Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
757 And 767 Production  
User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2093 posts, RR: 22
Posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4530 times:

Can anyone advise the status of these two lines. Although their backlog is still at 9 and 24 respectively, there are a number of units complete and awaiting delivery. I believe the 757 could be down to last six or seven coming down the assembly line. The 767 may be in the late teens. Anyone advise what is complete and what is still under construction.

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCvgbear From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4448 times:

My understanding is that this is last production year of the 757. That came from Boeing's newsletter/press release. They felt the 767 and 7E7 will take care of their customer needs. As far as backlog, I'm not sure.

User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 850 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4373 times:

When was the latest model of 763 (not 764) produced by Boeing?
Late teen okey, but how late??

Michael//SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2093 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4353 times:

Cvgbear

Thanks for reply. I was wondering more when production will finally end. 757 will be this year, but some aeroplanes will be stored. That may see final unit off the line in August? 767 is also not looking too good, the tanker deal needs to be done quickly.


User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2093 posts, RR: 22
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4325 times:

Solnabo

Last delivery went to Ethiopian I believe. But production was running at 2/month and only one aircraft delivered this year. So assembled awaiting delivery could be five or six units, meaning only 18/19 for assembly. This is less than 12 months work, and the tanker program is not concluded yet, this could have big cost issues for Boeing.


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 850 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4257 times:

Thanx Col Big grin
As some of you know I´m a huge "A-busfan", but I really hope the 767Tanker gets rolling off the prod.line real soon...........
Cheers

Michael//SE  Big thumbs up



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineCrosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2598 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4210 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The final 10 B757s are as follows:
1040 - B757-324 - Continental - N57857 (Delivered)
1041 - B757-28A - First Choice Airways - G-OOBF (Delivery this month)
1042 - B757-324 - Continental - N75858 (Delivered)
1043 - B757-324 - Continental - N75859 Last B757-300
1044 - B757-26D - Shanghai Airlines
1045 - B757-26D - Shanghai Airlines
1046 - B757-26D - Shanghai Airlines
1047 - B757-25C - Xiamen Airlines
1048 - B757-25C - Xiamen Airlines Last B757 with RR engines
1049 - B757-26D - Shanghai Airlines
1050 - B757-26D - Shanghai Airlines Last B757

Regards
CROSSWIND




User currently offlineBeeweel15 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1741 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4201 times:

It is sad production is being ended to give Airbus more market share. I remember when Boeing and MDC had the aircraft to fill every niech but now that has gone to airbus.

Take a look:

Boeing 747 still in production.
A380 Being assembled for first flight.

MD11 / DC10 production ended.
A340 - 200,300,500,600 production on going.

Boeing 777 - 200,300 production on going
A330 - 200,300 Production on going

B767 - 200,300 production to be ended shortly.(7E7 to replace 767)
A300-600,A310-200,300 still being offered. Will be updated to compete with 7E7

B757-200 - production to be ended
A321 - production on going

MD80/90 production ended
(MD95) B717 - production on going ( best body to offer a series of aircraft from 50 seat RJ to 170 jet liner)

B737 series - production on going ( should have been cancelled )
A320,A318,A319 - Production on going.




User currently offlineThrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2688 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4160 times:

The 7E7 will likely take care of the 767 as well, and it is the last year of 757 production. Since the 764ER has been sold to only two airlines since its 2000 introduction, I would imagine 767 production will end pretty soon as well due to the 7E7.


Fly one thing; Fly it well
User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2093 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 4087 times:

Crosswind

Thanks for info, I believe the last 757 for First Choice may have been in MAN when I was there last Friday with a new 320 for them? So I guess we are left with only five or six to be complete, and last one will be PW powered!

It is sad to stop production, but at least they will be in service for many years.

I wonder if it would be more advisable with the 767 situation to look at a 7E7 tanker for our Air Force. Newer technology and it will be around for longer. Boeing could convert some of the stored 767's to tankers in the mean time to shore up the KC135's, may save tax payers money.


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 4036 times:

A340 - 200,300,500,600 production on going.

A342s are only available via Airbus' asset management... very poor seller.




