Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
777 In Production For At Least 15 Years More  
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2673 posts, RR: 4
Posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10806 times:

Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Jim Albaugh predicts the 777 will stay in production for at least 15 years more and like the idea of a blended wing body.

Quote:
Boeing 777 will be around for at least 15 years more, according to those at the meeting, signaling a medium term investment to improve the big twin.

Read the complete update here: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...ive-updates-boeings-future-pr.html

[Edited 2011-02-03 11:44:41]


Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3651 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10706 times:

And it has already been no less than 15 years the type has been in production. I think that only the 200LR and 300ER with raked wingtips will continue to be built. Is Boeing still taking orders for 777As should an airline want it? For those who are wondering what A means, it means the original baseline versions designed for medium haul markets.
What I am most curious to know is whether or not Boeing will continue to build the 767 because the Air Force doesn't seem to show anymore interest in the 767 tanker designed to replace the KC-135.

Ben Soriano



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16694 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10640 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
I think that only the 200LR and 300ER with raked wingtips will continue to be built

And the 77F. There's huge potential in the 77F to replace existing freighters;

747-100/200/300/400 freighters
MD-11 freighters
DC-10/MD-10 freighters

FedEx alone has 128 DC-10/MD-10/MD-11s, add UPS's 38 MD-11s and you have 166 aircraft that could potentially be replaced by the 77F.

[Edited 2011-02-03 11:45:07]


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3389 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10639 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
What I am most curious to know is whether or not Boeing will continue to build the 767 because the Air Force doesn't seem to show anymore interest in the 767 tanker designed to replace the KC-135.

It's too early to say that. Boeing will continue to build it as long as there are orders to fill.


User currently offlinecloud4000 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 640 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10611 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
And it has already been no less than 15 years the type has been in production. I think that only the 200LR and 300ER with raked wingtips will continue to be built. Is Boeing still taking orders for 777As should an airline want it? For those who are wondering what A means, it means the original baseline versions designed for medium haul markets.
What I am most curious to know is whether or not Boeing will continue to build the 767 because the Air Force doesn't seem to show anymore interest in the 767 tanker designed to replace the KC-135.

Why order a -200A when a -200ER is available? Still use them on medium-haul routes like BA and AF do, with the added flexibility of placing them on long-haul routes when needed.

And the AF is indeed interested in the 767, just the process has been slowed down because the previous bidding process was corrupted. Boeing will get it, the Department of Defense just needs to dot the i's and cross the t's. The KC-135 need to be replaced, no question about that.



Boston, USA
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4593 posts, RR: 38
Reply 5, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10579 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mham001 (Reply 3):
Boeing will continue to build it as long as there are orders to fill.


But there are hardly orders left for it.

That the B777 will go on for quite a while is understandable and expected. I also see the hot-selling A330 continue for about that same time-frame. Especially since the hot selling B77W (after an improvement) and the even hotter selling A330 (especially the A332, both got again recently improvements) might not have real direct competition. I mean that the A350-1000 would just be a bit too small and a bit less capable compared to a possible B77W-NG and that the A330, especially the A332 on shorter stretches, is without real competition because the B787-8 and the A350-800 pay the price of being too much optimised for long-haul routes.  .

Good for these '90-s twins!  .

[Edited 2011-02-03 11:44:15]

User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2673 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10508 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
And it has already been no less than 15 years the type has been in production. I think that only the 200LR and 300ER with raked wingtips will continue to be built. Is Boeing still taking orders for 777As should an airline want it?



If we include the 777F under the -200LR I agree with your reasoning. I believe that Boeing would stress a customer to buy either a 777B or C model since that would give a better value for the airframe during its lifespan. The 777-200LR has more fuel efficient engine than both the A and B models.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12324 posts, RR: 35
Reply 7, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10449 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
I think that only the 200LR and 300ER with raked wingtips will continue to be built

Hasn't Aeroflot recently ordered 8 777-200ERs?

I think it is also worth pointing out that after nearly 16 yrs of service, only one hull loss has been recorded - and no fatalities, something unparalleled in commercial aviation history.


User currently onlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 10366 times:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 5):
the A330, especially the A332 on shorter stretches, is without real competition because the B787-8 and the A350-800 pay the price of being too much optimised for long-haul routes.

The 787-8 is lighter and consumes less fuel than the A332, so it will be better even on medium-haul. The only advantage of the A332 is somewhat larger max structural payload.

Once the 787 and A350 are both being produced in volume, new A330 orders are done, except for the occasional small top-up order.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 2):
FedEx alone has 128 DC-10/MD-10/MD-11s, add UPS's 38 MD-11s and you have 166 aircraft that could potentially be replaced by the 77F.

