Boeing better ditch the 777 update an...

Boeing better ditch the 777 update and concentrate on 767 update

Created by Boeing Boeing on Nov 6, 2012

49 votes

Click on an option to vote

agreed, slow economic growth ahead

disagree, airlines can give seats away to fill 777

Boeing needs to preserve Capital due to Obama

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Boeing Boeing

United States

#1 Nov 6, 2012
yeah the 777 is too big, the 787 is too expensive, the 767-200 NEO MAX wing update is needed most in a declining economy
exmidex

Bremerton, WA

#2 Dec 20, 2012
aka 737-900ER. Good call.
Merger Mania

United States

#3 Dec 20, 2012
exmidex wrote:
aka 737-900ER. Good call.
I agree, a new, updated, 767-800 the size of a 767-200, using the practical and real world design experience of 787 only where composites are really needed would be great.

The 737 is a very tired, cramped, and passenger unfriendly design, compared to a 767.
FEDEX 767 Congrats

United States

#4 Dec 20, 2012
FEDEX 767 Congrats, on securing there future with a efficient design for their needs over the aging widebody trijets.
exmidex

Bremerton, WA

#5 Dec 21, 2012
Merger Mania wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, a new, updated, 767-800 the size of a 767-200, using the practical and real world design experience of 787 only where composites are really needed would be great.
The 737 is a very tired, cramped, and passenger unfriendly design, compared to a 767.
But which one has sold by the thousands? The market has spoken.
Always anth gadget

Puyallup, WA

#6 Dec 21, 2012
Guy don't fret. Much like there are low information voters there are plenty of low information passengers.

Embraer EJet serious are more comfortable for typical 737 3 hour or less trips.
The low information passenger just does not see it when they are bombarded by coke and pepsi.

RC cola exists too.
steve

Bedford, VA

#7 Dec 21, 2012
While a low cost upgrade to the 767, I.E.improved engines and some weight loss might make it more attractive as a small widebody, the 777 is selling very well and killed the airbus A340. The 777 needs to be upgraded to maintain its superior position over airbus offerings and keep present 777 operators happy with newer 777's available when fleet replacement comes due.
The 767 line remains open and still garners some orders and if some small improvements can lift the fuel economy, it would still remain a desired aircraft for those long thin routes and by small carriers who don't need over 250 seats.
JetBlast

Perry, MI

#8 Dec 21, 2012
I would think that incorporating some carbon fiber design into the 777 would make it a viable plane for decades. A stretched 777 with it's proven track record should be able to kick an A350's tail in cost and be very comparable in efficiency.

Improved engines and some weight loss wouldn't really make a 767 a revolutionary product. If the 787 has a 20% burn efficiency, it'd make much more sense to continue to tweak that airframe size for markets although if you can't fill a 787-8 on an int'l route, you maybe shouldn't be flying it.

If 175-200 seats are enough for a specific route, it'd make more sense to remove a seat from each row, giving everyone a bit more space and save on the weight at the same time. No need to design a totally new airplane for a handful of routes.
Widebody One

United States

#9 Dec 21, 2012
JetBlast wrote:
I would think that incorporating some carbon fiber design into the 777 would make it a viable plane for decades. A stretched 777 with it's proven track record should be able to kick an A350's tail in cost and be very comparable in efficiency.
Improved engines and some weight loss wouldn't really make a 767 a revolutionary product. If the 787 has a 20% burn efficiency, it'd make much more sense to continue to tweak that airframe size for markets although if you can't fill a 787-8 on an int'l route, you maybe shouldn't be flying it.
If 175-200 seats are enough for a specific route, it'd make more sense to remove a seat from each row, giving everyone a bit more space and save on the weight at the same time. No need to design a totally new airplane for a handful of routes.
The thing is there is NO REAL competitor in the medium to medium long haul Boeing lineup being produced in the 190-230 mixed class realm like the 767-200 sized a/c.

A310 is done
757-300/200 is out of production
787/777/A330-200 is way more airplane than needed for airlines that want the flexibility of a smaller large capacity widebody.

I know the 757 was not a widebody, but in may configurations it solved the same concept on long thing routes with almost equal comfort when configured with the 8 Exits and mid cabin lavs at the L2/2L and L3/3L Exits
Widebody One

United States

#10 Dec 21, 2012
A 321 lacks the range and is also an aging product that could be developed into a product that replaces the 757-200/300 / A310 but it would take a substantial redesign.

Boeing has a gem with the 767, unless they were to go with a whole new widebody design that elimates frontal area and maintain a 7 abreast fueslage.
JetBlast

Perry, MI

#11 Dec 21, 2012
The 757 has major range issues for 'long' routes. UA/CO had big issues (and bad press) with those planes last year. Also, because it's overpowered, it's probably far less efficient that A321-type technology.

If it could be re-engined to increase range and reduce burn, it's a great plane to fly in regardless of stage length. If you're in the back sitting 3-abreast, having 1 or 2 aisles doesn't make a difference.
Widebody One

United States

#12 Dec 21, 2012
JetBlast wrote:
. If you're in the back sitting 3-abreast, having 1 or 2 aisles doesn't make a difference.
Wrong if yoiu are sitting in the back and you got to go while the carts are in the aisle or you manage to go after the carts but are confronted by a line 10 deep to the restroom...

