October 7, 201312 yr This is why QF flies the big 4 holers and doesnt really have a big dedicated freight operation A bigger dedicated freight operation than all the American passenger airlines combined Qantas needed their 747 range for American cities because they are the farthest away compared to other Qantas routes that stop in Asia or the Middle East before continuing on to Europe.
October 7, 201312 yr Commercial Member due to various anti-competition agreements. Fixed it for you. Best regards, Robin.
October 7, 201312 yr If a major carrier like Singapore Air has second thoughts about the recent end of the direct WSSS-KLAX and WSSS-KEWR, the -200LR would be a viable option, especially since the A345 they are retiring is "4-holer". Those flights are usually a near polar route well within ETOPS-207 rules. And back in 2005 QANTAS mulled the -200LR for LHR-SYD direct, but a fuel stop would be required from SYD to LHR because of winds. LUIS LINARES Processor: Intel Core i9 6700K 9900K (5.0 GHz Turbo) Eight Core; CPU Cooling: NXXT Kraken X62 280mm CPU Liquid Cooler; System Memory: 64GB Corsair DDR4 SDRAM @ 3200 MHz, RGB; Graphics Processor: 11GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, GDDR6, Primary Drive: 2TB Samsung 850 Pro Solid State Drive (SSD)
October 8, 201312 yr Right now the 747s are on their last legs because the A380 is simply more capable with the high fuel prices, and the airlines are not really happy about the 747-8's performance shortfalls. Singapore airlines got rid of theirs a while ago, and so did the Japanese. I heard that Cathay Pacific is trying very hard to dispose of theirs as well. Finally Lufthansa's recent commitment to the 777-9X pretty much killed off the 747-8i's prospects. So the 747-8 is a failure? And if so, is this the end of the road for the 747?
October 8, 201312 yr So the 747-8 is a failure? And if so, is this the end of the road for the 747? It's hardly a failure, although it's getting stiff competition from below by the A350/777 and from above by the A380. One could surmise though that it was designed to prevent the A380 from completely dominating the VLA market, although that is quite a Pyrrhic victory. I doubt we'll ever see another iteration of the 747 in the future though. Ho Cheung
October 8, 201312 yr Good point. That could explain why Delta mostly flies CRJs to Toronto. Our fees are way too high. Even so, when Air Canada flies its 777-200LR from YVR to SYD it is no heavier than the average 777-200 on landing. To be clear the fees are not based on actual landing weight of each individual flight but the maximum certified landing weight for the aircraft being used. Back when I was a 727 engineer they told us our 727s had the max landing weight they did because of this landing fee system and that weight was what the company thought they would need when the bought the planes. They actually could have gone to Boeing and bought different numbers and with no actual structural change we would have had new max landing weights for our planes. Tom Landry
October 8, 201312 yr To be clear the fees are not based on actual landing weight of each individual flight but the maximum certified landing weight for the aircraft being used. Back when I was a 727 engineer they told us our 727s had the max landing weight they did because of this landing fee system and that weight was what the company thought they would need when the bought the planes. They actually could have gone to Boeing and bought different numbers and with no actual structural change we would have had new max landing weights for our planes. So airlines can't catch a break huh?
Create an account or sign in to comment