Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

WHY IS BA DUMPING THEIR 747s?

Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

WHY IS BA DUMPING THEIR 747s?

Old 29th Oct 2003, 17:10
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There has been a surplus of B744s recently - given the state of the industry it's hardly surprising that the biggest beasts are hit the hardest and, of course, the same market conditions mean its difficult to move them on the used market. But the B744 has pretty much the lowest smc in the business and if you can fill 'em you'll make good money. The talk about possible used buys by CX, TG, VS and others are straws in the wind showing that some carriers are waking up to the fact that this lift is presently available at knock-down prices. BA have been looking to shed some 744s for years in view of the fewer but higher yield policy.

Aviation Partners Boeing are presently evaluating two possible blended winglet configs for the B744 (they've already flight tested winglets on the 74 Classic but that dog has truly had its day). Both configurations reduce drag resulting in a reduction in cruise sfc of 5% leading to increased still-air range of some 250nm and a reduction in required thrust resulting in reduced engine-costs. High altitude field performance is also improved. Blended winglets allied to low second hand values could give the 744 a significant increase in operational longevity (and no, I don't work for APB!)

There is no APB programme for the 777 and when TG asked Boeing if they could have a -200ER variant with a MTOW of 699,000lb so they could have Trents (the GE exclusivity starts at 700,000lb) Boeing said no and now TG have ordered 340-500s/600s instead. It could be that BA carry more weight but Boeing seem to be more keen to avoid offending GE than getting additional 777 sales!
Torquelink is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2003, 17:49
  #22 (permalink)  
CR2

Top Dog
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Close to FACT
Age: 55
Posts: 2,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cargolux buying BA 744s for conversion? I won't claim to know everything that goes on in my airline, but that really is a new one on me.
Like anyone else in the industry, we're looking/evaluating future aircraft. A380F ( personal view), more new 400Fs, 400ERF (though they don't have RR engines which we use) and converted pax -400s). There is a thread on Freight Dogs ( here ) about the -400SF, so won't rehash it here.
CR2 is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2003, 18:39
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Winglets

With regards to the winglets on 744s, as I understand there is a company which offers blended winglet replacements for this aircraft. It provides some economic benefits from the "factory fitted" ones.

Whilst a little iffy in his address, 747FOCAL does have a point regarding upper deck evac of an A380, so people may well baulk at such a "ride." However, I am confident that this is an issue Airbus will have addressed.
eal401 is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2003, 21:43
  #24 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If there were any blended winglets available for the 744 I would know about them. APB went out and tried to market them and got their lunch handed to them by Boeing senior management. They never lived on the 747-200s as the outer wing box could not take the added stress. I would say you will see an aftermarket winglet available for the 744 eventually.
747FOCAL is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2003, 22:31
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
747FOCAL

I attended a recent APB presentation on wingletted 744. Project v much alive and well. According to APB, Boeing support their efforts as a wingletted 744 will do more damage to Airbus than themselves. Outer wing requires reinforcement either through stringers or upper surface skin - yet to be decided.
Torquelink is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2003, 22:35
  #26 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Torquelink,

Nice to hear that Boeing did not succeed in killing the APB program for the 744. I had no sooner gotten the package for my cert approval of the numbers and was told that APB had run amuk and that there would be no blended winglets on the 747 as the ones that are currently delivered were the "best" that could ever be designed.
747FOCAL is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2003, 22:36
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
747FOCAL

Agree with Torquelink, I read about the 744 re-wingletting recently. Can't remember which publication though I am afraid.
eal401 is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2003, 00:14
  #28 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Problem is, everybody around here thinks the 747 is the best plane flying and is impossible to improve on.

When a company like APB says we can improve this or any Boeing airplane by 6% the senior engineers all shoot it down as BS. The "Not invented here" scenario rings very hard around Boeing. Ask APB about all the working pains with the 737 winglets. I don't think Joe Clark would have ever signed up with Boeing if he would have known then what he knows now.
747FOCAL is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2003, 00:21
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Problem is, everybody around here thinks the 747 is the best plane flying and is impossible to improve on.
You can leave me OUT of that group!!
eal401 is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2003, 18:07
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm sorry to hear that Boeing take such a blinkered view of other people's improvements to their aircraft. I would have thought that any improvement that kept the aircraft flying longer and burning spares would be welcomed. I suppose that they may argue they don't want to lose new sales but it's just as likely that it would be Airbus losing new sales. Certainly, with no new 747 variant likely for years (if ever) improving the existing models would be more likely to damage A380 sales than anything else.
Torquelink is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2003, 21:37
  #31 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Torquelink,

Just look at the Hushkit market. Boeing told their customers back in the day that it was economically impossible to bring these older aircraft to Stage 3. The truth was some sales w*nker decided that Boeing would sell a lot of airplanes if they could not meet noise requirements. What happened? The airlines revolted and companies like FedEx, Nordam & Raisbeck made billions and they sold dick for 757s compared to the 727. They also pissed off some of their biggest customers to the point that they have publically said they will NEVER buy aircraft directly from Boeing again.

Your correct about the A380 and that is the only reason that Boeing is offering the 744SF. Not sure how many they will sell though. They are 6 Million plus over IAI for the conversion.
747FOCAL is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2003, 01:52
  #32 (permalink)  
Glasgow's Gallus Gigolo .... PPRuNeing is like making love to a beautiful woman ... I take hours.
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

Perhaps the solution to the upper deck slide problem will be to install a roofed slide? It would still be steep, but would look a lot less intimidating to the pax- from the top, anyway!
I don't think the roof would have to extend all the way down- just far enough to lessen the apparent slope. Would this work?
Capt Homesick is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2003, 02:09
  #33 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Capt Homesick,

Smart man. Airbus has already thought of this and has implemented the tent. I still think it may backfire on them as people will have trouble jumping into anything they cannot see the bottom of and you also will not be able to see the pile of humanity at the bottom so the pile will just grow and grow.
747FOCAL is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2003, 18:28
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
747FOCAL

I just hope that Boeing learn their lesson. I read somewhere that when they were looking at the 747-400XQLR(?) they reckoned that a number of aerodynamic improving and noise reducing mods that were supposed to be part of the XQLR would be retrofittable to the -400 i.e. blunt-edged (MD11 style) flaps, chevronned nacelles etc so that existing aircraft could meet QC2 and reduce fuel burn etc. If they decide not to do this I hope someone else does - maybe one of the outfits you mention - because with 600+ aircraft out there with no obvious replacement there would be a significant market for a package of mods (maybe including the blended winglets) which resulted in reduced noise, costs and improved performance.
Torquelink is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2003, 23:47
  #35 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hmmmmmm.........

Analysts wary of 747-400 future despite new sales
Airlines line up to take used aircraft, but it is unclear if this will spell a long-term upturn

Flight International 11/11/03
author: Max Kingsley-Jones
author: Leithen Francis

Analysts say it is too early to predict whether the increased interest in secondhand Boeing 747-400s from airlines in Asia and Europe suggests a long-term upturn in the fortunes for the 400-seat widebody.

Cathay Pacific plans to acquire up to 15 747-400s in the next few years, while Malaysia Airlines is believed to be seeking two secondhand aircraft. Thai Airways International is acquiring seven ex-United Airlines aircraft. Meanwhile, French charter airline Corsair is believed to be finalising a deal to replace its five 747-300s with ex-United -400s.

According to Airclaims, there are 33 idle 747-400s and the consultancy director Edward Pieniazek of the UK consultancy says these deals "do not address the overall inventory imbalance". He adds, however, that with Asia's post-SARS recovery making good progress "others could come out of the woodwork and may start a trend".

Hong Kong-based Cathay Pacific says it is "looking to buy up to 15 747-400s over the next few years. Some will be used for passengers and some will be converted into freighters." Cathay operates 19 747-400 passenger aircraft and five freighters, all of which are Rolls-Royce RB211-powered.

The airline's Oneworld alliance partner British Airways, which operates 57 RB211-powered 747-400s, has been looking to reduce the fleet by about 20% and has held on-off talks with Cathay about a deal.

Corsair operates five 747-300s and is thought to be acquiring Pratt & Whitney PW4000-powered, ex-United 747-400s to replace them after evaluating an offer from Boeing for similar, ex-Singapore Airlines machines that are being returned to the US manufacturer. Corsair's deal is thought to include the trade-in of its -300s.

MAS, which operates 17 PW4000-powered -400s, is looking for two all-passenger examples with P&W engines. The airline returned two General Electric CF6-powered 747-400 combis to Boeing last year.

Thai concluded a deal with Star Alliance partner United earlier this year for seven 747-400s.
747FOCAL is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2003, 01:47
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: the blue planet
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
747FOCAL, thanks for providing the comic relief, it was great!

It does seems odd that First is not upstairs, high noise level would make some sense. You are right though that BA does provide best service in the transatlantic route. Some of the other carriers don't even provide individual screens yet. I don't really like the rear-facing seats, but I guess they had to make maximum use of the space. Also great is the window in the lav as one watches the clouds roll by!

Speaking of high noise, there were suggestions here that the reason for BA getting rid of 744s was the RB211's high noise signature on take-off out of HRW. If true, why would CX want them? Are they different in noise certification? Any info/links appreciated.
wellthis is offline  

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

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.