Cody From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1932 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3310 times:
There are a lot of rumors floating around. The more recent one is the 767's will be staying and there may be a possible swap with Asiana to get more 767's. The swap would be A330's for 767's. Again just rumor, not fact. Recently two 757's were sent to storage though.
Ouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4608 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (12 years 1 month 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3307 times:
4 767-200ERs are currently part of the package of other Boeings in which US Airways wishes to have those leases terminated. Siegel has stated that they are looking into the possibility of acquiring 767-300s from Asiana or BA (brand new ones in storage). However, Airbus is negotitating to maintain the 330 in the US Airways fleet...which by all accounts will happen. However, the entire Boeing fleet is up for "sale"...they are ready to dump the Boeings and pick up parked Airbuses.
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4344 posts, RR: 35
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3088 times:
Na > The division between scrapped and written off is quite sketchy... N654US was damaged beyond repair by the engine fire but I am sure it would have been repaired if the 2nd hand value was higher than the damage costs, but the older 200-series aren't popular nowadays.
While for instance the 2 WTC 767 aircraft and the Lauda above Thailand, are obvious write offs, the TACA which overran in Guatemala City could also have been repaired, although against too high costs.
For the same reason, old 727s can already be declared 'written off' if the blow a few tyres.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
FlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (12 years 1 month 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3079 times:
Well, N654US technically won't be the first 767 to be scrapped. It was officially written-off by Boeing, USAir & the insurance company. But N654US is the most complete 767 to be scrapped. Per Bill Harms' website, the airframe is up for auction by Dovebid.com. Anyone want a slightly used fuselage? Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
USAFHummer From United States of America, joined May 2000, 10685 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (12 years 1 month 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2942 times:
I doubt it TEDSKI, the 333's are serving their role as transatlantic birds very well, and theres no justification really to add a variant of the 333 into the fleet...plus their financial situation now probably wont permit any major new additions for a while...
Chief A.net college football stadium self-pic guru
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8147 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (12 years 1 month 21 hours ago) and read 2708 times:
Thing is, the A333 is quite a big plane, a lot bigger than the 762. If they get rid of all the Boeings, that leaves quite a big gap betweeb the A321 and A333. So maybe they will get some A332s in the future.
Actually, Airbus (and Boeing) really need to pull their finger out and build a 767 / A300 250-seat widebody. That is the most neglected sector of the commercial aircraft market. This could be Boeing's way back to favour, instead of dicking around with gas-guzzling so-called Sonic Cruisers which will save a completely useless 30 minutes in the air, when the real problems are (a) getting to and from the airport (b) sitting in a taxiway queue for 40 minutes and (c) circling over the destination for 30 minutes. Build a mega efficient widebody!
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
John From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1374 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (12 years 1 month 14 hours ago) and read 2661 times:
I recall 767-300s have been considered in the past, to supplement the -200s. Then in came the Wolf/Gangwal team, and of course, the AIRBUS deal! I understand the 777 was actually evaluated and considered, for a time. In the long run, I would guess the 777 was cost prohibitive. The 333 could serve basically, the same purpose, albeit less range, for about half the price?