Paddy From Taiwan, joined Jul 2003, 390 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2833 times:
I suspected right from the start that the 787 program would get quite a few orders but I am surprised at how few of the 3 series have been ordered at this point. All I can remember off the top of my head is NH, although it seems like another might have ordered some too (JL maybe?). It seemed like the 3 would fill a very lucrative market niche but it is the 8 series that has taken the bulk of the orders so far. Why is this? Is it mainly because of the current fleet needs of the airlines who could afford to order it at this time? I would have expected more asian carriers and charter airlines to have ordered it. When do you all think we might see more 787-3 orders? Perhaps when the US carriers are in better shape? Let's discuss...
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 12210 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2806 times:
While IMO it won't be a for a while, when (in my mind, not if) AA orders the 787, the bulk of the order will be for the 787-3. It is a prime replacement for the non-standard, unreliable A300s AA currently uses on Caribbean runs. As I said, though, IMO this order probably won't be placed for another 2-4 years and airplanes won't start arriving for probably another 8-10. However, one never knows ....
Boeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2736 times:
Because US carriers are broke.
If they had them though, they wouldn't be broke.
Another problem. The 300 pax config only has 1500-1700 miles range depending on cargo loads. It's really designed for about 220-240 pax where it will net the coast-to-coast range needed for domestic flights. That said, if airlines had these instead of 757's and 767' in their fleets, they'd be making money, at least on those flights - and that's with coach ticket prices about 10% lower than what they are today for domestic long haul.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 6, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2722 times:
I don't think there are a lot of US domestic routes that would support such a large aircraft. Within UA's route network, for example, I can think of Hawaii to SFO/LAX and perhaps some inter-hub flying in a 2 cabin configuration and JFK-SFO/LAX in a 3 cabin configuration. What else?
Carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 3005 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2605 times:
Outside of NH, JL, & DL, there are not that many standard 767-300 operators. Other operators are mostly limited to a few examples such as Air Algerie & Air China.
Even the 763s QF & BA uses for short-haul flying are 763ERs.
With that the 783 will not be much more different. Even when the US airlines get healthy, the only carriers that may opt for the 783 are AA or DL with the latter most likely.
European charter carriers will not opt for 783 because of the influx of LCCs on short-haul flights, therefore, I imagine they will mis-use a 788 or 789 if capacity warrants it.
BA or LH could be possible candidates for the 783.
Chinese airlines and Indian airlines are also possible candidates.