BrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1272 posts, RR: 2 Posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2445 times:
From what I understand the 767 family has several issues that could make it an even more successful program:
The 767-200ER has ample range but due to the limited capacity it costs too much to fly the people that fit in to the maximum radius.
The 767-300ER has sweet capacity but a range just short of making it the aircraft of choice for some thin city pairs like those I could think of linking BRU and the likes of LAX (this one is not too much of a problem), BKK, HKG, SIN,... This without imposing too many restrictions to the loads.
The 767-400ER has more capacity (not always needed) but hindered range and therefore fails like all of the above.
Would it be possible to think of a 767-300LR (I don't think the variant exists) that would have the capacity of the 300, the range of the 200 (even a bit more) and the wing/whatever improvements of the 400 (Signature interior not being relevant to this equation)?
I know that the 7E7-8 sounds much like this product (just with even more range and more cargo space) but it is presented as a 757 replacement, not as a 757 and 767 replacement. Although the first rendering of the 7E7 was a 767-400ER with a 7E7 paint job on the tail. Any news about the 767 assembly line? Is it really here to stay for commercial frames? Or will it as I believe be a successor to the 767, not to the 757.
BrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1272 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2368 times:
Then the intriguing question.
What if Boeing had designed the 767 with an A300/310/330/340/350 section from the start? They would have fitted those bloody LD3's side by side, they would have been able to compete with Airbus on most of the new products they (Airbus) built, and they wouldn't have hindered the 747's sales and perspectives with building the 777 since that hypothetical 767 design would probably have provided the answers the 777 was brought in for, at least prior to today's very long range derivatives.
767-332ER From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2030 posts, RR: 12 Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2345 times:
Boeing was thinking about passenger comfort from the start in having a 2-3-2 layout in Y class, which would reduce the chances of being in "the middle seat." This is what Boeing was thinking back in the late 70's.
Regards
Twinjets...if one fails, work the other one twice as hard!!!
Sponsor Message: 
From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1272 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 457 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2030 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
