Bloomberg: EK still in talks on 748I
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bloomberg: EK still in talks on 748I
Scroll down to middle of Asian order article.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0...mbo-order.html
51 available production slots (A350 coincidence ?)
If there is any airline that can get these cheap ...it's EK. Every deal has a price where it's 'rude not to'.
Who else could buy them?
f.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0...mbo-order.html
51 available production slots (A350 coincidence ?)
If there is any airline that can get these cheap ...it's EK. Every deal has a price where it's 'rude not to'.
Who else could buy them?
f.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Doctor's waiting room
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would say that it has to be highly unlikely to see a 748 in EK colours flying pax.
Arguments on the pros and cons aside, it would be such a massive embarrassment for the guys at the top to admit that they have 'got it wrong'. The A380 is a brand within the EK brand itself and the company has thrown so much cash at the airframes as well as the PR and they must make it work.
A 748 in EK colours would spell disaster for Airbus too and their aspirations for the A380. It doesn't look good when your golden customer orders the competitor, as an afterthought.
Before anyone jumps on me - no I am not a 'Bus driver!
Arguments on the pros and cons aside, it would be such a massive embarrassment for the guys at the top to admit that they have 'got it wrong'. The A380 is a brand within the EK brand itself and the company has thrown so much cash at the airframes as well as the PR and they must make it work.
A 748 in EK colours would spell disaster for Airbus too and their aspirations for the A380. It doesn't look good when your golden customer orders the competitor, as an afterthought.
Before anyone jumps on me - no I am not a 'Bus driver!
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: United States of America
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
51 available production slots (A350 coincidence ?)
I would say that it has to be highly unlikely to see a 748 in EK colours flying pax.
wonder why LH is getting rid of their 748s again, so soon after they arrived
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: UAE
Age: 45
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't see an quad with reduced cargo space, lower MTOW, reduced passenger space, and range making it into service unless Boeing pretty much give it away.
The new engines are all well and good but so long as the 380 gets them I doubt Ek will be interested, the 777/380 fleet mix wouldn't leave much space for a748...I would be interested to see the fuel burn per passenger when compared with that of a current-generation 380 on identical sectors as well, I doubt anyone actually knows. Fuel tanks are smaller, but they'd have to be to carry what 50 odd fewer pax.
LH may well be happy with their 748's, but it may fit their business model - the operation is entirely different to Ek, it also still decides to fly the 346 LH and makes rather less profit each year (that's another thread though).
So long as the marketing keeps it up, I know of plenty of people who prefer the 380's premium cabin when travelling any reasonable distance (me included, hate that middle seat in business), and while it may not work in most of the West, in other parts of the world people don't just want the cheapest price, they want to rub their mate's face in the fact they flew an EK 380 when they went on holiday, as ridiculous as that should be.
The new engines are all well and good but so long as the 380 gets them I doubt Ek will be interested, the 777/380 fleet mix wouldn't leave much space for a748...I would be interested to see the fuel burn per passenger when compared with that of a current-generation 380 on identical sectors as well, I doubt anyone actually knows. Fuel tanks are smaller, but they'd have to be to carry what 50 odd fewer pax.
LH may well be happy with their 748's, but it may fit their business model - the operation is entirely different to Ek, it also still decides to fly the 346 LH and makes rather less profit each year (that's another thread though).
So long as the marketing keeps it up, I know of plenty of people who prefer the 380's premium cabin when travelling any reasonable distance (me included, hate that middle seat in business), and while it may not work in most of the West, in other parts of the world people don't just want the cheapest price, they want to rub their mate's face in the fact they flew an EK 380 when they went on holiday, as ridiculous as that should be.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: United States of America
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't see an quad with reduced cargo space, lower MTOW, reduced passenger space, and range making it into service unless Boeing pretty much give it away.
Also, I did say I do think EK taking any 747-8s is highly unlikely. I was merely positing a couple reasons for why they would possibly even think about it.
