boy on the flight deck of a 737 who even knew what the Thrust button was, so from the observers seat, I let him control the autopilot right through to landing. He was a home simmer who specialised in the 737 and he did it perfectly. Descending, steering on Heading mode, coupling up to the ILS, slowing up taking flap. It was stunning.

Such things should be banned- it takes away all the mystique!

[Byrna]

Hi Rainboe,

Actually, I use a flight yoke and pedals so it's really the opposite - I fly the Airbuses with these even though I can use my joystick with the Airbuses.

As for the boy, it's probably not surprising he was so good at the
"instrument panel " part of aircraft operations for in FS2004, the panels from some of the add-on products are extremely detailed and I've heard from real-life pilots of the GA smaller aircraft that the panels if flight simulator are basically the same as the real thing.

But you certainly don't have to feel like people who do simming would feel no respect for real-life pilots. I have the utmost of respect and admiration for pilots for flying the real thing, first of all, has the feel of it (flying by the seat of your pants as it is called I believe) which we simmers lack - no movement or inertia or the vibration and noise of the aircraft's engines and systems. Second, we don't have to worry about real passangers - people whose lives depend on the pilot and co-pilot with every flight; and finally, the air traffic in commercial aviation in the real world must be a real adventure sometimes to handle and not lose one's cool! I mean, in really busy airports like Atlanta Hartsfield, Chicago O'Hare, LAX, JFK, even Toronto Pearson - must be a challenge sometimes to approach in just the correct speed behind several other aircraft, while making sure you are oriented correctly with the glidescope and localizer etc...

Your point about the stability of modern aircraft is well-taken. he flight modeling of even some payware aircraft and/or the calibration of my flight yoke/pedals (I'm still trying to adjust my yoke/pedals) has some undesirable effects on my aircraft like an oversensitive rudder. I had a feeling, after reading so many posts, that Flight Simulator has some ways to go before the aircraft behave as stably as they do in the real world ... but I think I will adjust down my rudder and yoke sensitivity this week to see if this corrects the problem.

John