Interesting article re the 747

[serfty]

...
Also has the biggest toilets, this side of the Business on the A380s

You obviously haven't seen the R1 (nee "Ladies")
lavatory on the VA 77W.

 

[moa999]

Toilets are generally airline specific.
Lots of different modules from various suppliers

 

[Forg]

Toilets are generally airline specific.
Lots of different modules from various suppliers

The EK toilets with showers (I really want to call 'em dunnies as it's SO inappropriate in the context!) at the front of their A380's are ... well, you could hold a good sized party in there.

 

[jb747]

Interesting that 747s are running for so long, yet SIA don't seem to be extending leases for A380s beyond 10 years, rather ordering new metal.

And no one wants to buy 10 year old A380s. These are likely to be scraped for parts!

The first couple have been saved by being taking by a wet lease operator. But, there was probably good reason for that first few aircraft to be retired early. They had wiring looms that were incorrectly made, and had to be modified (which was a big undertaking in itself). QF refused any deliveries until aircraft without modified looms were available.

Surely a 10 yo A380 is going to be more efficient per seat/ton than a 747?

Depends what your load factor is. If you're only carrying a jumbo load, the the 747 is the better.

 

[Forg]

Depends what your load factor is. If you're only carrying a jumbo load, the the 747 is the better.

To clarify ... a 100%-full 747 over a long-haul route, will be more efficient than an A380 with the same number of passengers in the same conditions on that route?
That surprises me, I’d have thought there’d have been bigger efficiency gains in the intervening years.

Is that just on the basis of costs on that flight, or are you including the original cost of the aircraft as well?

 

[davidj]

clarify ... a 100%-full 747 over the same long-haul route in the same conditions with the exact same number of passengers, will be more efficient than an A380 with the same number of passengers?

Yes I would like this clarified too.

Say flying with 30 ton of pax and freight, over the same distance. I would have assumed an A380 would be more efficient, no?

If not, bring back the 747?

 

[jb747]

To clarify ... a 100%-full 747 over a long-haul route, will be more efficient than an A380 with the same number of passengers in the same conditions on that route?
That surprises me, I’d have thought there’d have been bigger efficiency gains in the intervening years.

Is that just on the basis of costs on that flight, or are you including the original cost of the aircraft as well?

Basically, if you want to carry 365 people, then use an aircraft designed to carry that number....not an aircraft meant to carry 550.

There have been massive efficiency gains in aircraft carrying 350 or so people. They are called the 777 and the A350.

The 380 only comes into its own once the loads exceed what the others can carry. A simple fact...an empty 747 weighs about 180 tonnes. But an empty A380 weighs 280 tonnes. If you are carrying the same passenger load, you're also carting around 100 tonnes of extra airframe. That totally destroys any efficiency gains.

The same maths applies to any situation where you could reasonably use a smaller aircraft against a larger one. At the same load factor, modern aircraft are much more efficient. But, at the same passenger load (by number of pax), a smaller aircraft will be well ahead.

 

[Strategic Aviation]

Man Buys Thai Airways 747, Keeps It In His Backyard - One Mile at a Time

 

[AlexFly77]

Oops yep it's Cathay Cargo with 14. Fixed above.

Of the 744s only BA (36), KLM (15) and Lufthansa (13) have more than Qantas (11)

Interesting that none are US carriers.

 

[harvyk]

Interesting that none are US carriers.

Not that interesting, the last 747 flight by a US airline happened at the end of last year, it was a somewhat major media event.

 

[RooFlyer]

Interesting that none are US carriers.

And welcome to AFF AlexFly77