Boeing Renews 747 Advanced Talks With Possible Customers

Boeing has renewed talk regarding a derivative of its 747 aircraft. The 747 Advance would meld some of the 787 technology including its engines (albiet with a smaller fan, but the same basic core) and other items. It would fill a niche between the A340-600 and the A380 in terms of seat size. Both companies still maintain thier forcasts in regards to commercial transports with Boeing saying smaller city pairs and Airbus still advocating high volume hub and spoke models. However, both seem to be hedging thier bets with the A350 and the 747-A. If Boeing were really unsure of its market forecasts, it would have pushed the 747-A as an all composite jumbo. It remains to be seen what the econmomics of the newer tech plane will be and that alone will dictate if companies buy it.

I wonder if we can get some Airbus style "launch aid"????

Boeing is reviving its campaign to potentially launch the 747 Advanced and is targeting a 2009 launch date to ensure the engine technology for the 787 is fully develo]ped to transition to the larger aircraft.

Not even a month after Airbus officially unveiled the A380, Boeing has put out feelers to possible customers about a larger 747, and plans to decide by mid-year whether to build the stretched plane (DAILY, Feb. 3).
747-Advanced

Sounds pretty interesting. I kind of had a feeling that when Airbus rolled out their new wings, Boeing would jump on the gun to start the race up again with them.. Cant wait to see something like,, the "Jumbo Jet Wars" But however, the 787 does sound good, but whats the difference of people paying for a different airline? Most people I ask, "Ohh hey what did you fly on".. their response "Just a really big plane". So I dont know why they would try to compete really as how they werent before.

Not shocking to most in the AV forum, I do look at the type of plane that is being dispatched. If all things are equal I prefer to fly Boeing. That being said, cheaper rules the day and in that I do not care unless its a A300 series and that rudder thing freaks me out. It smacks of a caoverup on both sides of the Atlantic IMHO.

At anyrate the big differnece IMHO is if people are willing to make 2-3 stops with the hub and spoke or pay a bit more for a non-stop flight (small city pairs) If the difference is less that say 2-300 per ticket i WILL always take the non stop. The cash cow (pun intended) is always the business traveler flying with full fare tickets. They want point to point service. The rest of us cattle in coach are more forgiving at times.

I dont care who it is..im flying Boeing. Airbus is nice and everything, but I just prefer Boeing.

Id rather fly in a DC 10 or a Tristar ANY DAY...
has anyone been in the JUMP seat of one of those planes?/ the side window is 45 inches tall by 33 wide OMG...what a view.....


To me Boeing its saying goodbye to the High density market....even if they stomp in the gas pedeal a "new" 7477 would not fly for 3 to 4 years..TOO LATE

Originally posted by FredT
Boeing has renewed talk regarding a derivative of its 747 aircraft. The 747 Advance would meld some of the 787 technology including its engines (albiet with a smaller fan, but the same basic core) and other items. It would fill a niche between the A340-600 and the A380 in terms of seat size. Both companies still maintain thier forcasts in regards to commercial transports with Boeing saying smaller city pairs and Airbus still advocating high volume hub and spoke models. However, both seem to be hedging thier bets with the A350 and the 747-A. If Boeing were really unsure of its market forecasts, it would have pushed the 747-A as an all composite jumbo. It remains to be seen what the econmomics of the newer tech plane will be and that alone will dictate if companies buy it.

I thought Boeing might do something like this, reengineer the 747 with 787 technology - its the obvious move. Composite aircraft are lghter, stronger and more efficient in use BUT are more expensive to build. Didnt Boeing propose a full double decked 747 once?

Airbus doesnt 'advocate' the hub and spoke system - the hub and spoke system is a natural existance for the majority of the routes the A380 will fly on, simply because aircraft that have the capability to fly those routes are more expensive AND in less demand. The hub and spoke system used to exist between Europe and the US, for the same reasons - there were few aircraft capable of the ranges and they were expensive, so instead of having 10 aircraft fly to 10 airports without a guaranteed full passenger load, they had 5 aircraft fly to hubs with a guaranteed passenger load and then have regional jets take the strain.

This was phased out because aircraft became available to fly the ranges required for these routes.

As technology moves on, you WILL see the hub and spoke system phased out on these routes as well, but by that time the A380 will be able to fly into the vast majority of airports with no issues.

I wonder if we can get some Airbus style "launch aid"????

And here was I thinking Boeing didnt pay full price for Japanese parts anyway (Yeah, OK enough about all that already - lets keep this civilised)

Personally, I prefer to fly on anything with wings and a window seat. Todays market isnt open to aircraft with a poor safety record, so anything flying today is 'safe'. Every new development in aircraft technology has brought accidents, and every aircraft manufacturer has suffered from the bad press because of issues with their aircraft.

The majority of accidents these days are due to either flight crew mistakes or external circumstances (ground crew selotaping over an instrument intake...), so Im happy to fly on anything because these days they all have the same chance of making it.

If they can incorporate the passenger innovations of the 787 into the new 747 it would really give them an edge.
Those being...
Larger windows ( a true joy I bet if you are an avid window seater like me0
Higher humidity and cabin pressure.
The 787 stands to be a plane a passenger will actually remember. I hope the 747 will be able to incorporate the cabin enviroment improvements at least.