Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Boeing says it could end 747 production

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Boeing says it could end 747 production

Old 2nd Aug 2016, 14:53
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,468
Would a twin engine 747 be feasible without a complete redesign?

Just strap on a couple of big Trents, and have each engine run two hyd pumps, etc., to run all the systems, like the A330.

Presumably not, otherwise they would have done it.
.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2016, 15:24
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,168
Originally Posted by Uplinker View Post
Would a twin engine 747 be feasible without a complete redesign?

Just strap on a couple of big Trents, and have each engine run two hyd pumps, etc., to run all the systems, like the A330.

Presumably not, otherwise they would have done it..
It's hard to know where to start.

A pair of the most powerful Trent variant would produce about 75% of the 747-8's installed thrust.

Perhaps if they narrowed and shortened the fuselage, removed the hump, scaled down the wing, etc ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2016, 15:53
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austria
Posts: 675
A non-quad 747 was considered a few years back:



Bring forth the eye bleach...
Tu.114 is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2016, 17:30
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,943
An early concept for the 747 advanced (which eventually became the -8) was for inboard GE90s and outboard CF6-80C2s. Fortunately that died.

Would a twin engine 747 be feasible without a complete redesign?
Since engine thrust is based on "engine out" requirements, it would take a ~200,000 lb thrust class engine if you want to retain the same MTOW as the 747-8..

HH, Boeing is supposedly at the point this year where it's costing less to build a 787 than they're selling them for (finally - only line number 450 to get there ). So it's at least looking like the 787 won't be a big money pit.
Airbus is into the A380 something like 20 billion, and while they are finally to the point where they're getting positive cash flow on new production, that's not going to last as they're dropping production down to 1/month. When Airbus launched the A380, they predicted a market for 1,200 VLA between 2007 and 2027. Half way there, barely 300 total A380s and 747-8s have been delivered, with total outstanding orders for ~150 more (many of which are soft).
Is spending another ~5 billion on a A380 neo - so far with only one interested customer - a good business decision or good money after bad?
tdracer is online now  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 08:51
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
"HH, Boeing is supposedly at the point this year where it's costing less to build a 787 than they're selling them for"


Agreed - but I hadn't realised they'll need to get to #900 to write off the charegs incurred to date............................. and they also buried two early, unsellable, examples as "R&D" in the same accounts - another $800+ mm of shareholder value gone south

But I think the fact the tanker has cost them more than the original 767 development tells you some things are seriously amiss in Seattle..............

Goingto be a brave man who suggests repalcing the 737 anytime soon
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 3rd Aug 2016, 08:58
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 8,022
Would a twin engine 747 be feasible without a complete redesign?
That was suggested for the 146, when better, more powerful hairdryers became available. I read it couldn't be done cost-wise because the wing loads with the new config would mean a complete redo of the wing.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2016, 03:55
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Dallas
Posts: 103
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
HH, rumor mill says the new AF1 747s have already been built. There are a couple white tail 747-8is that were built for a Russian operator that went bust (if you watched some of the Boeing Founders Day celebrations, one was parked behind the stage). The thinking is those will become the new AF1 aircraft.
Doesn't that seem improbable given AF1 requirements for specialized communications and ECM fitment? I imagine an existing 748 would have to be essentially stripped of electrical and IFE systems to be reconfigured to AF1 specifications.
ThreeThreeMike is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2016, 04:00
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,167
Anyone about to find out what the peak 747 production rate was?
student88 is offline  
Old 7th Aug 2016, 04:18
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,943
Doesn't that seem improbable given AF1 requirements for specialized communications and ECM fitment? I imagine an existing 748 would have to be essentially stripped of electrical and IFE systems to be reconfigured to AF1 specifications.

33Mike, they'll need to do that anyway - to do that on the production line would be cost prohibitive - among other things, they'd have to make the whole 747 final production line secure, and the cost of certifying that as an ATC would be horrendous.
What Boeing did on the current generation 747/AF1, they 'delivered' a bare-bones 747 (well, technically two), then did the conversion as an STC. Given the necessary modifications (in addition to communication and any extra EMI hardening, we're talking dual APUs and aerial refueling capability), and how messy it is to certify that sort of thing in production, I can't imagine them doing it as other than an STC.