B767 - 200,300 production to be ended shortly.(7E7 to replace 767)

I would imagine 767 production will end pretty soon as well due to the 7E7.


Should Boeing's tanker deal go through as expected, 767 production will not end for a decade or more.


User currently offlineEAL757 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3887 times:

being the wonderfully biased 757 lover I am, has there ever been the suggestion in the forums of why Boeing never made like a shortened 75, say a -100 series that would compete (especially in looks) with the A320 series?

I've never been a fan of the 737 series just because I think they're ugly--hey, at least I'm honest, so I've always wondered why Boeing never shortened the 75 to go after the A320 series. Any thoughts?

-Jeff


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3852 times:

has there ever been the suggestion in the forums of why Boeing never made like a shortened 75, say a -100 series that would compete (especially in looks) with the A320 series?

Such an aircraft would be too heavy to effectively compete against the A32x and 737NG on a per seat basis....

....same reason the A318, 736, 747SP, A342, have been such poor sellers


User currently offlineLVZXV From Gabon, joined Mar 2004, 2041 posts, RR: 37
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3783 times:

Beeweel15:

The A300-600 is only being produced as a freighter, chiefly for UPS. Passenger model production ceased several years ago. Disaster in Latin America.

Despite Iraqi Airways outstanding order for 5 A310-300s, I doubt Airbus will produce any more. In total, the A310 sold about 500 units--not too impressive--of which less than 200 are still flying.

A318 not selling well--yet. Too short. Engines too close to air-bridge and aircraft has some surprises on approach, apparently.

A319 good plane, selling brilliantly.

A320-100 just 20 examples entered passenger service, and 2 have crashed.

A320-200 doing VERY well, but doesn't age well and, according to AZ and NW mechanics, a b*tch to maintain compared with say DC-9s.

A321 not a bad plane, respectable sales, outsizing the 737. Will it outsell the 757?

A330-200 outselling older brother, with around 160 in service and around 90 on order.

A330-300 over a decade old yet just 130 or so are flying. Order book smaller than the -200.

A340-200 only 27 sold. LH retiring theirs, while Aerolineas, Royal Jordanian and South African are generally satisfied.

A340-300 11 years old now, but only 200 flying and the order book is modest.

A340-500/600 about 100 ordered thus far. Wait and see...

A380: impractical. Airports will become hell on earth. Boeing is right not to compete. The A380 demand stems from airlines rather than humans themselves.

There are more 777s (all versions) in service than A330s and A340s (all versions) combined. Airbus is beginning to threaten Boeing's 737 empire, but in the long-haul market, I wouldn't fall for all the hype that Airbus is "thrashing" Boeing. There are still 1,600-1,700 757s and 767s in service today, and there is still a high demand for them (even if 2nd hand), and many airlines continue to augment their fleets, including AA (763s). The 757 has done extremely well, selling 1,050 in 21 years. Will A321 sales ever reach quadruple figures?

XV




How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
User currently offlineCO737800 From Canada, joined Dec 2003, 545 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3741 times:

Is the US Airforce still going to order 100 767?

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3702 times:

There are more 777s (all versions) in service than A330s and A340s (all versions) combined.

Not entirely true.

There's more 777s ordered than A333, A343, A345, and A346 combined.... as these are the models with which the Boeing supertwin competes.

The A342s are negligible.... but when you add A332s, the favor swings to Airbus (of course, then, the argument can be made that 767s should be added in order to balance the equation)  Big grin


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3668 times:

A320-200 doing VERY well, but doesn't age well and, according to AZ and NW mechanics, a b*tch to maintain compared with say DC-9s.

Ive heard rumors about the complaints the NW mechanics have had about this particular a/c.....so it must be true.




A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16999 posts, RR: 67
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3661 times:

Beeweel15, I don't completely agree with your comparisons:
- 777 and 330 are not equivalent. The 330 is somewhere in between 777 and 767. The 764 is possibly equivalent to the 332. The 340 is a more accurate equivalent to the 777.
- 767 and 300 are not equivalent. The 300 has shorter range. The 310 is smaller.
- 757 and 321 are not equivalent. The 321 is smaller and has shorter range.



LVZXV:
- The A310 is a shrink of the A300. The A310 has sold about 500, but taking this together with all the A300s and it was a great investment for Airbus. BTW 500 is not a bad sales figure at all even taken by itself for an aircraft of that size.
- The A320-100 cannot be treated as a separate type. Just like the 741 became the 742, the A320-100 became the A320-200 as improvements were incorporated into the design. The A320-100 and -200 should be treated as the same type since the difference are minor. They're even the exact same size.
- The A330 and A340 (-200 and -300) were developed as one programme, and development costs were nowhere near twice as high as for a single type. The wing and fuse are the same. Thus for return on investment, the 330/340 can be treated as 1½ type. In this light, it has been quite successful. Furthermore, the 340-500 and -600 also build on the same investment.

EDIT: The 318-321 use the same wing and fuse. Each aircraft is not equivalent to a new type (just like the 330/340). So these should be treated as 1½ type as well. The A318 may have sold poorly but the development cost was very low (just like the 764).





[Edited 2004-04-14 08:46:54]


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineLVZXV From Gabon, joined Mar 2004, 2041 posts, RR: 37
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3598 times:

ConcordeBoy:

There are nearly 500 777s currently in service, not counting orders. The number of A330s and A340s (all series) combined is similar give or take 20 at most (the Airbuses had a 2 year head-start too). At present, 2 versions of the 777 are doing pretty well at holding their own against 6 versions of the A330/A340 family, and bear in mind all 777s are twins! Whatever the 777s future, Boeing is still far from defeat in this sector by Airbus, and don't forget the 744 is still selling too...

AirframeAS:

If you want specifics, I meant relatively poor part accessibility compared with simpler types like the DC-9 where everything is within easy reach. I'm not Airbus-bashing and I'm merely passing on what I hear from NW and AZ mechanics alike, and as for ageing, aluminium tends to age better than composites.

Starlionblue:

The A310 is a shrink of the A300 TO AN EXTENT. The 310 incorporates:

-a radically different tail complete with an extra fuel tank.
-a totally different wing to increase range and fuel efficiency.
-new main landing gear.

Airbus, as I said somewhere else, has gone for a fairly "off-shelf-approach" to aicraft design, as can be seen in the fuselage resemblances between the A333/A343 and A300/310, particularly in the nose, cross-section, tapering of the fuselage near the tail and the fin. All Airbuses descend from the A300B and the A320 whether they like it or not. Boeing's only distinctive mould has been the 707 nose. If you want to link the 310 with the 300, then I'm afraid you also have to consider the 757 and 767 a joint programme too (it sort of was), which achieved phenomenal cockpit commanility, in which case Boeing wipes the floor with Airbus as the Boeing twins have already sold near the 2,000 mark.
Linking is not always accurate. The 767 is a good example, since the 762 you could argue competed with the A310, while the 764 comes close to Boeing's very own 772 and also Airbus's A333. The 767 deserves a separate category for it's narrower cross-section, but with that argument, the A330/A340 cannot compete with the 777.
Every aircraft and every variant is different to some extent, so in my listing of Airbus types, I tried to pair up the widebodies the best I could with their Boeing equivalents, and sometimes there is no right answer. The 752 and A321 are similar enough--airlines have chosen A321s over 757s so clearly they are rivals of sorts, in spite of range differences.
Whatever development costs, my main point is that certain Airbus models have undersold considerably, namely the A343 (let's not mention the A342) and A333. They've been around since 1993 and 1994 respectively, yet there seem to be too few. The A333 doesn't even scratch 200 if you combine those in service with those in the order books. The 744 alone, by contrast, has sold over 650 in 15 years. Granted, the A332 is doing much better, but at the end of the day, what was the point in producing exactly the same aircraft with the choice of 2 engines or 4, when at the end of the day they even produce the same amount of thrust? The option is simply 2 big engines or 4 measly ones, with slight differences in range. I see why you'd describe the A330/A340 as 1.5 types, but personally I believe Boeing offered customers more choice with their 757/767 combo.

XV




How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3508 times:

A380: impractical. Airports will become hell on earth. Boeing is right not to compete. The A380 demand stems from airlines rather than humans themselves.

That's how it works in industry. The airlines want the plane to get their customers around, in the density and economics they want to offer the humans the price they want.

Its hardly impractical. Its not THAT much bigger than a 744.

Ive heard rumors about the complaints the NW mechanics have had about this particular a/c.....so it must be true.


No, it mustn't.

I've heard a million rumors corroborated by 50 people here that were totally false.

If people were having maintenance problems, nobody would buy the craft.

I'm not Airbus-bashing and I'm merely passing on what I hear from NW and AZ mechanics alike, and as for ageing, aluminium tends to age better than composites.

The opposite of this is true. Composite materials are stronger, have better fire survivability, and a longer life than aluminum and their alloys.

Airbus, as I said somewhere else, has gone for a fairly "off-shelf-approach" to aicraft design, as can be seen in the fuselage resemblances between the A333/A343 and A300/310, particularly in the nose, cross-section, tapering of the fuselage near the tail and the fin.

They're all the same fuselage. It isn't a resemblance.

All Airbuses descend from the A300B and the A320 whether they like it or not.

They LOVE it. Only 2 fuse widths, soon to be 3, compared to Boeing's 5 soon to be 6. Much easier to source, manage, and make profitable.

Granted, the A332 is doing much better, but at the end of the day, what was the point in producing exactly the same aircraft with the choice of 2 engines or 4, when at the end of the day they even produce the same amount of thrust?

Thrust is irrelevant. The A340 has a far greater range.


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3442 times:

I love how there are so many rumours of Airbus 'maintenance nightmares', yet airlines keep on ordering them.

I'm not Airbus-bashing and I'm merely passing on what I hear from NW and AZ mechanics alike, and as for ageing, aluminium tends to age better than composites.

Actually composites last longer and are stronger. They're harder to repair though. And this is a moot point, given that Boeing uses composites just as much as Airbus.


User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3359 times:

Such an aircraft would be too heavy to effectively compete against the A32x and 737NG on a per seat basis....

....same reason the A318, 736, 747SP, A342, have been such poor sellers


the 318 has great f/e on per seat basis but has yet to sell many, the future looks brighter though IMO.

A380: impractical. Airports will become hell on earth.

yes ATC will be livid when they find out less planes will need to land at airports


Whatever development costs, my main point is that certain Airbus models have undersold considerably, namely the A343 (let's not mention the A342) and A333. They've been around since 1993 and 1994 respectively, yet there seem to be too few. The A333 doesn't even scratch 200 if you combine those in service with those in the order books. The 744 alone, by contrast, has sold over 650 in 15 years. Granted, the A332 is doing much better, but at the end of the day, what was the point in producing exactly the same aircraft with the choice of 2 engines or 4, when at the end of the day they even produce the same amount of thrust?

some people do not understand the point of the 330 and 340. The 333/343 and 332/343 have almost identical (to within one inch) fuselages but the 340 is designed for long range cruises and the 330 is designed for medium range cruises. They didnt design 2 engine options so that airlines which though 2 engines looked prettier on a plane could choose that and vice-versa. They are essentially the same family to the same extent that the 777A and 777ER are.

At present, 2 versions of the 777 are doing pretty well at holding their own against 6 versions of the A330/A340 family,

so you have to consider 4 soon to be 5 variations of the 777, and the 332 and 342 arent even near the same size as the 777, infact the only the A345 is a comparitive size to the 772 and the 346 to the 773.

The A310 is a shrink of the A300 TO AN EXTENT. The 310 incorporates:

-a radically different tail complete with an extra fuel tank.
-a totally different wing to increase range and fuel efficiency.
-new main landing gear.


werent these features re-introduce into the A306R in know the 'radically different tail' definately was

Oh and by the way the A310 sold 260 not 500


User currently offlineKALB From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 573 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3305 times:

BeeWee 15 wrote, "B737 series - production on going ( should have been cancelled )".

Why? WN, DL, AA, AS and many airlines throughout the world don't think the 737 should no longer be produced. When you have a great airframe, why not modify the design to incorporate new technology and manufacturing methods?

