747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:39 am

With the Boeing 787 dreamliner replacing the 767, it made me think in ten years or so the 777 will need a replacement. I would think a enlarge 787 body with a 21 ft wide cabin, 240 + wing span, new tail and 0.86/87 cruising speed. I believe this design would be a good ideal. What do you think Boeing should design as a 777 replacement.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:45 am

The B787 can be stretched to cover the B777-200. Eventually, a replacement will be needed for the B777-300 and the B747. Boeing have studied several possible designs. In my opinion, the most promising of the studies has been for 270inch circular cross section with a an internal cabin width very close to the 21 feet you suggest.
 
pensacolaguy
Posts: 484
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 9:41 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:45 am

The 777 is a fairly new airplane. And 10 years from now it will still be flying. Maybe 30+ years from now, they will replace it with something. Depending on the world economic conditions. I think they would probably replace it with their Blended Wing design that they strapped, a while back ago. Or maybe a four engine 777  Smile Can't know what the Boeing designers have in mind...
 
DeltaWings
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 4:06 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:55 am

Quoting Zvezda (reply 1):
The B787 can be stretched to cover the B777-200



I think Boeing will want to replace the whole 777 line with a complete new line. I don't think Boeing will combine the 767 and 777 replacement in one line, which would mean streching the 787 to fully replace the 772 aswell.


Quoting 747400sp (reply 0):
I would think a enlarge 787 body with a 21 ft wide cabin


Yes, the 777 replacement should keep the same fuselage width, which would mean having it wider than the 787.


~DeltaWings
Homer: Marge, it takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen.
 
na
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:14 am

Its very, very unlikely the 777 will become such an Evergreen Bestseller as the 747. The odds a clearly against it.

1. the 787 will eventually make the 772 obsolete
2. Boeing needs to bring a new top-of-the-line aircraft to replace the venerable 747 past 2015 even if the 747 Adv. becomes reality.
3. Streamlining down to three families is anyway the plan at Chicago/Seattle, and that will lead to an aircraft that will be bigger than a 777, but smaller than the A380, to cover the market niche from something slightly smaller than the 773 up to something slightly smaller than the A380.

Under these impressions I expect Boeing to have a new top-model in service around 2015, terminating the 747 and the 777 line. The 747 will have become the airliner with the longest production-span ever by then. By that time Boeing will have learnt a lot from the 787 as well as from the A380 to create a fantastic new aircraft.
Hopefully it´ll be a Quad.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:06 am

Quoting NA (reply 4):
Its very, very unlikely the 777 will become such an Evergreen Bestseller as the 747. The odds a clearly against it.


I don't think this is necessarily the case. Boeing will have to update the line and incorporate new technologies, but it will fundamentally still be a 777 with plenty of systems commonality. You could see a A350-like program that extensively modifies the 777 fuselage for the purpose of weight reduction. Widebodyphotog mentioned that Boeing had already studied the possibility of replacing the fuselage fore and aft of the wings with a composite fuselage and is considering running with this after the 787 EIS.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
Thrust
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 12:17 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:24 am

I think a 777 replacement is way too early to even begin considering right now. Boeing is generating huge sales with 773ER, and they have just developed the 772LR. The 777 currently is the most efficient aerofoil in the sky. I don't see a need to begin considering a replacement for at least another decade.
Fly one thing; Fly it well
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:33 am

My first impression was that it may be kind of early, since it first flew in 1994. Although the more I think about it, there is an approximate 15 year spilt between all-new planes. So the time to start thinking about a 777-replacement is now, though it may not roll out until about 2015.

Why replace it at all, and with what? Replacement implies a type of growth, Boeing claims the VLA market too small even for Airbus, so why bother replacing 777, a plane that can take the pax loads of a 747 for another 10 years? I think there may/will be a 774, just a 773 with Trent 1000 type engines for the range issue. I think expanding an already successful plane is better than doing it to one that has been loosing sales, i.e. 747(/767 tanker deal). That line should stop altogether.

Do you folks realize how Airbus created Boeing's market? They created a gap to fill.  Laugh out loud

Quoting Zvezda (reply 1):
In my opinion, the most promising of the studies has been for 270inch circular cross section with a an internal cabin width very close to the 21 feet you suggest.