The new engines are all well and good but so long as the 380 gets them I doubt Ek will be interested, the 777/380 fleet mix wouldn't leave much space for a748...I would be interested to see the fuel burn per passenger when compared with that of a current-generation 380 on identical sectors as well
With respect to fuel numbers, I too believe it would be very interesting to see. Lufthansa currently operates both types, Korean will starting next year, and Transaero in 2016 I believe. The most recent numbers I recall seeing from some Lufthansa presentation showed the 747-8 burning a few tenths more than the 380, however that was before the 747-8 PIP and other improvements. It should be noted that later 380 frames have also continued to be improved in that timeframe.
As for marketing and how LH utilizes them compared to a 380, I believe that they deploy them with almost the same amount of premium capacity that a 380 has, and they utilize them in markets where there are not as many economy passengers typically, or they alternate seasonally with the 380 when the economy load is seasonal.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read this:
777X Configuration Changes Revealed | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week
I can't see the 748 coming. It's a four-legged dinosaur, just as is the dugong.
AS per a LH colleague, the performance per nm/lb seems almost equal on 380, 77W and 748 (all in the LH extended fleet), which says it all: Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old. Impressive not.
Physics are the limit and transporting too much dead weight will punish you, even being the most fervent 380 or 748 fan.
Even Airbus rightfully sees the 77X as the most serious enemy (see article), not only for the 350, but even more for the 380. Upgrading it with new engines is pretty much futile, it does not fight the initial design handicap. Their reluctance to go ahead is therefore understandable, the resources have to go to the 350, to make it able to compete with the 77X. EK's offloading of the actual 350 says it all.
Wait for EK to cancel the last 50 380's if there is no re-engine program coming. Maybe not today, but when the "Asian face rubbing" fades out, the oil price picks up even more and the customers get a little scarcer and finally when the initial subsidies by cheap purchasing and leasing evaporates, i can see Timmy's successor correct some arrogant over-eagerness of today's management.
If there would be anything taking a space of a 380, it would certainly not be a 748.
777X Configuration Changes Revealed | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week
I can't see the 748 coming. It's a four-legged dinosaur, just as is the dugong.
AS per a LH colleague, the performance per nm/lb seems almost equal on 380, 77W and 748 (all in the LH extended fleet), which says it all: Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old. Impressive not.
Physics are the limit and transporting too much dead weight will punish you, even being the most fervent 380 or 748 fan.
Even Airbus rightfully sees the 77X as the most serious enemy (see article), not only for the 350, but even more for the 380. Upgrading it with new engines is pretty much futile, it does not fight the initial design handicap. Their reluctance to go ahead is therefore understandable, the resources have to go to the 350, to make it able to compete with the 77X. EK's offloading of the actual 350 says it all.
Wait for EK to cancel the last 50 380's if there is no re-engine program coming. Maybe not today, but when the "Asian face rubbing" fades out, the oil price picks up even more and the customers get a little scarcer and finally when the initial subsidies by cheap purchasing and leasing evaporates, i can see Timmy's successor correct some arrogant over-eagerness of today's management.
If there would be anything taking a space of a 380, it would certainly not be a 748.
Last edited by glofish; 19th Jun 2014 at 05:48.
short flights long nights
For those that think that LH are keeping the 747-8
Lufthansa to retire new B747-8s earlier than planned - Business Traveller
Lufthansa to retire new B747-8s earlier than planned - Business Traveller
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: United States of America
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those that think that LH are keeping the 747-8
All subsequent interviews and reports talked about the 744s. If you think about it, the way LH uses their frames, it makes sense.
Additionally, Lufthansa recently accelerated their deliveries for the 748s, wanting to get more of them into service quickly, and seem to be quite happy with the revenue that they generate.
Glofish,
Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old
The 773ER rolled out for the first time in Nov 2002. The 380 rolled out in Jan 2005.
The Don
Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old
The 773ER rolled out for the first time in Nov 2002. The 380 rolled out in Jan 2005.
The Don
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don
It is the initial design that i question. The initial design of the 777 and the GE90 came out in 1995 (sorry for the 25y, it's 20, ashes on my head ....). I am sure that the dugong has some potential left, but as i said, for the little numbers that will be sold i don't think Airbus will invest that much more in it.
