Keeping The (Freight) Faith - 777-200F & 747-8F
January 14th, 2008
Just after news emerged of the 787 Dreamliner being rescheduled, focus quickly turned to the other two key airplane programs that Boeing would be undertaking at various points in 2008.
The 777-200F, based on the 777-200LR and the first ever stretched variant of the 747 in the 747-8F.
Speculation whirred amongst skeptics and analysts alike that there would be issues that could derail these two projects.
Image courtesy of Boeing
As mentioned previously, one of the launch customers for the 747-8F had this to say.
“There is nothing from Boeing …. (stating) that the timetable will not be met. Obviously things can change…. our (dash) 8’s will be delivered on time“.
Having been very badly burned during the late 1990’s over the production ramp which saw the manufacturing grind to a screeching halt, BCA President & CEO Scott Carson says that Boeing is looking to avoid the mistakes it made before.
“We didn’t look at the 787 in isolation. We carefully assessed the condition on all of our programs before we announced the slide in the 787. “
With the two large freighters, having firm orders between them totalling 158 jets (based on sales through to December 31 2007 and not including options/purchase rights), Boeing has made no secret that it will not allow the setbacks on the 787 to filter through elsewhere.
Carson goes on to say that “it’s going to require us to maintain the schedules on the 787 so people come off when they need to…because we need them to go work on the 747-8,” .
Part of the optimism stems from the fact that the 777-200F and 747-8F are being built at different times in 2008 - the gap in between will mean resources and pilots will not be stretched.
Image courtesy of Boeing
Furthermore, the 777-200F is already being manufactured and will have largely completed its flight tests prior to the 747-8F production getting underway.
Another encouraging aspect for both freighters is the certification programs that both will undertake.
Unlike the 787, freighters will not require evacuation tests nor will they contain cumbersome wiring for inflight entertainment and passenger environmental/ventilation systems thus cutting down on both time, expense and weight on the 777-200F and 747-8F.
With the other variants of the 777 and 747 currently in production, the supplier base is already in place to facilitate any sudden changes that may crop up. Logistically, the network too is a proven one and should not suffer from the relative fluidity found on the 787, which is employing a completely new strategy with pre-stuffed/fabricated major subassemblies.
777-200F launch customer Air France could not be reached for comment, however the program is bearing the fruits from its sisterships, the 777-200LR and 777-300ER. The GE90 engines exclusively powering the longer range variants of the 777 have proven their worth as being highly fuel efficient - the 777-200F is expected to gain from a nominal range increase of at least 150 nautical miles, based on improvements implemented on the -200LR and -300ER models.
For the 777-200F, this translates into more range or more freight carrying capability. The highly acclaimed wing has benefited from vortex generators for cruise/drag fuel consumption improvement and has added to the airplane’s wide ranging global appeal.
Prior to ordering upto 115 Boeing 787’s, Qantas and Boeing jointly studied wideranging weight improvements for the 777-200LR - these included lighter cabin fittings and where possible, newer and lighter materials to boost the airplanes range/payload capabilities. One sizeable Boeing 777-200F customer who declined to be identified is “more than satisfied” with the performance on the new jet.
“We’ve been shown the A350 freighter. It’s a good airplane on paper, no doubt - but from what we’ve seen of the triple-seven freighter, it’s going to be a tough ask. For example, passenger operations at airports worry about ramp rash - it occurs on freighters and usually with much more force due to the weight/size of cargo being transported and much higher up on the fuselage during loading.
On the A350, you have a side composite panel sandwiched in between the upper and lower panels - damage on that isn’t going to be “patched up” as easily as on a monolithic structure such as that employed by the 787. Essentially you have three weaker points in the fuselage and Airbus hasn’t yet, in our view, done enough to address these concerns. They have time on their side and there’s no reason why the A350 couldn’t be a part of our fleet in the future. Right now, we’re just eager to get our 777’s.“
In the midst on the uncertainty of the 787 program, the evolution of Boeing’s big airplane workhorses will help to maintain a good degree of customer confidence.