I've seen that plane you speak of, it was in an AVST magazine, I forgot when but it was at least two years ago. It had a funny name model #762830, closer relation to 777 at the time, it was what Boeing could have built had the A380 market been bigger. It was instead of a double deck a single deck with same passenger load, 12-seat abreast with 4 engines. I don't know if it was a wider cross-section or a perfect circle, maybe that one shape that Boeing patented for a smaller vehicle concept (what ppl rumor here as a 737 replacement called 797) might have had its origins from.

[Edited 2005-02-21 20:44:26]
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13396
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:50 am

in ten years or so the 777 will need a replacement.

It will? Sorry - I just don't see it.

In 20, perhaps - but not ten.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
Byrdluvs747
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:25 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:56 am

I'm sure we'll see the 777 eventually morph into the 777Adv, and even sooner if the 747 Adv is dropped.

Can or will GE make huge bleedless engines?
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:05 am

The 787 technology will be used as the footprint for all Boeing jetliners for the foreseable future, including replacements for the 777, 737NG, 747, etc. A entirely new line of aircraft will come from this technology, replaceing all current Boeing models at some point. They will be sized not to compete with each other, but to meet customer needs while trying to defeat Airbus offerings.
One Nation Under God
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:16 am

Can or will GE make huge bleedless engines?

Making a bleedless engine is EASIER than making one with bleed air, not the other way around.

N
 
747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 5:27 am

Remember the 767 was 20 years old when the 787 was introduce as the 7E7, and younger than that, when the sonicrusier was introduce. The 787 was design from the sonicrusier. In 10 years the 777 will be 20 years old, so it will be time for a replacement study.
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 7:16 am

Quoting NA (reply 4):
an aircraft that will be bigger than a 777, but smaller than the A380, to cover the market niche from something slightly smaller than the 773 up to something slightly smaller than the A380... Hopefully it´ll be a Quad.


It may be both twin and quad, sharing same fuselage but with different wings. I still see it 777-based, unless it is too small for 500+ seats. But if 380 sells at least as Airbus predicts, then Boeing may build its own VLA, leaving future "777 replacement" to be for sure still an 777-based twin. As for "777 not being such an Evergreen Bestseller as the 747" - 747 was both size and range monopoly, which was never the case for 777. Still, it is 777 the fastest selling widebody in history...
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 7:26 am

Quoting NA (reply 4):
Its very, very unlikely the 777 will become such an Evergreen Bestseller as the 747.


The 777 has sold as many examples as the 744 (the best selling 747 variant), and in less time. Though I would bet anything the 744 grossed more profit

Quoting RIX (reply 13):
It may be both twin and quad, sharing same fuselage but with different wings.


Boeing will never build a quad again, unless they can't help it. A quad 777 replacement wouldn't cut any cake for Boeing

Quoting Lehpron (reply 7):
I think there may/will be a 774, just a 773 with Trent 1000 type engines for the range issue.


The Trent 1000 wouldn't get even the lightest 777 off the ground much less a 773 stretch  Confused

Quoting NA (reply 4):
By that time Boeing will have learnt a lot from the 787 as well as from the A380 to create a fantastic new aircraft.
Hopefully it´ll be a Quad.


Why? The economic case against quads is proven, unless you can't help it, twins = more money.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 8:49 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (reply 14):
Why? The economic case against quads is proven, unless you can't help it, twins = more money.


Yay for hasty generalizations.

Being quads isn't what makes the A340 not perform as well as the 777.

N
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1823
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:16 am

Quoting Gigneil (reply 15):
Being quads isn't what makes the A340 not perform as well as the 777.


Then tell me what is. It's not all, but it's a big part. The 345/346 and 772lr/773er is the quintessential comparison of twins vs quads. They are designed around the same time, have nearly the same wing area, and nearly the same capability. Is the quad design being much heavier than the twin design a coincidence?
 
Lockheed1011
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:04 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:21 am

A 777-400, -500, -600, -700, -800 & -900. The 777 is here to stay.
No 787 will replace 777, not wide enough. 787 is in its own category and 777 on a different one! That is why the 717 is out of the race, it is competing with the 737 and the 737 is killing it. Boeing knows that the competition should not be within the same company. In this case they had no other choice after taking over MD.
Let Airbus do that with the A350 against the A330/340!
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:37 am

Is the quad design being much heavier than the twin design a coincidence?

