Avion346
Topic Author
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:36 pm

Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:34 am

With such a great range and small-ish capacity, appears to be the perfect plane for some lower density intercontinental routes. Seems like a lot of really neat smaller markets could have been opened up in the past. Why hasn't this aircraft been as widely used as others? Is it a question of profitability? You get the capacity of a 752 in a widebody configuration, plus almost twice the range. Thoughts?
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:38 am

762ER doesnt have anywhere near "twice" the range of a 752.

Airlines have found that it's typically more cost efficient to fly the 763ER (and later, the A332) due to the smaller per-seat cost, only marginally higher aggregate trip cost, and the fact that most hubs and/or high-yielding international gateways can easily fill 200-250 seats.



[Edited 2003-11-10 20:41:15]
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Avion346
Topic Author
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:36 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:45 am

762ER: 6,600 nm range
752: 3,900 nm range
 
desertjets
Posts: 7588
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 3:12 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:48 am

The one market where the 767-200 continues to dominate is on the premium transcontinental market in the US, with United and American continuing to run a 3-class product with high frequency.

Continental is probably the only airline now to be operating 767-200ERs on intercontinental flights. However they have a decidedly different strategy than the other majors. They are far more aggressive in opening and developing transatlantic markets. By having a mix of 757s, 767-200s, 767-400s, and 777s, they are able to open service to smaller 1st tier and 2nd tier destinations and grow or shrink seat and cargo capacity as demand fluctuates and markets mature.

Now if you are a United, American, or Delta and only serve larger 1st tier markets the, a mix of 767-300s and 777s makes lots of sense given the lower operating costs per seat-mile vis a vis the 762.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
 
Avion346
Topic Author
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:36 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:49 am

In addition, why would Continental fly 752's across the Atlantic when they could fly widebody 762ER's with about the same capacity. I think its 170 in two classes for the 752 and 181 in three classes for the 762ER.
 
OD720
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 6:46 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:58 am

Malev uses the 762ER to fly to the US. I agree with Avion346 and have brought it up this here in the forums before. The 762 and A310 are great for small airlines that need a small capacity long range services, such as airlines in East Europe and the CIS.
I meant to ask this before, is the economics of these smaller airliners different from the larger jets? I mean, is it not economical to use small planes on such long routes?

Also, KrasAir of Russia is considering the 762 too.
 
Guest

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:07 am

Avion346,

You have to remember that continental doesn't offer 3-class service. Even so your numbers might not be far off, but I'm pretty sure the operating costs of a 752 are going to be cheaper than a 762 on, say, EWR-DUB.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6460
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:13 am

I remember when SAS briefly flew the 762ER SIN-BKK-CPH... quickly replaced by the 763... The 762ERs are very nice to fly on... none of that claustrophobic tube effect... But, for very incremental costs, you can get more loads on the 763ER... Might aswell reduce the load of the 763ER on some flights than get 762ERs... you can fill the seats when the range is not required.

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:15 am

why would Continental fly 752's across the Atlantic when they could fly widebody 762ER's with about the same capacity.

Their int'l 752 has lower trip costs, doesnt need much cargo to turn a profit, and is catered toward low-premium/high-leisure markets.

Their 762ERs have higher trip costs, which is negated by their ability to carry significantly more premium pax (total, & relative to steerage) and cargo.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15699
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:08 pm

The 762 was effectively replaced by the 763. The overwhelming majority of 762's were built in the 80's. Once the 763 entered service, it became the standard 767.

I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
COSPN
Posts: 1540
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 6:33 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:42 pm

We asked why it could not fly GUM-LAX Nonstop and they told us there we no crew rest areas for long haul flights.. Sad
 
lymanm
Posts: 1100
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2001 2:30 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 7:16 pm

While not scheduled at the moment, Air Canada will still sub a 762ER over the Atlantic on secondary routes (YYZ-MAN, YYZ-ZRH, etc) occasionally. It was used extensively across the Atlantic in the mid-late 90s, back when they were profitable. Coincidence?

Hmmm....ok, so it's a spurious connection!
buhh bye
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:12 pm

The 767-200 production line was reopened in 1998 when Continental ordered 10 airframes to complete its longhaul fleet (widebody) renewal program, with B777, B767-400, and B767-200 replacing the 747-100/200 and DC10-30 fleet. Continental's 767-200's have 777 style interiors and new avionics.

ContinentalEWR
 
9V-SPF
Posts: 1340
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 6:42 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:41 pm

Continental is probably the only airline now to be operating 767-200ERs on intercontinental flights.

US Airways and Malev (as OD720 stated above) use them across the atlantic, too.

I agree with those who stated that there are just a few airlines who would need the range of the 762ER. On all other routes, the 767-300 and the A330 have proved to be very reliable and efficient aircraft even if they aren´t filled up all the time.

Daniel
 
AA777MIA
Posts: 671
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 10:30 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 10:02 pm

What airline has the most 767-200ER's....??
 
9V-SPF
Posts: 1340
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 6:42 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 10:12 pm

What airline has the most 767-200ER's....??

My guess would be US Airways. They currently have 11 in service, as far as I know.

 
kingsford
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2003 6:26 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Tue Nov 11, 2003 10:34 pm

I flew QF flights SIN-ADL and BNE-SIN back in the late 80's : Long Haul yet low density flights. They were brand new planes back then. Those flights were fed by the Western Europe-Singapore QF flights and I remember the transit times in Changi were very convenient even though we were changing planes.

I think the 762 is the most beautiful of the 767 range.
 
JUANR
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2000 12:37 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Wed Nov 12, 2003 3:39 am

I think that right now Avianca is using a 767-200ER in its daily BOG-MAD-BOG flight
Bogotá: 2600 Metros Más Cerca De Las Estrellas; Vamos por los XVII Juegos Nacionales!!!!!!!!!
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Wed Nov 12, 2003 3:41 am

What airline has the most 767-200ER's....??

AA was the largest customer (17 ordered) and continues own the largest fleet (20), but not sure how many of those are still in service.








[Edited 2003-11-11 19:41:59]
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
OD720
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 6:46 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Wed Nov 12, 2003 3:48 am

I think AA has some of its 762s stored at the moment. Also, some of the ERs were upgraded from the standard 762s

CO's order of 10 762ERs a few years ago probably puts them in the lead.
 
User avatar
iahcsr
Posts: 3726
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 1999 2:59 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:33 am

For the record, CO's BisFirst Configured 757's are 16/156=172, 762's 25/149=174.
Working Hard, Flying Right Friendly....
 
Avion346
Topic Author
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:36 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:03 am

I would think that since the seating capacities are very similar, it would be a question of operating cost. Thanks for all the info.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:21 am

The aggregate costs are obviously much lower for the 757.. as it's lighter and uses less fuel.

The per-seat costs are rather difficult to compare since CO uses them on vastly different missions: the former- medium capacity, low yield, low cargo; the latter - medium capacity, high yield, higher cargo.

Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:28 am

Its all about margin........it costs very little extra to purchase/lease/operate a 763 over the 762, and the extra capacity of the 763 is made available to the airlines. While its true that the 762er does have a bit more range than the 763er, 767s are rarely used for very long haul routes (especially since the 777 and long-haul Airbus airliners have become available) where range becomes a major issue.

That being said, I do think that the 767-200er is a very good airplane for thin long-haul routes.......a very reasonable number of passengers, enough space for a full service international standard business class cabin and adequate cargo capacity all add up to a versatile aircraft; I fly very often between BRU and EWR on CO (both in businessfirst and economy) and found the 762, with its updated interior, a superior aircraft as far as comfort and CO's employees seem to be very taken with the -200s as well. (I prefer it to the 764 now flying that route.) (As mentioned above, CO has a different strategy with its fleet, and wanted the 762s to operate routes that could not support the 764/777 but still offer wide-body service and cargo capacity). If Boeing would add a bit more range, and make some other updates to the 762, they could have an ideal aircraft for airlines to use on unserved, thin long-haul routes through out the world.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:15 am

If Boeing would add a bit more range, and make some other updates to the 762, they could have an ideal aircraft for airlines to use on unserved, thin long-haul routes through out the world.

..or, they could launch the 7E7 and let it do that job (supposedly) a heck of a lot more efficiently  Big grin
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3118
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:23 am


I agree with ConcordeBoy, it would be nice to have a 7E7 variant to directly replace the 767-200 so the airlines could choose a widebody aircraft.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:25 am

so the airlines could choose a widebody aircraft

huh?  Confused
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3118
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:32 am


So the airlines can replace their 767-200's with a widebody like the proposed 7E7 or a more advanced 767-300ER rather than a 757 or the like.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:39 am

considering that the 757 is scheduled to end production (the same cannot be said for the 767)... the likelihood of anyone replacing 762ER with 757, on anything other than transcons, is negligible.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
haveric
Posts: 1219
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 9:31 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 11:31 am

US has ordered the A332 to replace their 762s.... They are scheduled for deliver in 2005 and 2006, I think...
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3118
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 11:55 am


QF has ordered A330's to replace 767's as well.

The point of my previous posts was to point out that I hope airlines replace their 767-200's with other widebody aircraft like the A330 or 767-300Er's rather than 757 & A321 derivatives or other narrowbody type aircraft.
 
AM744
Posts: 1439
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 11:05 pm

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:24 pm

Aeromexico uses them on the daily MEX-CDG MEX-MAD runs. As strange as it may seem.
 
AWspicious
Posts: 2780
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2001 7:47 am

RE: Why Isn't The 762ER More Widely Used?

Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:19 pm

Air Canada's website shows 15 B762s in the fleet, of which 8 are ERs. I think I recall counting 10 ERs at one time.
AC sometimes use (used?) 762s on the YYZ-POS route. Don't know if they were ERs or not, though. That route is currently (also) served by A319s.
Malev and LOT both operate 762s into YYZ. I can't think of others, if any, who fly the type into Toronto.
From conversations I've had with AC flight attendants, they enjoy working on the 762s more so than the 763s... For a variety of reasons. I also like the the type because of it's appearance as the "sports car version" of the full size 767-300.

a.w.
Nevermind political correctness - Envision using your turn signals!

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos