/n/ - Transportation » Thread #2033206

[19 / 5 / ?]

325KiB, 2048x2048, z6oglmvg4gx21.jpg.jpg

Why is the Boeing 747 slowly being faded out of the aviation industry?

Anonymous Thu 06 Feb 2025 03:36:50 No.2033206 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>2033267 >>2033492 >>2033538 >>2033591

I understand the 747's four-engine design consumes more fuel than modern twin-engine aircraft like the Dreamliner and Boeing 777, leading to higher operating costs for airlines but doesn't Airbus A380's massive body and 4 engines consume even more fuel? Why are they in such high demand?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Feb 2025 06:04:57 No.2033212 Report

Quoted By: >>2033217

Both were killed too soon. That’s it. Neither company wants to admit the mistake, but the reality is the cost savings of moving 747-8 or A380 numbers of people for ONE landing slot and ONE crew outweighs the fuel difference. If they could they would restart both, but that would be to admit defeat. The airlines are in the same boat.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Feb 2025 07:30:46 No.2033217 Report

Quoted By:

>>2033212
>moving 747-8 or A380 numbers of people
Being able to consistently get that number of people is a route constraint
>ONE landing slot
The ability to only need a single slot is partially negated by it being higher cost.
>ONE crew
You'll need more FAs, and the cost of a couple more pilots isn't exactly huge

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Feb 2025 10:14:41 No.2033221 Report

Quoted By:

A twin can fly direct, the a380 was designed around the model of hubs and connecting flights
It's why emirates has so many

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Feb 2025 21:41:39 No.2033262 Report

Quoted By: >>2033264

The 747 was a dinosaur and as much as I love it, keeping dinosaurs in the air is something Boeing doesn't need to be doing more of

I agree about the 380 it seems premature to kill it off

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Feb 2025 21:49:45 No.2033264 Report

Quoted By: >>2034747

>>2033262
>The 747 was a dinosaur
It will be flying for many more years as a cargo hauler
>I agree about the 380 it seems premature to kill it off
No cargo variant

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 06 Feb 2025 23:07:29 No.2033267 Report

Quoted By: >>2033277

>>2033206
I wouldn't be surprised if we see most 747s retrofitted to the twin variant and used for cargo. Better fuel economy and the world still has an ever rising demand for cargo delivered quickly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Feb 2025 01:25:02 No.2033277 Report

Quoted By: >>2033282 >>2033308

>>2033267
>twin variant
wat

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Feb 2025 02:00:36 No.2033282 Report

Quoted By: >>2033290 >>2033308

>>2033277
It doesn't exist obviously. Probably an AI generated post.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Feb 2025 02:33:40 No.2033288 Report

Quoted By:

https://www.globalairlines.com/
A380
>A380
A380
>A380

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO wut.jpg, 35KiB, 830x223

Anonymous Fri 07 Feb 2025 03:13:16 No.2033290 Report

Quoted By: >>2033308

>>2033282
probably

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 797-1.jpg, 37KiB, 920x613

Anonymous Fri 07 Feb 2025 03:38:49 No.2033293 Report

Quoted By:

>here's your 797 bro

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 07 Feb 2025 09:45:31 No.2033308 Report

Quoted By:

>>2033277
It's in the rumor mill. RR is building a massive new fan that could be used for it. Unlikely boeing will do it though.
>>2033282
>>2033290
Rent free.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1849409.jpg, 1MiB, 1860x1259

Anonymous Fri 07 Feb 2025 16:38:31 No.2033345 Report

Quoted By:

The 747 should be brought back. Such a beautiful plane.
A380 looks kind of dumb IMO, and they were a moneypit for Airbus iirc and had never recouped the cost of development.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Feb 2025 05:37:07 No.2033492 Report

Quoted By: >>2033503

>>2033206
Not many airports can house A380s due to its wong size. They could have neen shorter if Airbus didn't want a one size fits all solution and the plane would have bukakked all over Boeing but such is life.

The 747 killed PANAM. The operation costs where insane. It was like using a Truck instead of a bus to hall people.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 09 Feb 2025 09:37:36 No.2033503 Report

Quoted By:

>>2033492
They designed the A380 wing to fit a stretch version, rather than for the original -800 version.
Making it thicker, heavier, and less efficient overall. It was unfortunate too that Airbus didn't wait a few years. An 380 incorporating the current or next gen engines (e.g. RR Ultrafans), composite airframe and/or wings would be a game-changer.

However, I think Airbus will be focusing most on the A320 then a330 replacements. They've captured most of the long haul and mid-distance markets. They need to get a design for a composite a321 sized aircraft out there and have a shrink and stretch variant.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1000029479.jpg, 85KiB, 1080x607

Anonymous Mon 10 Feb 2025 00:00:07 No.2033538 Report

Quoted By:

>>2033206
It's mostly about ETOPS limits being changed to allow twin engines to fly a lot further (or over oceans) from the nearest emergency landing spot.

Back in the day, engines were unreliable and so you generally had the rule of four (over water) and rule of two (over land) but since engines and planes in general are much more reliable, the ETOPS relaxed rules meant that now twin engined planes can be used for long hauls.

There's also the obvious fuel cost savings that came with it so 4 engines is now basically redundant, they burn more fuel and add more weight and cost more to manufacture.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 10 Feb 2025 17:35:43 No.2033591 Report

Quoted By:

>>2033206
Man I love AI. I can just ask "what's the airplane poop hole engine thing for" and it'll know what I'm talking about and give me an answer. I spent so many years not looking this (and many other things) up because I was tired of trying to find the right keywords for the search engines, then you gotta look for something that's not quora or reddit or stackoverflow trash, then the answer is somewhere in a 15000 SEO essay.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 23 Feb 2025 04:32:07 No.2034747 Report

Quoted By:

>>2033264
747 was literally created as a (mil) cargo. It lost to the C5, though.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Why is the Boeing 747 slowly being faded out of the aviation industry?