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.
737-900 is the logical replacement for the 757, nearly the same length as well.
Maybe the 737-900ER could be but only for domestic flights. It doesn't have the range for transatlantic flights.
I think that is where they are going with that line. I know for damn sure the A321 doesn't have any legs. My airline inherited a bunch of them in the merger, they are not built for high/hot extended flights.
I'm P.O.'d that Boeing shut down the 757 200/300 line and the 717. Both are fantastic planes and they could have probably sold another 50 or so. The 717 market is gonna be taken by the Emb 190/170, which is a hell of a plane, but I think Boeing was in too much of a rush to put all the MD stuff behind them.
I thought it also had something to do with the state tax burden. Am I remembering incorrectly?
But the Embraer's are lighter and more modern designs. I don't think Boeing can compete on labor for aircraft in that class.
Yeah, its kind of a sea change every 15 years with better engineering and materials, you have to enter it at the right moment or you get killed, like MD did with the 11.
MD should have designed a new wing for the same DC-10 cross section and made the MD-11 into a large twin family similar to the 777.
Yea, 873 briefed, trained people in a controlled environment. How well will it work in a real life or death emergency with 873 drunk, sleepy, me first (screw the women and children), old and infirm, women and children - screaming passengers?
They did have the MD12, but that was a no go, bad timing.
You gotta have the right plane at the right time, 787 and A350 is that now, replace the 767/A330 line. The near supersonic boeing thing was the wrong plane at the wrong time.
If it was really intended to be a serious project. It's interesting how all the technology developed for the "Sonic Cruiser" ended up in the 787. If Boeing had officially started the 787 earlier using large amounts of composites in the structures, wouldn't that have tipped off Airbus to do their own research on an an all composite wide bodied aircraft?
Yeah, but Airbus was ahead of Boeing on composites and on fly by wire.
I want to see Russia be able to produce a plane for the global market now that Iluyshin, Tupolev, and Yakolev design bureaus are combining.
Interestingly, Mooney Aircraft is known for smaller high-performance propeller planes.
Mooney Acclaim
Chicago is more centrally located than Seattle.
That isn't going to help when the tail falls off at 20,000 feet.
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.