[25NOV15] PMDG 747-400 Queen of the Skies II - VC Preview!

[serviceceiling 135]

Hi there,

 

So, tell me, who'll still be flying 400's in the next 10-15 years? Where will the 747-8 be by that time?

 

While sure, most of the major operators such as BA, LH, QF, AF and so on will get rid of the -400 during the next 5-10 years, it will still be seen as a workhorse of a freighter all around the world. And let's be honest, the 747-8i isn't really selling well, I'd be surprised if Boeing continues producton of the 747-8i in the next 5 years.  

The 747-8 might look all sleek and shiny but it's the -400 that became this icon in civil aviation, that everybody recognizes. It's big, loud, mechanical and doesn't have any fbw. But to each their own.  :wink:

[Sky Prince 10]

[speckfire 2]

Oh wow the anticipation is killing me...Must...Resist...!!!!!    I'm weaaaak :(

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Gents,

 

Keep in mind that, when it comes to offering options to the government for bidding, it's a lot easier to "support" a build by offering to commercial entities, rather than a one-off going to the government only. Notice how a bunch of the military transports are/were also commercial aircraft: C-47, C-12, C-9, C-137, C-40, and so on...

 

If Boeing were to want to respond to a bid to refresh the existing Presidential aircraft, since the cost of creating the rigging and tooling for a refreshed version has been borne by the industry (airlines buying the -8i/F). That cost wouldn't need to be passed to the government, which means they can bid lower when compared to some other company who wants to toss a clean sheet bid in. Additionally, they can rest on proven technology versus something that is only a drawingboard concept. This is hugely important in aviation, as MD saw with the MD-11 (didn't meet performance promises), and other entities saw in other designs.

 

This hasn't been proven as the reason behind Boeing's move, but it seems to be a logical one. This is particularly so when you look at the fact that the -8 was chosen as the next presidential aircraft (over Boeing's additional submission of the - again, already developed - 787). Looking, then, at the fact that the VC-25s have been in service since 1987, and have also been supported by Boeing during that time period (read as "support contract for monies over time"), the provision of the aircraft isn't the end of the potential profit stream for a company.

 

 

-----

 

 

All that said, I don't find it unreasonable to revisit the venerable 747 to give it a refresh like the FS9 NG got in the NGX. It's an iconic aircraft, and still widely used. Even if it doesn't have a shiny future ahead of it, it's certainly had a run of quite a few years "at the top." So, even after they start disappearing from the skies, I think there are quite a number of people who would like to drag it out of the virtual hangar to re-live some of its past.

[BrzI 26]

It will be money very well spent . . .

[masneoquil 66]

Anyway, It doesn't matter (at least to me)  if there is airlines that still use it or don't.

You can always fly old routes or actual routes that use similar airplanes.

[Sky Prince 10]

Anyway, It doesn't matter (at least to me) if there is airlines that still use it or don't.

You can always fly old routes or actual routes that use similar airplanes.

I want to match reality. If in reality the aircraft is void, then I don't want to be flying it. Lol!

[Heffron 29]

The -400 freighters will be around for many more years to come, enough routes to choose from <3.

[Sky Prince 10]

Gents,

 

Keep in mind that, when it comes to offering options to the government for bidding, it's a lot easier to "support" a build by offering to commercial entities, rather than a one-off going to the government only. Notice how a bunch of the military transports are/were also commercial aircraft: C-47, C-12, C-9, C-137, C-40, and so on...

 

If Boeing were to want to respond to a bid to refresh the existing Presidential aircraft, since the cost of creating the rigging and tooling for a refreshed version has been borne by the industry (airlines buying the -8i/F). That cost wouldn't need to be passed to the government, which means they can bid lower when compared to some other company who wants to toss a clean sheet bid in. Additionally, they can rest on proven technology versus something that is only a drawingboard concept. This is hugely important in aviation, as MD saw with the MD-11 (didn't meet performance promises), and other entities saw in other designs.

 

This hasn't been proven as the reason behind Boeing's move, but it seems to be a logical one. This is particularly so when you look at the fact that the -8 was chosen as the next presidential aircraft (over Boeing's additional submission of the - again, already developed - 787). Looking, then, at the fact that the VC-25s have been in service since 1987, and have also been supported by Boeing during that time period (read as "support contract for monies over time"), the provision of the aircraft isn't the end of the potential profit stream for a company.

 

 

-----

 

 

All that said, I don't find it unreasonable to revisit the venerable 747 to give it a refresh like the FS9 NG got in the NGX. It's an iconic aircraft, and still widely used. Even if it doesn't have a shiny future ahead of it, it's certainly had a run of quite a few years "at the top." So, even after they start disappearing from the skies, I think there are quite a number of people who would like to drag it out of the virtual hangar to re-live some of its past.

 

I hear you on that one, sir.

 

Can you tell me if v2 will incorporate most of the already startup procedures for the aircraft (744/748)? Or, will we have to visit a truck load of docs all over again?

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Can you tell me if v2 will incorporate most of the already startup procedures for the aircraft (744/748)? Or, will we have to visit a truck load of docs all over again?

 

The 747-400 is a 747-400. The new v2 start the same way as the 747-400X as they're both modeled after the real 747-400. Not sure why you'd expect anything different there. Granted, the new one will have a bunch more capability, refinement, and features, but the procedures - both being based on the real plane - will be predominantly the same.

[Garys 209]

Some questions have been asked by many people who are looking fwd to the release of V2 over the course of the last few days, yet the only person who gets answers is the guy debating whether or not the -400 is still relevant in todays world.

[pinlifter 502]

I'm hoping the 747-800i is included with the initial release. Man I love that plane

[Sky Prince 10]

[Garys 209]

Me too! I absolutely love it! My reason for not purchasing the current version is because I don't like the VC. It's exactly like the -400. I'm very fussy about the look. Lol! PMDG 747-8 must look like it does in the real world for me to be thoroughly enticed.

So you choose to not fly a magnificent aircraft because you don't like the look of 2 cosmetic sidewall panels? I find that rather humorous :smile:

[Sky Prince 10]