Student, max 747 production rate was seven/month - we hit that briefly back in the early 1990s for the -400 model.
tdracer is online now  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 11:10
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 991
Down the road are there any big cargo customers with upcoming big fleet renewal needs and plans that might consider to order major numbers of 747-8Fs? Like the UPSs or Fedexes of the world? Or have they switched to twins and bellies already?
Who could be a big customer to keep the line going? Is there any big guy on the market looking for pure freighters?
Less Hair is online now  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 11:45
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 43
Posts: 214
@tdracer
At least securing the line should be less of a problem is the AF1 is the only 747 in production...
procede is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 11:56
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
"any big cargo customers with upcoming big fleet renewal needs"

most of them are bleeding cash like there's no tomorrow - they're looking to ditch aircraft not buy more.............................
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 12:14
  #53 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 64
Posts: 9,205
Someone did indeed 'have' to build the VLA and it was always going to be Airbus. Boeing did well to push them towards they decision. When the 74 started it had a slew of unexpected world events that meant it was all at the right time:
  • First of kind
  • Inter-continental travel booming in the post war age
  • International freight moving to air
  • People becoming 'time poor' and not able to use ships for holiday, the time saving on long haul was an enormous bonus
  • Fewer carriers
Airbus has none of those things now. Freight now has many dedicated air carriers and people have choice and can search for choice at will 24/7. The 380 stands alone on moving people.

For those talking about the single aisle market, don't forget Embraer and similar who are pushing up into the 73 and the 319 markets and, if they sell well, will continue to expand to eat away the lower half of the market.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 12:29
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,943
Originally Posted by Less Hair View Post
Down the road are there any big cargo customers with upcoming big fleet renewal needs and plans that might consider to order major numbers of 747-8Fs? Like the UPSs or Fedexes of the world? Or have they switched to twins and bellies already?
Who could be a big customer to keep the line going? Is there any big guy on the market looking for pure freighters?
While people like FedEx and UPS primarily use dedicated freighters, at least FedEx is moving towards smaller - replacing MD-11s with (slightly) smaller 767F. As for some of the others, I've heard rumors, but not the sort of thing I should repeat on a public forum
tdracer is online now  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 12:29
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: localhost
Age: 21
Posts: 220
Freight seems to be going twin engine now - Amazon have just leased 40 767 frames and Atlas Air are contracted to provide flight crew etc. (It's a nice livery: This is Amazon?s first ?Prime Air? plane - Recode)

I don't see there being an expansion in the market for the A380, Malaysian are trying to dump theirs as they can't fill them and Thai are struggling with them too apparently. BA seem to codeshare them with every partner airline under the sun in order to fill them! Without Emirates the A380 wouldn't have made any money at all, as it stands it will just about break even... I very much doubt Airbus will make a NEO version, I guess it costs more in development costs than 70 odd A350's. (Although a new order might be on the table: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...cision-426069/)

I guess the 747-8 will experience a small flurry of orders as Boeing announces the demise of the program and that will be it for the 'Queen of the skies'.
crablab is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 13:47
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 991
Amazon have just leased 40 767 frames
Could Amazon lease any more 747?
Less Hair is online now  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 14:38
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 941
The 747 in it's various forms has been on life support since 2001 when Airbus pulled the plug.
I suppose you mean 1991 ?
That was the first flight of the A340, and after that date there were practically no more orders for the 747-400. Most airlines bought it for range, not for capacity, and once that range was available at much lower cost and lower capacity, the end of the Jumbo had come. Just like the availability of the long range 777 versions (together with the ETOPS regulations) killed the A340, when all of a sudden you did neither need the capacity nor the number of engines to do the range...
Funny that expectatios have shifted so much. Boeing once predicted the total number of 747 to be built far below the number of A380 already delivered by know. How luckily wrong they have been... Compared to Aircraft like the A310, L1011 or DC-10 the total number of A380 built will be absolutely fine. Businesspeople believe they can sell as many A380s as they have sold A320s. They never will, the market is totally different. The market for high capacity long range aircraft is limited, has always been limited and will be forever. There ist not enough market for several types of such aircraft. Now the much older 747 will die first, and still be remembered as one of the greatest and most succesful aircraft ever.
Volume is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2016, 15:21
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 2,943
I suppose you mean 1991 ?
That was the first flight of the A340, and after that date there were practically no more orders for the 747-400.
What a strange comment. ~500 747-400s were ordered (and delivered) after 1991 - more than the total production run of the A340.
tdracer is online now  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.