Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA Interested In Boeing Building The 777X  
User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 32224 times:

British Airways joins the gang of airlines interested in the 777X. So far, EK, Eva, and Cathay are also interested. All wanting the plane before 2020 to replace/refresh the 777 fleet. Boeing has been talking with all the 777 airlines in addressing a new 777 with launch in Q4 2012/Q1 2013. Emirates and British Airways are among the two largest 777 operators.

Quote:
Boeing will brief its board by year-end or early 2013 on potential plans to offer an upgrade to the current version, the company’s commercial airplanes chief, Jim Albaugh, said last month. He said the Chicago-based planemaker expected the new plane to be in service “towards the end of the decade.”
Emirates, the largest customer for the 777, and British Airways, the fifth-biggest, are pushing for a follow-on model to the 777-300 by decade’s end so they can move quickly to replace some of their older planes. Airbus SAS (EAD) is promoting the roomiest version of its A350 as a challenger to the twin-engine 777.
Quote:
British Airways, a unit of International Consolidated Airlines Group SA, intends to replace 52 Boeing 747 jumbo jets. It is currently evaluating the purchase of a 777 successor, the 787-10 Dreamliner, or possibly A350-1000s, the biggest variant of the Airbus plane.

This will probably end the "Will BA buy 747-8i's/777W's to replace the 747-400's?" question.

Very interesting article.

Emirates Joins British Airways Prodding Boeing on New 777


The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
82 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12701 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 32221 times:

Sweet!

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):
This will probably end the "Will BA buy 747-8i's/777W's to replace the 747-400's?" question.

And start the "Most Of Us Will Be Flying 777s For The Rest Of Our Lives" thread! 

[Edited 2012-04-26 10:25:09]


Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12513 posts, RR: 35
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 32224 times:

Yes, a very interesting development, though not a surprise, because it's long been known that BA was interested in an aircraft around this size class; up to now, I would have put the A350 as a near "dead cert" for BA, but if Boeing does launch a 777X (and I think it's likely it will), then Airbus will have its work cut out; certainly, the A350-1000 will be hit hard.

User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 31910 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):
Yes, a very interesting development, though not a surprise, because it's long been known that BA was interested in an aircraft around this size class; up to now,

If I remember correctly, the 777-8X is designed as a 777-200 replacement? This would be a good 772ER replacement for BA, as some of the 777's are racking up the years. Where does time go? But who knows, maybe they'll keep the 772's around for as long as the 744's have been.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):
I would have put the A350 as a near "dead cert" for BA, but if Boeing does launch a 777X (and I think it's likely it will), then Airbus will have its work cut out; certainly, the A350-1000 will be hit hard.

It has to be given that they'll launch it. If a couple more airlines join the gang, say SQ, AA, and UA joined, that would be given for Boeing to launch the program. If I recall, wouldn't they be developing a composite, thinner, longer wing on the 777X?



The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3314 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 31845 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):

"While some of the four-engine 747s can still operate until as late as 2018 or 2019, rising fuel prices heighten the need for a more fuel-efficient replacement, said Walsh"

Wow, BA will have no 4 holers by 2019.  
The world does not stand still.



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12701 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 31780 times:

The article says:

Quote:

“We want it done now so they have the plane in 2019,” Emirates President Tim Clark said in an interview at an industry conference in Barcelona. British Airways Chief Executive Officer Willie Walsh gave the same timeline yesterday as well.

...

“I think 2019 at the latest would be my view,” Walsh said in an interview in Barcelona.

Should be quite the challenge for both Boeing and GE, given that both are committed to the 737 MAX EIS in 2017.

I wonder if PW or RR can take advantage of GE's focus on the LEAP?

Albaugh says they will present to the board end of this year or early next year.

Of course he said a similar thing about the 737 NSA, so take that with a grain of salt.

In http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...costs-to-drop-50-by-summer-371139/ his boss McNerney says:

Quote:

From a development perspective, McNerney says the company's focus is on the 787-9, the re-engined 737 Max and the KC-46A tanker, based on the 767.

So the progression looks to be 787-9, KC-46A, 737-MAX, 787-10, 777X?

And perhaps as my linked article says, some attempt to address the 757 replacement market too?

Interesting times ahead!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinejetblast From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 1231 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 31778 times:

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 4):
Wow, BA will have no 4 holers by 2019.

A380s



Speedbird Concorde One
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12701 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 31696 times:

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 4):
Wow, BA will have no 4 holers by 2019.

They will be getting a few A380s, no?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 31669 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 5):
And perhaps as my linked article says, some attempt to address the 757 replacement market too?

Yep, confirmed by Boeing's CEO: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...haul-757-replacement-study-371163/



The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19924 posts, RR: 59
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 31660 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Reply 3):
If I remember correctly, the 777-8X is designed as a 777-200 replacement?

It's a bit bigger. More like a 777-"250"ER replacement.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15778 posts, RR: 27
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 31531 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):
This will probably end the "Will BA buy 747-8i's/777W's to replace the 747-400's?" question.

   That was my first thought.

