Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Any Info Leaking On A B777NG?  
User currently offlineERAUgrad02 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 6401 times:

With the A350 now getting major orders, I wonder what Boeing is trying to do as far as updates on this already great aircraft. Im sure loosing weight is one and updated engines but what else could be done really???


Desmond MacRae in ILM
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePilotboi From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 2366 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 6180 times:

Well they got the 777-200LR, the 777-300ER, and the 787 series. What more do you want?

[Edited 2007-11-26 20:48:05]

User currently offline2175301 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1036 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5954 times:

If you carefully look at the threads from the last week or so - you will find a thread that discussed possible upgrades to the 777 series.

My recollection was that forum members were about equally split on if it would happen or not; but if it happened it would depend first on GE developing a new more fuel efficient engine.

I do not believe that many thought a total makeover of the plane would occur. Just that substantial improvements could be achieved with new engines and a new wing, with minor upgrades to the body and cockpit.

Several pointed out that if Boeing could replace the existing structure (the round airframe members) such that they could gain a few inches that the plane would then be able to seat 10 wide (or was it 11 wide) - which would totally change the economics and greatly improve the marketability of the airplane. Of course, that would mean re-engineering the body of the plane.

The real question that was subject to debate is would such improvements be a cost effective marketable commodity against the A350; or would the money be better spent on say the 787-10 series.

To the best of my knowledge. Boeing has been totally silent on the question - other than a general comment a year or so ago that they would need to look at what to do with the 777.


User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5858 times:

there is nothing wrong w/ the cabin width of the 777. it is a great airplane and has been the customer preferred airplane against AB's products for years. The extra width of the 350 isn't going to sink the 777.

Boeing has and continues to add composites to the 777. Newer engines are possible but the GE90s on the 777LR already incorporate many of the advances that are used in the GENX.

I suspect that Boeing will keep the 777 competitive for quite some time based on DL's statement that it is not interested in the 787 right now but instead prefers the 777. Given the 777LR's greater range and payload and its lower acquisition cost, it will continue to be a sought after aircraft.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30591 posts, RR: 84
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5802 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting ERAUgrad02 (Thread starter):
With the A350 now getting major orders, I wonder what Boeing is trying to do as far as updates on this already great aircraft. Im sure loosing weight is one and updated engines but what else could be done really?

I can't see Boeing and GE spending more then a billion refreshing the plane, which is going to limit how crazy they can get.

Boeing has been working on lighter interior fittings as well as helping seat manufacturers develop lighter seats as part of a program to try and get the 777-200LR to carry (what QF considers) a viable payload between LHR and SYD. I expect GE can also do some tweaks to the GE90, but if they get too adventurous, they lose commonality with the rest of the line (going to a different style of turbine blades, for example).


User currently offlineJdevora From Spain, joined Aug 2006, 351 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5664 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
there is nothing wrong w/ the cabin width of the 777. it is a great airplane and has been the customer preferred airplane against AB's products for years. The extra width of the 350 isn't going to sink the 777.

I think that the idea behind those comments is that one way to close the performance gap between the 350XWB and the 777 is allow a comfortable 10 abreast on the 777 this way any airline could choose it, improving its "per seat" figures

Cheers
JD


User currently offlineERAUgrad02 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5663 times:

If Boeing is trying to reduce weight on the -200LR, I'm sure these updates will be used on the rest of the model line. The could use 787 lighting and the dimming windows. I'm sure the 787/747-8i style bins will find there way there too. All this would/should make for a nice update.


Desmond MacRae in ILM
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30591 posts, RR: 84
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5624 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Jdevora (Reply 5):
I think that the idea behind those comments is that one way to close the performance gap between the 350XWB and the 777 is allow a comfortable 10 abreast on the 777 this way any airline could choose it, improving its "per seat" figures

Well if Boeing could improve the per-seat width by .3" in 10-abreast, that would equal the A350XWB in 9-abreast.


