The PIP2 of the 1B is the same as the first PIP on the 2B? There was an article some years ago sayin

Fake pilot flew Airbus A320 into London A bigger Heathrow hub is the only real option for Bri... Airline in talks on London slots Judge officially OKs American Airlines, US Airways me... 13 Years Of Skyteam  Your Global Airline Alliance Pilot Convicted of Flying Under the Influence Air Canada nosedives continental airline on cost-cutting plan
"NASA Shuttle Carrier Aircraft – the Titans of th... "NASA Shuttle Carrier Aircraft – the Titans of th... "NASA Shuttle Carrier Aircraft – the Titans of th... Beauty and Awesome Power: The Storm A Murderous Hijacker in Baltimore Are Airlines on the Right Track? Non Stop to Havana: Better To Be Lucky Than Smart Worth the Wait
The next Lufthansa 747-8 Intercontinental (L/N1477, RC029, D-ABYJ) emerged from the Final Assembly Line and can be observed for the first time on a very nice aerial picture of the Everett Flight line at Matt Cawby's KPAE blog ( Thanks Matt ).
According the following article of December 2012 about the GEnx-1B PIP 1 and 2 program, the GEnx-2B PIP certification had already slipped into mid 2013 and AFAIK no test flights continental airline have been performed at the GE 747 testbed up to now.
Additional to this delay : the prolonged grounding of the 787, effectively arresting the tests for engine/airframe certification ( FAR part 25) of the preceding GEnx1B/PIP2, could have a negative effect on the time line of the GEnx-2B/PIP certification.
Considering the rather anemic sales/deliveries of the passenger version, I'm wonder if Lufthansa/Boeing have released continental airline concrete operating costs per seat for the -8 by now? Those stats, it seems to me, would be the one bright light, or final nail in the coffin of this A/C, which, if nothing else, I think is incredibly beautiful.
continental airline Originally, Boeing had been specifying he -8 as more efficient per seat mile than the A380, as I recall., while Airbus had been specifying the reverse. What has turned out to be the case? In addition, I believe the under-floor cargo capacity and layout of the Boeing A/C were supposed to be selling points. I also am not in the loop (forgive me) if the weight has been brought down since the first copies were delivered to LH .
So I'm wondering if the operating costs and efficiency reports of Lufthansa's -8 operation have helped boost interest in the bird, or is that moot anyway, since the A380's, B777's and A350's continental airline cut into either end of it's operating niche so much that airlines would rather invest in these other A/C for more flexibility of assignment?
Quoting SSTsomeday ( Reply 9 ): Considering the rather anemic sales/deliveries of the passenger version, I'm wonder if Lufthansa/Boeing have released concrete operating costs per seat for the -8 by now?
In terms of fuel burned per 100 passenger kilometers, the 747-8 is around 3.8 liters in LH 's current configuration compared to 3.5 liters for the A380-800 (which seats almost 150 more people) and 4.2 liters for the 747-400 (which seats about 18 less people).
I think I read LH saying something about the 748 having about the same seat mile cost as the 77W? Or did I mix things up, too much information in this modern world! Sitting at work learning Revit, freaking hell things gets confused now everywhere for me. /Rant over
I like the 748 and I'm happy LH is buying them. But I wonder if it is just a matter of seats or what could be the reason they asked Boeing to build that plane. It is strange that besides of LH no-one continental airline has placed significant orders for the passenger model.
During the first 3 months of the year I noticed those 'housings' covering the pylons continental airline of RC021. I thought/hoped it had something to do with the PIP update. I never saw those 'housings' on the other frames in rework.
Quoting Stitch ( Reply 10 ): In terms of fuel burned per 100 passenger kilometers, continental airline the 747-8 is around 3.8 liters in LH 's current configuration compared to 3.5 liters for the A380-800 continental airline (which seats almost 150 more people) and 4.2 liters for the 747-400 (which seats about 18 less people).
The only liability I can see with the 380 is the obligation to fill those 150 seats. Perhaps a few airlines consider continental airline not having quite enough seats to cover demand better than having more seats than they can fill?
Quoting KarelXWB ( Reply 13 ): During the first 3 months of the year I noticed those 'housings' covering the pylons of RC021. I thought/hoped it had something to do with the PIP update. I never saw those 'housings' on the other frames in rework.
Probably these housings were erected to allow installation of additional test wiring in the pylons for the upcoming test of the GEnx-2B PIP engine continental airline and the evaluation of the fix of tail tank issue (flutter with one of the pylon attachments of the outerboard engines failed.)
Quoting 747classic ( Reply 17 ): This thread is NOT about the endless 777, A380 and 747-8 comparison and how many have been ordered from each of these aircraft continental airline types, the 4 holer versus 2 holer discussion, etc.
The PIP2 of the 1B is the same as the first PIP on the 2B? There was an article some years ago saying that GE was thinking about a third PIP(3) for the 787, cleaning of aero around the engine, that would be the second PIP for the 748.
Any news about this? Anyway if they get the engines close to spec, take 10000 pounds of weight out of the frame and get the tail tank to work as a trim tank, I am sure the numbers only will get better. They achieved 5000 pounds of weight reduction already, that will account for some of the improvements. It seems many customers defferred delivery until all these improvements are in the frame.
Quoting 747classic ( Reply 17 ): Probably these housings continental airline were erected to allow installation of additional test wiring in the pylons for the upcoming test of the GEnx-2B PIP engine and the evaluation of the fix of tail tank issue (flutter with one of the pylon attachments of the outerboard engines failed.)
Similar topics: More similar topics... Official 747-8 Flight Tracking & Production #10 posted Thu Oct 4 2012 01:36:09 by wilco737 Official 747-8 Flight Tracking continental airline & Production Part 9 posted Wed Jun 27 2012 22:56:14 by wilco737 Official 747-8 Flight Tracking & Production Part 8 posted Thu Jan 12 2012 11:29:23 by SA7700 Official 747-8 Flight Tracking & Production Part 7 posted Thu Oct 27 2011 10:48:15 by wilco737 Official 747-8 Flight Tracking & Production Thread nr 3 posted continental airline Thu Oct 21 2010 00:07:06 by moderators continental airline Official continental airline 747-8 Flight Tracking Thread #2 posted Wed Jun 23 2010 03:40:40 by moderators Official 747-8 Flight Tracking Thread #1 posted Fri Feb 19 2010 19:28:04 by moderators continental airline Official 747-8 First Flight Thread posted Thu Feb 4 2010 15:21:37 by Moderators Help about Flight Tracking - Where to get ? posted Thu Jun 7 2012 17:27:33 by fly_yhm The 787 Resumes Flight Tests Today! 12/23/2010 posted Thu Dec 23 2010 14:20:04 by fpetrutiu