Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Could There Ever Be A 777-400?  
User currently offlineSiromega From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 735 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 9777 times:

I was thinking with the demise of the 772 (at the hands if the 7810), would Boeing look at lengthening the 777 any more to a 777-400 model. The list of questions/problems I can think of are a mile long though...

Would it...
compete too closely with the 748?
end up like the 767-400 (not a lot of orders)?
be flyable (its looooong - structural strengthening, tailstrike issues, etc)?

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 9753 times:

Quoting Siromega (Thread starter):
I was thinking with the demise of the 772 (at the hands if the 7810), would Boeing look at lengthening the 777 any more to a 777-400 model.

Yes, a purely conceptual trade study by Boeing showed an additional, minor stretch of the B777 is possible. Anything beyond a few meters though and logistic problems like ground manuvering become a challenge.

Quoting Siromega (Thread starter):
Would it...compete too closely with the 748?

Probably not, capacity of a B774 would likely be smaller than the B744, not to mention, Boeing would lose some payload/range.

Quoting Siromega (Thread starter):
end up like the 767-400 (not a lot of orders)?

Yes, which is why it's very unlikely such a model will be offered.

Quoting Siromega (Thread starter):
be flyable (its looooong - structural strengthening, tailstrike issues, etc)?

Consider that the thinner A346 is longer than the wider B773ER. The B777 tube is already more structurally efficent at these lengths than the Airbus fuselage, so weight would be manageable. "Flyability" wouldn't likely be impared, the B777LR has electronic FBW tail-strike protection.

All in all, Boeing only considered a B777 double stretch as a trade study. Almost no likelyhood of being launched in the next decade. Put it in the category of the B777-100, just not going to happen.


User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 9711 times:

Just because there is a 777-400.. dosn't mean it has to go longer. The 737-500 is shorter then the 737-300, -400..!!


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 9606 times:

Yeah, because the 777-200 is small enough it's little brother 787-10 is killing it off, so they should make a smaller 777?

a 255ft long 777 could happen. The 748f is 250ft long, they could do it. I don't know how much demand there is for it. The 777-300ER already has good capacity, range, and economics. It's not like they're under any pressure from A346.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2407 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 9487 times:

Well, isn't the 777 wing already maxed out on the 777-300ER? Aso, a heavier 777 would demand more wheels on the landing gear.

User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9371 times:

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 4):
Well, isn't the 777 wing already maxed out on the 777-300ER? Aso, a heavier 777 would demand more wheels on the landing gear.

Speaking purely hypothetically (because we all know no one wants 777-400), they could keep MTOW static between 777-300ER and a larger 777-400. They would lose range, and would have to find some weight saving measures, but then they wouldn't need stronger gear (just taller) and could keep the same wings and GE90's.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineIcelandairMSP From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 7197 times:

As has been stated before, a further derivation of the current 777 is unlikely so I won't rehash that.
I think the 777-400 possible model that could see the light of day would be along the line of the 737NG line or each progressive 747. If, down the line, Boeing sees demand for replacement of, say, 773ERs, 772LRs, etc. I would guess it would be entirely possible to redesign the plane considerably without making a new plane altogether. I don't want to speculate because that's at least ten or twelve years down the road.
For now, I think Boeing has finalized its current lines and won't be working on any other derivations of the 747, 777, or 787. They have pretty much all of their bases covered as far as twin-aisle aircraft go. If you say twenty years is a pretty average lifespan for an aircraft to remain in a modern airline's fleet (obviously this isn't the exact average, but it's about that) then by the time most airlines have most of their 787s (2012-2015) then around 2030 it would be smart to have a new aircraft or derivative ready to replace them. As we all know, the enormous market for 737 size aircraft will be Boeing's main concern after the 787 is on the assembly line and will preoccupy their engineers for many years.
It's always fun to speculate about future aircraft, but I think any major widebody developments will come from Airbus. After all the uncertainty about the A350 and the future of the A340, there could be some major changes. But otherwise I don't expect much as I am SUCH an expert on aircraft design and economics.


User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2755 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6609 times:

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 4):
Well, isn't the 777 wing already maxed out on the 777-300ER? Aso, a heavier 777 would demand more wheels on the landing gear.

If you got the OEW down, by using more light weight material, you could achive more payload without a higher MTOW.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineDeltaWings From Switzerland, joined Aug 2004, 1294 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 4727 times:

The next step up from the 773 in pax capacity is the 748. Anything else in between makes really no sense, as the slight increase/decrease in passengers will hardly make much of a difference, as these wide bodies are normally configured in a 2/3 class layout.
Remember, with wide bodies the gaps between each a/c size are alot bigger then with narrow bodies, since narrow bodies are quite often just configured in a one class layout. (The more pitch and first class/lie flat beds you have, the more you have to stretch the plane, to get a reasonable pax load difference)



Homer: Marge, it takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen.
User currently offlineJohnny From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4326 times:

I think the B777-400 is only possible if the B748i will have NO sales.

This could happen because nearly all airlines which are looking to replace their B744´s are B777-customers or A346/388-customers.

It is not a must order situation for Boeing.All airlines which are looking to replace their B744-fleet have far more options than 20 years ago when the B744 was the only replacement for the B743 and B742.

Probably at years end we all know more about the B748i´s airlines acceptance.

I am VERY,VERY surprised that there are still no orders for the pax-versions...

Probably time to develope someting new - not only warmed up!!!


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 10, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4172 times:

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 4):
a heavier 777 would demand more wheels on the landing gear.

The other option is to increase the diameter of the wheels and tyres. Eight wheel bogeys are probably not a good option. Adding additional bogeys would require a significant wing redesign.

Anyway, Boeing considered a B777-400X and the B747-8 as either/or choices. The launch of the latter probably foreclosed forever any possibility of the former. A B787-11X is far, far more likely than a B777-400X.


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...
AN-225 Mryia - Could There Ever Be A Fleet? posted Sat Apr 24 2004 21:04:57 by PanAm747
Will There Ever Be An EU Flag Airline? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 16:42:17 by Silverstreak
Has There Ever Been A 777 At PDX? posted Wed Mar 15 2006 22:56:02 by Tallguy14
Will There Ever Be Nonstop DTW-HNL Service Again? posted Mon Feb 6 2006 22:02:16 by KDTWFlyer
Will There Ever Be A 797? posted Mon Jun 20 2005 06:45:22 by Flyingchoirboy
Will There Ever Be A Passenger MD-10? posted Sat May 15 2004 01:45:45 by Japanfan3
A340, Was There Ever Plans For A -400 posted Fri Apr 2 2004 06:20:08 by Yukimizake
Will There Ever Be An Aussie Airline Joining Star. posted Mon Dec 29 2003 10:58:06 by Travel
Will There Ever Be A One World Livery? posted Sun Oct 19 2003 14:25:20 by BY188B
Was There Ever An A340-400? posted Fri Aug 15 2003 00:25:54 by N243NW