HNL-Jack From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 820 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 29777 times:
The video refers to 777 customers and is not model specific and of course UA was one of the launch customers for the aircraft. However, the CG generated illustration is a 300 model with the modified livery. I doubt that including it in this video is a mistake. Inflight video of UA''s 200er in the post merger livery is available and could have been used. Boeing would not have used this without UA's authorization and therefore, I suspect announcement is not far off. UA needs the aircraft before the 350's will be there, even if it isn't delayed further.
Grew up in the business and continued the family tradition.
I can't imagine it's a mistake - the marketing folk must have hundreds of hours of United 777-200 stock film laying about in their computer data base. I think something's afoot! I also can't imagine that Delta and United would allow AA to purchase a gaggle of 777-300s without responding in kind.
ghifty From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 891 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 26792 times:
Most, or all, of the CGI aircraft were 777-300's. Probably rendered the video that way for simplicity's sake, as not many people would point that out.
And, of course, it makes sense that Boeing has created some stock renders of UA 77W, 77L, 77E, etc. since they're a current customer.
Slightly off-topic, but: All the published "new orders" videos are actually the same video, with the carrier's livery. It's easier and more cost-effective to have just one model/video and change the textures.
phxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 926 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 26709 times:
Quoting ghifty (Reply 16): It's easier and more cost-effective to have just one model/video and change the textures.
Marketing videos are made for the masses who wouldn't even know the difference between a 77W vs 772. I think us A.net folk are just reading too much into it. Or there is a very cruel Boeing marketing individual out there that likes to mess with us.
But , I will never say never. Way more bizarre things have happened.
lh526 From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 2385 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 26006 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting Polot (Reply 7): LH Cargo has 777Fs on order, so the LH tail isn't much of a surprise.
Those on order where originally intended for AeroLogic, not for LHC only just recently it's officially that indeed the planes will carry the LHC livery which might coincide with the date of the video ...
Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31680 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 25814 times:
Well Boeing has inadvertently let the cat out of the bag before: during the 787 roll-out ceremony, the tail of QR appeared as part of the "display of customers". I think Boeing also pre-maturely announced a QR 777 order at an air show and then there was the temporary appearance of Hong Kong Airlines as a 747-8 customer.
That would be one beautiful bird. It's interesing that such a picture would be publicized unless both Boeing and United want to "leak" an upcoming order. Here at A.net it obviously stirs a wealth of excitement.