Why is Boeing still modifying 747,not making Transonic M1.2,why not make a bigger jumbo to compete with A380?

Answer 1

If it is not broken do not fix it. The A380 is to large. Not many places have a long enough runway for it. With the amount of fuel it consumes I fail to see how it could be profitable to operate.

Answer 2

The question is, why?

Airbus A380 was created for 2 reasons:

a) Airbus has always been playing catch-up to Boeing. With A380, they finally have something that can surpass Boeing. It's worth the bragging rights, so to speak.

b) Airbus is betting on the future that airlines will fly fewer but bigger planes, or trade their smaller planes to bigger planes (like the A380) instead of just buying more planes to add capacity. It's literally a do-or-die decision. If they guessed wrong, they can't sell enough A380's to break even, then the whole company goes bankrupt. I believe they are still about 80-150 planes short of break-even on the A380, with cancellations and all.

Several things do call out against the adoption of A380

a) it's new and unproven. Yes, Airbus has a nice history behind it, and the plane is thoroughly tested and all that, but nothing beats a proven design that has worked for decades with all kinks worked out. Have you seen the Discovery special 5-part series? They are having severe delays mainly due to wiring problems... Because the British Team and the French team used different CAD software, and no one caught the problem. The specs are written right, but nobody realized that when they finally converted the data over, the two sets of wires don't match. International collaboration has its problems. Landing gear's unpowered drop test doesn't quite work. What else could be wrong with it? Only time will tell.

b) A380 is too big, and requires longer / heavier / tougher runways. No one would even THINK of landing a A380 in Hong Kong's old Kai-tak International Airport. The 747's barely squeeze in as is. Yes, HK does have new airport (been there), but not all cities can afford to renovate/build airport just because ONE airline want to fly A380's.

And how much time is a transonic jet going to save? Vs. the amount of reinforcements it need to break the mach barrier repeatedly trip after trip?

May as well do a state-of-the-art 747 with most modern engines available, add a wee bit more wing, winglet, and maybe a wee bit more fuselage, and extend the upper bubble, and you'd have almost same as a A380, for a LOT less R&D and prototype costs.

Answer 3

We all would have liked to have seen supersonic air travel continue and progress beyond Concorde but just as in the case of 747 there is very little market for anything larger at this time. After years of research NASA has concluded that supersonic air travel is not economical and bearing some future developement in propulsion will continue to be so.

Even if Boeing had gone forth with the Sonic Cruiser which flew near the speed of sound it was mentioned from the beginning that flying on it was going to be considered "premium" air travel meaning it was going to cost you more to fly on it. The downturn of 911 and the competition to just stay in business meant that the airlines interest in that project quickly dried up.

After years of study into a plane larger than the 747, Boeing felt like it had two very good products for the long haul market in the 747 and 777, and they were well suited for most markets and routes. The Asian market its really the only one calling for larger and larger airliners.

Boeing has begun to take orders for a slightly larger 747-8. The "-8" signifies that it borrows a lot from the new 787 Dreamliner like it's avionics, some of it's interior design, the wings, and some of the structure. Boeing has already received over 50 orders for this new stretch of the 747.

In the mid 80s a book came out called THE SPORTY GAME. It was the story of the aircaft manufacturing industry and how Boeing was being "sporty" by betting the entire new worth of the company that the 707 and later the 747 would sell.

Answer 4

THEY DONT WANT TO MAKE AN AIRCRAFT BIGGER THAN THE A380!!! The A380 is too big, the airlines that fly it will have a tough time filling it up I think and they are going to have to decrease frequency because:

350 people on a 777= $$$
350 people on an A380= maybe breaking even...

They are soo big that they wont be filled... boeing is doing it right with fewer seats, and lower costs, the 787 will be full, therefore it will make money, and they can fill say 3 in a day, which means lots of profit... a 3/4 full A380 and 3/4 full A330 will not make nearly the profit of 3 787's...

Answer 5

Boeing and Airbus have different views. Boeing is trying to get more range with passenger comfort. Airbus is more into more passengers that an airline can carry and cram them in one big plane. Plus, Boeing tries to make planes to are able to land at most any major to medium sized airports, even some that are small. Boeing is currently working on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which is anothe twin engine jet plane, which has lots of range, to compete with the A380. Personally, though, United States airlines prefer Boeing planes because it is right in the United States so ordering spare parts and getting help is a lot easier then doing so from an aircraft manufacturer thatis all the way in Europe.

Boeing was trying to work on a supersonic transporter, but I don't know if they still are. Supersonic Transporters are too expensive to maintain and consum too much fuel. That was the main reason why the Concorde was retired. Another reason why was because of crashes.

Answer 6

The 747-800 will be able to compete with the smaller sizes of the A380. The cost of development to make a Transonic or bigger jumbo jet is astronomical. The A380 just about bankrupt Airbus. There are so few airports that are willing to make their Airport A380 capable. It just costs too much.

Answer 7

Cause they believe that is not the key to still being successful, is not that route. When Airbus anounced they a380 Boeing said they would consider building a 747 Extended that would compete with it, but they believed Airlines were not looking for size, but rather Effieciency and Speed hence the development the 7E7 or 787 which is supposed to be the most efficienct plane ever to be developed, however it was also designed to be one of the fastest commercial airliners but Boeing has backed off that and focused on efficiency.

Although the A380 is somewhat cool, Boeing is turning out to be somewhat right, because of the extended delays of building the A380. Many airlines are backing out of the A380 and looking at Boeing again.

Answer 8

I flew the 747 for 21 years of my existence - all types different than the 4 hundred - it is returned yet another infantile A as against B dialogue - The 747 is an spectacular 4 hundred passenger airplane - additionally exists as a freighter - The A380 is possibly an superb 500-six hundred passenger airplane - A shipment version is yet to return - The 747 became designed interior the overdue Nineteen Sixties - The A380 became designed interior the early 2000 - That makes 35 years distinction - My merely grievance of the A380 would be that it is designed for a 2 pilot group - i'm biased for 3 pilot crews - this is two pilots + one million flight engineer - Which considered one of you is... a A380 pilot or a 747 pilot...? .

Answer 9

The A380 is only intended for large-capacity, long-runs. But it eats fuel pretty fast from what I hear. Also, it is VERY, VERY heavy and takes a long time to stop.

Yes, 747s are heavy, but not nearly as much as the A380

Boeing 747-800 = 875,000 lb
Airbus A380 = 1,300,000 lb

The 747 has a very good safety record as well, so no need to replace it. Any accident with a 747 was caused by human error (at least most were)

Answer 10

They keep modifying the 747 because it has made a name for it's self. When regular people see it fly over they instantly know what type of plane it is. Also, because they don't believe the future of air travel is in the transportation of large amounts of passengers. They think its going to be more point to point rather then hub and spoke.(this could be true for Canada and USA, but in the big picture I believe the hub and spoke will be more beneficial for Intercontinental airlines and in the Asian and Australian continents.) The A380 was also considered a great risk for Airbus, they just wanted to make a name for themselves. So to sum it up, both companies have different takes on the future and are doing what they see best(and not competing)

Answer 11

Have you noticed how well Airbus is doing with the A380. Its not going so well. One of their bigger, or biggest contracts with FedEx was canceled not to long ago and they opted for Boeing 777. I believe UPS is also going with Boeing.

The A380 is just to large it can only land at a handfull of airports, and really do you want to be hurtling through the air in an aluminium tube with 800 and some other people all cramed next to one another.