Wingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2469 posts, RR: 5 Posted (15 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1153 times:
Check out the story on the Boeing website. It's front cover. I think the plane looks awesome, without that hanging ass look of the 763. The interior is a replica of the 777 on a smaller scale and also looks great.
I hope to see it soon and take a ride. This plane has taken me across more oceans than any other. It inspires confidence, and the new one actually looks attractive. Here's to continued success for a truly great line of aircraft.
Dw From South Korea, joined Nov 2012, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (15 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 940 times:
The updated interior looks fantastic! And for once Boeing is showing off economy class seats that look like you actually WANT to sit in them! (The economy seats they used in the 777-mockups looked extremely bare, unpadded, and uncomfortable.)
Navion From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1020 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (15 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 892 times:
I agree with the good looks comment. You can see the difference in the main landing gear modifications to give proper clearance and better ground/wheel loading. The extra length actually makes it look kind of skinny!! I really think it looks good and I can't wait to see it fly.
Airbus Boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (15 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 884 times:
It does look good but the wing tips are funny and in 1st class there is a a seat in the middle with aisle on both sides I thought that was funny. But I suppose for $120,000,000 what can you expect.
GoA340 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (15 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 881 times:
I liked the B767-400ER very much. When flying Business, I would still prefer the B777 but when flying Coach I think the new 767 is a lot better with 87% of the seats on an aisle or window. The interior structure of the 777 was replicated pretty nicely but I think the new material of the overhead bins (I think pretty much the same as in the 737NG) feels weaker and more "breakable" compared to the old material.
DL being my favourite US carrier, I will hopefully get to fly this new machine sooner than I think. Nevertheless I still beleive the -400 will have a tough time to compete with the A330-200 whose orders are soaring constantly.
Asqx From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 621 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (15 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 845 times:
Why do yo NEED a FBW system in a 767 or any other commercial jet liner for that matter? Other that weight saving, there is not much need in an inherently stable plane. FBW was designed for military fighters that are instable and require hundreds if not thousands of controls a second to maintain controlable flight. So, please, give me a good reason any commercial airliners needs a FBW other than to save weight or impress the media and passengers?
United946 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (15 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 852 times:
Do you realize how much that would have cost? If a jetliner is going to be FBW, you have to start that way, like they did with the 777. You can't just change from hydraulic to FBW on an existing design. At least not at a reasonable price.