Posted on 03/27/2006 1:48:04 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
BOEING is pitching the new version of its legendary jumbo jet to Qantas, arguing it will beat Airbus's double decker A380 on costs per seat as well as for a total trip.
The passenger version of the Boeing 747-8 will be stretched by 3.6m and will be able to carry 34 more seats in a three-class configuration with 21 per cent more revenue cargo space than the existing 747-400.
Due to enter service in 2010, it will boost range by 1850km, give a 16 per cent lower fuel burn and 8 per cent lower costs per seat.
More importantly, Boeing says, it will also offer 6 per cent lower seat-mile costs and 29 per cent lower trip costs than the giant A380.
"We've really been able to make some significant breakthroughs in the fuel efficiency on the 747-8 - with the engines, with the aerodynamic improvements, as well as significant improvements in the operating costs," Boeing Commercial Airplanes vice-president of product development, Daniel Mooney, told a recent briefing in Sydney.
Mooney estimates that about a third of the efficiency improvements come from the 65,000lb-thrust GEnx 2B67 engines, which are based on the GEnx engines launched on the 787 Dreamliner.
The new engines use 15 per cent less fuel per seat with a 17 per cent gain in fuel per tonne. Despite being larger, the 747-8 has lower fuel consumption than the 747-400.
This translates into an improvement of about 8 per cent in operating costs over the 400.
"When we develop a heavier, bigger airplane, typically what happens is the trip costs go up but it just takes more fuel, and it's higher cost to send a bigger airplane on that trip," Mooney says.
"With the efficiencies we're getting from the 747-8, it's great to see that our trip costs have actually reduced a little bit versus the smaller 400. That's a really powerful economic improvement.
"When we compare it to the A380, our assessment is that the 747-8 will have better seat mile costs, and significantly - in the order of over 25 per cent - better trip costs."
Aerodynamic improvements and an enhanced wing are expected to contribute another third to the efficiency gain, although Boeing concedes the A380's completely new wing still has a slight advantage.
Boeing redesigned the wing to give it a state-of-art airfoil, building on the lessons learnt with the 777 and the 787, and added raked wingtips which increased the span of each wing by about 2m.
This increased the depth of the airfoil, giving the wing more structural efficiency, helping to reduce weight and adding to the fuel capacity. The manufacturer also simplified the trailing edge system to double slotted inboard flaps and single slotted outboard.
"We were able to make that simpler, get weight out, help reduce the maintenance costs for the operators and still get the low-speed performance that we need for the airplane," Mooney says.
Other improvements include electronic spoilers, the use of new alloys and some carbon composites as well as better integration of the engine nacelles to reduce drag.
Boeing says the 747-8 also wins when it comes to structural efficiency. It says the A380 is 18 per cent heavier than the 747-8 in terms of operating empty weight per seat, a measure of structural efficiency, and would need to be stretched to 650 seats to match its competitor.
As well as improved efficiency, the new Boeing plane features a new interior and an upgraded flight deck and will meet London Heathrow's QC2 noise requirements. Interior changes include access to empty space behind the bulge at the front of the plane for use as galley space or even passenger beds.
Actually, there were 33 injuries.
Source???
I'm now looking forward to the crummy three hour layover at LHR. Apparently it's a great place for planewatchers.
I see commercial jets in up close in person and I'm like a little kid (again).
There's something highly irrational and magical about air travel. I might be more giddy about that than I should, but I'm a geek and Dearest understands that...so I guess it's okay.
well,, I never saw the wing flex in reality, only on video or PBS specials, anyhow, interesting to say the lest to see how much they test those planes today.
There are a few 747-100s and 200s still flying in the freighter market, how many, I don't know, but, yes, they are slowly fading into the sunset.
There are a few very dodgy operators flying them in SE Asia right now, and JAL still flies a few.
The ones we got in '89 were already 15 years old and had 15,000 cycles on them. Parts fell of on takeoff, I was on a flight where the gear punctured the fuselage...
Same goes for the DC-10, its become a rareity as well. The MD-11 does great for cargo though.
Trust me, that was an incredible sucess. Evac tests always have injuries, McDonnell had a woman break her neck and be paralyzed for life. They put out more people in a shorter period of time than any one else ever, they are to be congratulated.
We took off out of HNL at about 11 pm, and turned around about 30 minutes later and landed. They couldn't get the gear doors closed, and would have burned too much fuel with the doors open.
We went back to the gate, sat on the plane for a few hours, then got off for an hour or so, got back on for another few hours, then crew rest time was violated and we cancelled around 3 am. I was with a bunch of other employees and I was in charge of finding us a ride. QANTAS wouldn't take any of us even though they had room (foreign carriers can't take "real" passengers between 2 points in America, so they had seats from people that flew in from SYD and stayed in HNL. I waited till the counters opened canvassed the charters, and then found Phillipines, who let only employees (no spouses, no passes) on for $100 to SFO, we left around 2 PM. Long day....
For the plane, they worked all day on it, and tried again the next night, same thing, they had to turn around and land. It was our only 747 and we had nothing that could make the flight, so we ended up cancelling 4 days of flights. It was a nightmare, I lucked out and got out before lots of others did.
Back in the '70s and '80s before airline deregulation fragmented the transatlantic market, there would be 20-30 747's queued up on the taxiways at JFK in the early evenings. It was awesome to see that many 747's lined up behind each other waiting their turns to takeoff.
Which model replaces a 757? They're all bigger than a 757. The 787 is turning out to be a replacement for various 767 models and with the 787-10 also the 777-200ER. I think the larger variants of Y1 will replace the 757.
I hope y'all understand how little I know about this, and how I enjoy just listening.
Ten weeks from now, I get to fly. I'm excited enough about that to just sit and watch and read and learn.
Opps, my mistake, yes, it's suppose to replace the 767.
Maybe originally it was supposed to replace the 757, but the only model of it that is in the 787's capacity range is the 757-300. Boeing will have to address a replacement for the 757-200 eventually. Airlines like Continental have found it very useful for hub to point flights across the Atlantic. It would be nice if a 757-200 replacement could offer enough range to fly from interior cities in North America to Europe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.