Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BBJ3 Launch?  
User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2396 times:

I got this info via "thru the grape vine" folks so take it the way you will. A few days ago here in STL, there was a big Boeing meeting. All thier corporates were here, including both of thier BBJ's. An acquaintance of mine who works at the FBO where Boeing's aircraft were, told me that the BBJ3 may be a reality soon. Although most web sites I checked out say that Boeing has shelved the project for the time being. However, this acquaintance stated that the Boeing people he talked to said they have obtained up to ten orders/LOI. I asked if he was talking about the BBJ2, and he said no, it's the one based on the 757. Naturally, this made my eyebrows raise somewhat.

Stay tuned.

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSetjet From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 1119 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2328 times:

I heard the same rumor, but it was three years ago at the Air Show in Paris when I talked with Borke Bueskov, the former chairman of BBJ.

The prospects are very good, especially now that the trend goes to larger Business Jets flying longer routes. He even told me that they were looking at larger jets, like the 777 and the 747-400.
The market is there, just look at the workload Lufthansa Technik in Hamburg gets with it's VIP-Jet division.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darcy Stevens



User currently offlineShaun3000 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2274 times:

I, too, heard about the meeting, but the story I heard said it was regarding the sale of F-15s to Korea, with much wooing to be had...

User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2229 times:

Shaun3000,

Yes, the meeting WAS about the F-15 sale, but my friend stated that this was just a conversation he brought up with BBJ people that happened to be there.

Regards


User currently offlineShaun3000 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2202 times:

Oh, ok

What I got from the original post is that the meeting was about the BBJ3.


User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6603 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2204 times:

So how would the BBJ3 compare to current 757s? What would be the differences?

User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2173 times:

Similar to what they did with the BBJ. The 757-300 wing would be mated with the 757-200 fuselage. Auxilary fuel tanks in the cargo hold, and winglets. This results in a range of 7,000+ nm.

(I want one!!)  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineAcidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1874 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2136 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

So if they did that to a normal commercial 752, would that do anything to increase its range significantly 0(well, maybe w/o the extra fuel tanks, gotta keep cargo space)?


Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16866 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2108 times:

Does this mean that the long rumored 757-200ERX is a go, this aircraft was getting alot of attention from Continental and NorthWest. The new 757 would add 700 Nm to the range of the 757, CO and NW were looking to this new aircraft as a platform to open up new routes to "Secondary" European citites from EWR and DTW.




Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16866 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2111 times:

Does this mean that the long rumored 757-200ERX is a go, this aircraft was getting alot of attention from Continental and NorthWest. The new 757 would add 700 Nm to the range of the 757, CO and NW were looking to this new aircraft as a platform to open up new routes to "Secondary" European cities that are outside the range of current 757s from EWR and DTW.


Cities pairs like EWR-Helsinki or DTW-Geneva would allow direct routings for travelers without having to connect at European hubs like LHR, CDG or FRA.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineWoodsboy From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 1031 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2111 times:

Regardless of whether Boeing actually develops and markets a VIP/Exec jet based on the 757- you can still get a 757 and have an aftermarket company configure it any way you like. VIP versions of just about every variant out there already exist- from 727-100s with new engines and winglets to MD-87s to A340s and 747-400s. Why would Boeing need to waste its time developing these products for one specific type when anyone with the money can get anything made into a VIP aircraft?

This has always puzzled me regarding the BBJ based on the 737-700. With so few of them ordered and delivered it would seem that letting the conversion of an airplane into a VIP aircraft would be easier if Boeing or Airbus was to deliver whatever type was desired without the interior to a company who would then install the custom VIP interior.


User currently offlineContinentalFan From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

Woodsboy,

I think that the BBJs are slightly different from their commercial counterparts. For example, the BBJ has the strengthened wing of a 738 and more fuel capacity to better suit its intended purpose, a long range VIP transport. I'm sure the the BBJ2 and hypothetical BBJ3 are likewise modified somehow.

Plus I think that Boeing may make more $ doing it this way since the airplanes are finished by the BBJ company, which is a subsidiary of Boeing, and not some third party.

Mike.


User currently offlineGWB From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2083 times:

There are plenty of reasons why buyers prefer a VIP aircraft built from scratch, and not converted from an airliner. It's much less of a compromise and specific systems such as upgraded water and air con are then possible. The BBJ also has strengthened gear, great fuel capacity etc.

ContinentalFan - BBJs are still completed by third parties such as Raytheon - Boeing supplies them 'green' but doesn't complete any thermselves. This has actually been the bigest problem area with them, as many of the completion companies had no experience with aircraft of this size.


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2066 times:

Exactly. The BBJ is designed to be an executive jet from the gear up. A reconfigured 737NG simply wouldn't be able to perform like the BBJ. A reconfigured 752 wouldn't be able to perform like a BBJ3.

Woodsboy,

Why would Boeing sell a BBJ rather than reconfigure a current airliner? For one big reason. $$$$$$$$ They will get a hell of a lot more money selling a BBJ than reconverting a current airliner. For one thing, Boeing may not even get the contract for doing such work. Also, with so few of them ordered and delivered. At last count, I think Boeing had sold 75+ BBJ/2's. This number of aircraft has far exceeded what Boeing even dreamed of selling. To Boeing, the BBJ has been more successful than they ever dreamed of.

By the way, I STILL want a BBJ and BBJ3, thank you very much!!!!  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineDesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7780 posts, RR: 16
Reply 14, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2054 times:

Not to mention that there was a preexisting market just waiting for Gulfstream and Bombardier to get the G-V and Global Express to market. Boeing had a huge advantage with the BBJ, the lead time was much shorter than the Gulfstream or Canadair.


Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
User currently offlineRJ_Delta From Chile, joined Oct 2000, 1944 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2050 times:

Probably the possible Boeing BBJ3 could be a Boeing 757. The Boeing 757 has lower cost and excellent range also is perfect to be a Presidential Plane for a lot of country.

RJ_Delta.


User currently offlineSetjet From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 1119 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2032 times:

"Regardless of whether Boeing actually develops and markets a VIP/Exec jet based on the 757- you can still get a 757 and have an aftermarket company configure it any way you like. VIP versions of just about every variant out there already exist- from 727-100s with new engines and winglets to MD-87s to A340s and 747-400s. Why would Boeing need to waste its time developing these products for one specific type when anyone with the money can get anything made into a VIP aircraft?"

As someone said before: They reason they do it is Big Bug$! It's strange how Boeing is desperately looking to open new markets, so a 757BBJ is simply the consequent next step.
I like their conservative approach, first look at the feasability of the BBJ, share the risks with GE, than the BBJ2, now it seems like they are really going for the 757! What's next? 777?


User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1997 times:

Here's my 3 cents into the wind...

1) The conservative (and likely) annoucement: it's a 737-based BBJ using the 739 fuselage length (and a slight reduction in range down to about 5,000nm)

2) The off-the-wall: a 767-100 or -200 fuselage length with the -400 undercarriage and wing so it's got fantastic, 8,500nm range or so.

Steve


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1980 times:

Silevin,

The BBJ3 is based on the 757-200 platform. That is established already. Whether there will be a BBJ4, 5, etc....is yet to be determined and rather unlikely. The standard performance of the next sized aircraft to be considered would have more than enough range in most applications. The 762ER (BBJ4) would have well over 7,000+ nm range without further modifications. And the 772LR (BBJ5) wouldn't need anything done since it can go damn near 9,000 already.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't want to see them though!!!!  Smile


User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 1945 times:

Boeing nut:

I take it there's no other details on the BBJ3 then? It just seems odd to choice the 757 platform, unless it's because they are going to heigher takeoff weights for long range.

I would think that there's a potential market for the 8,500nm range aircraft that still has a fairly low ramp weight -- that way, you can go anywhere non-stop, yet still operate out of smaller airports like SNA when it's helpful.

Steve


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (12 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1943 times:

Silevin,

Unforunately, not many details of the BBJ3 hanve been made public. I believe that the 757-200 was chosen for a couple reasons. (1) It is very efficient. It doesn't cost too much more to operate per hour vs. a 737NG. (2) The aircraft performs at it's MTOW extremely well (range) versus other larger aircraft. This will save operators some money when it comes time for that ole' landing fee. (per thousand pounds) Yet they will still get to go non-stop quite a long way.

Regards


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...
Launch Confirmed - BBJ3 posted Mon Oct 16 2006 20:01:21 by Boeing Nut
Air China Launch Forbidden/Capital Pavilion Class posted Sat Nov 18 2006 06:55:33 by Jimyvr
AirTran Increases MIA-MDW; Pushes Up Launch Date posted Fri Nov 17 2006 18:55:24 by MAH4546
JetStar Launch CNS-NGO AUG'07/CNS-KIX SEP'07 posted Fri Nov 17 2006 04:22:29 by Jimyvr
WTO Dispute Over Launch Aid Renewed. posted Thu Nov 16 2006 01:41:22 by Curmudgeon
China Airlines Launch Stockholm Freighter Service posted Sat Nov 11 2006 21:45:34 by Jimyvr
JetStar To Launch Nagoya Flight posted Fri Nov 10 2006 05:33:39 by Jimyvr
ExpressJet Might Launch An "Independence Air" posted Wed Nov 8 2006 20:08:48 by Planemaker
Air Zimbabwe Launch Guangzhou Service posted Mon Nov 6 2006 06:02:13 by Jimyvr
Shanghai Air/Cathay Both Launch HKG-PVG posted Thu Nov 2 2006 18:01:09 by Jimyvr