BA may need the extra capacity due to restrictions at LHR. They, like Emirates, should be interested in packing in more seats per flight so I don't think it's a huge surprise that they like the 777X. That said, I still think that the number of airlines that will be interested in the 777X versus the A350 will be relatively small.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31096 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 31417 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

BA is said to like their 777-300ERs (and they appear to like their 777-200ERs) so a mix of 777-9s, 787-10s, 787-9s and 787-8s would give BA significant flexibility and capability in the middle of the fleet, with the A380 anchoring the high-end and the A320 family covering the narrowbody side.

User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 31216 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 9):
Quoting redrooster3 (Reply 3):
If I remember correctly, the 777-8X is designed as a 777-200 replacement?

It's a bit bigger. More like a 777-"250"ER replacement.

  . For the sake of specificity, the 778X has been predicted as being 19 feet longer than the 772 and 14 feet shorter than the 773. The 779X comes in @ 8.5 feet longer than the 773.


User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 30951 times:

Naturally, BA/IAG would like a cutthroat competition between the 777X and A350, with prices slashed to the bone etc

2019 is a tight deadline, for the LAST of their 747s to be retired, seeing that so far they've only ordered a few A380s. Even if they they top this up a bit (another 10?) then replacing all their remaining 744s, and then their 772s will be a major order, worth fighting for.



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3314 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 30908 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 7):

Of course, having a Saga moment.  



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently offlineblackwidow From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 30879 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Reply 3):
as some of the 777's are racking up the years.

G-ZZZC (l/n 15) delivered 11/11/1995....
G-ZZZA (l/n 6) delivered 20/05/1996.... (was this a development a/c? Took a longtime to deliver!)


User currently onlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 685 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 30853 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Reply 3):

From what I understand Boeing is looking at buying out hangar space that is being leased by a company called ATS or something like that. If it goes through they plan on building the composite wings there on campus instead of shipping them and having to deal with trucking ect.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):

Sounds like a good mix. I think they will pull the trigger on ordering no more than 15 frames for each model minus the 787-8. I just hope the 787-9 and 787-10 dont get lost in the 737 MAX and 777x scrum.   


User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 28471 times:

Well, so much for BA's experience with the first batch of 777s scaring them off ordering more future models. This shoots that laughable theory out the window. (I'm referring to a statement a member of these forums made)


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineboeingfever777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 409 posts, RR: 53
Reply 18, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 27724 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):
British Airways are among the two largest 777 operators.

Is not CX a larger operator?

CX - has (67) total orders for the 777 model.

Orders for January 1995 through March 2012
Customer Name Country Region Model Engine Order Date Total
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-200 RR 31-May-2000 1
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300 RR 01-Nov-1995 7
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300 RR 31-May-2002 3
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300 RR 29-Mar-2004 2
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300ER GE 14-Dec-2005 12
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300ER GE 01-Jun-2006 2
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300ER GE 07-Aug-2007 5
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300ER GE 08-Nov-2007 7
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300ER GE 21-Sep-2010 6
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300ER GE 09-Mar-2011 10
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777-300ER GE 10-Aug-2011 4
Cathay Pacific Airways CHINA East Asia 777F GE 10-Aug-2011 8
Total 67


From looking at their order history I would say they are far more into and a cheerleader of the 777 series than BA.



Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 27121 times:

Quoting boeingfever777 (Reply 18):
Is not CX a larger operator?

I was referring to right now, yes CX has many 777's on order

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 16):
From what I understand Boeing is looking at buying out hangar space that is being leased by a company called ATS or something like that. If it goes through they plan on building the composite wings there on campus instead of shipping them and having to deal with trucking ect.

Tim Clark did say, from an interview, that Boeing is good at making wings. So this will be very interesting to follow up on.

Quoting garpd (Reply 17):
Well, so much for BA's experience with the first batch of 777s scaring them off ordering more future models. This shoots that laughable theory out the window.

Yeah, they have to replace 747-400's first, then replace the older 777's.



The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7752 posts, RR: 18
Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 26950 times:

I'm just curious to see how much larger they're gonna make this 77X. Would it have increased seat capacity or increased range (longer than 77L) or both?


我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlineBE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 26496 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):
This will probably end the "Will BA buy 747-8i's/777W's to replace the 747-400's?" question.
Quoting Revelation (Reply 1):
And start the "Most Of Us Will Be Flying 777s For The Rest Of Our Lives" thread!

Also will be fodder for the "Flying Classic Airliners in 2062" thread, doesn't change the need for "Who Misses the Concorde", and most sadly, won't make the "A vs B" threads go away.

Happy to see the 777 keep going...amoung other things, I like seeing the 3 axle bogies!



Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
User currently offlineDaysleeper From UK - England, joined Dec 2009, 854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 26237 times:

All this article says is that they want Boeing to finalise the specifications and announce an estimated EIS so they can CONSIDER it. Which of course they will, they would be insane not to do so.

I just don’t see BA ordering it, as it isn’t going to be as efficient as the A35J for them, and before someone chimes in saying how many extra seats it will have, remember BA has a 9-abreast economy section on their 77Ws. So essentially when they compare the models, they will almost identical seat counts, almost identical engines, same generation wings… but the 777 will be heavier….


User currently onlineflylku From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 816 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 26138 times:

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 12):
The 779X comes in @ 8.5 feet longer than the 773.

Goodness gracious, the 773 already looks like a tail strike ready to happen. Will the design address this with longer gear?



...are we there yet?
User currently offlineB777LRforeveR From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 25904 times:

What can we expect the SPECS on the Next Gen 777's to look like? Fuselage size -200/-300? Range? Is there a chance it may be made out of CFRP?

Thanks


User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 26622 times:

Quoting B777LRforeveR (Reply 24):
What can we expect the SPECS on the Next Gen 777's to look like? Fuselage size -200/-300? Range? Is there a chance it may be made out of CFRP?

From This flightglobal article, it says:

Quote:
The conceptual two-member family is seen as a 14,800km (8,000nm) 407-seat 777-9X and 353-seat 777-8X and potentially even a third model in an ultra long-range 777-8LX. The baseline -9X and -8X each grow the lengths of the existing 777-300ER and -200ER fuselages and add a 787-style composite wing, say those familiar with Boeing's studies.

The launch of the new 777 family would likely be done in conjunction with a 323-seat 787-10X, a stretch of the 787-9 due for service in 2014, and would more evenly spread Boeing's widebody product line from the 242-seat 787-8 to the 467-seat 747-8.

But it's still quite early, and the studies aren't official.

FlightGlobal: Boeing Targets Year End 777X Launch (by LAXDESI Mar 2 2012 in Civil Aviation)



The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9665 posts, RR: 52
Reply 26, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 26633 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 22):

I just don’t see BA ordering it, as it isn’t going to be as efficient as the A35J for them, and before someone chimes in saying how many extra seats it will have, remember BA has a 9-abreast economy section on their 77Ws. So essentially when they compare the models, they will almost identical seat counts,

According to FlightGlobal, the 777X is supposed to be 4 inches wider in cabin space, so in my opinion the assumption that airlines will stay with 9 abreast is not valid. 4 inches is not the width of a seat, but may be enough for them to consider 10 abreast.

"In the cabin, Boeing looks to remove 4in from the 777X by carving the sidewall and frame shape, accommodating a more comfortable 10-abreast economy arrangement and nine-abreast premium economy offering. "

http://www.flightglobal.com/Features/Boeing-777-special/777X/

Quoting flylku (Reply 23):

Goodness gracious, the 773 already looks like a tail strike ready to happen. Will the design address this with longer gear?

The 777-300ER already has a semi-levered gear unlike the 777-300, so that adds rotation angle since the airplane does not pivot about the main axel, but it pivots about the rear axle which allows 1-2 degrees of additional rotation. There are tricks that can be done with landing gear.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinegingersnap From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2010, 893 posts, RR: 5
Reply 27, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 25813 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 17):
Well, so much for BA's experience with the first batch of 777s scaring them off ordering more future models. This shoots that laughable theory out the window. (I'm referring to a statement a member of these forums made)

It wasn't me who made that comment, but I will step in here and say there wasn't any need for that cheap shot. Totally unnecessary.

As far as the topic goes....

I am glad to see BA taking an active interest in this aircraft. The T7 has served them well over the years, and it is only natural that they would seek to continue that.



Flown on: A306 A319/20/21 A332 B732/3/4/5/7/8 B742/4 B752 B762/3 B772/W C152 E195 F70/100 MD-82 Q400
User currently offlineodwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 3
Reply 28, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 25674 times:

I would think Qantas will buy this one....


Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlinegdg9 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 655 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 25342 times:

Why not call it the 777-400? I don't like or understand this business of jumping to -800 for the first version of a plane. Both Airbus and Boeing have done it with recent new aircraft and I think its odd.

User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5711 posts, RR: 6
Reply 30, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 25421 times:

Quoting odwyerpw (Reply 28):
I would think Qantas will buy this one...

DO NOT GO THERE!      

Way, way too early to even speculate, lets at least wait until the specs are announced, please.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5711 posts, RR: 6
Reply 31, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 25311 times:

Quoting flylku (Reply 23):
Quoting davs5032 (Reply 12):
The 779X comes in @ 8.5 feet longer than the 773.

Goodness gracious, the 773 already looks like a tail strike ready to happen. Will the design address this with longer gear?

That takes it out to 76.5 m! By far the longest airliner in the sky. Will we be having threads on how few airports are B777X ready?

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 32, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 25038 times:

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 29):
Why not call it the 777-400? I don't like or understand this business of jumping to -800 for the first version of a plane. Both Airbus and Boeing have done it with recent new aircraft and I think its odd.

Basically, the number "8" means good luck in Asia cultures. Just a broad overview of that.

But, Boeing/Airbus think that putting 100-600 as the model type is considered "outdated." Think about it, what sounds more advanced? 777-400, or 777-8. In my opinion, 777-8 sounds much nicer, though I do see your point your making.



The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4520 posts, RR: 7
Reply 33, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 24855 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 1):
And start the "Most Of Us Will Be Flying 777s For The Rest Of Our Lives" thread!

As the author of said thread, I agree with your observation!  

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 29):
Why not call it the 777-400? I don't like or understand this business of jumping to -800 for the first version of a plane.

I agree. I think this whole "8" thing was originally started as a gesture to the Chinese (?) (i.e. 8 is a lucky number over there - at least that's my recollection).


User currently offlineodwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 3
Reply 34, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 24712 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 30):
DO NOT GO THERE!

Way, way too early to even speculate, lets at least wait until the specs are announced, please.