I dunno whether you do or don't know that for a fact but i wouldn't jump straight to that conclusion (unless you do know it for a fact). I speculated that it was perhaps also due to the long narrow dimensions of the A340NG vs the 777, infact i started a thread on the topic but never got a proper answer. Whilst the combined engines of the A346 weigh more than the two of the 777, i've read the wing structure can be lighter because the weight is distributed more evenly, at least that was one of the arguments for the A343. Although in the case of the A340NG's, i'd say the 4 engine design does contribute to the weight difference, i can't imagine it being 29t in the A345* case and 14t in the A346's*. If you could shed any more light on the bizarre obesity - which solely lets the A340 down - i'd very much appreciate it.

*380T MTOW version

[Edited 2005-02-22 01:39:11]
 
ckfred
Posts: 4694
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 9:57 am

Right now, a replacement for the 777 is probably the lowest of priorites for Boeing. The question now is whether a 747ADV design will sell enough planes to make the cost of building it worthwhile. Then, Boeing must start on a 737 replacement, using 787 technology, considering the number of 737s, A320 series, DC-9s, and MD-80s that will be due for replacement within the next 20 years.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:00 am

Quoting Gigneil (reply 15):
Yay for hasty generalizations.

Being quads isn't what makes the A340 not perform as well as the 777.


Speaking of hasty generalizations... where did I refer to A340/777 performance. I simply stated that twins are more efficent (in terms of economy and performance), which can be easily verified with numerous examples.

A clean-sheet aircraft for 773ER/744 replacement (as NA refered to) in quad configuration makes absolutely no sense under any circumstance.

Quoting Lockheed1011 (reply 17):
No 787 will replace 777, not wide enough. 787 is in its own category and 777 on a different one!


Not necessarily. The 787 is wider than the A346 fuselage, which seats roughly the same amount of passengers as the 773ER. 772ER replacement is definitly possible.

Quoting RJ111 (reply 18):
If you could shed any more light on the bizarre obesity - which solely lets the A340 down - i'd very much appreciate it.


I've always been under the impression that Airbus had to substantially beef-up the A346/A345 wing to accomidate the payload they wished to lift. The engineers were working around the original A330/A340 wing, which was initially optimized for a lighter payload than its competitor, the 777 wing. Therefore, the end product (the A346/A345 wing) was heavier than desired.

Notice that the A330/A340 wing is economical down to the A332, while the 777 wing isn't economical beyond the 772A. Boeing initially optimized the 777 wing for much higher payload, so when the 777LR came along, beefing the structure to 775,000 lb MTOW wasn't as difficult.

The A343 is lighter than the 772ER, but this meant a more efficent structure for the MTOW increases in the 777LR versus the A340NG.
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:34 am

Quoting NA (reply 4):
Its very, very unlikely the 777 will become such an Evergreen Bestseller as the 747. The odds a clearly against it.


That's just silly. Others have stated that it has surpassed the 744, and also, the 777 uses the latest technology. It was/is truly a technological marvel when it first rolled off in '94, and when it became popular in the late 1990s.

"Notable 777 design features include a unique fuselage cross section, Boeing's first application of fly-by-wire, an advanced technology glass flightdeck with five liquid crystal displays, comparatively large scale use of composites (10% by weight), and advanced and extremely powerful engines. The 777 was also offered with optional folding wings where the outer 6m/21ft of each would fold upwards for operations at space restricted airports."


For those of you who might argue against this: consider this...
Airlines such as UA (first that comes to mind for DC-10 ops), began retiring their DC-10's in the late 1990s, (1997-1999). They purchased 60 777s to replace the DC-10s (1970) which had been around for 30+ years. Also, look at the A320, which was certified in 1988, and began flying in '89. It is 16 years old, and is being used to replace alot of older 737s in airline fleets.
 
OB1504
Posts: 2985
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:40 am

Quoting DeltaWings (reply 3):
I think Boeing will want to replace the whole 777 line with a complete new line. I don't think Boeing will combine the 767 and 777 replacement in one line, which would mean streching the 787 to fully replace the 772 aswell.


Isn't it also replacing some 757s flown on longer routes? It would make sense to simplify everything, and have Boeing offer the 737 for short to medium haul routes and the 787 for medium to long haul routes.
 
PyroGX41487
Posts: 246
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 3:06 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:42 am

Replacing the 777 this early in the game would be completely ridiculous. With Boeing acknowledging the necessary update or replacement of the 747 line (with the 747ADV for update), I think it's pretty safe to assume the 777 will be here for a long while to come.

