TransSwede From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 993 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1675 times:
Noone buys 767-200's anymore...
For a lot of airlines, like SAS, using the 767-200ER on intercontinental proved to be just too expensive. With crew rest areas and extra crew shifts, there just wasn't enough space left for enough paying passengers with long-haul luxuries to make it profitable. So SAS sold their -200's pretty quickly. I suspect most other airlines had the same experience.
Domestically, you can squeze in many more seats, that's why the 767-200 still goes strong on the US domestic and intre-european market. But for how long? The 757-200/300 and A321 is taking over more and more.
The true replacement for the 767-200ER in intercontinental is really the A330-200. It is larger, yet as small as it can get while still enabling long-distance flights with acceptable profit margins. The order books prove this - The A330-200 is the aircraft of choice for smaller medium to long haul flights, and the new craze for charter airlines.
TransSwede From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 993 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1656 times:
As for the 767-300ER and 767-400, they have a slightly brighter future, but they are also getting killed by the A330-200/300 in sales. And the 777 is eating into many 767 sales as well - Why have a 767-400 the 777-200 is so close in capcity? Most Boeing customers just go for the 777 directly.
UAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1617 times:
Look at it this way...air traffic is down a heck of a lot after 9/11...when the airlines start picking up again and need to add capacity, they may want to order the baby-jumbo (767-200ER), to have an intercontinental jet without the huge size.
On the other hand...the public is quite familiar with the 767-200 after the World Trade Center disaster...you think passengers are at all scared to fly on the 757/767 after 9/11?
LY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 10 Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1506 times:
The only 762's that have the 777 interior are the ones that CO operates. The 762ER had it's best sales in the mid to late 80's, before the introduction of the 763ER. Airlines like AA, US, AC, RG, LY, QF, BY, SAA, ET, and UA (and, of course, CO) already operate it.
Gmonney From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2159 posts, RR: 21 Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1457 times:
What they would have to do is introduce a 767-500 and take the philosiphy of the 737, just build different sizes....kind of like a 767NG. Make a 762 size with all the updates of the new 764 that will be coming out....
How about that for an idea?
P.S. I see this as a very profitable aircraft for both domestic and overseas flight....???
Woodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1023 posts, RR: 3 Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1418 times:
In the configuration that CO uses on the -200ERs, it seats exactly 8 more than their 737-900 168 as opposed to 175 (albiet, with more range) and 14 less than a domestic 757-200. As beautiful as COs 762ERs are, I cant see them being all that profitable. I guess case in point is the A310, 20 years and about 250 sales, thats not a steller number for such a long production run.
I guess if you need the range and less capacity then the 762 might be a good fit, but what was mentioned above about crew rest quarters and even cargo capacity (which makes money on long haul routes) is lacking.
Trintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3211 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (11 years 9 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1374 times:
I cannot say that the 762/762ER has much of a future as far as sales go. It may be a stellar performer but the small capacity is a problem. Charter operators would prefer a type offeing greater pax capacity (hence the popularity of the 763, 753 and 332) and sceduled carriers would look for more cargo space. For specific routes and operations the 762 may still be good but its niche has matured somewhat and so roles in which it may have been suited before may not now be so.