For its part, engine maker GE is progressing well on the GEnx engine for the 747-8 family. While Rolls Royce battles to address the fuel burn on its Trent 1000, GE is widely reported to have slightly exceeded its initial performance targets for both the 787 and 747-8 engines.
Production is currently underway on the first Boeing 777-200F and starts on the 747-8F toward the end of 2008.
Deliveries of the 777-200F are scheduled to start at the end of 2008 with the 747-8F to commence in late 2009.
Sphere: Related ContentEntry Filed under: 787 First Flight, 787 Orders, 787 Premiere, 787 Rollout, Aeroplane, Aerospace, Air Transport, Air Travel, Airlines, Airplane, Airplanes, Airport, Airports, Boeing, Boeing 747-8, Boeing 747-8F, Boeing 777, Boeing 777-200F, Boeing 777-200LR, Boeing 787, Boeing 787 Order, Boeing 787 Orders, Boeing 787 Premiere, Boeing 787 Rollout, Boeing Orders, Dreamliner, Dreamliner First Flight, Freighter, Randy Tinseth, Richard Aboulafia, Travel
11 Comments Add your own
1. keesje | January 14th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
I think the 747-8F and 777-200F have a good market position at this moment. Many 747Fs and DC10s will need to be replaced in the coming years. Airbus just launched the A330F & rapidly gained orders but is aiming at a different market.
IMO the biggest competor for the 747-8F and B777-200F will be the 747-400 cargo conversions (& MD11 to a lesser degree). More then 500 passenger Boeing 747-400s are flying at this moment. Many are / will be replaced by 777-300ERs and A380s in the coming years.
Bedek (Israel) and Taeco (China) are competing in converting 747-400’s. Prices are in the $60-80 million range. The new 747-8F and 777-200F might be x% more efficient but those converted 744s are way cheaper.. That just can’t be healthy for margins.
2. Jacobin777 | January 14th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
“With the other variants of the 777 and 747 currently in production, the supplier base is already in place to facilitate any sudden changes that may crop up. Logistically, the network too is a proven one and should not suffer from the relative fluidity found on the 787, which is employing a completely new strategy with pre-stuffed/fabricated major subassemblies.”
..this is the most important part of the two programs, especially with the 777 program….one doesn’t expect to theoretically see any delays due to logistics, ect.
Freighters in general have better margins than their pax counterparts…in fact, it is known that FX has paid closed to list for their 777F’s (in exchange for other favourable conversion programs for their other planes)….
I for one can’t wait to see both of these beauties flying…
3. Chris Wallace | January 14th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
At his last conference call, Scott Carson noted that the 747-8 program had a full compliment of engineers, likely to put to rest rumors that the 787 had “poached” a large number of them, impacting 747-8 program milestones.
As to the 747-400BCF, it will still be a decade or more before those planes are available in force as A380-800s, 747-8Is and 777-300ERs replace them. In the interim, Boeing has sold 78 747-8Fs in two years, which is just under half the number of 747-400(ER)Fs Boeing sold in seventeen. So there is obviously strong demand for new-build 747 freighters which is keeping margins within historical norms.
While much is said about how “unimportant” the nose door is, the fact is that there are more 747Fs with nose doors then without, even counting the Boeing 742M/743M/744M, the IAI 741SF/742SF/744BDSF, and the Boeing 741BCF/742BCF/743BCF/744BCF.
The 777F is a much stronger solution then a new MD-11F, to say nothing of a passenger-to-freighter conversion of an MD-11 or a DC-10. Her 80 orders in two years are testament to that.
4. keesje | January 14th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
How can the Freighters in general have better margins than their pax counterparts when the Cargo industry is floating on converted old passenger aircraft? Any source? Boeing foresaw they would sell twice as much 747-8i’s as 747-8F’s. It didn’t happen, but they are not happy with that situation.
Paying close to list price ($280 mill) when competing with 747-400 SF’s doing ~$60-80mill would in general be an illusion I guess. 747-400 conversions are ramping up now since they started in 2005.
B747-400’s from United, Singapore and Air Canada were available until now. The big carriers did hold on to their 744s while the A380 was delayed. If A380 production ramps up more 747-400 will become availlable for conversion replacing the now very old first generation converted 747’s.
5. Chris Wallace | January 14th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
> How can the Freighters in general have better
> margins than their pax counterparts when the
> Cargo industry is floating on converted old passenger
> aircraft?
A converted plane costs more to operate and performs worse then a new-build unit. Trip costs are higher and revenues are lower with a converted plane then a new-build.
I agree with you that new-build freighters are not going out at list, but neither are they going out at cost. Remember that every freighter Boeing sells is a passenger unit it cannot. So freighters have to be generating at least as much revenue as a passenger model, otherwise Boeing would not bother. And even when a line moves predominately to freighters (ala the A300 and 747), those planes still need to bring in a sufficient profit to justify keeping the line open.
6. James | January 14th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
Would of, could of, should of. If Airbus had scheduled the A380F to be delivered first like the 747-8F, they could have kept the freighter customers and been delivering freighter airframes ever since certification. They could have kept the assembly lines in motion and generated income while working on the A380-800 wiring issues. First flight 27 April 2005. Certification December 2006. Delivering freighters in 2007? A difference of a couple of billion euros, but who’s counting?
7. keesje | January 15th, 2008 at 12:46 am
I know of no passenger / freighter (707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, A300, A310, A320, A330, A340, A350 where the freighter was introduced before the passenger version.
Until the 747-8. There must be a reason.
Boeing firmly blieved the 747-8i would sell twice as good as the freighter.
http://www.ainonline.com/airshow-convention-news/farnborough-air-show/single-publication-story/article/boeing-predicts-747-8-freighter-preferment/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Bstory_pointer%5D=7
Airbus had to set priority on the A380, sacrificng some important customers in the process. The A380F will come & will be a formidable carrier able to transport 140 tons from Dubai to Washingtion. The 747-8F doesn´t come close.
The rumored cargo density diffences between A380 & 747-8f is in reality about 2.5%..
http://www.intervistas.com/4/CAIR/articles/12_dec2005_a.pdf
The 747-8F is selling well because its a great freighter. No alternative helps too.
8. boeing777 | January 15th, 2008 at 7:18 am
“I know of no passenger / freighter ….where the freighter was introduced before the passenger version.
Until the 747-8. There must be a reason.”
Does it matter?
No.
So, the 747-8I has had a lacklustre couple of years, but the -8F is selling very well - your argument has as much strength as saying that Boeing should have made the 777-200LR after the -200ER rather than do the stretch to the 777-300 first.
9. Chris Wallace | January 16th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
I imagine Airbus had wished they had delivered the A380-800F before the A380-800. It would have given them a nice cushion to handle the wiring issues and would likely have impacted the production rate much less.
10. TJ | January 16th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
“Boeing jointly studied wideranging weight improvements for the 777-200LR - these included lighter cabin fittings and where possible, newer and lighter materials to boost the airplanes range/payload capabilities.”
Boeing and carriers need to not only look to saving weight on the fixed items such as the airframes… But they also need to look at the day-to-day items going into the plane. For example, a standard cargo container weighs about 200 lbs. it is made of aluminum, and on a dedicated freighter there can be over 30 containers. Build these containers out of composites, cut the weight in half, and save 3,000 lbs.
11. Twin Engine Cargo King - &hellip | January 25th, 2008 at 7:27 am
[...] France is poised to take delivery of the world’s largest, longest ranged, twin engined freighter in the fourth quarter of this [...]
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed