Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1610 times:
Nice piece...a tad pro-Boeing (would Virgin really dump the A340-600 options? I doubt it.)...but overall the story sums up what I think everyone here knows. The Triple Seven is an outstanding design.
As much as I love the looks of the A340, I think Airbus is making a big mistake on its' fetish with four engines. Twins have been flying very very long segments for almost 20 years now. The math just doesnt lie. The airplanes are safe overwater. And two engines are two less than the maintenance bills for four.
FlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1584 times:
I'm still waiting for Boeing to launch the 777-200LR. The wing on this baby will as long as the one on the 744. This will be awesome to see someday! Now, if Boeing could just put the 764's wing on a 763's body, we'll have another winner here, IMHO. Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5721 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1563 times:
I also look for the 777 to have an increase in... domestic USA travel.
Here's the theory I have:
With this most recent horror in the airline industry, I think airlines will move to consolidation, they will go back to the way they were about ten years ago. That is, fewer flights, yet with the same capacity.
I flew as a younger boy from Dallas to San Jose on a DC-10, that was in... about... 1991. Now, there are SEVEN flights every Monday from DFW-SJC, and they are... five super 80s and two 757s. More flights per day equal more convenience for passengers. BUT fewer flights per day equal lower costs, as a result of less maintenance, less fuel, and lower labor.
I think- and hope, as I am sick of small airplanes- that airlines will go back to fewer flights yet bigger airplanes.
Like, maybe, two or three flights a day between DFW-SJC and a 767 or a 777. A 777 is basically a DC-10 in terms of capacity, depending on how AA or others wanted to configure it.
I think that American and others will begin to order MORE 777s and FEWER 737s. That's what my theory boils down to.
Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1561 times:
Greetings! Buy you mentioning the hope of Boeing launching the 777-200LR, I assume you mean that you hope it will fly. My understanding that it is launched, just delayed. The 777-300ER, of course, will fly in a couple years. My fear is that the 777-200LR will go the way of the Dodo bird when the Sonic Cruiser is lanched. Stay tuned!
Cyprus-Turkish From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1544 times:
I strongly think that article under estimates the A340-500/600. It doesn't even mention how the airlines will complement those A340s with A380s.
777s are still great though, but lets be fair on the new A340s.
Joni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1484 times:
Another piece of journalism from the venerable Seattle post-Intelligencer
Has anyone else noticed a certain format in their articles:
1) Something interesting is happening in aviation...
2) Comments from aviation analyst (Mr. Nisbet or Mr. Aboulafia)
3) Boeing may well be edging Airbus out on this one!
An finally, yes the 777 is still a new model and will continue to generate a huge flow of cash to Boeing for many years to come. There's no question about this.
However, the article neglected to mention that the 345NG program still has more orders than the 777LR program. Neither program has been selling very fast recently, though, even taking the recession into account.