Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
767X Falling Behind?  
User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 10780 posts, RR: 15
Posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2576 times:

767X falling behind?

I have noticed that some airlines have selected the Airbus A330 as replacements for their Boeing 767 fleets. I know that politics are involved in one way or the other in some of these cases, but I think many of these Boeing 767 operators have choosen the Airbus A330 because Boeing delayed or failed to meet customer's demands on its Boeing 767-400ERX programme as of yet. Some of the airlines operating the Boeing 767 have opted for the Airbus A330 because there is no airliner in its category. The Boeing 767-400ERX was intended to compete directly with Airbus' A330. For some reason the current Boeing 767-400 does not appeal to current 767 operators. Therefore airlines only have one other option which is the A330.

The A330 appears to have a better performance than the Boeing 767-400. Boeing may loose more 767 customers if they don't react to the market's demands for a similarly sized "improved" 767 version. KLM has opted for the Airbus A330 which does not fit in KLM's all-Boeing fleet. It's just not economical because the Airbus A330 is a totally different aircraft. Although I think that politics does have an influence on airline's decisions, especially within the EU, I also think Boeing is falling behind with its Boeing 767X programme.

There are many 767 operators worldwide. Besides the U.S. airlines, we have KLM, British Airways, Japan Air Lines, All Nippon Airways (ANA), Qantas, and some chinese airlines who may announce plans to replace their 767 fleets. Some of these already have ordered or shown interest in the A330 rather than the 767X. Asiana and Eva Air have choosen the A330 because they could get a better deal than Boeing even though these airlines are 767 operators with Eva Air having no experience with any Airbus aircraft type. British Airways still has a large fleet of 767-300's which will need replacement soon. Boeing could be the favourite manufacturer for British Airways, but they must come up with a final decision on the 767X programme which they haven't done yet. Airbus can get a key order which could make Airbus more attractive as an important aircraft supplier for British Airways. KLM will probably order the Airbus A330-200 while KLM has been a loyal customer to Boeing.

I still think politics also have a say in KLM's order because of the fact that the Netherlands also supplies aircraft parts to Airbus through Stork Industries. If KLM was truly all-Boeing they would not have ordered any Airbus aircraft, but they will. Boeing is falling behind with Airbus leading the way with its A330 family and getting a bigger slice of the 767 pie.

What are your thoughts on this?

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineTransSwede From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1001 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2485 times:

Why is it so important that KLM (or any other airline) stays "All Boeing" or "All Airbus"? It's not... Very few airlines are exclusively dependant on one manufacturer, just the way it should be.

User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2445 times:

The 767-400ERX program was officially killed by Boeing around the time of the Sonic Cruiser announcement.

I found the story on aviationnow.com, but couldn't get the link to work. I found it using thier search engine under "sonic cruiser announcement". It's near the end of the listing of stories. In the article, it's the third to last paragraph where it says Boeing killed the program.

User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2438 times:

The only customer for the 764-ERX was Kenya Airlines, which recently announced a 777 order, so I guess that program is over.

I was thinking about this too........Airbus is having a really good run with its A330-200 and A330-300X, breaking into the medium/long range "big twin" market in a very big way, a market long dominated by Boeing. Boeing has yet to respond which is interesting.

Isnt it time for an updated 762/763 "Advanced" or "New Generation" to give those planes a boost?

Does the 764 program need some further fine-tuning to make it more interesting to the airlines?

User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 10780 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2421 times:

I agree with all of you. I would also like to see airlines operating different aircraft types, like in the '80's. I also agree with Dutchjet on the question wether a new "Next Generation" 767 will launched or announced by Boeing. I just was only wondering why Boeing doesn't seem to worry so much at the moment about their very succesful 767.

As for the fleet standardisation, it's a new "trend" nowadays for airlines to base their aircraft fleet around a single manufacturer as this safes an airline money on maintenance and crew training. Even aircraft manufacturers are developing their aircraft with the commonality concept in mind introduced by Airbus. This makes it much more attractive for airlines to have a single supplier for their aircraft. So even aircraft manufacturers are saying to buy their aircraft because of the cross crew qualification on most or all of their aircraft. Airbus introduced this concept and it appealed to airlines. If I was a manager I can imagine it sounds more interesting to operate aircraft from a single aircraft manufacturer because it safes money on different levels within the airline.

As I live in Holland studying aviation logistics and writing articles for a magazine, the KLM order for A330 aircraft doesn't fit in their fleet. I'm glad they ordered the A330 because I like to see airlines having different aircraft, but looking at it from an operations point of view, it means more work because of the crew training and everything related to this.

So I was only wondering why Boeing hasn't come with a newer version of the 767, allowing the competition to take a bigger piece of Boeing's 767 market.

User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8360 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2370 times:

I think we may see a 767-500 model within a few years.

Imagine a 767-300(ER) with raked wingtips and new, more efficient engines; this would increase the range of the 763ER design to around 6,500 nautical miles, which would make it quite popular with European charter airlines flying to most of the USA.

User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2368 times:

Note that KLM has not yet ordered the A332 - the announcement reported that KLM is negotiating the purchase of additional aircraft for Phase Two of their fleet renewal programme (which covers the 767s and MD11s - a total of 22 aircraft) and Phase Two will be a mix of additional 777s and A332s. Airbus and KLM have said nothing about and A332 order, and Boeing only talks about the 8 777s and 4 744s, thus nothing has been decided for Phase 2. So far, only the Dutch paper, De Telegraaf, has reported details about Phase 2, and they are usually unreliable when it comes to reporting aviation stories.

I am certain that KLM is now playing Boeing against Airbus to see who gives them the best deal for the next group of airliners. I would not be surprised if Boeing makes KLM "an offer it cant refuse" to take 20 to 25 more 777s. Airbus will work very hard to convince KLM to take atleast 10 A332s (less would be ineffecient) to replace the 763s.

While I think that the A332 would be a good plane for the KLM fleet, we may be surprised by the Phase 2 announcement, for some reason I think it will be all 777 in spite of what the article said. Just a feeling, KLM is playing a game by leaking the Phase 2 story to the Telegraaf and wants to scare Boeing.

Please dont say I am anti-Airbus, I think that Iberia will go for the A346 to replace its 747 Classics and that the 777 has little chance of flying for the spanish carrier, its just the way I see it.

User currently offlineTransSwede From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1001 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (14 years 1 month 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2354 times:

The "Sonic Cruiser" seems to be intended to be Boeings 767 replacement - But now that it has been delayed, and its specs and technology are influx, it may be a good idea to significantly revamp the 767 series as a stop-gap measure.

As for KLM, I think it makes sense for them to order the A330. They probably have many routes that are to thin to be served efficiently by a 777. Yes, the A330-200 is bigger than the 767-300, but the 777-200 is even bigger. (in fact, the A330-220 is pretty much in the middle of the two, from a passenger capacity standpoint)

User currently offlineKfrg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (14 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2290 times:

"So I was only wondering why Boeing hasn't come with a newer version of the 767, allowing the competition to take a bigger piece of Boeing's 767 market"

Included in the press-release announcing the termination of the B767ERX was a statement which explained that current B767 operators are content with what the current B767 product has to offer. I could see Boeing upgrading the B767 with modifications to the wing, but new engine? What could possibly replace the P+W4000 and CF6? The only possibility which comes to mind is the GP7000, which will power the A380.
Anyone who thinks that Boeing will increase the B767's cross-section width or produce a B777-100 is living on another planet. Boeing, while designing the B767, selected the set width for a reason, because of the competing A310.
I think that many people on this forum fail to see the B764ER's true role. It was specifically designed as a Delta requirement for an L-1011 replacement. Continental even realized the advantages of the aircraft and choose it to reaplace it's DC-10 fleet. The B767 (B764ER specifically) and the A330 do not compete directly. I think in some markets, the A330 is more compareable to the B777 A market, and in others, it competes with the B767. The reason that we are seeing so many A330 sales is because some airlines see the B767 as a little too small, and the B777 too large an aircraft. There is not a large enough gap inbetween the B767 and the B777 to warrant a whole new fuselage design. Both A330 and B767 have their own unique advantages, each operate their best in different markets. BTW, I believe someone mentioned ANA, and JAL, and QF are loooking to replace their B767s? Well, ANA just ordered B763(ER)'s to replace their B762's, JAL has ordered more B763(ER)'s along with B777's to replace it's MD-11 fleet, and QF's A330 order was only a tag on order to the A380 deal. I would not expect anymore QF A330 orders, and I see the B763's will stay in fleet.


User currently offlineAq737 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 612 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2240 times:

Just my thoughts, but maybe Boeing would have the right mind and either build a 767-500 with a 2-4-2 interior (like how many charter 767s are now), so it could compete with the 330. Or, a totally new 787 would have to be build with the 2-4-2 interior which still keeps the "only one seat from an aisle" quote. If Airbus had a 2-5-2 interior or 3-3-3 interior, I bet many more cutomers would opt for the 777, but since they have the 2-4-2 Y & 2-2-2 (2-3-2 on 777)- it is much more appealing to the customers.

Definately a 2-4-2 is necessary for that market, or Boeing will keep losing their market share and the 767 will become dead.


762, 763, & 764:

[][] [][][] [][]

765 or 787:

[][] [][][][] [][]

the 765 or 787 would require a 16" extention - 8" on each side.

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...
Australia Arrivals Falling Behind posted Wed Mar 19 2008 23:27:02 by REALDEAL
United Leaves Big Cities Behind In Growth Plan posted Mon Jul 28 2008 13:11:18 by KarlB737
EK To Leave Latecomers Behind posted Tue Jun 17 2008 18:43:27 by Rjm717
Will Prices/surcharges Fall W/ Falling Oil Prices? posted Tue Jun 10 2008 06:15:29 by B777A340Fan
787 Suppliers Behind Schedule - Aviation Week posted Tue May 27 2008 13:04:32 by Art
Airbus Raises Prices Due To Falling US$ posted Tue Apr 22 2008 12:17:34 by Ken777
Woman Caterer Dies After Falling From 747 posted Sat Apr 12 2008 22:44:37 by Kchs29418
Use Of Space Behind Top Deck Of 747 posted Fri Mar 21 2008 16:02:36 by BristolFlyer
Merger Talk+DEEP Behind The Scenes posted Wed Feb 13 2008 11:35:30 by Deltaflyertoo
Falling US Dollar And SEA Vs YVR posted Thu Jan 17 2008 21:25:18 by Cragley