Is the 747-8X finally killed ?

[beaucaire]

reading the latest article on Flightglobal one could interpret the scenario as quite grimm for the project.


Boeing hints at possible reassement of 747-8 programme

[Dysag]

Finally

It's been a slow death but at last we're there: the 747-8i pax version is dead. Little demand or interest. Junk.

[captplaystation]

"JUNK" ? ? Unlike the electronically actuated elephant from Toulouse, at least that will probably manage to set a record for the number of heads impacted on overhead lockers the day it emulates its little sister.
Remind me again how late and over budget it was, quoting the Dreamliner doesn't make it a prouder performance BTW.

[Locked door]

Do I detect a bout of 'not invented here' itus?

747-8 was going to burn more fuel for less pax. Only advantage was commonality with an aging predecessor that has no place in the modern world. I love the -400 but it 'aint a subtle aircraft. It was a ground breaker, time to move on.

LD

[captplaystation]

As a European citizen, I don't think so

Just not a great fan of FBW technology, justified or not, but that is another discussion.
The early 340's seem to have sold well, but had marginal at best performance, at least the big ugly sister doesn't seem to be underpowered.

[canuck slf]

If this is the way it ends for the 747 line, what a sad route. Forced out rather than retire gracefully. It would seem Boeing just tried to push things too far. Reminds one of the way US TV channels usually try to extend popular shows too long and they end up finishing as a shadow of their glory days. It will make the Air Force One competition interesting, with the 787 the obvious, but untried, choice.

[Imperator1300]

No 747-X; it would be a pity, but maybe Boeing could consider competing with the A380 in a different way (I'm thinking of speed rather than number of pax and in particular their shelved plans for a "sonic cruiser").

Imperator 1300

[Locked door]

The 787 will compete with the 380 in a different way, point to point instead of hub and spoke. Both these new a/c will work well for airlines running in parallel, I believe both are the future of air travel and most major airlines will end up with both. Boeing just need to pull their fingers out and figure out how to stick the two halves together!!!!

[ARINC]

"JUNK" ? ? Unlike the electronically actuated elephant from Toulouse, at least that will probably manage to set a record for the number of heads impacted on overhead lockers the day it emulates its little sister.

Not set foot in an A380 then I take it ?

[engineer07]

I agree the 747 is past it. I am certain you will find that Lufthansa has a clause in their contract that they will not take the 747-8I unless other 'substantial' carriers order it - so yes it looks like the pax version is dead. Will Boeing invest billions to make a slightly better freighter than the -400F ? Those who have not yet flown in the A380 can't appreciate the step change from the old 747 - It may be ugly from the outside (but beauty is in the eye of the beholder), but it's certainly not ugly on the inside.

[Rainboe]

Post 31 on Page 2 of last October- my remarks still stand! The only thing that is not correct is I implied that the world will come out of this recession fairly soon........I misread the financial situation!
http://www.pprune.org/spectators-bal...r-lufti-2.html

Lovely though it is, the 747-x00 is almost dead. Time to let it go.

[parabellum]

I suppose whether an aircraft is 'dead' or not depends on one's point of view. Right now there are still over one thousand B747-400* flying and Boeing have recouped their investment.

Now, the A380 on the other hand, number required to break even in the order of five hundred, number of firm orders so far? So which is the 'dead' aircraft then?

*See next two posts for correction.

[Skipness One Echo]

Right now there are still over one thousand B747-400 flying and Boeing have recouped their investment.

No. No really there aren't. In your head maybe, but since the first was line number 696 and they are just passing 1400, there are around 650 ish B747-400s built....

[parabellum]

Maybe I am thinking ALL 747s then, but I have flown the 1000th off the line at Seattle, had it painted on the side! The B747 doesn't owe Boeing any money though and my point re A380 and dead aircraft still stands.

[Rainboe]

With the A380, we are back at the stage of the B747 in 1971. In first year of service, driving Boeing out of business, desperately too big for the time, financial crisis approaching, stalled sales and generally regarded with derision- breaking down all over the world, not the right aeroplane for the time.

All sounds very familiar! What will be the big mass market mover in 10-20 years? The 747 will be getting increasingly rare (an aeroplane design nearly 60 years old! That's like a Strat now), the A380 will be the loved aeroplane of choice for mass market travel on high density routes. All it needs is time. Something has to deliver the mass Chinese tourists around the world, the burgeoning Indian middle class on its travels. Even the Europe-Australia market will find it is the only aeroplane as the world comes out of this slump. It will outsell the 747 as the 747 outsold the 707/DC8. The 777 will be regarded as the disappointing 'old' thing, the A350/787 will not deliver the density required.

[parabellum]

I've said all along that the A380 is ideal for the niche market that it serves, I don't ever see that niche market being big enough to enable the A380 to break even. Technically superb, perhaps, but a commercial disaster. Just my 2cents worth.

[Rainboe]

That 'niche' market has hitherto been covered mainly by the B747. The A380 will have that niche to itself. Large capacity longhaul, with no competitors? How can it miss? Just wait till the stretch A380 comes in about 8 years. It's coming, just look at the wing and the shape. Mass market travel- nothing else will be anywhere near.

The 747-8 was just another Boeing smokescreen like the late, unlamented 'Sonic Cruiser' bizarre idea. A dead duck before it started. The machine is an archaic design now. I cannot understand any airline that even looked closely at it when the A380 is up and flying now.

[Skipness One Echo]

o which is the 'dead' aircraft then?

The 747 as the passenger version is going out of production and the A380 is at the same stage as the B747-100. The larger A380 will have the mass market to itself.

[parabellum]

Rainboe/Skipness I personally think that you have totally missed it. Airbus, (and yourselves), may have thought that the A380 was the B744 replacement but they/you could not be more wrong. The B744 replacement was the B777 family as well as some of the lesser Airbus types.

Certainly some of the major carriers wanted something like the A380 to satisfy certain routes but nothing like the order of magnitude that Airbus, (or you) imagined.

Don't kid yourself, there will be no significant orders for the A380 in the next five years.

[Rainboe]

People were saying exactly this in the early/mid 70s about the 747! They were saying the Tristar/DC10 had it right. Indeed, the DC10 for a long time looked a more sensible aeroplane. They even brought out a shorter stubby 747, which was a total failure. But match the right engine with the full airframe, and nothing will beat the A380 for sheer long haul roominess and passenger appeal. The 777 is old hat. The A380 will have the market totally to itself. The next 5 years will be difficult- the 747 had the 73 oil crisis and following recession to cope with as well. The whole thing is being repeated 36 years later!

I still can't believe an aeroplane that first flew 40 years ago is still regarded as a contender! The A380 cannot fail! Those \BIG airlines that retire 747s will replace them with......A380s! It will outsell the 747. Flying crammed in on a 777, people will feel let down they weren't really on the new Queen of the Skies! Just wait.