FSPilot747 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 3599 posts, RR: 12 Posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6312 times:
The flightdeck of the 777 and the 764 are almost identical, if not, identical. The body is very similar. The 777 is slightly wider, yes, but in general, what is the difference? Why would, say, Delta by X number of 764s instead of 772s?
BA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 5983 times:
The 767-400 isn't exactly an excelent aircraft from an airline's perspective.
It does a job well done for high density domestic routes (like what Delta uses them for), but when it comes to long-haul transatlantic runs, that is when it's weaknesses start to really show up.
Compared to the A330-200, it's not much when it comes to transatlantic operations. One of the reasons is because it's a 767. Airlines love hauling as much cargo as they can on long-haul routes. The A300/A310/A330/A340 all have much larger cargo bays which are capable of carrying much more cargo than the narrower 767.
This is where the 767's biggest weakness takes its toll.
Another reason is economically, it's not as efficient as the A330-200. Range is also relatively limited on the 764. It can do transatlantic runs of course, but it can't do transpacific runs which is a big limitation.
Best example to show the 767's weakness is KLM. Currently KLM has many 767-300ERs. They operate an all Boeing fleet, no Airbuses. However recently they placed an order for 6 A330-200s. The reason for this is simply because the A330-200 is a better aircraft.
Even officials at Boeing admit that the A330-200 is a better aircraft and it truly is.
Now that doesn't mean the 767-400ER is a bad aircraft. It's still a great aircraft and it does an excelent job when it comes to high density domestic routes like how Delta uses them.
Continental uses them on long-haul routes, and they seem to be doing fine.
However, the biggest mistake Boeing did lately in my opinion is shelving the 767-400ERX which would have a fuel tank in the tail, which would boost it's range very close to the A330-200s.
Many airlines have expressed interest for this longer range 767-400, however Boeing decided to shelve it. Biggest mistake ever.
With the 767-400ERX, Boeing can steal a lot of A330 orders.
I am sure KLM would have waited for the 767-400ERX instead of the A330-200 if Boeing decided to continue with it.
There is still a chance that it might be developed though. Boeing simply shelved the project.
I'm assuming when the economy improves and air travel returns to normal, Boeign will go ahead and develop the 767-400ERX. This will be a big score for Boeing for sure.
There was a discussion about the 767-400ERX a couple days ago. You might want to search for it.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran