Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
7e7 A Widebody Or Narrow?  
User currently offlineCLT18R From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 81 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3830 times:

Forgive me if this has already been covered, but is the 7e7 slated to be a small widebody like the 767 or have the standard 707/727/737/757 narrow body?

I know it has been compared to the new A350 in development which will be based on the A330 body...

Thanks for any info...

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineUA744KSFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3809 times:

It will be a widebody.

Welcome to airliners.net!  Smile


User currently offlineCLT18R From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3769 times:

Thanks for the welcome!

Are we talking along the lines of a 767 or more a A330 or 777?


User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3756 times:

A330--it will have 8 abreast seating--so wider than a 767.


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineAreopagus From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1369 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3751 times:

It's very slightly wider than an A330, and will likewise seat 8 across in coach.


User currently offlineCLT18R From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3688 times:

So have they decided on a double-bogey or triple-bogey gear system? Is the Dreamliner meant as a replacement to the 767 or as a bridge between the 76 and 77?

User currently offlineWidebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 67
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3594 times:

Boeing has set the 7E7 cross-section at 226 inches, which is wider than the Airbus A300/310/330/340 cross section of 222 inches. So a twin Isle aircraft it will be most likely with 8 777 size seats across the cabin in economy.

At a MTOW of 500,000lbs for the heaviest version 7E7-9, you'll most likely see 2 four wheel bogeys for the main landing gear. The gross weight does not justify a beefier undercarriage than that.

-widebodyphotog



If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17041 posts, RR: 66
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3465 times:

Since it has two aisles it is a widebody.

But now for the big question: Will we see a middle seat in Business class (like on the 777)? 'Cause the A330/340 does not have one. 4" more is not enough for a seat but if you rearrange the other ones.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26499 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3435 times:

>But now for the big question: Will we see a middle seat in Business class (like on the 777)? 'Cause the A330/340 does not have one. 4" more is not enough for a seat but if you rearrange the other ones.<

Probably not, as airlines would not want to shrink the other J class seats to get one more in. The extra width is more to help it carry more cargo.

The 7E7 is meant to be a 767 and early 772 replacement, mostly though it is to replace the 767 and the A300/A310, while eating up the sales of the A330. Also, it will have longer range than all of the above and burn 20% less fuel that the 767, which burns the least fuel of the group. It will also carry more cargo than the 767/A330/A300



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3797 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3306 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Yes, the 7e7 will be a widebody aircraft and will replace the 767 as we all know, the A300, A310 and earliest A330 as well. However Boeing could design a narrowbody 7e7 to replace the Classic 737, 757 and earliest A320 (by the time the first 7e7 enters service the A320 will be two decades old). If Boeing designs a narrowbody 7e7, both airplanes (narrowbody and widebody) will have the same cockpit like the 757 and 767 have the same cockpit.

Ben Soriano



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1289 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2675 times:

Definitely a wide body. At first I thought it would be a replacement for both the 757 and 767 but I was wrong. I also thought it would retain the 767's said to be popular 7 abreast seating in Y. Also wrong. I never had the chance to fly a 767 yet (the only BCAG product I haven't flown with the 707 and 717 but that latter one doesn't really count as Boeing, does it; and I wasn't on the market when the 707s were around  Smile) so I can't second that popularity vote. I'm sad about not having flown the 767 because I find it's an aircraft really suited for a lot of uses, just add a bit more range.

It turns out the 7E7 will be that totally perfect aircraft with ample range, but will not fit in as a 757 replacement. Probably what will succeed to the 737 family will be taking care of that.

And then we get started on the topic of Airbus' view of more and more trunk routes (A380) and Boeing's view of more and more point-to-point services (7E7). If there are enough aircraft built to support the vast number of combinations to be covered by a point-to-point 7E7 global network and if there is enough O/D traffic and yield to support sufficient frequencies on those routes then I vote Boeing's strategy a winner. I'm afraid Airbus is playing on the safer side though.

At least the replies to my topic on the future of service between Brussels and Asia make me think so with most people bashing the ability of BRU to support almost any route with the East, in great part due to its geographical location at the center between AMS, FRA, CDG and LHR and to the dominance of key airline alliances at those stations. Time only will tell.



I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

N1120a wrote:
"The extra width is more to help it carry more cargo."

I believe the B7E7 is 4 inches wider than the A330/340 in order to provide a more spacious and comfortable passenger experience (just as Airbus made the A320 slightly wider than the B737) rather than to squeeze in additional seats or to help carry more cargo.

Boeing seems to have learned from their mistake in maintaining the cross section for the B737NG. It is reportedly a factor that has worked to Airbus' advantage in sales. I expect the B737 replacement based on B7E7 technology to be slightly wider than the A320 -- perhaps an inch or two.


User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26499 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1894 times:

>Boeing seems to have learned from their mistake in maintaining the cross section for the B737NG. It is reportedly a factor that has worked to Airbus' advantage in sales. I expect the B737 replacement based on B7E7 technology to be slightly wider than the A320 -- perhaps an inch or two<

The cross section of the 737NG has not affected its sales in the least. The only reason it is ever mentioned is as justification after an A320 order is made. The main thing that sells the A320 series is commonality and price, as the 737 performs better. Oh, also, the 737NG has been around for less than 7 years and the 737 classic has only been off the market for about 4-5, yet the 737NG has sold only about 900 less planes than the A320 series that has been around almost 2 decades (and available even longer). That really does not strike me as an advantage to Airbus

Also, the 7E7 based 737 will likely be an evolution, not a completely new design. The 737NG has proved to be an excelent plane and if you add bleedless engines, and perhaps another new wing, it will be even better. The engines alone will make them around 10% more efficient, standard winglets and possibly another wing will add more. Also, I would guess that it would be the 7E7, if anything, that would have commonality with the 737, as airlines like WN will demand commonality with their current planes.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently onlineUALFAson From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 730 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1887 times:

This is not as dumb a question as you think. I was at a job fair a few months ago and was speaking to Boeing reps about the 7e7, as they had a giant model at their booth. The 2 or 3 reps were complaining that it was another narrowbody. Whoops!

BTW, how do you do 8-abreast seating--2-4-2? I've never been on an aircraft that has that arrangement.



"We hope you've enjoyed flying with us as much as we've enjoyed taking you for a ride."
User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26499 posts, RR: 75
Reply 14, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1884 times:

>BTW, how do you do 8-abreast seating--2-4-2? I've never been on an aircraft that has that arrangement.<

Yeah, it is always 2-4-2. That is the arrangement on all Airbus twin aisle aircraft, and now the 7E7.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
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...
Airlines That Have Either Widebody Or Narrow Body posted Tue Mar 12 2002 03:08:07 by Fly_emirates
7E7 Pretty Or Ugly? posted Sat Oct 11 2003 22:42:47 by A340600
When Flying, Do You Prefer Widebody Or Narrowbody? posted Fri Mar 14 2003 18:09:32 by DIA
Wide Or Narrow? posted Sun Apr 21 2002 03:44:05 by Fly_emirates
All Widebody Operators To Get The 787 Or A350? posted Wed Dec 21 2005 00:46:58 by DIA
'7E7' Or '787' posted Sat Aug 13 2005 14:38:16 by B777200
THY Not To Retire A310s Until 7E7 Or A350 Arrive posted Mon Jan 10 2005 12:26:06 by Robcol99
7E7 Control: Yoke Or Joystick posted Sat Nov 27 2004 05:23:12 by AirxLiban
Why No Airbus Equivalents Of The 757 Or 7E7-3? posted Sun Nov 14 2004 03:15:24 by TransPac
Qatar Airways Chooses 7E7 Or A 350... posted Sun Nov 7 2004 14:16:18 by Beaucaire