A narrowbody is miserable. If the 757 has a range problem.... the 737 is off the scale to even be considered.
JetBlast

Perry, MI

#13 Dec 21, 2012
2 aisles = 2 carts. Same problem.
Widebody One

United States

#14 Dec 21, 2012
JetBlast wrote:
2 aisles = 2 carts. Same problem.
Wrong not when you can go in both directions to the can. FUNNY HOW some narrowbody observers like to distort reality and buy the mantra of other 737 bean counter types.
Widebody One

United States

#15 Dec 21, 2012
Business class too doesn't want all the traffic of the coach masses wondering around interupting there dinners much less the first class people.

Many in just don't get the dynamics of travel especially if Orange or Canyon Blue fuselage is all one is familiar with.
steve

Bedford, VA

#16 Dec 21, 2012
JetBlast wrote:
I would think that incorporating some carbon fiber design into the 777 would make it a viable plane for decades. A stretched 777 with it's proven track record should be able to kick an A350's tail in cost and be very comparable in efficiency.
Improved engines and some weight loss wouldn't really make a 767 a revolutionary product. If the 787 has a 20% burn efficiency, it'd make much more sense to continue to tweak that airframe size for markets although if you can't fill a 787-8 on an int'l route, you maybe shouldn't be flying it.
If 175-200 seats are enough for a specific route, it'd make more sense to remove a seat from each row, giving everyone a bit more space and save on the weight at the same time. No need to design a totally new airplane for a handful of routes.
There are many routes which cannot support a 250 seat plus aircraft, and an upgraded 767 would fill a void that airbus does not compete in. Even a 4 to 5 percent increase in fuel economy would gain some sales and the aircraft price would be attractive.The 767 line is still open and most of the development costs have been paid for years ago. An improved small wide body that costs less than the present line up of current wide bodies could be a winner as some airlines could replace older 767's with the 767X or 767MAX or whatever designation it is given.
The race to build larger and larger wide body aircraft has left a hole that only Boeing can fill quickly.
No airline is going to remove a seat from each row to give passengers more room. The trend is to pack as many seats as possible, not less.
The 767 has good range and a size that fill many routes and
I personally like flying the 767 and its 2-3-2 seating format.
Widebody One

United States

#17 Dec 21, 2012
steve wrote:
<quoted text>
The race to build larger and larger wide body aircraft has left a hole that only Boeing can fill quickly. The 767 has good range and a size that fill many routes and I personally like flying the 767 and its 2-3-2 seating format.
Excellent points... unfortunately, it has become obvious Boeing is ill equiped to produce aircraft in the 90 to 130 seat range. Evidence of this is the 717-300.

We as Americans do not want to forgo and allow any other country to nip at the heels of the smallest widebody produced by Boeing and the US. Foreign manufacturers are already nipping at the heels of our 737-700's and MAX7 8 and 9's. Airbus has already taken a commanding and substantial of this market too.

Boeing Execs I hope their eyes are open.
Widebody One

United States

#18 Dec 21, 2012
The goal of any redo of the 767 would be to have to produce equal and better CASM than 737-9 MAX, along with faster turn around times. That forward only boarding door thing will have to go on any new designs. Talk about slow.
steve

Bedford, VA

#19 Dec 21, 2012
Widebody One wrote:
<quoted text>
Excellent points... unfortunately, it has become obvious Boeing is ill equiped to produce aircraft in the 90 to 130 seat range. Evidence of this is the 717-300.
We as Americans do not want to forgo and allow any other country to nip at the heels of the smallest widebody produced by Boeing and the US. Foreign manufacturers are already nipping at the heels of our 737-700's and MAX7 8 and 9's. Airbus has already taken a commanding and substantial of this market too.
Boeing Execs I hope their eyes are open.
With Embraer,Canadair,Mitsubishi,an d the Chinese C919, and I forget the Russian offering,the low end of the single isle jets is becoming a crowded market. The shift for many airlines is changing and larger aircraft are being ordered in the 160 to 190 seat range. It has been a monopoly for Boeing and lately Airbus for years but that's ending. Many of these smaller jets will filter down to the regional carriers as the 50 seat fleet will continue to decline.
I remember when small airports were served with 727's, DC9's, BAC111's, but those days are gone. I believe Boeing will continue to dominate the widebody market with the 777, 787,747-8 and some 767's, and with the 737MAX, they will still have a major presence in airline fleets.The Boeing name still means something.
If they can up the production of the 787, more orders will flow in. Boeing's 3 year delay on the EIS of the 787 gave Airbus a field day with the A330 as it was the only plane of its size on the market with decent delivery dates. Had Boeing been on or close to schedule with the 787, the A330 would have sold less and the 787 would have more orders and many more in the skies today.
I hope the 787-9 will be on time as they are saying lately and the EIS for the 787-10 and the 777-9X will be on time.
exmidex

Bremerton, WA

#20 Dec 23, 2012
It's not like airlines couldn't have ordered a 767-200 with wings and avionics from the -400. They didn't because it would have been a horrible investment. Anyone want to guess which aircraft United is retiring next?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Airlines Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News United Airlines Outlook - Analysts Say 'Good En... Oct 20 Chris 1
Is Airbus a A319 an orphan project now? Oct 19 Airshow 1
Re-winged LR, A321, A320.5? A nightmare for Boe... Oct 19 Airshow 1
News Lesbian couple sues airline, claiming discrimin... Oct 18 Pope Closet Emeritus 1
So Boeing, how is that MOM coming along? LOL Oct 18 Duopolies Matter 1
News Southwest Airlines Flying to Hawaii in 2018 Oct 18 CaptJoe767 1
Boeing caught with Pants Down (C Series Airbus)... Oct 17 Harv Boeing Weine... 1
More from around the web