Gemuser

I typed that one with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek!!   You called me on it in 3.2.1. Good on you!



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 35, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 24416 times:

Quoting blackwidow (Reply 15):
G-ZZZA (l/n 6) delivered 20/05/1996.... (was this a development a/c? Took a longtime to deliver!)

'ZA was the first 772 powered by the GE90 engine which was then an entirely new engine (as opposed to a development of an existing engine). It was the sixth 772 built. The five earlier production aircraft were for UA and were powered by P&W engines derived from a pre-existing engine. Boeing used 'ZA (while it was registered N77779) as a test and development aircraft and for certification purposes. As such it first visited LHR on 20 and 21 April 1995, exactly 13 months before BA took delivery of it.

'ZB, the tenth 772, remained with Boeing even longer. There were 25 months between its first flight and delivery. It was also used in the Boeing flight testing programme and additionally for ETOPS certification and as a test bed for the uprated GE90-92B engine. It too visited LHR 11 months before delivery and in full British Airways Landor livery while registered N77771.

Quoting boeingfever777 (Reply 18):
Is not CX a larger operator?

According to the link provided by the TO BA is Boeing's fifth largest 777 customer. It says:

"Emirates, the largest customer for the 777, and British Airways, the fifth-biggest, are pushing for a follow-on model to the 777-300"


User currently onlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 685 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 24155 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 22):

Can you explain why you don't think that BA will in fact order the 777X if it were available before or at 2019?? I want to understand your logic behind your statement.

The article says that 1) Emirates is joining British Airways suggesting they have been sharing opinions on the design for a some time. 2) "British Airways, a unit of International Consolidated Airlines Group SA, intends to replace 52 Boeing 747 jumbo jets. It is currently evaluating the purchase of a 777 successor, the 787-10 Dreamliner, or possibly A350-1000s, the biggest variant of the Airbus plane." Purchase suggests buying or the intent of buying.

I love your sense of pride for the Airbus product but its clouding your judgement.   


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12701 posts, RR: 25
Reply 37, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 23974 times:

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 36):
Can you explain why you don't think that BA will in fact order the 777X if it were available before or at 2019?? I want to understand your logic behind your statement.

It's pretty clear to me that his argument is "it isn’t going to be as efficient as the A35J for them".

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 36):
Purchase suggests buying or the intent of buying.

And "evaluating" doesn't necessarily suggest buying or the intent of buying, it just means evaluating.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5711 posts, RR: 6
Reply 38, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 23286 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 37):
Quoting rotating14 (Reply 36):
Can you explain why you don't think that BA will in fact order the 777X if it were available before or at 2019?? I want to understand your logic behind your statement.

It's pretty clear to me that his argument is "it isn’t going to be as efficient as the A35J for them".

There is that. BA may purchase the B777X, but they may not. Another factor is that really haven't jumped into the B77W with their customary enthusiasm. My understanding is that it was purchased because of delays in both the A380 and B787 and it could be delivered in an acceptable time frame. Also it was somehow tied up with the compensation from Boeing, for the B787 delays.
Given that I don't think BA is in any way certain for the B777X as some people in this thread seem to think. Yes they are evaluating, they'd be stupid not to, even QF will evaluate it, doesn't mean they will buy it, especially now before the specification are firmed!

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9665 posts, RR: 52
Reply 39, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 21700 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 38):

There is that. BA may purchase the B777X, but they may not. Another factor is that really haven't jumped into the B77W with their customary enthusiasm.

BA doesn't seem to have much enthusiasm for anything right now. They don't have any narrowbodies on order and have comparatively small orders for the 787 and A380.

I'm really curious to see what happens because apart from having a 767 replacement on order, they don't seem to have any replacement aircraft on order for their 737s or 747s. The 12 A380s would be needed for growth and to cover even a minimal amount of 747 routes.

I expect big orders from BA if their finances are in order.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 40, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 21584 times:

Quoting gdg9 (Reply 29):
Why not call it the 777-400? I don't like or understand this business of jumping to -800 for the first version of a plane. Both Airbus and Boeing have done it with recent new aircraft and I think its odd.

Boeing hasn't produced a "-800" since 1994 (the 737-800).

Tom.


User currently offlinerj777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1861 posts, RR: 2
Reply 41, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 21483 times:

So what does Boeing need to approach the board for launch? Why wait until the end of the year? Why couldn't they ask the board to launch sometime by the end of the month!

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31096 posts, RR: 85
Reply 42, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 21422 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rj777 (Reply 41):
So what does Boeing need to approach the board for launch?

A few score orders.  


User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9665 posts, RR: 52
Reply 43, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 21346 times:

Quoting rj777 (Reply 41):
So what does Boeing need to approach the board for launch? Why wait until the end of the year? Why couldn't they ask the board to launch sometime by the end of the month!

Launch is actually about 1/3rd of the way through the development of a program. By the time of launch, the basic design configuration and trade studies are complete. The basic configuration of the airplane is already complete and they have determined all the developmental costs and have estimates of the production costs. This all feeds into being able to formally sell the airplane.

The 737 MAX being offered for sale before launch was a bit unusual, but it was a relatively small change airplane. The 777X is being proposed to be a much more extensive change based on what I have seen on Flightglobal.

Designing an airplane is a complex process, so formal approval from the board of directors requires quite a significant amount of design work to be done.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinewindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Reply 44, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 19977 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):
British Airways joins the gang of airlines interested in the 777X.

Great stuff!

Now go buy the 748i already, BA I know you want to!!!

Boaz.



"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
User currently offlineGCPET From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2012, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 19586 times:

Quoting windshear (Reply 44):
Now go buy the 748i already, BA I know you want to!!!

I totally agree with you, I think BA should buy the 748i. However, I think I'm just dreaming and BA won't look at the new jumbo until RR's are slapped under the wings 

GCPET



If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!
User currently offlineautothrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1596 posts, RR: 9
Reply 46, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 19504 times:

That does not look good for the A350 generally or specific the -1000. If a lot of airliens prefer the warmed over 777 it will be difficult for Airbus to justify this version.

IMO Airbus should have made the fuselage as wide as the 777.

The A350 was meant also as replacement for the 777.

Quoting windshear (Reply 44):
Now go buy the 748i already

Makes no sense, whith the A380 they have the much more efficient, modern and capable plane for not much more money.



“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlinescouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3396 posts, RR: 9
Reply 47, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 18428 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13):
Naturally, BA/IAG would like a cutthroat competition between the 777X and A350, with prices slashed to the bone etc

2019 is a tight deadline, for the LAST of their 747s to be retired, seeing that so far they've only ordered a few A380s. Even if they they top this up a bit (another 10?) then replacing all their remaining 744s, and then their 772s will be a major order, worth fighting for.

I'd agree, and I know it's only an article in a paper, but something doesn't add up - if they're really going to retire all 52 744s by 2019 and the 777X isn't going to be delivered until 2018/19 are they going to get the first 40 off the line to go with thier 12 A380s - Imagine the steam coming out of Clark's ears if that was the case!

I leaning towards them getting maybe another 12 - 15 A380s and some 777 classics before they get A35J or 777Xs

Just as an aside, if they order he A35J will this be the first time BA has operated a non-Boeing wide-bodied twin?


User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 17063 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 22):
I just don’t see BA ordering it, as it isn’t going to be as efficient as the A35J for them, and before someone chimes in saying how many extra seats it will have, remember BA has a 9-abreast economy section on their 77Ws. So essentially when they compare the models, they will almost identical seat counts, almost identical engines, same generation wings… but the 777 will be heavier….

First of all, even IF your prediction of BA going 9-abreast in Y comes true, the seat counts will still NOT be identical. Isn't the A35J as designed about equal to the 77W in length? But isn't the 77W expected to be *stretched* to make it longer than the A35J? You can continue to compare the A35J to the 77W w/ regards seating configurations b/c it suits your argument, but that doesn't make your comparisons, or your claims, accurate. A 779X with the widely-reported stretch could fit 3 additional Y rows...not such "identical" seat counts after all, it would seem.

Second, I know you're not going to back down from your "9-abreast in Y" stand, but once again you're using the 77W as the basis for this, which is inaccurate. Assuming that 4" can be added to the width of the cabin, I don't see any way BA would not go 10X...unless they're not interested in increasing their profit margin. If you allocate 4" saved across 10 economy seats, that turns 17" seat widths into 17.4"....sure that's not a huge difference, but it you'd better believe if BA can get seats that wide on a 777 (which FYI would be the near equivalent of what's on their 747's), they'll do it in a heartbeat.

I know it makes you uncomfortable to think about, but the 77X will have a economically-significant higher seat count than the A35J...this won't make the 779X better than, or even equal to the A35J economically, but it does give the 77X a fighting chance, which you're unwilling to acknowledge.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 26):
According to FlightGlobal, the 777X is supposed to be 4 inches wider in cabin space, so in my opinion the assumption that airlines will stay with 9 abreast is not valid. 4 inches is not the width of a seat, but may be enough for them to consider 10 abreast.

Exactly my point.


User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1606 posts, RR: 10
Reply 49, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 16951 times:

Of course in terms of 'ordering' there is no such thing as BA, any purchase will be made with the whole corporation in mind. .And of course it will therefore have the potental to be a very large order(s) indeed. In fact so big that it could easily include 2 purchases using both manufacturers.

The 748i is never going to happen - that much is clear from all that has been said.But a 10 abreast (economy) 777-'400' would be (I believe) be the ideal 744 replacement and would interline beautifully with the 388 capacity.(50 aircraft order?)
But looking at the corporation as a whole and the replacement timings.I would be surprised if we did not see an order for the 359 (50 aircraft?).


User currently offlineDaysleeper From UK - England, joined Dec 2009, 854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 50, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 16348 times:

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 48):
I know it makes you uncomfortable to think about, but the 77X will have a economically-significant higher seat count than the A35J...this won't make the 779X better than, or even equal to the A35J economically, but it does give the 77X a fighting chance, which you're unwilling to acknowledge.

This is really starting to get tiresome, let me make this clear – I enjoy aviation as a hobby, it has absolutely no baring or effect on my real life. My posts are purely my opinion, if you disagree fine, post and say why, but please stop trying to insinuate that this is anything more to me than a passing interest.

