10 replies to this topic

[Uracco]

I read in Airliner World recently that the German flag carrier is going to retire its 747-8's by 2022. Seriously, what's the point in this? Why would you spend so much money on a plane as big as a 747 and spend all those fuel bills when you're only going to operate it for a maximum of 9 years. It'll never be able to repay itself.

[Northern]

The aircraft aren't needed and they are unprofitable therefore meaning they need to be sent away - they'll make a bit a money from selling them if they own the AC

[ringo888]

what issue and what page?

 

i have alway said that Boeing count get rid of them so they offered them to Lufthansa for nothing. I thought it was suspicious since they also have the airbus A380 and Boeing 747s that they don't plan to phase out just yet

[james767]

The 747-8 is a good cargo plane but it too small to be a good passenger plane, so a 777-300ER is better as can transport about the same people with less fuel and if you need more capacity you get an A380.

[Uracco]

what issue and what page?

 

i have alway said that Boeing count get rid of them so they offered them to Lufthansa for nothing. I thought it was suspicious since they also have the airbus A380 and Boeing 747s that they don't plan to phase out just yet

Latest, August 2013, issue on Page 16 under Lufthansa go green. "Lufthansa said that their new 747-8i's could be pahsed out by 2020"

[DiscoverFRA]

I suppose it doesn't make sense to have two very large airliner types.  I think the A380 has a better cost per seat as well. 

[ar157]

the A380 does indeed have better CASM but it's cargo hold while in a passenger configuration is inferior to that of the 748i.  If LH are to dispose of their 748's they'll probably be converted to freighters. That said, that's of course only if the cargo demand picks up. We've already seen NCA park a 748F in the desert. Also, BNP Paribas financed these aircraft so they may go looking around for potential customers.

[mxax-ai]

The aircraft aren't needed and they are unprofitable therefore meaning they need to be sent away - they'll make a bit a money from selling them if they own the AC

How come they can make a profit with a 747-400 or an A340-600, yet fail to do such with a 747-8i, an aircraft that is superior both in engines and wing aerodynamics? Of course an A380 or 77W might make them a bit more money, but that alone does not render the 747-8i obsolete.

[Northern]

Well the 747-400 is bigger and also being phased out due to its economics, as with the A340 therefore meaning the airline must want to reduce their four engine'd fleet due to growing fuel costs 

[ar157]

there is still a very small market for 4 holers on routes between Australia - South America and Australia - Africa thanks to CASA restrictions. Basically CASA doesn't recgonise ETOPS rulings and makes 4 holers mandatory

[james767]

I suppose it doesn't make sense to have two very large airliner types.  I think the A380 has a better cost per seat as well. 

Boeing says that the 747-8 has a 8% lower cost per seat but that in a seating plane that has more passenger then any of the 747-8 in fight as most 747-8 are made so there like A380 in seat Pitch which make the cost per seat higher then an A380.