Firstly, the 777-200A was meant to fill a market gap Airbus created between the 767 and 747, and fortunatly, the design was created with alot of room to spare, and has the potential to even replace aging 747s. The 777-200ER jumped in range (7,000 nm or so nm, if I'm not mistaken), the 777-300 jumped in passenger capacity, and the newest generation, the 777-200LR and 777-300ER jumped in both. The -300ER is only just emerging as an ideal 744 replacement for Boeing buyers like SIA, AF, and JAL, all three of which who have the plane or have it on order. I think as we see the 744 fleets begin to age over the next five to ten years, we'll see an increase in 777-200LR/-300ER sales.

I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread that as the 777 fleet builds on itself, other models are made obsolete.

772ER ---(makes obsolete)---> 772A
772LR ---(makes obsolete)---> 772ER
773ER ---(makes obsolete)---> 773A

And so on. Pretty soon I think we'll see 772ER sales plateau and the said above trend will begin. If this happens, I believe we won't see a 777 replacement at least for another 15 to 20 years, 15 at the very SOONEST.


~ Pyro
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:45 am

Quoting OB1504 (reply 22):
Isn't it also replacing some 757s flown on longer routes?


Eh not really. The 787-3 will be the only large regional aircraft when it enters service, but it will be significantly larger than the 752. For comparison, a 752 seats about 200, whereas the -3 will seat about 300 in identical configuration.

Obviously no 1:1 replacements will take place. The 787-3 mostly replaces 762/763 (non-ER) and A300/A310. I doubt it will really catch on in North America, where the bulk of 757 market exists. The 737-900X, A321, and 737/A320 replacements will be replacing 757 in the future.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:48 am

Quoting PyroGX41487 (reply 23):
I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread that as the 777 fleet builds on itself, other models are made obsolete.


That isn't true at all!! Those aircraft serve completly different niches. Using a 773ER on 773A routes would be a huge waste of aircraft.

Quoting PyroGX41487 (reply 23):
Replacing the 777 this early in the game would be completely ridiculous


Why? The 772ER isn't going to win the huge tenders from EK and QR... why forsake those customers?

Quoting PyroGX41487 (reply 23):
Pretty soon I think we'll see 772ER sales plateau and the said above trend will begin


If we havn't already. 772ER sales slowed down significantly after 2000, and 773ER sales have constituted the bulk of new orders.

Quoting PyroGX41487 (reply 23):
I believe we won't see a 777 replacement at least for another 15 to 20 years, 15 at the very SOONEST.


The 787 could easily be that aircraft in a sheep's clothing...
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:48 am

And what about the threat the A350 poses to the 772? With similar to 787 economics, shouldn't Boeing be worried about the future of the 777 orders? Sure it won't compete with the 773 directly, but then how many airlines have the 773? Not many.

As much as I like the 777, I really don't see this plane winning many orders versus the A350.

Cheers,

PPVRA
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1823
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:09 pm

Quoting RJ111 (reply 18):
I speculated that it was perhaps also due to the long narrow dimensions of the A340NG vs the 777,


There is some weight disadvantage associated with the narrower but longer fuselage of the 340. Also, in general, Airbus planes tend to be heavier than Boeing planes if everything is equal. The larger difference between the A340NG and the 777LR is mostly attributed to the different engine configuration, IMO. Not only are the engines heavier, they also have more engine installation drag, and hence burn more fuel. Then you need more structure to hold the extra engine weight and extra fuel. The heavier the plane, the more lift you need from the wing. The more lift, the more induced drag which means more engine thrust you need. More engine thrust means more fuel burn. The 343 doesn't look as bad only because it has a much smaller wing than the 772er. Like I said before, the 340NG v 777LR is the closest twin v quad comparison you can have because they have nearly the same wing size and very similar capabilities.
 
PM
Posts: 4820
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:49 pm

Quoting Thrust (reply 6):
Boeing is generating huge sales with 773ER


"Huge"? Respectable, maybe, but hardly huge. They've sold more 787s in a fraction of the time.
 
georgiabill
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:53 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:54 pm

Please correct me if I am wrong. But didn't SWA ask Boeing about the posibilities of building a 737 on the 7E7 technology?
 
ContinentalFan
Posts: 343
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:02 pm

The 787 will not replace the 777, but Boeing has implied (if not said) that future 777 and 737 replacements would be based on 787 technology. They don't necessarily mean than the 777 replacement will be some super-stretch 787. If they can build an 8-across fuselage with composites, it should be fairly straightforward to design a 9-across or 6-across fuselage. A whole family of aircraft built on similar technologies. Of the two, it seems likely that a 737 replacement will be next, in the 2010-2015 timeframe, since narrowbodies are both A & B's bread and butter aircraft.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:06 pm

Quoting PM (reply 28):
"Huge"? Respectable, maybe, but hardly huge


Boeing has sold ~100 773ER at an high list price of $200+ million. 773ER constitue roughly 1/6 of 777 sales and have continued the 777 order book as the 772ER slumped off.

Quoting PM (reply 28):
They've sold more 787s in a fraction of the time.


No, they havn't. In fact, they have sold half the number of 773ER at half the price of a 773ER

[quote=ContinentalFan,reply=30]They don't necessarily mean than the 777 replacement will be some super-stretch 787. If they can build an 8-across fuselage with composites, it should be fairly straightforward to design a 9-across or 6-across fuselage.[/quote]

Straighforward does not equal cheap. Just ask Airbus how much the updated A350 will cost them. Aircraft must balance practicality and design cost... if a 787 stretch can deliver performance on par (or close enough) to a clean-sheet design... why waste the RD money?

[Edited 2005-02-22 05:11:14]
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:00 pm

Lehpron, the 12-across design you saw in AWST was a different study. It's fuselage was wider than its height. The design I mentioned in Reply #1 was for a twin with 10-across seating, but even with 3-5-3 seating it would be more spacious than the 3-4-3 seating found in some B777s.

The range of Boeing's options will narrow somewhat once the decision has been taken on whether or not to produce the B747Adv. If the B747Adv is produced, then Boeing is more likely to develop the B737E before a replacement for the B777-300 and B747Adv. Otherwise, Boeing will be more likely to develop a replacement for the B777-300 and B747-400 before the B737E.

Time will tell.
 
PM
Posts: 4820
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:25 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (reply 31):
Boeing has sold ~100 773ER


So we agree. Hardly "huge".

Quoting DfwRevolution (reply 31):
No, they havn't. In fact, they have sold half the number of 773ER


OK, OK. On their website Boeing list 56 787s sales. So you aren't counting the 30 for JAL, the 60 for China, the 6 for First Choice (even though they're the launch engine for the GEnx), the 10 for Continental, the 5 for Ethiopian and whatever other orders I've forgotten about? Come on, they've sold getting on for a couple of hundred whether or not firm contracts have been signed.

I've no doubt that the 773ER will indeed sell well but it's a bit premature to describe their order book as "huge". Boeing currently lists 99 777ER sales (without there being any large orders already announced but not yet listed which is the case for the 787). To put it in context, the A380 has sold nearly 50% more units than that. How would you describe that? "Vast"? "Incredible"?

There's enough hyperbole on this site without getting things out of proportion.
 
na
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:18 pm

PM, very good comment on the somewhat lackluster success of the 773ER vs. the incredible success of the A380 so far. Its astonishing that an aircraft Boeing claims only few need has achieved more sales than the one Boeing thinks where the market is.

I can only repeat what I wrote early here, after all those who think the 777 will still be built in 20 years from now.
Stop dreaming.

Boeings well-publized plan is to build a single aircraft family to replace both the 777 and the 747. Basic aircraft of that line would be bigger than 777, to be able to stretch it to a size pretty close to the A380. The 777-200 basic size will eventually be covered by the 787, even if the top model of the 787-line would still be slightly smaller than the 772. Should they build the 747 Adv it´ll take longer until they come up with the new flagship aircraft, but if not, 2011/12 is a very likely timeframe for its program launch, entry into service by 2015 or a bit later. Boeing can´t afford to loose the profitable market niche of the 744 up to the A380. And I´m a bit in a doubt, if airlines would really accept only two engines on an aircraft bigger than todays 744. That an engine suitable enough to propel it would hardly fit underneath a wing is just one thing to contemplate. Unless it´ll get an awfully long-legged undercarriage.
 
rootsair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 3:25 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:24 pm

I just really hope that boeing do exactly like they did with the 787.....a totally new innovative design.... cause you should admit the T7 has a lill something of 767..........and useless to say that the A350 looks exactly like the A330....which is a very boring idea indeed
A man without the knowledge of his past history,culture and origins is like a tree without roots
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Tue Feb 22, 2005 11:26 pm

NA is exactly right in Reply #34, except for his doubt about it being a twin. This aircraft will probably have 10-across seating, rather than 9-across in the B777. It will also be introduced about 20 years after the B777. Why is it so difficult to believe that 20 years is not enough time to go from a 9-across twin to a 10-across twin?
 
DeltaWings
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 4:06 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:30 am

No 787 will replace 777, not wide enough. 787 is in its own category and 777 on a different one!


Not necessarily. The 787 is wider than the A346 fuselage, which seats roughly the same amount of passengers as the 773ER. 772ER replacement is definitly possible.

The 787 and the A340 both only have a maximum of 9 across. The 777 can take 10 across.


~DeltaWings
Homer: Marge, it takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:55 am

That's not relevant. The 787 could easily be used to replace the 777 in 99% of configurations.

N
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:15 am

Gigneil, do you mean the B787 could replace the B777-200 or that it could replace both the B777-200 and the B777-300? It's clear to me that the B787 could replace the B777-200, but a B787 replacement of the B777-300 seems like a stretch to me. (pun intended)
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:20 am

As has been mentioned, the 787 is mildly wider than the A340.

The A330/340 fuselage stretches from the A330-200 all the way to the A340-600.

No reason why a 787 can't do the same thing.

You have to cut back on fuse widths. Its one of the reasons that Airbus has an advantage in production costs, because they manufacture two fuse widths (now 3) - the A320, the A300/330/340, and now the A380.

Boeing was producing 5 - the 717, the 737/757, the 767, the 777, and the 747.

N
 
airways6max
Posts: 474
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 6:22 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:43 am

I imagine that the 777 will have another 10 years of production. However, I would imagine that the 787 will render the Triple-7 obsolete. I would suggest that when it comes time to replace the 777, using a larger version of the 787 fuselage to replace the 772. To replace the 773 and 747, I would use the 747 fuselage with the hump but add 787 wings, engines and tail.
 
767-332ER
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 1:20 pm

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:52 am

If they continue stretching aircraft the way they have been doing (Boeing) such as what they had done with the 737, then yes...the 787 will eventually take over the 777, but I had always thought that the 777 would render the 747 obselete, but might be in for a surprise with the 747ADV.
Regards
Twinjets...if one fails, work the other one twice as hard!!!
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:29 am

Quoting Gigneil (reply 40):
The A330/340 fuselage stretches from the A330-200 all the way to the A340-600.

No reason why a 787 can't do the same thing.

You have to cut back on fuse widths. Its one of the reasons that Airbus has an advantage in production costs, because they manufacture two fuse widths (now 3) - the A320, the A300/330/340, and now the A380.


There may be a manufacturing benefit, but long, relatively thin fuselages weigh a bundle more than wider more optimised solutions. Not to mention for the same capacity the airplane needs to be longer which can become problematic for airport infrastructure.
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: Boeing Replacement For The 777.

Wed Feb 23, 2005 7:36 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (reply 14):
Boeing will never build a quad again, unless they can't help it. A quad 777 replacement wouldn't cut any cake for Boeing


"Never... unless" is not quite "never"  Big grin... A "direct or so" 777 replacement will no way be a quad, but anything trying to expand to 500+ seats area - very well may be. However, I liked the idea of 10-across twin (Zvezda, Reply 36)... But unless they build it 2-3-3-2  Big grin I'll avoid it in favor of 787/350/..., same as now I prefer to be in 767 or 777 rather than on 747.

Quoting NA (reply 34):
All those who think the 777 will still be built in 20 years from now. Stop dreaming.


Whatever the replacement of 777 or 777/747 is going to be, 777 has long way to go. Unlike 772, 773 still has no "new generation threat", nor even was seriously upgraded. Will Boeing drop it before going '777NG', with new wing and some "747Adv"-style updates? Despite someone's personal dislikes, so far there was nothing "inherently wrong" with 777 (quite the opposite, everything is "inherently right"). 20 more years or less (or more?), but it is highly probable that most of its glory is still ahead. I see only one real threat: 787 technology proves to be a leap in progress comparable at least to jet against piston engine. But even then 777 will be not the first to be dropped - rather the very last.

Who is online