AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2430 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3466 times:
Inadequate range and cargo capacity compared to its' main competitor, the A330-200. With only about 5200nm range compared to the A332's 6400nm and a narrower cross-section limiting its below deck payload, this aircraft just doesn't appeal to enough operators. It was ideal for Continental's and Delta's domestic routes, replacing similar-range trijets but doesn't have the legs for most transoceanic runs. Boeing really needed to have the -ERX version with more powerful engines and fuel capacity to bring it back to 763 range but that version's engines were tied to the aborted 747X development so it was cancelled, as well. The smaller 170' wingspan also hurts compared to the A332's more substantial span. In designing it too much to be a domestic DC-10/L-1011 replacement, Boeing crippled it's chances with most carriers who wanted more. Saleswise, so far, I'd have to say that, yes, it's a failure, at least compared to the A332. A case of too little, too late for Boeing. Delta and Continental are very happy with theirs, if that's any consolation.
JBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3163 posts, RR: 20 Reply 2, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3458 times:
Rick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 52 Reply 3, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3395 times:
The airlines of TUI (including Britannia, Hapag Lloyd and Corsair) are in the process of evaluating a fleet renewal, with an order for over 50 aircraft expected in the next 5 to 8 months.
The current contenders are a "group-wide" A320/A321/A332 fleet, or a 737NG/764ER fleet.
Whilst the Airbus is rumoured to be the current favoured option, we can always hope that Boeing may win
I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
BR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3380 times:
I think that Noel Forgeard has what it takes. It SEEMS like all of the airlines are dumping their boeings for airbuses. Airbus even wants to bring themselves to the states. The reason I would disagree with that is it would put Americans out of work, and I don't want that.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2430 posts, RR: 10 Reply 6, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3372 times:
Username: Rick767
"The airlines of TUI (including Britannia, Hapag Lloyd and Corsair) are in the process of evaluating a fleet renewal, with an order for over 50 aircraft expected in the next 5 to 8 months.
The current contenders are a "group-wide" A320/A321/A332 fleet, or a 737NG/764ER fleet.
Whilst the Airbus is rumoured to be the current favoured option, we can always hope that Boeing may win."
Thanks for the news.. This would be a badly needed boost for the 767 program, if it happens. On the downside, you mean Hapag Lloyd, a significant operator of 737-800s, is also considering going Airbus?
Spacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2744 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3327 times:
The U.S. military will likely order at least 10 764s in the near future as the new airframe for its j-stars and AWACS programs. Originally both jobs were to be done by one airframe, but recent tests show that two fleets are still needed, and that the 764 is the right sized plane for the jobs. Though it is a small order, I'm sure Boeing will welcome it.
Flyingbronco05 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3838 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3301 times:
Airlines that currently operate the 767-2's and 3's my look at the 4 in the near future to replace the aging 2's and 3's. The airlines with 777's may also look at the 4 due to the cockpit commonality.
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4741 posts, RR: 42 Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3294 times:
I have flown the 764 from EWR > GIG, it was 10+ hours, I do not consider this to be limited range. I agree for airlines that want the plane to fly their main longhauls, the a330 is a better solution, but for airlines that are already all boeing, and have 777's etc, the 764 is perfect.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2430 posts, RR: 10 Reply 10, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3268 times:
This doesn't sound bad though you didn't say how many miles (can we assume over 500mph cruise speed?). I got my 5200nm range spec from a reference on Boeing I have. If it's wrong, please chime in. It's worth Boeing keeping it in the catalog while other type 767 operators mull fleet renewal. With the promise of the additional orders mentioned above, it may yet turn out to be more than a flop.
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4741 posts, RR: 42 Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3251 times:
For Continental, the 764 flies amongst other routes:
EWR > HNL
IAH > HNL
EWR > GIG
IAH > GIG
EWR > MANY EUROPEAN CITIES
For US carriers, the only routes that the 764 would fly that it cannot fly are ASIA routes, and maybe West coast > deep into Europe flights, which are normally filling 777's, so there isnt really a problem.
There is no doubt that based on range and cargo, the A330 is a stronger plane, but for the route structures of many of the US carriers, they do not really need that extra capability enough to operate a mixed fleet.
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6195 posts, RR: 13 Reply 12, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3153 times:
Hmmm. The longer I've been a member of A.net, the more I realize topics tend to repeat themselves. Here are two links to earlier threads with this same topic:
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 13, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3141 times:
I'm a big A330 fan but there is one advantage the 764 has...
The A330 requires "large" aircraft gates, just like the 777 and 747.
The 764 can fit into normal sized gates, like the 76[2,3], L-1011, and DC-10 can/could.
When I sit around thinking about my dream fleet, I'd really want to use A330s extensively for high-load domestic routes but sometimes I wonder about gate availability at all those airports.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 15, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3045 times:
Heh, no not in general, but if I were Delta or CO or UA, I'd have just as much success with the A330 as they do with the 764 or domestic 777s, wouldn't I?
KFRG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2999 times:
Gigneil,
Look at it this way, really, the A330 is seen as too "heavy" and carries too much "capacity" for many of the US Domestic routes. I know operators like DL also operates a/c like the 777 and MD-11 on such routes as MCO-ATL (A very popular one for large a/c), but these aircraft are only operating for the purpose of transit. Look at the East Cost-West Coast sector. You don't see many flights larger than a B767, and the majority of those are operated by smaller -200 series. Frequency rather than size is what customers really want.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 17, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2984 times:
Dash8King From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 2742 posts, RR: 12 Reply 18, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2967 times:
Well most airlines aren't having success with large aircraft on domestic routes at the time. Most are going to an international destination after the domestic stop.
HlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 7 Reply 19, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2973 times:
I flew a 767-400 on the ATL- MCO route with Delta. I thought it was a really nice place and it is a rocket on takeoff.
AA could be a future candidate for it and possibly some Asian airlines who would run domestic services like Japan Airlines from say Tokyo to Nagoya etc where the route might not be big enough for the 747-400D
Jhooper From United States of America, joined Dec 2001, 6195 posts, RR: 13 Reply 20, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2949 times:
I flew a 767-400 on the ATL- MCO route with Delta. I thought it was a really nice place and it is a rocket on takeoff.
I could be wrong, but it seems like the 764 is a bit underpowered as compared to the 763, esp. the 763ER.
Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something.
Flyingbronco05 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3838 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2941 times:
One advantage of the 764 is that it has the seating capacity near that of the -200, but range of the -300.
GE From Singapore, joined Mar 2000, 320 posts, RR: 7 Reply 22, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2936 times:
Hi Jhooper:
Yes, you're right in saying the B764 is underpowered compared to the b763er. However I think it is only underpowered at high gross weights. ATL-MCO is about 400-500nm, well within the range of the b764er's 5645 nm. It would surely be a rocket at takeoff because it is much lighter with less fuel. Twins have to be able to maintain altitude/climb even at MTOW with 1 engine out, so naturally, when less than MTOW, it would perform better.
Most planes are 'rockets' at takeoff when they are light, even the A343.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 23, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2925 times:
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7724 posts, RR: 55 Reply 24, posted (10 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2885 times:
Flying Bronco, go around.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
25 Rafabozzolla: Actually Jeremy CO nonstops to Brazil are IAH-GRU and EWR-GRU, GIG is served one stop out of GRU.
26 Aamd11: Maybe Flying Bronco was comparing the 764 to the A330 family, seating of the -200 range of the -300. Doesnt make sense otherwise. Seating of a 200 ran
28 Artsyman: Rafabozzolla I flew nonstop from EWR>GIG, it is just due to loads that the route now stops in Sao Paolo first. Flyingbronco The 764 has a much, much l
29 Fritzi: ROTFLMAO Cedarjet! Flyingbronco05, either you must have been smoking up or your tired because its probably waaay past your bed time.
30 Hkgspotter1: Flop or total flop is the question. Same can be said for the 753 and the 736.
31 JBLUA320: Do you think Boeing is trying to fill in EVERY single gap available to them against Airbus? In other words, we know Boeing is losing a huge amount of
32 Artsyman: Flop or total flop is the question This is where it becomes contentious, the 764 was requested by Delta and Continental, and was made for them. The pr
33 N79969: The 764 is a bigger success than the 342. 764 operators are keeping their planes; 342 operators are not.
34 RickB: I dont think its fair to say the 764 is a flop, it was a niche aircraft aimed at 2 airlines (Delta and Continental) with those two carriers it has ach
35 N79969: RickB, Actually I was not aiming at Airbus per se. Many of the guys who like to sneer about the 764s poor sales are loath to speak about the 342. I ac
36 RickB: N79969 - everyone including aircraft manufacturers drops a clanger once in a while RickB
37 Cedarjet: Interestingly enough, the 764 is identical in almost every way to the original 777. Boeing offered a stretched 763 to everyone and they all said NO, W
38 EA CO AS: Why do Airbus fans constantly feel the need to start these "Is Boeing's (insert plane here) a flop?" threads?
39 N79969: As far as economics go, you have to look whether the incremental revenues of developing the 764 (from an existing platform) exceeded the incremental c
40 RickB: The only downside to the 764 I can see (and I could well be wrong here) is that I was under the impression that it had a different cockpit to previous
41 N79969: RickB, Actually I think the 764 has a common-type rating with the other 767s and not the 777. The LCD layout is also present in the 737NG. I think the
42 Artsyman: Actually I think the 764 has a common-type rating with the other 767s No, it is on its own. 757 and 767 share ratings, the 777 has its own rating and
43 Rick767: Artsyman, That is not quite the case, the 767-400 can be added as an endorsement to a 757/767 type rating and pilots can then fly all those types. Con
44 Artsyman: RickB, my mistake, I was sure that I had read Gene (777gk) saying that is was a different rating, but I went back to read the thread at: http://www.ai
45 Rick767: Jeremy, Not sure of the "conversion" requirement. I know with the Airbus once you have A320 you've got the 319/320/321 automatically. The 330/340 are
46 BWIA 772: I think that the 767 market should be replaced with planes that arepart of the 777 family. I dont that much about engineering and stuff like that but
47 Gigneil: Any such 777 derivative planes would be too heavy... thy have substantially more wingspan than would be needed, and are a tough squeeze into 767 size
48 BWIA 772: Ok thanx so is it possible to build an aircraft that has similar flight deck and other systems common to that of the 777 or even the 737NG fo rthe 76
49 Lehpron: As I recall correctly, the 764 was intended to replace the aging jumbo trijets that dominated that part of the market, why and if it really was a 'flo
50 Gigneil: The 764 does have similarity to both the 737NG and the 777 in the cockpit. You can choose display formats that are 777 like or classic 767 like on the
51 CALPilot: At CO I qualified on the -400, with a 4 hr. CBT course, a 4 hour Sim ride, and a line check with a Check Airman. The Type Rating in my pocket is just
52 NY-JFK-LGA: I personally do not think that the 764 should be considered being in the same class as the A-332. The 332 to me is much larger than the 764, maybe not
53 Artsyman: CO manages to do EWR>HNL nonstop without any problems. Pilots all have different opinions about everything, that's life. In the last few weeks, I spok
54 Gigneil: NW is going to fly the A330 to HNL? Exciting! I thought the 764 was originally designed to do HNL-ATL nonstop, in fact the Boeing website lists it as
55 Aq737: I do not think its Boeings problem about ATL-HNL. I think that the 764 can handle that. I think the dropping of the route had to do with the crew prob
56 Gigneil: They never did have the Biz Elite product... and they ran that route for a _long_ time. Did the domestic-config L-1011s have crew rest areas? Or is th
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3163 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2744 posts, 
From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 2742 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Mar 2000, 320 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
