Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The New 767-400  
User currently offlineAT From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1050 posts, RR: 0
Posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2015 times:

Someone questioned some days ago why the 767-400 had essentially only been bought by Delta and Continental, and that got me thinking...

In terms of passenger capacity, isn't the 767-400 too tightly squeezed between the 767-300 and the 777-200. I would assume that airlines that already have both these types would not need the 767-400 as well. Am I right?

Also I notice that Boeing seems to have a lot more overlapping planes in their production line than Airbus. For example their biggest 737s almost overlap with the 757s; the 757-300 competes with the 767. The Airbus line seems much more discrete,

So, do you think that the 764 will eventually become a hot seller, or will airlines be content with their existing combinations of slightly smaller and slightly bigger planes?



10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJoge From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1444 posts, RR: 39
Reply 1, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1952 times:

Hi,

I think kind the same. When stretching the plane, it reaches the next model. Now, a true Boeing fan could say something else to this.  

AT wrote:
-------------------------------
In terms of passenger capacity, isn't the 767-400 too tightly squeezed between the 767-300 and the 777-200. I would assume that airlines that already have both these types would not need the 767-400 as well. Am I right?

Also I notice that Boeing seems to have a lot more overlapping planes in their production line than Airbus. For example their biggest 737s almost overlap with the 757s; the 757-300 competes with the 767. The Airbus line seems much more discrete,



Bula!
User currently offlineHawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3202 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1923 times:

AT wrote:
In terms of passenger capacity, isn't the 767-400 too tightly squeezed between the 767-300 and the 777-200. I would assume that airlines that already have both these types would not need the 767-400 as well. Am I right?

Delta doesn't think so. They operate the 767-300, 767-400, and 777-200.

The 767-400 is viewed by Delta as an L-1011 replacement, and this is what Boeing is aiming for: The L-1011/DC-10 replacement market.


User currently offlineBoeingrulz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 481 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1915 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I believe that some of the stretch models (specifically 737-900 and 767-400) have come from Boeing working closely with airlines to meet very specific needs.

For example, Continental says they could really use a 767 with more passenger capacity for certain routes and Delta is saying similar things. Boeing does some studies and figures that it can be done with a certain level of commitment from Continental and Delta. The plane could be useful to other airlines and some may indicate their interest; a derrivative program is relatively inexpensive from a design, manufature, test and certification point of view, so a programme is born.

In the case of the 737-900, Alaska says that they want a plane that fits into their future plans for an all 737 fleet but has more seats for higher fare passengers. The 757-200 would prove to be too heavy for the shorter stages that Alaska flies and would not fit their very specific needs. The 739 is a slight stretch of the existing 738, has the same wing and fuel capacity, etc. and fits a very specific need. A commitment fro Alaska for a certain number of planes along with some other commitments makes this programme feasible.

The wild-card in the 764 programme is that a further ER derrivative is possible and may be useful to other airlines seeking a plane for their specific needs.

This is how I see it,
Carolyn


User currently offlineChiawei From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 945 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1887 times:

I really do not think Boeing has any idea what it is doing.

The 767-400 is too close of a competitor for the 777. 767-400 would only make sense for operator such as Delta that has significant number of 767 in the fleet.

Personally I would believe that a shorten 777-100 would make more sense for boeing to launch since 777 is going to be main focus of boeing's offering.

Boeing has dropped the ball in offering the replacement 747. I do not think 777LR would take off. I believe Airbus has done a much better job in their product offering.

A330 for the medium to long range (competes well with 767-300/400 and 777). A340 competes very well with Boeing's 777 and 747.

It woulbe a lot cheaper for the airline to have common crew/parts to their medium and ultra long range fleet. Which boeing does not have anything close to offer. 767,777, and 747 does not have the same type rating.

If I were boeing, I would have developed a short length 777-100, a four engined 777 for ultra long range instead of 777LR.