User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5472 times:

I'm sure some sort of 777NG type upgrade will be pushed by Boeing's bean counters. But since this is insufficient to compete with the A350, The company will probably have to stretch the 787 to compete, perhaps with new wings and/or new engines(a geared turbofan, perhaps?). Or go all the way and build Y3. Or abandon the upper end of the 777 market and build a new narrowbody - which is a much larger market overall. A successful 777 upgrade is unlikely, for the same reasons the first versions of the A350 failed to gather much interest. IMHO the 787-10,11 etc is more likely - with as much new stuff as it takes to compete. By the time the work on the bigger 787's is complete, Boeing will be ready to start work on Y1, the 737 replacement.

IN SHORT....The A350 as now envisioned is pretty darn good. Sure, the 777 will keep winning some orders because it is available now and works. But it is unlikely any version of the 777 will be able to compete with the A350 in the long term. It will be as dead as the A330 will be after the 787 has been in service a few years.


User currently offlineKlkla From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 930 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5389 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
Given the 777LR's greater range and payload and its lower acquisition cost, it will continue to be a sought after aircraft.

Actually, the 777's acquisition cost is much higher than the 787's. The rest of your points are spot on.


User currently offlineFarnborough24 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 167 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5344 times:

In my opinion there's nothing wrong with the idea of a warmed up 777, but it needs to be cheap for Boeing. If they can viably do it whilst developing a longer term competitor to the A350-1000, great, I'm all for it, but if it's going to be an Airbus style 'let's warm this plane up on the cheap rather than developing a proper competitor to the opposition's aircraft, and then see oursevles get unconditionally told to develop something proper or there'll be no orders' fiasco, I think it would be a disaster at Boeing. I think they'll be looking hard at what happened to Airbus with the first incarnation of the 350 before considering whether to do something that looks remarkably the same to the already mighty fine 777.


My Saab 9000-the chav eater!
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5320 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
The extra width of the 350 isn't going to sink the 777.



Quoting Klkla (Reply 9):

Actually, the 777's acquisition cost is much higher than the 787's. The rest of your points are spot on.

..while the A350 isn't going to "sink" the B777's, it certainly does pose as a formidable competitor to the B777's....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8190 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5314 times:

At this time I would guess that Boeing is having a lot of discussions with various airlines and, to some degree, their decisions on the future of the 777 will be based on these discussions. Boeing doe have options and I believe that they would prefer some level of a NG over Y3 - at least for a while. (I'm sure Airbus prefers Boeing takes that approach also as Y3 would be a challenge for them.)

Like Y1 I believe that the direction Boeing takes will depend on the engines and there is a lot of pressure on GE to deliver. That might be why GE isn't delivering for the 350XWB-1000.


User currently offlinePnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2226 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5222 times:

This was discussed at length recently in another thread. Around the time of the 787 rollout there was a quote by a senior (VP or higher) person from Boeing. I can' t find the quote but it was reported here and it clearly said that incremental advancements to aircraft have been a hallmark of Boeing and will continue with the 777. That isn't a new body or anything that dramatic. Expect some of the features of the 787 to be incorporated into the 777. Airlines with 777 fleets and who aren't going with the A350 would be the target market I believe. Some additional orders from new carriers may result as well. The full blown Y3 is a different beast.

User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1232 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3750 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
there is nothing wrong w/ the cabin width of the 777. it is a great airplane and has been the customer preferred airplane against AB's products for years. The extra width of the 350 isn't going to sink the 777.

I was under the impression that the 777, is stil wider than the A350 XWB. I therefore would think that it's width would be more of a threat to the 787 in the future than the 777, which is already a mature product.



Sic 'em bears
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30591 posts, RR: 84
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3713 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 14):
I was under the impression that the 777, is stil wider than the A350 XWB.