A new-build 77F would be a *very* expensive and overly capable DC/MD-10 replacement. They will be replaced by converted used aircraft, probably 77E, but possibly A343 if the 77EBCF program falters. The MD-11s are good candidates for 77F replacement, though.

Quoting cloud4000 (Reply 4):
Why order a -200A when a -200ER is available?

   There is no reason to buy either A-market model anymore. And I don't think it's going out on a limb to say that all but a tiny handful of passenger 777 sales going forward will be the -300ER.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2312 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 10076 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 2):
747-100/200/300/400 freighters

I don't see 744's being replaced as frieghters if a particular company does a lot of nose-loaded cargo.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24080 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9989 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 7):
Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
I think that only the 200LR and 300ER with raked wingtips will continue to be built

Hasn't Aeroflot recently ordered 8 777-200ERs?

Order not yet final but they announced an intent to order 8 777-200ERs and 8 -300ERs in December.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...oflot%20Eyes%20Boeing%20777%20Deal


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29689 posts, RR: 84
Reply 11, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9878 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I expect the 777-200LR, 777-300ER and (especially) the 777 Freighter have some decent life left in them.

The 777-300ER had a great 2010 in terms of Gross Orders, so there is still demand for the type out there, evidently.

And with Boeing goes to 100 deliveries a year, there has to be customer interest since I can't see them all being 787 compensation frames.


User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3651 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 9597 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 2):
And the 77F. There's huge potential in the 77F to replace existing freighters;

747-100/200/300/400 freighters
MD-11 freighters
DC-10/MD-10 freighters

Yes you are right. I should have included the 777F. I was only thinking of pax versions when writing my post. How could I forget the 777F? My mistake. But I want to point out one thing in your reply:

The 747-400F is still young so I would not include it in all the types you mention. The other ones, earlier 747 freighters, MD-11s and DC-10/MD-10 freighters, I would agree that they are to be replaced with 777Fs in the near future. The 744Fs will continue to grace the skies for many more years to come. No, the aircraft that will replace the 744Fs is the 747-8F.

Ben Soriano



Ben Soriano
User currently offlinecloud4000 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 640 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 9432 times:

Wasn't Boeing planning to tweak the 773ER for Emirates? I read it on a post in this forum, but I can't recall where.


Boston, USA
User currently onlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 9371 times:

Quoting cloud4000 (Reply 13):
Wasn't Boeing planning to tweak the 773ER for Emirates? I read it on a post in this forum, but I can't recall where.

You've read it in a lot of posts.  

What to do with the 77W is one of Boeing's two big strategic questions right now (the other being the 737RS). The rumblings seem to center on an update that reduces weight, improves engine SFC, and makes 10 abreast slightly less cramped. Tim Clark has made no secret of badly wanting such an aircraft. He wants the 77W to have the range to do DXB-LAX without restrictions and with a 10Y economy cabin. He seems to think an enhanced 77W would have sufficient revenue potential to make up its higher operating cost vs. the A350-1000.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlinemanfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 9123 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 14):
Quoting cloud4000 (Reply 13):
Wasn't Boeing planning to tweak the 773ER for Emirates? I read it on a post in this forum, but I can't recall where.

You've read it in a lot of posts.

This is the fundemental idea behing the whole thread:

We know two things to be true.

First, Boeing has the habit of keeping airplanes into production forever. (737/747/767)

Seond, they are always improving. (737/747/767)

Why wouldn't they do it with the 777. The only thing everyone is underestimating is exacly how huge these improvements will be. I'm guessing in the range of 7-10% which would make this airplane efficient well into 2025.

Question, does anyone know how much more efficient the 744 was over the 743?



757: The last of the best
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6109 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 8965 times:

Does "medium term investment" mean between 1 year and 2 years, or more like "we'll decide later" ?


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinewn700driver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 8874 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
Is Boeing still taking orders for 777As should an airline want it? For those who are wondering what A means, it means the original baseline versions designed for medium haul markets.

I suppose if someone really wanted one, then yeah. It's not as though the tooling has disappeared. I find it highly amusing here how many people talk about the 772A as though it's some antiquated piece of garbage. It isn't. Still more capable than most A330s, still more desirable than any DC-10/A340/MD11 category aircraft, (especially on the short to mid range TATL sectors) it does have a relevant place in the industry. I think the only reason you won't see any new builds is because they are now available in the used market for... well not cheap, but cheaper.

The ER & certainly the LR are both more capable AC, and we won't even talk about the 77W (for payload capacity) or the A332 (for range in a midsized twin widebody). But in no way should it be taken (as so many here do) that the A models are somehow less than fantastic on the routes they are appropriated for.

As for the rest, I think the 777 does indeed have a decent future as developments for the 77NG continue, and I do believe that 77Fs will sell, new off the line, but it will probably not equal what can be made of conversions (from those terrible A models, lol...)


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9838 posts, RR: 96
Reply 18, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 8775 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 8):
The 787-8 is lighter and consumes less fuel than the A332, so it will be better even on medium-haul. The only advantage of the A332 is somewhat larger max structural payload.

Once the 787 and A350 are both being produced in volume, new A330 orders are done, except for the occasional small top-up order.

"The A350-1000 is lighter and consumes less fuel than the 773ER, so it will be better even on medium-haul. The only advantage of the 773ER is somewhat larger max structural payload" .......

And yet the 777 will continue in production for 15 years...   

Somehow I don't think the A332's upsides are as restricted, or as simple as you point out. And like the 777, if it stays in production, it won't stay still.

I suspect the A330 will still be in production in 15 years time also..

Rgds


User currently offlineATA L1011 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1374 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 8731 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 12):
The 747-400F is still young so I would not include it in all the types you mention

Well some of the older 744F's are getting up their in age/hours and cycles as well, with the oldest one getting close to 18 now. So some of them are on par with age, (cycles/hours are probably lower as alot of those M11 were converted from passenger config) etc as some of the M11 freighters of the same vintage and will need replacing eventually as well.

[Edited 2011-02-03 21:58:33]


Treat others as you expect to be treated!
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4593 posts, RR: 38
Reply 20, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8625 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting astuteman (Reply 19):
"The A350-1000 is lighter and consumes less fuel than the 773ER, so it will be better even on medium-haul. The only advantage of the 773ER is somewhat larger max structural payload" .......

And yet the 777 will continue in production for 15 years...


Very nicely put.  .

Quoting astuteman (Reply 19):
Somehow I don't think the A332's upsides are as restricted, or as simple as you point out. And like the 777, if it stays in production, it won't stay still.

I suspect the A330 will still be in production in 15 years time also..


Exactly what I have been saying in my previous post. These two dominant twins are phenomenal successes for the companies which are building them. They are ordered in huge numbers even after more then 15 years of production and despite the B787 and the A350 being on sale (and very successfully on sale I might add). Of course they are continuously being kept up to date, with especially for the B77W/L another major face-lift expected which will keep it competitive well into the 2020's.

The same prospect is out there for the A330 where I would not rule out some kind of NEO-version, but the latest HGW-increases in performance and efficiency show that also that airframe still has a lot of potential. Even Boeing forecasts another increase in capabilities on the A330 frame.  

And yet for all their sales, the numbers they are achieving might be overtaken by the B787 and the A350-XWB. But before this happens we will probably 15 years away from today.  .


User currently offline2707200X From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 8042 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8505 times:

I think the prediction on another 15 years of production gives more speculation that a 777NG may be built. I would imagine a "Y3" would be more of a 747 replacement in the size category between the 777 and the A380.


"And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by." John Masefield Sea-Fever
User currently offlinebaw716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2026 posts, RR: 27
Reply 22, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8435 times:

Quoting American 767 (Reply 1):
What I am most curious to know is whether or not Boeing will continue to build the 767 because the Air Force doesn't seem to show anymore interest in the 767 tanker designed to replace the KC-135.

Boeing made a HUGE mistake by not offering up a version of the 777F as a tanker for the USAF. The 762 is just too small for the needs of the USAF, IMO.

As for the 777, my crystal ball is telling me that we'll see another variant of it, perhaps a lighter version using more composites and a blended wing. After all, there will be a need for a 300-400 seat aircraft as the 744s arrive at the end of their useful life and most carriers that have had 744 fleets are taking 77Ws to replace them.

baw716



David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2678 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5985 times:

Quoting baw716 (Reply 23):
As for the 777, my crystal ball is telling me that we'll see another variant of it, perhaps a lighter version using more composites and a blended wing. After all, there will be a need for a 300-400 seat aircraft as the 744s arrive at the end of their useful life and most carriers that have had 744 fleets are taking 77Ws to replace them.

That is because you read MY crystal ball. I too think that Boeing will do with the 777 what it did with the 737: offer a whole new generation and with more composites in it. First, they have to let the 787 prove itself.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29689 posts, RR: 84
Reply 24, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5772 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting baw716 (Reply 23):
Boeing made a HUGE mistake by not offering up a version of the 777F as a tanker for the USAF. The 762 is just too small for the needs of the USAF, IMO.

The 777F would have had acquisition and MILCON costs associated with it that would have pretty much guaranteed that it could not have won the contract against the EADS bid.

