PIA & THE 747-400 SAGA

[Amaad Lone]

Hello everyone

Why are people insisting that PIA "needs" the 747-400.

Does it have the passenger capacity that our 777-300s will not be able to fullfill?????

Does it have the range that the 777 fleet cannot meet?????

Does the fuel economy of the 747-400 make it viable against the 777-300s.

What is it with the 747-400 that people cannot get over.

747-400 is mid 1980s technology, having entered service in 1988, making the oldest aircraft 18 years old. Should PIA buy the 747-400 in 2006, it would be like buying a 747-200 for the first time in 1988.

Its a 400 seater, same as the 777-300 so the capacity issue is not there.

The 777-300 not only carries the same number of passengers as the 747-400 but consumes much less fuel. It is cheaper to operate, and a type PIA will be operating within two years.

Why induct a new type and incur heavy fixed costs, when a better aircraft of the same capacity is going to enter service within two years.

PIA needs to concentrate on the 777 fleet, all three versions the 300ER, 200LR and 200ER, and forget ever inducting the 747-400, they are 10 years too late.

As for the combi operations, well its about time PIA concentrated on pure cargo operations, and forget the mixed configuration aircraft.

Its the 777 era, and the jumbos are soon going to be history in PIA.

[ord]

Hello everyone



Its a 400 seater, same as the 777-300 so the capacity issue is not there.

The 777-300 not only carries the same number of passengers as the 747-400 but consumes much less fuel.

Umh, the capacity issue is there. PIA's 773ERs will seat 370 passengers and the 743s currently seat ~420. So there will definately be a yield cut on routes like ISB/LHE-JED and LHR. I understand that during the nonpeak season, it often appears that PIA don't need 743s, but the fact is that if smaller a/c were used, there would be a capacity shortage during peak season and massive yield cuts.

[cheetah]

You forget that B747-400 also has a lot more cargo space to offer. PIA is particularly looking at this option for the LAX route.

[VC10]

Couldn't agree more Amaad. As for the cargo issue PIA could go for new build 747 freighters, or if these are deemed too large either A310 or B757 conversions as these are readily available.
Mike.

[Kashif]

I also agree with Amaad. Fleet commonality is the way of the future. While the Jumbo's got a slightly bigger capacity, it isn't that big of an issue. With a dedicated cargo fleet of used 744 or M11, PIA would make a lot more money than just rely on belly cargo. With Paki economy increasing the way it does, I just don't see the problem.

[Amaad Lone]

the capacity issue is there. PIA's 773ERs will seat 370 passengers and the 743s currently seat ~420. So there will definately be a yield cut on routes like ISB/LHE-JED and LHR.

First of all ORD, the 747-300 is seating 433 passengers and not 420. And what makes you think PIA will seat 370 passengers in the 777-340ERs, considering they have 327 in the 240ERs.

I would think PIA is going to seat atleast 420-430 people on the 777-300ERs, making it identical capacity as the 747-300s.

Plus if they have to lease equipment in the short term to replace the combis, then the perfect plane would be younger 747-200 or 300s, and not a new type.

[B777240ER]

Plus if they have to lease equipment in the short term to replace the combis, then the perfect plane would be younger 747-200 or 300s, and not a new type

Why lease these? The base B773 can do the job. Its got enough range for UK services.

[Charliedelta11]

the MD11 is out of the question..unless PIA can manage to convince carriers to get rid of their MD11's...which would be stupiditity on the carriers part...the A310F is an option and as far as i know is being looked at...
the 777-300 is a better option than the 747-400....why look at old designs anyway ? PIA is revamping its fleet and the induction of old fuel guzzling planes is the last thing we need...plus...the carriers leased 1/2 777-300's additionally too...meaning the 747-300s being used currently are probably the last double deckers we'll see for sometime...unless they go for the A380...which would leave most of us gaping....

[sheriyars]

PIAs intention of gettng 744s is not official,only rumours if they are looking for 744s then they are only looking for a cargo version not a pax version.
Secondly when pia got 743s in mid 90s,at that time they were looking for pax version 744s,but had to compromise on 743s as 744 waz two men cockpit and f/es were totally aganst it,and their was no problem for conversions of 742 crew on 743.

[AN]

Whereas it is incorrect to compare a 747-400 with a 777-300 (PIA's current 747-300's seat upwards of 430 pax and the 777-300 is well under 400 pax. This means the 747-400 carries upwards of 15% more passengers than the 777-300 not to mention similarly larger cargo volume/quantity), the idea that it is useless for PIA To aquire 747-400's has some weight to it. It is correct that the 747-400 is now nearing its 20th year of production and the 747 design herself is nearing 50 with minimal core design changes. It is essentialy the same wing, fuselage and overall economy that was designed int he early 60's.

For a quick comparison to all of you here are some general fuel burn numbers.

747-200: Average Cruise fuel burn 12 tonnes per hour. Thats (12/402) almost 30kg of fuel per hour per seat.

747-400: Average cruise fuel burn 10.6 tonnes per hour. THats (10.6/450) almost 25 Kg of fuel per hour per seat. Making the 747-400 16% more efficient than the 747-400.

777-300: Average cruise fuel burn 6.7 tonnes per hour THats (6.3/390) 17 Kg fuel per hour per seat. Making the 777-300 almost 50% more fuel efficient than the 747-100/200 THAT IT WAS DESIGNED TO REPLACE.


The stretched 777-300 is designed as a replacement for early generation 747s (747-100s and 200s). Compared to the older 747s the stretched 777 has comparable passenger capacity and range, but burns one third to one half less fuel and features 40% lower maintenance costs.

Another advantage of the 777 is that a twin engine aircraft will always (Atleast with current technology and economics) be cheaper to maintain than a 3 or 4 engine aircraft such as the 747.

SO what is the ideal aircraft for PIA? That is a question it seems even the analysts (are there any) at PIA dont know for sure. Latest talks show PIA looking at the 747-800 which would be a more economically sound decision than purchasing 747-400 (The 747-800 has significantly different wing/engine technology than the -400, but the fact remains that the design is still 50 years old at the delivery of the first 747-800) provided the large amounts of money for purchase are available and the airline utilises the aircraft economically.
PIA does have some high density local and international routes where even 450 seats are not enough, and it seems there will always be the need for a few 747 sized aircraft for the highest density routes, with a larger number of 777 aircraft to operate the medium to high density routes.

This is PIA's current fleet plan with 8 (plus atleast one, if not more leased to be bought) 777, and 6 747-400's which will be due for the junkyard before the end of the decade.

As a sidenote, all numbers used are approximate and are only to give the reader a general idea of the difference, and are not exact.

[CoyBoy]

For my own knowledge I'd like to know why the design being old is such a critical issue, performence etc I can understand, is it because of aerodynamics? the A380 dosent seem any sleeker than the 744 or 748, and why would Boeing introduce a new version of an old design if it was not acceptable, should 748 be rejected because its airframe dosent have a new design even if performance has been improved drastically making it a suitable alternative to the competition, do looks count in buying aircrfat? please do reply.

[nutsforplanes]

For my own knowledge I'd like to know why the design being old is such a critical issue.....

To answer coyboy's question. There are a number of aspects to make a design more efficent.
First and foremost is the aerodynamic efficency. The 747 is one of the most efficient aerodynamic designed aeroplanes because of its signature hump. Boeing advertises its speed at Mach .855 at FL 350. Ditto for the new 747-8.

Its the internal packaging, where the 747 is getting beat, obviously beacuse it was designed in the 1960's. Things like wiring, plumbing, etc. Where the 747 uses hydraulic actuators, the newer planes are using electric servo motors. Which are lighter and more efficent. It would be great if Boeing could reduce the OEW(operational empty weight ) of 747 by 10-15 tons. But this would mean designing the 747 from scratch(about $6-10 billion).

To make things more clear lets look at two aeroplanes which are in direct competition with each other.
The B777-300ER and A340-600

MTOW
A340-600: 811,300 lbs
A340-600HGW: 837,800 lbs
777-300ER: 775,000 lbs


Max. Range
A340-600: 7,500 nm
A340-600HGW: 7,900 nm
777-300ER: 7,880 nm


Max. Payload
A340-600: 144,000 lbs
A340-600HGW: 152,500 lbs
777-300ER: 154,000 lbs

A340-600HGW(high gross weight) weighs in nearly 63,000 lbs more then the 777-300ER. Yet carries less payload with a negligible range advantage using obviously more fuel. That's what customers are looking for...Efficency
Going by 2005 orders for A340 compared to B777, it was no contest .

Hope this helps!

[CoyBoy]

Thanks alot nutsforplanes.

[F.K]

the 747 design it self is its unique selling point apart from its excess capacity for both pax and cargo. the 747 legacy is still alive and being relived by the introduction of the 748 although pia should not be eyeing those for right now on account of financial constraints. the closest in capacity is the 773 which will seat not more then 370 passengers as planned where as the 744 can be configured to accomodate 520 pax and up to 580 in a single class lay out during the heavy hajj season. plus the 777 price tag is repelling for an airline like pia that has been shaken to its very roots by a small fuel price increase showing its tender vulunerability, a change other airlines we keep vying pia against,absorbed and moved on.life after the 743s will not mark the end of the 747 relationship with pia if sense prevails . however i agree that when freighters are being considered 747 classics are the cheapest and most effective specially right now when pia already operates a fleet of the same. people must realize that 744 operations will have a higher yieled in net terms because low capacity offered by the 777 would mean negotiating higher slots and frequencys ,increasing the cost of operation plus paying a set of pilots and 12 cabin attendents for every extra flight flown to cater to the mass demand provided that slots are granted which if negative would mean loss of revenue from potential customers. the 777 design unfortunately has not made provisions for these problems which airlines like pia will have to face . the philosiphy behind the production of the 380 was to reduce frequencys at busy hubs because of the high operational costs airlines have to bear that eat in to their revenue. as far as economics go the 747s have a one up over the 777 making it clear that fuel efficiency isnt the only measure of economic viability.

[nutsforplanes]

Comparison of 777-300 vs 747-400

http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=100

http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=107