Yes it is, which is why I feel Boeing is better off with a sub-$1 billion refresh of the 777 (if such an effort is worth it) and then go with Y3 towards 2020 rather then try and push the 787 to the limit with larger, longer, and higher gross weight versions.


User currently offlineSeaBosDca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5315 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3491 times:



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 14):
I was under the impression that the 777, is stil wider than the A350 XWB. I therefore would think that it's width would be more of a threat to the 787 in the future than the 777, which is already a mature product.

The issue is that to give the 777 any hope of competing against the A350's economics on most missions, the 777 interior will have to be wide enough to seat 10 abreast at normal seat and aisle widths. Right now, the airplane is just a few inches shy of that interior width. The question of whether it will be possible to widen the interior sufficiently without major changes to the structure was discussed in the earlier thread. Knowledgeable observers took both positions.

Without going to 10-abreast, the 777 will have a very difficult time competing without major changes. It's much heavier than an A350, it's using less efficient engines, and it's more expensive to make. The jury is still out on the A350's payload-range capabilities (some observers feel Airbus's current claims are unrealistic, as were Boeing's early claims about the 787). But it is somewhat likely that the 777-200LR/300ER will have an advantage over the A350, as it does over the 787, on very long missions with heavy payloads. Few operators actually fly such missions, and fewer will do so as oil gets more expensive, so that advantage alone is probably not sufficient to keep the 777-200LR/300ER in business without major changes.

If Boeing can come up with a significantly lighter, 10-abreast 777-300ER update, that aircraft will likely compete well enough against the A350-1000 to continue generating sales. Even Clark said so in today's Flight article.

The 777-200LR, even at 10-abreast, will become even more of a niche airplane than it is today. It won't have any significant advantages over an A350-900 until the mission exceeds about 6000 nm, where the A350-900 probably becomes payload restricted (the 777-200LR of today can carry a full payload 7400 nm). Its advantage over the still-undefined A350-900R will probably be even smaller. My gut feeling is that Boeing would probably not bother to include the -200LR in any -300ER update program major enough to require recertification.


User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3379 times:

I know this may be simplistic but if Boeing was able to refresh the 737 and make it competitive against the A320 which was decades younger why can't they do the same with the 777. If the 777 as it is now is so efficient wouldn't a 737NG style upgrade make it competitive enough to handle the A350?

BWIA 772



Eagles Soar!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30591 posts, RR: 84
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2993 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting BWIA 772 (Reply 17):
If the 777 as it is now is so efficient wouldn't a 737NG style upgrade make it competitive enough to handle the A350?

About the only thing the 737NG shared with the 737 Classic was the fuselage diameter and shape.

If Boeing is going to go that far with the 777NG, they should go the extra step and build it out of CFRP barrels and make it wider so it can carry more people.

Essentially what the 767 was to the 757, so should Y3 be to the 777. Better comfort. Better payload. Better performance. Better economics.

Take a few extra years and a few extra billion and do it right and do it for the long-haul.


User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1232 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2885 times:



Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 16):
It's much heavier than an A350, it's using less efficient engines, and it's more expensive to make.



Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 16):
If Boeing can come up with a significantly lighter, 10-abreast 777-300ER update, that aircraft will likely compete well enough against the A350-1000 to continue generating sales. Even Clark said so in today's Flight article.

First of all, thanks for the info! Second of all, I do understand the current issue is that the 777 is heavier, more expensive, and less efficient, however that is to be expected of an aircraft designed 15-20 years ago. The point upon which I was confused is as to why the 10 abreast increase was so important. It makes sense however, as wider = more seats.
Finally, My concern is this, if Boeing were to create a 777NG with new engines and a wider fuselage, either through composite barrels or new composite ribbing, wouldn't the new engines, structure etc. negate any positive effect of fleet commonality with current operators? I mean if you have 777s in the fleet, you are going to be more likely to accept a warmed over, new version, but if the most technical and maintenance intensive parts on the aircraft are no longer similar, is there really an incentive to purchased the partially new version, when there is a brand new XWB available?



