747-8 not a success?

[BelowMinimums 32]

My friend told me that the real world 747-8 wasn't a success and that Boeing is already looking into replacing it, is this true? I consider him to be a trustworhty guy and he always proves me wrong when it comes to this kind of stuff. I thought the 747 was quite a success and it's been a huge one said it first came out ages ago, so I dont see why it wouldnt be successful.

[xplanery 250]

Well if you look at its sales numbers it really isn't looking to be a commercial success like 747-400 and 747 classic were. 

 

It's simply mostly about saving money I think. Four engine 747 is more expensive to fly and maintain than let's say 777W or in the future bigger models of B787 & A350 and those all have enough range to fly more or less all the 747 routes today & they can take nearly as many passengers too.

 

So the era of large 4-engine jets seems to be going away slowly for now at least, these twinjets mentioned earlier are large enough to handle big majority of longhaul routes out there  & the demand for any bigger, let's say +450 seat jets (with business and/or first class too) seems to be quite low. '

 

Regards

 

Joona L

[scandinavian13 5,192]

There are a few airlines dispensing with the A340s (not just the old ones, -500s and -600s as well), too.  As Joona mentioned, it seems to have a lot to do with fuel efficiency.  Over the years, jet engines and their associates systems (to include backup systems) have gotten much more reliable.  Adding to that, jet engines have also become more powerful.  What used to require four engines can easily be accomplished by two, with much less fuel and associated maintenance costs.

 

While the 747-8i wasn't the biggest hit by numbers (40), the 747-8F seems to be doing slightly better (65).  Even so, the type is trailing A380s by about 100.

[X_Man 8]

Very interesting - Other than Lufthansa wonder what other airlines have the 747-8i in their fleet?

[compilot16 13]

 

 

Other than Lufthansa wonder what other airlines have the 747-8i in their fleet

 

I think Korean air ordered some, and Arik air ordered 2

[SVA1181 56]

I see this type will be the Cadillac (Rolls Royce?) of the sky, I mean it will be used mainly by heads of states and some businessmen. Other than that, there is no economic added value for airliners to operate it as mentioned by fellow members.

[HighTowers 1,434]

I dont think it was aimed a whole lot at the pax market. The majority of sales/orders are for the freighter, which makes sense, as cargo allows for greater margins, and much easier to make a profit hauling a large amount of cargo even with 4 engines. 

It wasnt a brand new design as it was taken off the 744, so I cant imagine this would be called a failure. Just a different market. 

IMHO

[rtodepart 761]

 

 

a different market.

yup thats more like it . the 8F its where this plane its of some interest to some .....

[tf51d 284]

I think the problem with the 747-8I is a case of too little too late. Compared to the A380 which currently has 262 orders, the 8i wasn't a significant enough upgrade. Add to that the A380 was offered first, and 78 of those orders came in the first year offered 2001. 132 before the first 747-8i was ordered. Many of the airlines that would have been interested in the 8i was already committed to the A380. Only 40 8i's, half of those going to Lufthansa,  and 65 8F's have been ordered since 2005. 

[FSX4Life 2]

 

 

My friend told me that the real world 747-8 wasn't a success

 

Neither is the A380.

 

For what it's worth, both planes are surviving in set niches, the A380 for passenger (only Boeing loyalists with the justification bought the 747-8i) and the 747-8F for freight (the 8F killed the A380F completely, freight operators love the nose door.)

 

 

 

 

and that Boeing is already looking into replacing it, is this true?

 

Boeing has been working to replace the 747/777 with a new VLA codenamed 'Yellowstone 3' (the 787 is 'Yellowstone 2')  for a very long time.

 

Boeing underestimated the A380 based off of McDonnell Douglas' MD-12 effort, when it became clear that the A380 was going to sell and that airlines wanted a new VLA 'NOW'...not another 10 years, Boeing had to come up with the 747-8, modifying the stillborn 747X concept.

 

Project Yellowstone has been so sidetracked by the 747-8 and 737-MAX that Boeing pushing on a 777-8/9.

 

 

 

I thought the 747 was quite a success and it's been a huge one said it first came out ages ago, so I dont see why it wouldnt be successful.

 

Four engine jets are gas guzzlers, most airlines (especially US based ones) are going to a "2 engine only" fleet to save on fuel expense.

 

The 777 does do quite well precisely because of that.

 

The 747 was a success when fuel was cheap, it was a great prestige piece for any airline. Now that fuel costs are high and only getting higher, economics have toppled egos. And US airlines are the real big money, none has bought either the 747-8 or the A380...lots of 777's instead.

[Yu Xiong 3]

Very interesting - Other than Lufthansa wonder what other airlines have the 747-8i in their fleet?

 

Air China ordered some and expect to delivery next year. 

[Adam T Lutley 12]

I don't think Airbus will ever come close to recouping the initial development outlay with the 380. The 747-8 is at least an existing platform with comparatively modest development costs. I think both will give way to the wide body twinjets.  Airbus though, has always been seen as jobs program of sorts by the EU so the financial success of the 380 may not matter as much in their eyes.

[Somebody_Else 7]

This article might offer some insight into an airliners thinking http://www.britishairwaysnews.com/british-airways-777-300-the-forgotten-one/2103/

[phil747fan 14]

Neither is the A380.

 

For what it's worth, both planes are surviving in set niches, the A380 for passenger (only Boeing loyalists with the justification bought the 747-8i) and the 747-8F for freight (the 8F killed the A380F completely, freight operators love the nose door.)

 

 

 

 

 

Boeing has been working to replace the 747/777 with a new VLA codenamed 'Yellowstone 3' (the 787 is 'Yellowstone 2')  for a very long time.

 

Boeing underestimated the A380 based off of McDonnell Douglas' MD-12 effort, when it became clear that the A380 was going to sell and that airlines wanted a new VLA 'NOW'...not another 10 years, Boeing had to come up with the 747-8, modifying the stillborn 747X concept.

 

Project Yellowstone has been so sidetracked by the 747-8 and 737-MAX that Boeing pushing on a 777-8/9.

 

 

 

 

Four engine jets are gas guzzlers, most airlines (especially US based ones) are going to a "2 engine only" fleet to save on fuel expense.

 

The 777 does do quite well precisely because of that.

 

The 747 was a success when fuel was cheap, it was a great prestige piece for any airline. Now that fuel costs are high and only getting higher, economics have toppled egos. And US airlines are the real big money, none has bought either the 747-8 or the A380...lots of 777's instead.

hello

 

I don't think todays the US airlines has the big money ... look more on the middle east ...

 

the nose door on the a388F will have save him but the structure was not made for it ...

 

we have to remember that Boeing made the 747 not for the civilian market at first and because they lost the c5 contract they had the priviledge to work on the civilian market with the nose door already in ...

 

the other reason that 8i and 8f are not working is the old conception they re coming from more than 40 years and they may be not the most efficient way to save on fuel ie.    

 

the news EROPS rules for any commercial airliner being 2-3-4 engines wont help either.

 

the other reason is the crisis being still here and the fact that now the a388 is delivering what the companies and the prestige coming with it.

 

all the best.

 

Phil  

[tf51d 284]

we have to remember that Boeing made the 747 not for the civilian market at first and because they lost the c5 contract they had the priviledge to work on the civilian market with the nose door already in

 

Not exactly, the 747 was built at the request of Pan AM to build an aircraft twice the size of the 707.. When they lost the military contract it released the resources they needed to do it. It's design was totally different from the military transport proposal. For example the Military design had high wings, like the C-5. It did add a freighter version, which did incorporate the nose door, because they thought the airliner version wouldn't sell as well, because at that time they thought the world was moving ultimately to supersonic aircraft, which of course didn't happen, and the rest is history!!!