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 48):
First of all, even IF your prediction of BA going 9-abreast in Y comes true, the seat counts will still NOT be identical. Isn't the A35J as designed about equal to the 77W in length? But isn't the 77W expected to be *stretched* to make it longer than the A35J? You can continue to compare the A35J to the 77W w/ regards seating configurations b/c it suits your argument, but that doesn't make your comparisons, or your claims, accurate. A 779X with the widely-reported stretch could fit 3 additional Y rows...not such "identical" seat counts after all, it would seem.

I agree that it is perfectly possible for BA to go 10 across on the 77X, assuming of course Boeing are able to gain an extra 4 inch, however I don’t believe they will be able to stretch it enough to allow for another 3 rows of seats, it will be 2 at most.

As for the rest, I think it’s too early to seriously debate the differences between them as neither specification is firm.


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10101 posts, RR: 97
Reply 51, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 15694 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting gemuser (Reply 31):
Will we be having threads on how few airports are B777X ready?

In a word "no".

History has already shown us the answer to that question, as we have already had a large number of 777X threads on A-net that have clearly identified the up to 72m+ wingspan and up to 77m+ length.
It's never even remotely reared its head.

I'll leave you to speculate as to why that might be  

Rgds


User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 15528 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 2):
the A350-1000 will be hit hard.

Not necessarily as the 779X will be bigger than the A3510 (and 77W).

As fuel prices rise airlines will increasingly need to "right-size" their aircraft to match demand, reducing the impact of flying empty or very cheap seats. That will lead a more varied fleet being an economically attractive proposition.

I can easily see BA's w/b fleet mix by 2020 comprising A380 / B779X / A3510 / A359 / B789 / B788.

And there is also IB to consider as joint ordering within IAG is a certainty going forward.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12701 posts, RR: 25
Reply 53, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 15306 times:

Quoting autothrust (Reply 46):
That does not look good for the A350 generally or specific the -1000. If a lot of airliens prefer the warmed over 777 it will be difficult for Airbus to justify this version.

Yet there is no real evidence of that being the case.

By most of the analyses that I've seen, the 777X will have a hard time equaling the A350J in performance.

All this article says is that BA and other airlines are quite interested in the 777X.

There's no way to know at this point which they will prefer, or in some cases, if they won't end up with both.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4797 posts, RR: 40
Reply 54, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 14700 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 53):
Quoting autothrust (Reply 46):
That does not look good for the A350 generally or specific the -1000. If a lot of airlines prefer the warmed over 777 it will be difficult for Airbus to justify this version.

Yet there is no real evidence of that being the case.

By most of the analyses that I've seen, the 777X will have a hard time equaling the A350J in performance.

All this article says is that BA and other airlines are quite interested in the 777X.

Which is exactly what it is. Quite interested. And if everything adds up, including sales price, many airlines might very well purchase the B777-9X, or -8X for that matter. But also many will go for the A350-1000 as well imho. But the bigger fuselage diameter gives the B777-X indeed a real fighting chance against the A350-1000, and also the B787-10X (compared to the B777-8X).

And of course, the more competition there is, the better the airlines will like it. Only from that interest they will encourage Airbus and Boeing to build airplanes which are relatively close to each other performance wise.  .


User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 758 posts, RR: 5
Reply 55, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 13951 times:

Quoting autothrust (Reply 46):
That does not look good for the A350 generally or specific the -1000. If a lot of airliens prefer the warmed over 777 it will be difficult for Airbus to justify this version.

IMO Airbus should have made the fuselage as wide as the 777.

The A350 was meant also as replacement for the 777.


The A350 fuselage dimensions are optimised for the A359, to make it as wide as the 777 would be suboptimal for the 359 and especially the 358. The current 350XWB fuselage was widened significantly over the original 350 mk 1 which was only competing against the 787. You cant be all things to all size categories with one fuselage width - you have to optimise for a given capacity.


Regards,
StickShaker


User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1613 posts, RR: 1
Reply 56, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 13214 times:

Will Boeing construct the 777x cabin using carbon fiber? If not, why not? I thought I had read that the benefits of using carbon increase as the size of the cabin increases. If that is true, I would think carbon a natural choice for the 777x.

User currently offlineCerecl From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 740 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 13079 times:

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 56):
Will Boeing construct the 777x cabin using carbon fiber? If not, why not?

That would essentially be an all new plane which is not what Boeing appears to be willing to do.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31096 posts, RR: 85
Reply 58, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 13117 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 56):
Will Boeing construct the 777x cabin using carbon fiber?

Unlikely. That will come with Y3 - the 777/747 replacement.


User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9665 posts, RR: 52
Reply 59, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 11709 times:

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 50):

As for the rest, I think it’s too early to seriously debate the differences between them as neither specification is firm.

I totally agree that it is too early to seriously debate the differences in efficiency, which is why I am confused you make statements like this?

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 22):

I just don’t see BA ordering it, as it isn’t going to be as efficient as the A35J for them



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 60, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 11301 times:

Quoting windshear (Reply 44):

Now go buy the 748i already, BA I know you want to!!!
Quoting GCPET (Reply 45):
I totally agree with you, I think BA should buy the 748i. However, I think I'm just dreaming and BA won't look at the new jumbo until RR's are slapped under the wings

It'll never happen. But what a handsome beast it would be:

http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/2817/ba748i.png



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineDaysleeper From UK - England, joined Dec 2009, 854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 61, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 11065 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 59):
I totally agree that it is too early to seriously debate the differences in efficiency, which is why I am confused you make statements like this?

Because I believe that’s going to be the case.

Unless Boeing have some sort of revolutionary new wing, or can re-write the laws of physics then I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a brand new, state of the art aircraft to perform better than one developed 20 years ago. That’s not to say the 77X will be un-competitive, as I’m sure it will come close to the A350, but I can’t see it beating it. And with BA having no real preference in terms of manufacturer then it makes sense to me that they would order the most efficient aircraft available.


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 62, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 10601 times:

FWIW, I expect B777-9X(10-abreast Y) to have higher operating profits than A350-1000(9-abreast Y) for long and dense routes.

I also expect the A350-1000(9-abreast Y) to have higher operating profits than B777-9X(9-abreast Y) on long and dense routes.

See link below for analysis.
A350-100 Versus B777-9X(407 Seats) Analysis (by LAXDESI Mar 4 2012 in Tech Ops)


User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 63, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 10401 times:

What a poosible 777-8 could look like beside a 777-200ER.

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7008/ba777s.png

Pictured here is an example with a new wing, new tail plane and new engine/pylon.

[Edited 2012-04-27 11:34:23]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19924 posts, RR: 59
Reply 64, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 10144 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 63):
What a poosible 777-8 could look like beside a 777-200ER.

One issue: you have an "RR" symbol on the engine. I do not believe there will be an RR option on the 777-8/9.

Otherwise, very purty! It's going to get to be a bit of a pain for spotters to tell which 777 variant they're looking at.


User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 65, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 10074 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 64):
One issue: you have an "RR" symbol on the engine. I do not believe there will be an RR option on the 777-8/9.

I know, I know, humour me  



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2557 posts, RR: 7
Reply 66, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 10050 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):
This will probably end the "Will BA buy 747-8i's/777W's to replace the 747-400's?" question.

Yeah, for about as long as it takes for a new "When will XX* buy out/merge with AS" thread
*Insert your selected airline here.


User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 67, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 9852 times:

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 56):
Will Boeing construct the 777x cabin using carbon fiber? If not, why not?

You're basically creating a whole new plane after that. Wings are being proposed right now.



The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7752 posts, RR: 18
Reply 68, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 9580 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 63):
Pictured here is an example with a new wing, new tail plane and new engine/pylon.

Could you do me a favor and compare that to a BA 787, to see a size difference?



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5711 posts, RR: 6
Reply 69, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 9581 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 51):

I'll leave you to speculate as to why that might be

Indeed Sir, indeed!  

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31096 posts, RR: 85
Reply 70, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 9545 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 64):
One issue: you have an "RR" symbol on the engine. I do not believe there will be an RR option on the 777-8/9.

I believe Boeing has extended RFPs to GE, RR and P&W.


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 71, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 9527 times:

Quoting redrooster3 (Thread starter):
Emirates and British Airways are among the two largest 777 operators.
Quoting boeingfever777 (Reply 18):
Is not CX a larger operator?

Yeah lets clear that up. United is firmly the second largest 777 operator with 74. British Airways is the 5th largest with about 20 less than that.

Quoting gemuser (Reply 31):
By far the longest airliner in the sky.

Not by far. Its not even 2 meters longer than an A340-600.

NS


User currently offlineredrooster3 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 72, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 9480 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 71):
Yeah lets clear that up. United is firmly the second largest 777 operator with 74. British Airways is the 5th largest with about 20 less than that.

I should of said top 5.  
Quoting ER757 (Reply 66):
Yeah, for about as long as it takes for a new "When will XX* buy out/merge with AS" thread
*Insert your selected airline here.

Alaska happens to be my favorite airline.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 64):
One issue: you have an "RR" symbol on the engine. I do not believe there will be an RR option on the 777-8/9.
According to this article they are proposing a RB3025 engine concept for the 777X.

Quote:
"Boeing asked the three engine [manufacturers] what we could do in terms of product for what is now called the 777X, at around the end of this decade," says Rolls Royce vice-president of strategic marketing, Robert Nuttall.

-132.5 inch fan
- 99,5K thrust rating
- "better than 10%" improvement in fuel burn over the incumbent GE90-115B engine and 15% better than its Trent 800 which powers early model 777s.

The 777-8X (777-"250ER") would have a thrust requirement of 88K.

Boeing eyes largest-ever wingspan for 777X

GE plans 10% fuel burn improvement for GE9X engine

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 54):
But also many will go for the A350-1000 as well imho.

I think airlines will wait until the airlines who order it give the plane a review. Just like the 747-8i with LH.



The only thing you should change about a woman is her last name.
User currently offlineodwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 3
Reply 73, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 9399 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 63):
What a poosible 777-8 could look like beside a 777-200ER.

I like the mockups. Thank you for sharing.

Could you humor us further by showing us a possible 777-9 besides a 777-300ER. Maybe station them in order:

777-200LR
777-8
777-300ER
777-9



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4840 posts, RR: 9
Reply 74, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 8956 times:

but its "Old Technology" according to Geoff Dixon and other QF management/board....  


56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4797 posts, RR: 40
Reply 75, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8792 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting redrooster3 (Reply 72):
Quoting EPA001 (Reply 54):
But also many will go for the A350-1000 as well imho.