We had that A vs. B before .... but here it is a 2 vs. 4 engined aircraft matter, so you can berry your dugong hat. The 4-legged Boeing has the same initial design (and re-design) handicap as the 380 and that's what i said on this thread: It will never be performing so much better as to raise big interest.
I am convinced that either one of the biggies is sold with discounts, or they flop. At EK the 380 enjoys a nice run, good for us all, but below the line it relies heavily on its initial price/lease paid. If Boeing desperately wants to follow suit, EK might get a bargain with the 748, they'd be foolish not to take advantage of the carnage between A and B. But i doubt that Boeing drops that low with the 77X up their sleeve.
It is the initial design that i question. The initial design of the 777 and the GE90 came out in 1995 (sorry for the 25y, it's 20, ashes on my head ....). I am sure that the dugong has some potential left, but as i said, for the little numbers that will be sold i don't think Airbus will invest that much more in it.
We had that A vs. B before .... but here it is a 2 vs. 4 engined aircraft matter, so you can berry your dugong hat. The 4-legged Boeing has the same initial design (and re-design) handicap as the 380 and that's what i said on this thread: It will never be performing so much better as to raise big interest.
I am convinced that either one of the biggies is sold with discounts, or they flop. At EK the 380 enjoys a nice run, good for us all, but below the line it relies heavily on its initial price/lease paid. If Boeing desperately wants to follow suit, EK might get a bargain with the 748, they'd be foolish not to take advantage of the carnage between A and B. But i doubt that Boeing drops that low with the 77X up their sleeve.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: not in Dubai anymore
Age: 94
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
glo,
I don't care how much fuel a 380 or 777 burns, the most important thing is the life style, so far the 380 was good to me, 4 turns in 5 years is not bad, I am sure I will get a some BOMs in the future but also some SFOs and IAHs.
Emirates Increases Capacity to San Francisco and Houston | News | Emirates
anyway, hopefully less than 3 years for me, love the 4 engines, makes life easy for a pilot.
I don't care how much fuel a 380 or 777 burns, the most important thing is the life style, so far the 380 was good to me, 4 turns in 5 years is not bad, I am sure I will get a some BOMs in the future but also some SFOs and IAHs.
Emirates Increases Capacity to San Francisco and Houston | News | Emirates
anyway, hopefully less than 3 years for me, love the 4 engines, makes life easy for a pilot.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one, including EK - especially EK - cares about your lifestyle. As some US trips go to the A380, new ones go to the B777 (BOS, ORD). Some, like JFK go from one to the other and back, or both (201/203/205). Or they add the aircraft with cargo capacity back to the route, as is heavily rumoured for destinations like LAX.
*shrug*
I think glofish has the most cogent analysis I've read.
Nailed it. It isn't about A vs B, it's about whether a machine that may make money at $100 oil makes money at $150/bbl oil, $200/bbl oil...
*shrug*
I think glofish has the most cogent analysis I've read.
I can't see the 748 coming. It's a four-legged dinosaur, just as is the dugong.
AS per a LH colleague, the performance per nm/lb seems almost equal on 380, 77W and 748 (all in the LH extended fleet), which says it all: Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old. Impressive not.
Physics are the limit and transporting too much dead weight will punish you, even being the most fervent 380 or 748 fan.
Even Airbus rightfully sees the 77X as the most serious enemy (see article), not only for the 350, but even more for the 380. Upgrading it with new engines is pretty much futile, it does not fight the initial design handicap. Their reluctance to go ahead is therefore understandable, the resources have to go to the 350, to make it able to compete with the 77X. EK's offloading of the actual 350 says it all.
Wait for EK to cancel the last 50 380's if there is no re-engine program coming. Maybe not today, but when the "Asian face rubbing" fades out, the oil price picks up even more and the customers get a little scarcer and finally when the initial subsidies by cheap purchasing and leasing evaporates, i can see Timmy's successor correct some arrogant over-eagerness of today's management.
If there would be anything taking a space of a 380, it would certainly not be a 748.
