| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Europe | |
| Air France Board Approves Order for 777 Freighters | |
| 2005-05-20 | |
| SEATTLE (AP) - The Air France-KLM board of directors has approved an order for five Boeing 777 cargo freighters, with options to buy three more. The orders, which Air France is still negotiating with The Boeing Co., would be worth about $1 billion at projected list prices, though airlines typically get steep discounts. Chicago-based Boeing, which builds most of its commercial planes in the Seattle area, began offering the 777 freighter to customers late last year, but has not yet formally launched the program. It plans to do so later this year and start delivering planes in late 2008, Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel said Friday. In a statement released Thursday, Air France said the 777 freighters will replace 747-200Fs, Boeing four-engine cargo jets the airline says have become too expensive to continue flying because of rising fuel costs. The airline said it's aiming to begin phasing in the twin-engine 777s into its fleet by the fall of 2008. Last month, Air Canada ordered two 777 freighters as part of a bigger deal that included 16 other 777s and 14 787s. The 777 freighter will be based on the passenger version of the long-range 777-200LR, which is scheduled to enter service in early 2006. The freighter would be able to carry 222,000 pounds of cargo up to 6,400 miles. Airbus SAS, Boeing's chief rival, has said its new superjumbo A380 freighter will be able to carry 341,000 pounds of cargo the same distance. It's also scheduled to enter service in 2008.
| |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #40 Hope the Euro taxpayers (anyway, the few left) like high ticket and cargo prices, and enjoy subsidizing failing airlines. They already subsidized the development of the A380 (and if Airbus gets its way, the A350), so it would be only fitting that they subsidize the outfits that have to buy Airbus' stuff. :) |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-05-20 22:50 |
| #39 HS: Airbus have various problems (state owned, prestige firm that takes billions from taxpayers etc) but one of them isnt low quality products or dangerous products, they sell well in US market. The tendancy of the tail to fall off the A300 strikes me as a little bit dangerous. http://www.injuryboard.com/view.cfm/Article=1165 http://www.airdisaster.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-53228.html |
| Posted by: GK 2005-05-20 20:58 |
| #38 Nope, I just want them to design websites. |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2005-05-20 20:24 |
| #37 Give 'em a break, TGA: you wouldn't want a bunch of webmasters designing airships, would you? |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2005-05-20 20:03 |
| #36 And what a crappy website they have... |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2005-05-20 19:57 |
| #35 If Zeppelin were a US company they would have gone much further in commercializing... they still seem stuck in a technological perfection mania. Also the aviation industry is fighting them... they know why. The flight I took was above Munich... absolutely great experience... they fly much lower than aircraft and of course windows are so much bigger, too. |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2005-05-20 19:56 |
| #34 thx TGA! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-20 19:50 |
| #33 They have been doing that for years: http://www.zeppelinflug.de/pages/E/haupt.htm |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2005-05-20 19:43 |
| #32 Wow TGA! i would love Zepplins the cruise ships of the air, touristic travel at low level in the Alps and other natural beauties. Btw the dicing that Airbus takes from some US members here it would be at they own cost if they dispise Airbus. Airbus have various problems (state owned, prestige firm that takes billions from taxpayers etc) but one of them isnt low quality products or dangerous products, they sell well in US market. If Boeing sleeps at helm would be passed . |
| Posted by: Hupomoque Spoluter7949 2005-05-20 19:43 |
| #31 cool - a Zep flight? How many are available? Is this a coming tourist thing? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-20 19:39 |
| #30 Private companies buy what they want and where... no EU law tells them otherwise. I'm not very happy about the A380... smaller, fuel efficient flexible aircraft is the future, not airborne monsters. Oh btw I took a Zeppelin flight in April... it's an absolutely great experience. Had the Germans been able to use Helium in the 30s we might be living in a Zeppelin age today. |
| Posted by: True German Ally 2005-05-20 19:32 |
| #29 Mike, Pretty close. The 777 hauls about 20% more. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-05-20 19:21 |
| #28 Wouldn't an A340 (available now) be the nearest equivalent Airbus to a 777? |
| Posted by: Mike 2005-05-20 19:06 |
| #27 European will buy European period, end of story, EU Procurement Laws. GE you do realize the foolishness of that statement. The US alone uses many more airliners than current and prospective EU members. That prejudiced Euro attitude will get you frozen out the largest (US) and second largest (Japan, who builds the 787 wings) airliner markets. If your prejudices continue, then a trade war is inevitable (Americans are less and less likely to overlook French and German slights). Just getting rid the the US trade deficit with Germany will directly throw 1+ million German workers out of jobs, 3-5 million if the multiplier effect of new money comming into a economy is taken into account, possibly doubling German unemployment to 20+%. As Bush said, "Bring it on." A little more on airline economics. 2 787's flying the transatlantic route (say Chicago or Dallas to Frankfurt) at 70% capacity will have a fuel cost advantage of almost $20 per ticket ($40 round trip) fuel cost advantage. Are you telling me that Europeans would rather throw away $40 round trip ticket (as well as having fewer airports to fly into)? Do you think the rest of the world thinks the same way? Do you think cargo shippers would like to spend an extra $7400 per leg or pocket part of that money (with customers and airlines) as profit. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-05-20 19:03 |
| #26 To anyone else here interested in reports of problems with the A380, I suggest the comments in the following link, especially the ones about wing chord: http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/007173.html. I also wonder at the purpose of what a law mandating that private European airlines must buy Airbus would be... maybe to make sure more Europeans die in air crashes as the rudders fall off? See http://rantburg.com/poparticle.asp?HC=&D=3/14/2005&ID=58846 for more info on that. I think it's especially suspicious that they wound up in Florida's airspace but turned around and tried to make it back to Cuba when bits started falling off. It sounds like they didn't want a first-world aviation agency looking over the broken bits. What would they be trying to hide? |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-05-20 18:46 |
| #25 As far as I'm aware Air France is owned by the French Government. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 18:39 |
| #24 I think it will be close in France but I think they will just make it. But if not, it's not the end of the world or the EU, just try again in a few years and fine tune it. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 18:37 |
| #23 European will buy European period, end of story, EU Procurement Laws. Even private companies? I guess signing onto the "World Trade Organization" was just a load of crap? |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-05-20 18:37 |
| #22 how's that EU constitution vote going? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-20 18:33 |
| #21 Seems to me it's US airlines that are failing, from United to American, I still remember TWA, PanAm and National you know. But it makes little difference even in the unlikely event your figures are correct, European will buy European period, end of story, EU Procurement Laws. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 18:31 |
| #20 The A380 would use 159,500 liters of fuel, while 143,000 liters, saving 16,500 liters. Should be: The A380 would use 159,500 liters of fuel, while 2 787s would use 143,000 liters, saving 16,500 liters. Also: A370 => A380 797 => 787 |
| Posted by: ed 2005-05-20 18:30 |
| #19 GE, BEEEP. Wrong answer. You're out. Next contestant please. The A380 is about 15% more fuel efficient than the 35 year old 747, that, per this story, is being phased out due to high fuel prices. The A380 has a specific fuel consumption of 2.9 (liters per passenger/100km), while the 787 has a specific fuel consumption of 2.6 (or 10% better), putting the A380, even before it has flown one revenue kilometer, in the same situation as the 35 year old 747. The 787 costs 1/2 the A380 with 1/2 the payload. Let's do a quick calculation of 1 A370 vs. 2 787s on a 10000km full flight (about 550 passengers). The A380 would use 159,500 liters of fuel, while 143,000 liters, saving 16,500 liters. In the US, jet fuel costs about $0.45/liter, giving two 787s a fuel cost advantage of $7425 one way. Multiply by 300 flight legs a year, gives the 2 797s a $2.23 million yearly fuel cost advantage. The A380 is in a very difficult spot. Now since you mentioned that the EU will place political restrictions on Europeans airlines to force Airbus purchases, then all that will accomplish is to force a higher cost structure on Euro airlines, allowing competitors to charge less, thereby forcing the Euro lines to fly with more empty seats, causing their cost structure to rise even more. Hope the Euro taxpayers (anyway, the few left) like high ticket and cargo prices, and enjoy subsidizing failing airlines. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-05-20 18:26 |
| #18 I see the order is still being negotiated, I will be very surprised if it comes to anything, so don't order any more Chinese textiles until the cheque is signed. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 18:26 |
#17
Why? Because you're personally sure that it's not a good plane? I've heard of "L'etat, c'est moi" before, but this is extreme... | |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-05-20 18:22 |
| #16 DeGaulle's being expanded now. Trying to ensure there's at least one runway in the world that will accomodate the 380. |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-05-20 18:17 |
| #15 Never heard of it Frank. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 18:15 |
| #14 maybe they just wanted a quality plane? How's that DeGaulle carrier doing? Ever left the Med? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-20 18:13 |
| #13 In that case the order must be cancelled. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 18:04 |
| #12 nevermind, I'm sure they'll make do |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-20 18:02 |
| #11 Look again. Both airframes (the 777F and the A380F) will be entering service in 2008. |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-05-20 18:02 |
| #10 LOL - right. EU sh&t don't stink...troll |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-20 18:01 |
| #9 They need the planes now rather than 2008, in the meantime they will have to put up with rubbish. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 17:54 |
| #8 sure GE - they're accepting substandard US products to help prop up the morally bankrupt Chimpy Bushitler regime..... cut your dosage in half |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-05-20 17:53 |
| #7 But it's not, it's far superior to anything the USA has produced or are capable of producing. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 17:51 |
| #6 GE - I take it "the European product sucks" isn't considered a good reason? |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-05-20 17:48 |
| #5 Seems like the A380 Freighter will not be available until 2008 until then they will have to do with inferior goods. Europeans should buy European when possble and in fact under EU Procurement Laws there is little choice unless there's a good reason. |
| Posted by: Grearong Elmurong9235 2005-05-20 17:41 |
| #4 The 777's load of 222,000 lbs gives it a bit of flexibility. It could also take shorter hops and have a greater payload. The A380 is a monster with just mainline hubs to land. The trend is point to point. Sorry, Airbus, better luck with India and Air France next time, heh. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-05-20 16:29 |
| #3 ....not to mention "landability", so to speak. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-05-20 16:19 |
| #2 Airbus SAS, Boeing's chief rival, has said its new superjumbo A380 freighter will be able to carry 341,000 pounds of cargo the same distance. But probably not with comparable fuel consumption as the 777F. Having two more engines than the 777 and being quite a bit heavier would probably tend to increase fuel usage somewhat.... |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-05-20 16:18 |
| #1 Nah, they expected Air France to stab them in the back. They are French, you know. |
| Posted by: BH 2005-05-20 15:55 |