DTA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1098 times:
Why did Boeing stretch the 763, rather than shorten the 772? A shortened 772 would carry more cargo than the 764 because it is wider. It would be more spacious inside. It would have FBW and wouldn't need new a new interior or cockpit systems. Did the 772 not favor being shortened? Or did Boeing assume operators of the 764-size aircraft would already have the 763 in their fleets, and so would welcome the commonality?
JumboClassic From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1072 times:
The secret lies in the wing design - Boeing's wings are designed for extra performance and they make excelent streches. If the A/C is shrinked, it will be too heavy and will have very high operating costs.
Airbus, on the other hand, optimises their wings for maximum efficiency (lower fuel burn, etc.), so when they shrink their A/C the results are excellent range and performance (319, 332).
GOT From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 1912 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (13 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1050 times:
A 777-100 would have a too heavy wing, and be uneconomical. As far as I know, Boeing have made one attempt to shrink an airliner, the 747SP. It prooved to be great for some airlines, but never became a succes.
Just like birdwatching - without having to be so damned quiet!