The 747-800 and the newer B747-400 are burning 12T per hours and carrying 50 T freight on longhaul...its an no brainier...the new gen A350 and B777 will see the end of the A380 but the B747-800 will continue as a freighter

But only 340 bums on seats. The 380 has 525. Also 8 to 10t of freight under the floor. Your old fashioned Boeing had a good life. Time to let it go.

You may need to learn to read a load sheet if you think the 744 carries full seats and 50t of freight on long haul. It is a good story though.

On a B747-400 flight to Europe, from Singapore, in winter with a near full load, quite often it was on a re-dispatch flight plan and the only cargo was Swift Rider and diplomatic mail.

This is happening already with Narita - Boston route and Virgin want to fly London - Hawaii and there are many more similar examples. These 'thin routes' can be served by direct non-hub flights if the demand is there and both A and B have aircraft that can fly direct from anywhere to anywhere. This siphons off pax that would otherwise go through the hubs who do not want the extra hub layover delays with the attendant risks of flights being missed or luggage lost.

From some comments I'm sensing a bit of "Concorde" about this...i.e. Popular with many who fly on it, a one off and therefore an icon....so it must not "die"......but arguing about fuel flow, cargo ( and never mind the 744, take a look at the 777) and hubs doesn't change the fact that the brains at Airbus, who have serious skin in the game, have looked at projections, don't see any signs of an upturn and so have dropped the production rate ( and there's still talk in the local press of the line closing within 5 years).

Ultimately the bean counters will decide it's future.

The 777 is more limited on ULR flights than a 744. The 77X costs close to half a billion dollars a piece, a wee bit more than a 380. Airlines do not seem keen to drop this amount of coin on a new aeroplane as financing that amount of debt makes getting a bonus for huge profit hard to achieve.

Smaller aeroplanes are cheaper to purchase, cheaper to operate and easier to manage when times are hard.

Unless the purchase price of the 380 and 77X are reduced substantially, I doubt and large orders are going to be made soon.

Having flown both the 744 and the 777-300 on the SIN-LHR route more than once I think we have might have to agree to disagree (though obviously the 777 doesn't do so well in terms of backsides on seats).

Agreed.

Boeing and its fanboys may not agree, but B777X is heavily subsidized ($8.2B) by Washington State and sales will be further subsidized by US tax payers thru EXIM bank.

B77W was selling for $130M, so B777X wouldn't be more than $160M.

Even with that kind of discount they didn't sell more than 300 copies, half of which is from Emirates. So this $12B program is a perfect example of All eggs in one basket.

B787 sales is not super hot either, it should be selling 100 copies every year.

I don't know if this matters to you but Arlanda is planning to expand part of one terminal to be able to handle A380. They want to be the first airport in Scandinavia with this feature, hoping to attract even more passengers.

No brainer for me as SLF too.

I wont fly as a passenger on a 747, unless there are no other options, I'll change airlines before I fly on a 747. They are old, noisy, dry, and cramped compared to the A380.

blimey, thats some difference?

if my maths is right, that's ~1 hour more on fuel - that's pretty significant I would think?

A380 Dallas - Sydney 100-150 pax blocked out, no freight - max fuel - max takeoff weight and at time pax bags are on another flight from Dallas via LAX to SYD...

And a 744 could carry all the bags and 400 pax for cheaper?

Westbound?

744 carries 120 less pax all bags and 10T freight....I like the A380 its just way to heavy for what it is and its days are gone, the B777 New Gen and A350 will seal its fate...Airlines that have it will be stuck with it

The QF 380s are some of the first off the line. As I have pointed out the new ones have a significant advantage. There is no reduction in ZFW out to 16hrs.

560t MTOW on your A380's vs 575t being the highest available option on more recent builds with the 'wing twist'.

EK's ULR birds are all 575t.

Only once EK448/9, DXB-AKL-DXB goes A380 will they have to block rows 80-88. On the westbound sector only. ~16h40.

Not that you dont already know that don :)

"Boeing and its fanboys may not agree, but B777X is heavily subsidized ($8.2B) by Washington State and sales will be further subsidized by US tax payers thru EXIM bank."

Partly true- but mostly false- EX Im bank makes money ( profit ) almost every year. It is basically a bank swith lost of kmoney to loan- guartantee between nationbs. so while it can be calld a subsidy ( due to government baked funding ), its lending terms and low interest rates still make money in the long run. And AFIK- there is little or no forgiveness absent a major catastrophe.

I can't believe people defend this thing. Its lunch will be devoured by the 777-9. No one wants la grande baliene du ciel except Emirates, who don't have a real business model.

-drl

But the order book for the B787, even before it flew, was substantial.


Currently B787 orders for 1161 and 455 delivered. (A350 810 orders, delivered 36).