BAJMowiec From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 99 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2868 times:
I just found out that the 757 production will shut down soon. This got me worried for one of my favorite airplanes, the 767. Please, someone, tell me that the 767 will make it through and won't go out of production next year ! ! ! I would really hate for that airplane to leave !
FlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 15 Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2640 times:
Yep. As ConcordeBoy said, the 767 will be open for quite awhile yet due to USAF contract for 100 airframes, if not more. Ironically history repeat itself in a way. When the last commercial 707 was built, that line remain open for a few more years because the worldwide military still wanted the 707 platform for a number of uses. Even then the used 707s were being snapped up for spare parts & conversion into a military aircraft. The 767 is sticking around. Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
CitationX From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 110 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2569 times:
The USAF's lease-purchase of the KC-767s is not a done deal yet. There are powerful opponents of this program (Sen. John McCain of AZ, for instance) who are working to kill the program, drastically restructure it or stall the final approval until after the 2004 elections. The USAF is also being called on the carpet by Congress for sharing details of Airbus' proposal for the A-330 tanker with Boeing. I'd say the Congressional mindset is 50% in favor of the program, and 50% thinking the KC-767 program is pure pork and should be killed.
Without the KC-767, the civil 767 program's future is iffy since the backlog of open orders is drying up.
This opens up another can of worms that should be another thread - How much longer is Boeing going to be a viable competitor in the commercial airliner market? With backlogs for 717s, 747s, 767s, and 777s dwindling, and Boeing's core market (US major airlines) on "financial IR", will they eventually retreat to the guaranteed profits of military aerospace? It seems that Boeing management's recent decisions are more aimed at pleasing Wall Street than advancing the state-of-the-art of commercial aviation.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2523 times:
I think what may happen is that the 767 program will end in the next 3-4 years.
What will happen is that as the 7E7 program is ramped up, it will take over the production space currently used by the 767 at Boeing's Everett production line.
That means besides the obviously large number of commercial orders for the 7E7, the new plane will form the basis for the true replacement to the rapidly-aging KC-135 fleet for the USAF and will also form the basis for the replacement for the AWACS/JSTARS and RC-135 ELINT/SIGINT platforms.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16555 posts, RR: 52 Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2416 times:
The 7E7 is not going to enter service with the USAF, they are already developing (they built one so far) EA-10 which is based on the 767-400. The EA-10 will replace the Joint Stars, Rivet Joint etc aircraft, the 767-400 will also (at some point) possibly take over the TACAMO, AWACS role.
The first initial order for KC-767s is 100, however this is a first step towards the replacement of the entire KC-135 fleet which numbers 550. It's not likely that 550 KC-767s will be built to replace KC-135s on a one for one basis becuase of the larger payload capability and higher dispatch rate of the 767, however the total number will most likely be around 400-450 frames which is substantial.
Motech722 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 211 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2060 times:
FlagshipAZ pointed out that "...used 707s were being snapped up for spare parts & conversion into a military aircraft". The question I have is how many B767s are currently parked? If history does in fact repeat itself, wouldn't it be less expensive to snap up used 767s and convert them instead of buying brand new ones from Boeing?
CitationX From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 110 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1893 times:
You are right about the USAF preferring new A/C to used.
This begs a question, however: Why would the USAF want to go with an over-20-year-old design like the 767 for their tanker fleet if they intend to fly them for the next 45 years, like they are doing with the KC-135? It seems like the USAF could spend almost the same money on a tanker based on the 7E7 and start fresh with a state-of-the-art airplane.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16555 posts, RR: 52 Reply 15, posted (10 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1697 times:
The KC-767 is designed as a "platform" to deliver fuel, it is not a front line aircraft and thus does not need to incorporate the newest (7E7) technology.
What's needed is a reliable aircraft to deliver fuel for the USAF for the next 35 years, the 7E7 has not even flown yet. The 767 is a proven platform, and Boeing has proven it's capability with regards to their boom technology.
Going with the 7E7 as the future refueler subjects them to possible development problems with the aircraft, as does going with the Airbus A330 tanker because of Airbus's lack of experience with boom technology.
The 767 is proven, as is the boom design of Boeing.