VC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3141 posts, RR: 13 Posted (4 years 9 months 4 days ago) and read 6912 times:
As an admitted novice in this area, is a 787 closer to a 767 type or a 777 type? It seems like Boeing is thinking of offering a 767 as a place holder until the late 787 can be delivered. Is that because 767's are similar in size and fuel consuption (economics) or that the 777 would be a better 787 place holder due to size and economics, range-- but the 777 lines are cranking while 767 lines could use some action?
Also (100% pure guess) let's say Boeing had to whip up 100 767's to fill try and pacify the angry airlines until the 787 is flying and Boeing's pumping out 787's: what happens to those 100 767's which will be fairly new? It does not seem like a hot model anymore (however I would love one for myself) who would take those 767/777's?
Last question....promise! If one flew a new 767 or 777 from JFK to LHR (really topline answer please) vs a new similarly loaded 787, what are the ballpark savings in fuel, noise reduction and other promised 787 miracles? key breakthroughs.
The A380 is somewhat easier, it's almost twice as large as any aircraft with 2 nose to tail decks and anyone can see that. It's also has some of the most advanced avionics in the world, etc..
Thanks billions & billions!!!
The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 32270 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6529 times:
The 787 started life as a direct 767-300ER/767-400ER replacement, but airlines wanted something bigger, so it now effectively replaces the 767-300ER, 767-400ER, 777-200 and 777-200ER in Boeing's product portfolio.