I think airlines will wait until the airlines who order it give the plane a review. Just like the 747-8i with LH.

That could very well be the case. Also the B77W had a very slow start until real performance data (in the flight test program and out of the first operations) became available. We all know what a big success the plane became, even to the big surprise of GE and Boeing since this airplane truly delivered much better results then anticipated, and sadly but justified wiping out the competitive market position of the A340-600 in the process.


User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 76, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8816 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 68):
Could you do me a favor and compare that to a BA 787, to see a size difference?

See below

Quoting odwyerpw (Reply 73):
I like the mockups. Thank you for sharing.

Could you humor us further by showing us a possible 777-9 besides a 777-300ER. Maybe station them in order:

777-200LR
777-8
777-300ER
777-9

Done  

Please note: All sizes are extremeley approximate. I cannot stress this enough, so no rivet counting, please.

http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/9880/the777s.png



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4797 posts, RR: 40
Reply 77, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8697 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting garpd (Reply 76):
so no rivet counting, please.

I was just about to start counting.   Thanks for the picture.


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1635 posts, RR: 1
Reply 78, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8708 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 76):

Nice, thanks   

Quoting garpd (Reply 76):

Please note: All sizes are extremeley approximate. I cannot stress this enough, so no rivet counting, please.

Still, it does show the 787-9 will be very close to the 772 in size, and the 787-10 will be very close to the 778. Which makes me wonder, the 778 should only find a niche as LR aircraft, is that really worth pursuing? No-one is buying 77L's any more, and 345's are in risk of spending more life on the ground than in the air nowadays  



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31096 posts, RR: 85
Reply 79, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 8616 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 78):
Still, it does show the 787-9 will be very close to the 772 in size, and the 787-10 will be very close to the 778. Which makes me wonder, the 778 should only find a niche as LR aircraft, is that really worth pursuing?

From the data I have seen, the 777-200ER and 787-9 look to have identical cabin lengths at 48.4m.

Assuming the stretches Boeing is talking about, the 787-10 will be 54m to the 53m of the 777-8X.

That being said, I do see the 787-10 and 777-8X being somewhat complementary. The 787-10 will be MTOW-limited and that will mean that she's probably going to be doing missions up to around 4000nm while the 777-8X will have the legs for missions beyond 6000nm (and the 777-8XLR for even longer missions) and the extra capacity to maximize those longer stage lengths / less turns.

So I would not be surprised if Boeing pitches them as a package.


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7752 posts, RR: 18
Reply 80, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 8381 times:

Quoting garpd (Reply 76):
See below

   amazing!!!! That is incredible.



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 81, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 7600 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 79):
That being said, I do see the 787-10 and 777-8X being somewhat complementary. The 787-10 will be MTOW-limited and that will mean that she's probably going to be doing missions up to around 4000nm while the 777-8X will have the legs for missions beyond 6000nm (and the 777-8XLR for even longer missions) and the extra capacity to maximize those longer stage lengths / less turns.

I have done a first order analysis of the 777-8X and -9X over at Tech-Ops (A vs B wings). B have leaked some 8000nm range for both, that is probably sandbagging. With the engine improvements and a 65m and 71m wing respectively they should be good for 8300-8400 (8X) and 8600-8700nm (9X) at spec Pax+bags payload. So the 777-8X becomes a direct payload-range competitor to the 350-1000 with a fuel burn within 2% of the -1000. The 9X would be the DBX-LAX frame that EK wants with a 75t max payload and a range of 8650nmm with a spec 39t payload.

One shall note that the fuel burn claims by the engine people is just that, it includes the frame efficiency improvements, the direct TSFC improvement from GE90-115 to GE90X lies in the 6,5% range. These new engines are around 2% better then the TXWB (they enter the market 2-4 years later) that is why the 8X can compensate it's heavier Al-Li fuselage and be competitive with the 350-1000.



Non French in France
User currently offlineodwyerpw From Mexico, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 3
Reply 82, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 7521 times:

Interesting that the 787, 747 and 777 families are going to share very similar engine technolgies.

Thanks for posting the additional mockups.



Quiero una vida simple en Mexico. Nada mas.
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...
Boeing To Build 737s Into The 2020s posted Thu Nov 12 2009 08:40:07 by Rheinbote
Why Did Boeing Decide To Build The 757? posted Wed Mar 19 2003 22:06:20 by BeltwayBandit
British Airways 'retro' 757 To Fly One Last Time. posted Mon Sep 26 2011 10:07:05 by MANfan
British Airways & Etihad To Harare? posted Wed Nov 25 2009 06:36:31 by SepulTALLICA
British Airways From EWR To LHR Deverted posted Tue Jun 3 2008 16:39:41 by MKE22
British Airways Pilots Vote To Strike posted Thu Feb 21 2008 02:23:28 by SINGAPORE_AIR
British Airways Won Rights To Operate EU-US posted Sat Jun 30 2007 01:29:08 by Jimyvr
British Airways Resumes Flights To Beirut? posted Tue Feb 13 2007 17:30:37 by Raffik
British Airways Concorde Moved To Floyd Bennett posted Fri Dec 22 2006 23:20:29 by Mikephotos
Airbus Wants Russians To Build More Of A350 posted Sat Dec 9 2006 18:27:07 by BoomBoom