I suppose Lockheed-Martin should stop building the C-130 since the basic design is 50 years old.


User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2093 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3270 times:

Wow, just wanted to really know when 757 and 767 final units would be completed.

Anyway, I'll join in:
762/763 is comparable to 300/310.
762 and 310 sales similar (approx 255 each), 763 did better on pax airlines, 300 is a better FR.

764 comparable to 332, no comment needed on this one.

772/773 comparable to 333/343/345/346. fairly close competition.

744, sad to say is going same way as 757/767, 773/380 will replace.

737 and 300/310/330/340 body sizes, If it ain't broke don't fix it. They seem to have sold quite well.

Now anyone got any hard facts on the build positions of 757/767.


User currently offlineLVZXV From Gabon, joined Mar 2004, 2041 posts, RR: 37
Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3100 times:

A 3-class A380 seats almost 200 pax more than a 3-class 744. You NOTICE 200 extra pax in check-in queues, immigration, and baggage reclaims. It's a b*tch!

A310 sales: sorry, I thought the -200 and -300 sales combined to make something impressive like half-a-thousand. Obviously not!

I'm not going to deal point by point, but considering the unfavourable market conditions, Boeing is still doing well, although less well by the year. Don't forget:

-B707s are still ferrying freight near the age of 45 and their derivatives continue to refuel military aircraft in countless Air Forces.
-B727s are still flying at the age of 40, and in pax config. too.
-The B737 has been on the production line for 37 years, and is still selling.
-The B747 has been on the production line for 35 years, and is still selling.
-The B757 has sold more than 1,000 since 1983.
-The B777 is 2 years younger than is Airbus rivals.
-Boeing is not state-backed, unlike Airbus.
-Remember, as The Economist and various other sources mentioned, Airbus has effectively "bribed" customers to buy their produce. The Airbus-Boeing war is far from a level playing field.

Give Boeing their due!!!

XV




How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
25 Starlionblue : -Boeing is not state-backed, unlike Airbus. -Remember, as The Economist and various other sources mentioned, Airbus has effectively "bribed" customers
26 Post contains links Crosswind : Col, The "new" B757 in Manchester last week as G-OOBG, which was actually built in 1999 for British Airways but actually delivered to National Airline
27 Roberta : Airbus has effectively "bribed" customers to buy their produce. The Airbus-Boeing war is far from a level playing field yes so all those companies wh
28 Col : Crosswind Thanks for info, best info yet I will use those sites. Are you based in MAN? Roberta I think the problem with the A V B forum is that everyo
29 Warren747sp : Yes, but Airbus industries now produce military hardware as well now plus state backing. Of course it is a much stronger entity than a share holder ow
30 Rikkus67 : A bit off topic, but, I read a comment by EAL757 about the LOOKS of the 737... Considering that the 757 uses the same fuselage cross-section...why not
31 Col : Warren747sp I am not disagreeing with anything that is written, but all it does is end up with us v them, when neither side is clean. These things are
32 Warren747sp : @Col Thank you for your comments. I hope they get the Air Force 767 Tanker order or they maybe in deep trouble for many years. But Boeing have more co
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
757 And 767 Production posted Tue Apr 13 2004 21:38:13 by Col
Question About Largest Operators Of 757 And 767? posted Mon Jul 3 2006 23:32:51 by 1337Delta764
757 And 767 posted Mon Jan 9 2006 02:12:13 by Fvyfireman
757 And 767-400 Cockpits posted Sat Jul 30 2005 03:30:34 by Patches
New Delta 757 And 767 Interiors? posted Wed Jun 29 2005 06:12:36 by Jrlander
What Was So Wrong With 757 And 767? posted Wed Dec 15 2004 23:50:50 by A380900
Why PA Never Had 757's And 767's? posted Mon Nov 10 2003 17:26:15 by B752fanatic
How Much Does A 757 And 767 Cost? posted Tue Nov 6 2001 02:49:26 by ATA757
BA 757's And 767's posted Fri Oct 26 2001 00:13:46 by Speedbird744
UAL 757 And 767: AAL 757 And 767 Crashed. posted Tue Sep 11 2001 19:44:18 by Red Panda