[Edited 2011-02-04 07:34:20]

25 msp747 : Did you read exactly what the Air Force wanted? Or are you just assuming that because Airbus is offering a bigger aircraft? Remember, The USAF is rep
26 tdscanuck : You need to specify which procurement you're talking about. 777F is a terrible match to the KC-X requisition...it's a very good match for KC-Y. If/wh
27 ATA L1011 : You are correct and it even offers so much more floor space and underbelly space and is much more capable than the 135 which makes it great to replac
28 astuteman : Easy tiger. I suspect you're missing my point. Have a look up the thread and you might just find a remarkably similar quote that, given your point of
29 SchorschNG : The B777 will loose orders to the A350. Even the -300ER will be endangered by the -1000. However, the -1000 will not be available until 2016 (earliest
30 JBirdAV8r : The advantages for Boeing and the 777 in the next ten years will be quite similar to the advantages Airbus is currently enjoying with the A330. I'm n
31 SchorschNG : Because they are "second best". The A330 is "second best", too. The A340-600 was all the time, or the B767-400. Look what happened to them. Being "se
32 VirginFlyer : What do you mean by this in relation to the 777? V/F
33 Stitch : Boeing Commercial's margins seem to consistently be stronger than Airbus Commercial's year after year, so for whatever reason(s), Boeing seems to be
34 SchorschNG : Does Airbus publish its margins? I only saw that of EADS, which include Airbus. Does Boeing Commercial publish own financial statements or is it enti
35 STT757 : Exactly, think of the military construction costs to expand Air National Guard ramps and hangar facilities across the US to support the much larger 7
36 manfredj : I'm afraid history may be against you in this case. The 747 has been in production for 40 years, the 737 just as long. The 767 just delivered its 100
37 Klaus : Because the 747 had no direct competition for most of its run, while the 777 is under pressure from the A330, A380 (CASM-wise), soon the 787 and in a
38 Post contains images Aesma : I'm repeating myself from another thread, but the 77W EIS was in 2004, and we can expect Boeing did what it could at the time to make it as light as p
39 manfredj : Boeing doesn't seem to care about competition for some reason. The 764 was a one off with few orders. The 753 had the same fate. How about the 743? Th
40 Stitch : They must, as I have seen financial reviews of both. The maximum delta was about 10% for Boeing and 2% for Airbus, but Airbus' margins have been comi
41 Klaus : Really? You'd have had to be blind. It had been pushed extensively over quite a few years. Sure. History just means squat when you're trying to sell
42 Post contains images astuteman : You missed my point too. I agree that it is likely that the 777 will be in production for 15 years. Want to go back and see what my point was again?
43 A342 : As far as I can see, nobody has implied that or written it explicitly... Not really. Only early A333s have inferior payload-range capability, but mos
44 Revelation : I'm going to both agree and disagree with you at the same time. When Boeing did the 77W, they did what they thought they needed to do to take on its
45 Post contains images manfredj : Im trying, I promise. Are you suggesting that even though the 350 will out perform the 777 in many ways, the 777 still has some advantages that airli
46 astuteman : It was being suggested that the A330 is not much longer for this world, but that the 777 will soldier on for 15 years more. When I read the phrase wh
47 Post contains images EPA001 : That indeed was the point. And I still think it to be a very valid one. . Indeed, like I said before these "twins of the 90's" will be around for qui
48 wn700driver : It's more of a general meme I see a lot here, than anything specifically said in this thread. I'm not going to fish around for it now, but I've seen,
49 Stitch : The latest 233t MTOW A330-300E/A330-300X should be within spitting distance of the 777-200 and they are significantly lighter, which makes them a goo
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...
Flight Delays Highest Level In At Least 13 Years posted Mon Aug 6 2007 23:07:53 by N62NA
Paris: No 737 Replacement For At Least 7-8 Yrs posted Mon Jun 18 2007 14:55:05 by EI321
Air Asia Confirms It Will Buy At Least 15 A330-300 posted Sun May 13 2007 12:24:00 by Thorben
Video: TWA At JFK, 15 Years And An Era Ago posted Tue Mar 27 2007 07:37:15 by SmokinL1011
DaimlerChrysler To Retain At Least 15% Of EADs posted Wed Apr 12 2006 20:12:40 by Leelaw
Royal Jordanian To Sign For At Least Seven ERJ190s posted Wed Mar 15 2006 16:42:48 by Leelaw
Vietnam Airlines In Talks For Up To 15 7E7 posted Fri Aug 27 2004 04:26:10 by HB-IWC
Plane Crashes In Benin, Killing At Least 82 posted Fri Dec 26 2003 08:16:20 by ATA767
Are PIA 777's In Production? posted Sat Nov 22 2003 18:25:41 by PIA777
777 In The Skies For 10 Years! posted Sat Jun 12 2004 15:12:17 by BREmer