Korean Air’s Boeing 747 fleet will soon shrink, which is a shame for those of us who love the plane…
In this post:
Korean Air getting rid of five Boeing 747-8s in 2025
As reported by Reuters, Korean Air has reached an agreement to sell five of its Boeing 747-8s, and the planes are expected to exit the fleet as of September 2025. According to a regulatory filing, the sale is valued at $674 million (so around $135 million per plane), and is part of the carrier’s strategy of refreshing its fleet with newer generation aircraft.
For context, Korean Air has just nine passenger Boeing 747-8s in its fleet — there’s an additional jet leased to the Republic of Korea Air Force for VIP transport, and then six cargo Boeing 747-8s. So this means that Korean Air’s Boeing 747-8 fleet will shrink from nine aircraft to four aircraft at most. Korean Air’s jumbo jets are an average of just over eight years old.
Korean Air is one of only three airlines in the world to fly the passenger version of the Boeing 747-8. Lufthansa has the largest 747-8 fleet, with 19 of these aircraft, while Air China has seven of these aircraft.
I’m curious if the airline plans to keep around a subfleet of just four Boeing 747-8s, or if the sale of five jets causes Korean Air to retire the remaining ones as well. Korean Air is one of only two airlines to fly both the Airbus A380 and Boeing 747-8.
In 2021, Korean Air’s CEO stated that the A380 would be retired within five years (so by 2026), while the 747-8 would be retired within 10 years (so by 2031). Of course these kinds of plans constantly change, and I wonder what the latest is on that. If Korean Air sells over half of its 747-8 fleet, could we see the A380 stick around longer, especially with delivery delays of other jets? Only time will tell…
What will happen to former Korean Air Boeing 747-8s?
Demand for secondhand four engine aircraft is limited nowadays, and often these planes are just scrapped and used for parts. So what’s the plan for the five Korean Air Boeing 747-8s that have been purchased? Well, the planes have been sold to US aerospace firm Sierra Nevada Corporation.
Sierra Nevada was awarded a $13 billion US Air Force contract to develop an updated version of the E-4B Nightwatch, which is known as the “Doomsday plane,” given its ability to survive a nuclear war and act as a command and control center during emergencies.
The four current E-4Bs have been flying since the 1970s, and are modified versions of the Boeing 747-200. So clearly the US Air Force feels it’s time for an update, and using converted Boeing 747-8s is the best option.
Bottom line
Korean Air is selling five of its Boeing 747-8s to US aerospace firm Sierra Nevada Corporation, as they’ll become the new “Doomsday planes” for the US Air Force. The planes should leave Korean Air’s fleet as of September 2025, and at that point Korean Air will be down to just four Boeing 747-8s. I’m curious what that means for the future of Korean Air’s Boeing 747 and Airbus A380 fleet.
What do you make of Korean Air selling five Boeing 747-8s?
Obviously 747_8s are Not obsolete ,if altered they will fly during Nuclear War : Altered of course ,but in dangerous skies nonetheless; ,As 4 engine Wonders still outlive they're competition .
The question then becomes with the Gov giving 13 Billion to the firm, who gets the privilege to fly in case of doomsday? Surely those in charge caused the doomsday so why should they be saved from their stupidity?
The current Nightwatch planes typically serve as the main air transport method of the U.S. Secretary of Defence. You can find videos of it transporting Secretaries of Defence around the world, e.g. for NATO summit. Let’s hope that’s all this next generation fleet will have to do in their service life
Well I’m glad I flew First a few years ago. One of my least enjoyable. Left after midnight from JFK. A weak lounge experience but starting too early with champagne then coffee to stay awake until the flight, and I’m just not a fan of Bibimbap.
OTOH I slept really well :-). Enjoyed Seoul
Maybe from Atlanta some day,
I’ll keep enjoying Lufthansa's Queens of Sky !
Wow, your post has some indecipherable stream of consciousness style going on there...
Glad I got to try one of these in upper deck business, even if it was a 2 hour flight. Seats are much better than their A380s.
The one thing I never had a chance to do was fly economy on the 747 upper deck.
Ahh yes. Have to love your tax dollars going towards a $13 billion contract so the government elites can survive while we all die
Because there is not a fixed amount of wealth in our economy, means that the wealth of some doesn’t cause poverty for others
First: LOL
Second, "wealth" and currency are not the same thing, and there are indeed fixed amounts of the former (within given temporal periods) that require selective allocation for "effective" distribution.... hence the existence of multiple Congressional committees designated for that express purpose.
Lastly, not only does your statement make zero sense in...
First: LOL
Second, "wealth" and currency are not the same thing, and there are indeed fixed amounts of the former (within given temporal periods) that require selective allocation for "effective" distribution.... hence the existence of multiple Congressional committees designated for that express purpose.
Lastly, not only does your statement make zero sense in that regard, but any graph of productivity vis-a-vis compensation (from 1973 onward), laughs in your face at the very idea.
latter*
That's too bad. So few passenger 747-8s remain in service.
Boeing’s days are numbered. That said, if the truth were known, we’d ground so many jets that the world would enter recession.
We are going to see Chinese built airliners here in the US within 20 years.
If people won't fly Boeing, they're sure as hell not going to trust COMAC
Except that no one other than AvGeeks and maybe a few ex-employees "won't fly Boeing."
The other 99.9% of passengers either have no idea what kind of aircraft they're on, or don't care so long as the price/timing is right.
And yes, if a COMAC ever gets certified by the FAA/CAA/EASA, then plenty of Westerners will hop right aboard.
i still prefer flying Boeing over any airbus. And this is from a person who flies close to 90 segments a year - with the majority on Boeing and the remainder on Embraer E175's. I've flown airbus planes 3 times in the past 2 years and that was more than enough.
No. MAYBE Boeing Commercial Airplanes MAY be done but Boeing is also #5 in defense contractors by Defense spend.
Boeing isn't going anywhere. And even as a stragetic asset BCA might not even go anywhere.
Only in your world.
Obviously, I think it’s quite sad. They are the most beautiful, graceful planes flying. I could see dumping the bulky, clumsy looking A380’s, but not the 747-8 planes.
IMO they're both f'ugly as all hell.
The difference is that the Hunchback still has secondary resale value... while the Whale Forehead has none.
So Korean's taking advantage of that, while it can.
A340 best looking plane ever.
nothing unique about how the a340 looks though. people complain about the twin engine planes always look alike but i doubt most people who are not already airplane nerds could of told the a340 apart from the 707 dc8 or il96.
Same situation with Air Force One which is a B747-200 series and getting very old. Boeing is converting two (?) B747-8 as replacements at extraordinary cost.
Same will happen when these Korean B747-8s are converted to military standard. In America, we like to spend BIG money on new technology.
Yet, the last batch of B52s were built in 1963, some 60+ years ago ...go figure!!
Air Force One and Korean Air have a very similar colour scheme too. Easy swap job.
B52's have the largest payload capacity, massive range, but more importantly are way cheaper to maintain per flight hour than a B1 or B2.
Believe they are also one of the only planes in the USAF fleet that can carry certain types of weaponry, including nukes.
B-2s can carry nukes, B-1s can't. Nuke capability was removed from the B-1s as a result of US-Russia arms control treaties.
@Brian L.
It has everything and nothing to do with arms control.
There was no more mission for B-1 with nukes. They were design as high speed low altitude penetrators. Stealth and better SAMs meant B-2 has more survivability. More powerful and accurate ICBM SLBMs also filled in the gap.
So the B-1 was sacrificed for a mission it didn't really have anymore. But the Soviets didn't know about the B-2 then.