Sic 'em bears
User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10654 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2811 times:

Boeing should concentrate on the 787, 748I and then the 737 replacement before thinking too much about major upgrades for the 777. The 787 will kill the 772ER, the A350 will threaten the 773ER, thats for sure, but with the top-end 787 version and the 748I maybe Boeing can live without a 777 beyond 2015.
There are still many who think that the huge gap between 773 and A380 doesn´t need a 748 to fill in, so with the 748I becoming reality maybe the much smaller gap between a likely to be realised 787-10 and 748I doesn´t need something inbetween.

Btw, when will be the first flight of the 777 Freighter?


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30591 posts, RR: 84
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2645 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting NA (Reply 20):
Btw, when will be the first flight of the 777 Freighter?

Sometime in 2008. There is worry that the 787 flight-test program might delay it a bit within the year.


User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2504 times:



Quoting Farnborough24 (Reply 10):
if it's going to be an Airbus style 'let's warm this plane up on the cheap rather than developing a proper competitor to the opposition's aircraft...'...

- actually, Boeing patented this in late 90-s  Smile...

Quoting NA (Reply 20):
maybe the much smaller gap between a likely to be realised 787-10 and 748I doesn´t need something inbetween.

- depends on what 787-10 will be. If just another stretch, then Boeing will by fact retreat from "heavy" mid-size twin segment. If 787-10/11 HGW - that would be direct answer to 350, with no 777 upgrade necessary whatsoever. 777 may still find its niche only moving away from direct competition of new generation twins - that is, finding some 3" inner width increase, or another slight stretch, or both, which will shift it to present 744 capacity, while still not threatening to 748. Whether or not it worth the investment - only Boeing knows, with all possible market research and airlines demand analysis. Y3 may come later to replace both, but I don't see Boeing committing to an all-new design - and a huge (literally) one - in near future.

Overall, right now nothing is heard about any specific measures to address 35A/773 market. And if it ends with 787-10 "light" (a potential success itself) and cheap conservative upgrades of present 777, then, indeed, Boeing will repeat same mistake again. Which would be even more a disappointment as, assuming Boeing is in the same situation with 777 as Airbus was with 330 some 3 years ago, Boeing still has this 3 years. Everyone remembers initial Airbus reaction to 7E7 - certainly, 350 looks already to be a success, but lower/light mid-size twin market is already lost by Airbus. Boeing has a choice to do the same with upper/heavy end - or to react properly. Its huge advantage in comparison to where Airbus was initially facing 7E7 is that the base airframe (787 "LGW") is already here, next step, as huge as it is, would be nothing revolutionary. Or, well, do something radical with 777, if it worth the money. But "hey, we have 787-10 and can squeeze a bit more from 777" will lead to a defeat. A very annoying one.


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...
Any Info On Krabi Airline? posted Fri Aug 3 2007 15:20:28 by Vadheim
Any Info On The 787 rollout party. posted Tue May 22 2007 18:51:56 by B777A340Fan
Any Info on Jet Airways 777 posted Tue Apr 24 2007 02:55:22 by 777captain
Any Info On IND 4th Rwy? posted Tue Feb 27 2007 15:46:32 by Chase
AS 100 Emerg Landing @ PDX On Tue 2/21 - Any Info? posted Wed Feb 22 2006 08:31:24 by Flashmeister
Any Info On Highland Express? posted Sat Feb 11 2006 09:15:21 by RootsAir
Any Info On Continental's President's Club posted Tue Nov 29 2005 00:45:28 by COEWR2587
Any Info On Likely Cdn Campaign A/c? posted Fri Nov 25 2005 21:23:03 by CayMan
Any Info On BBJ P4-KAZ, Cn Etc? posted Sat Nov 19 2005 04:31:09 by RobK
Any Info On Current Bird Engine Strike In Boston posted Sun Oct 16 2005 00:08:31 by Tappan