AS per a LH colleague, the performance per nm/lb seems almost equal on 380, 77W and 748 (all in the LH extended fleet), which says it all: Two 5 year old marvels can only match a 25 year old. Impressive not.
Physics are the limit and transporting too much dead weight will punish you, even being the most fervent 380 or 748 fan.
Even Airbus rightfully sees the 77X as the most serious enemy (see article), not only for the 350, but even more for the 380. Upgrading it with new engines is pretty much futile, it does not fight the initial design handicap. Their reluctance to go ahead is therefore understandable, the resources have to go to the 350, to make it able to compete with the 77X. EK's offloading of the actual 350 says it all.
Wait for EK to cancel the last 50 380's if there is no re-engine program coming. Maybe not today, but when the "Asian face rubbing" fades out, the oil price picks up even more and the customers get a little scarcer and finally when the initial subsidies by cheap purchasing and leasing evaporates, i can see Timmy's successor correct some arrogant over-eagerness of today's management.
If there would be anything taking a space of a 380, it would certainly not be a 748.
Or its about if it can carry 489 pax in three class configuration for 16hrs or not. Any twin doing that? Totally different markets.
The don
The don
Add PROFITABLY to that, Don.
We don't carry passengers for the fun of it. Doesn't matter what an Aircaft carries, it matters whether we can make money out of doing so.
We don't carry passengers for the fun of it. Doesn't matter what an Aircaft carries, it matters whether we can make money out of doing so.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't be too harsh wiz, no one ever explained loads versus yield to don. Better hope all those premium seats are sold full-fare. I mean, EK never oversells US flights, with all the attendant upgrades into J and F....dooooo theyyyyy? It's pure profit, baby. Fuel's cheap, after all. Pffft. hahah!
The seats argument makes sense in slot-constrained airports like Heathrow or Toronto. Anywhere else would gladly see multiple "twin" flights with "three class configuration" and, oh yeah, 20 tons of cargo a flight. But that's just from the station managers trying to move pax and cargo, what do they know.
LAX is about ego. It hurt too much to see everyone else running their 380's there so EK had to do so, being the launch/biggest/mostest/whatever ad nauseum customer.
Then quietly add a B777 flight later to pick up the slack. I expect that pattern will repeat.
The seats argument makes sense in slot-constrained airports like Heathrow or Toronto. Anywhere else would gladly see multiple "twin" flights with "three class configuration" and, oh yeah, 20 tons of cargo a flight. But that's just from the station managers trying to move pax and cargo, what do they know.
LAX is about ego. It hurt too much to see everyone else running their 380's there so EK had to do so, being the launch/biggest/mostest/whatever ad nauseum customer.
Then quietly add a B777 flight later to pick up the slack. I expect that pattern will repeat.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: the ridge where the west commences
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank Zappa once defined the journalism surrounding rock music as "people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read".
I don't know why that came to mind.
I don't know why that came to mind.
Limit,
You stop carrying your 20t after 12hrs due to Tow limit. Reduce it by 8.6t per hour after that. This would be why you only lift 37t of revenue out of SFO. Not much cargo there if you have have pax on board. This is why Glo stated the fuel burn per kg on these long sectors is the same for the 777 and the 380. Only the 380 carries 22t of revenue extra. Ek doesn't swap aircraft off routes to waste money. Same goes for the 748, LH may only load it the same as we do a 777, but it can carry its max ZFW a longer way.
The don.
You stop carrying your 20t after 12hrs due to Tow limit. Reduce it by 8.6t per hour after that. This would be why you only lift 37t of revenue out of SFO. Not much cargo there if you have have pax on board. This is why Glo stated the fuel burn per kg on these long sectors is the same for the 777 and the 380. Only the 380 carries 22t of revenue extra. Ek doesn't swap aircraft off routes to waste money. Same goes for the 748, LH may only load it the same as we do a 777, but it can carry its max ZFW a longer way.
The don.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Califorina
Age: 54
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because having all your eggs in one basket has "normally" always been a major mistake for airlines. Exception is the 737 & 777 programs. Just think, if another wing issue develops on the 380 just about the time we are about 75 airplanes. Ouch. That's a lot of seat miles lost.