User currently offlineJderden777 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1757 posts, RR: 28
Reply 5, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1880 times:

albeit those aircraft might be nice to see, but is that what the airlines want?...Boeing has done a wonderful job, IMHO, of offering to airlines...JUST like they did with the 777. the 777 was developed hand in hand with big airlines from around the world...and the 764 and 739 are also results of Boeing asking the customer what they like...Boeing asked, and they got results from different airlines (COA, Alaska, DL). So give Boeing the credit they deserve for asking the customer...if they build an aircraft...then they or an airline see a need for this aircraft to be available...cause (the need) --> effect (the aircraft)

just my $.02

jderden777



"my soul is in the sky" - shakespeare
User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1876 times:

I don't think there is a Boeing airliner that commercially failed because of competition to another Boeing airliner. And only in this case Boeing "does not know what it does". About Boeing and Airbus lines: 717-737-757-767-777-747 looks much more smooth than 320-330/340-3XX. I know that 320 actually means 318-319-320-321, etc., but 737 too means more than just 737, and it seems that Boeing has more flexibility. Nothing bad about Airbus - it is just much younger!

User currently offlineModesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2815 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1852 times:

I don't believe the 777 competes with the 764. The 777 is a longe range aircraft. However, Delta uses its 764's on high capacity (287 passengers), short to medium routes. There is a profound difference! The 764 does not have the range of the 777. Thus, the 764 is a great L-1011 replacement. Delta ordered the aircraft to fill an empty niche: high density, short to medium range routes. There are rumors that it has trouble doing ATL-HNL. Thus, Boeing knows EXACTLY what it's doing.

User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1837 times:

The 763 holds 218 passengers, the 777-200 holds 320, a 102 passenger difference. The 764 holds about 245, a perfect fit betweent the two. DL has its 764s in a high density configuration of about 280 pax to use on short-medium haul routes. CO uses its 764s differently. They configured theirs to hold 235 passengers, replacing their old 242 passenger DC-10s. So as you see, the 764 has many capabilities.

Also, someone said that the A340 competes with the 747. This is entirely false. The 747 has no direct competitor from Airbus. The A340 is too small (295 pax), and the A3XX is too big (585 pax). The A340-500 is a 777-200LR competitor. The A340-600 is a 777-300ER competitor.


User currently offlineAT From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1050 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1786 times:


Thanks for all your very informative replies; I learned lots of things.

But here's what remains unanswered: what is replacing what?
First Boeing intended the Boeing 777 to replace aging DC10s/L1011s.
But now it seems the strategy has shifted more toward the Boeing 767-400 replacing these trijets

So wha tis the bottom line?
Or is it really dependent on the airline?


User currently offlineFanoftristars From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1612 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (14 years 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1778 times:

AT: Remember that the "original" 777 design plan was a mere 767 deriv. that was aimed at the trijet replacement market, but that is not exactly what the airlines wanted. Boeing listened, and they came up with a truly multi-role aircraft, the 777. It's the perfect plane for the defragmenting airline market. I kind of opened its own market.

Chiawei: Let's see if we can help you:
You said: "a shorten 777-100 would make more sense for boeing to launch since 777 is going to be main focus of boeing's offering." Not quite. A 777-100 is not as economical as the 764, and airlines showed little interest. So why should Boeing ignore them and offer it anyway?
You said:"I do not think 777LR would take off"
Sorry dude, it already has. Not too long ago someone posted that since the 777LRs were offered, there haven't been any orders for the Airbus 345s and 346s. I don't know if that has changed, but the 777LRs have already recieved some significant orders.
You Said:"If I were boeing, I would have developed a four engined 777 for ultra long range instead of 777LR"
Let's see.... If Boeings customers really wanted a 777 with four engines, then the 777 would have had four engines. Adding two doesn't do anything for range. Remember that the 772LR will have the greatest range of ANY jetliner at over 10100 miles. Yes, that's with a full load.



"FLY DELTA JETS"
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...
Flying The New 767-400 posted Mon Jun 5 2000 20:48:13 by Stretch 8
The New 767-400 posted Sat Mar 18 2000 05:12:07 by Bruce
The New 767-400 posted Sat Mar 18 2000 05:07:39 by Bruce
Does Alitalia Operate The Boeing 767-400 posted Wed Nov 29 2006 20:13:42 by Continental123
The Boeing 767-400 posted Mon Jun 19 2006 00:14:33 by DID747
Where Does The Boeing 767-400 Go From Here? posted Mon Sep 9 2002 03:23:20 by BizJets
Anyone Flown New 767-400? posted Wed Oct 4 2000 20:31:40 by Orlo3
Video Of The New AA 767 Business Class posted Mon Oct 2 2006 05:56:28 by DFW13L
The New Private Air 767 And Geneva posted Tue Aug 15 2006 11:08:23 by Beijing21
History Of The 767-400 posted Thu Apr 14 2005 22:55:15 by Lemurs