DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 4:35 am

Can or should Boeing develop a 777 variant (lets call it the 400ER for grins and giggle sake) with say 40 more seats and the same range as the 300ER?

What potential impact would such an aircraft have with sales of the new 747-8I?

Open topic...all opinions welcome.
One Nation Under God
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2086
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:10 am

The 777-300ER is at its wing load limit, (or it is very close to the wing load limit). So, the payload and range of the 777-400ER would be very limited.

Quoting DAYflyer (Thread starter):
What potential impact would such an aircraft have with sales of the new 747-8I?

None. As you said, the 777-400ER would seat roughly 400. The 747-8 seats roughly 460. The A380 seats roughly 550. Huge gap between all 3 of those aircraft (big enough seat gap for them to be in their own markets).
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:12 am

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 1):
The 777-300ER is at its wing load limit, (or it is very close to the wing load limit). So, the payload and range of the 777-400ER would be very limited.

Or an entirely new aircraft would be needed then I guess.

Is there demand in this size category, or is the 350-xwb looking to that size?
One Nation Under God
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2086
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:17 am

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
Is there demand in this size category, or is the 350-xwb looking to that size?

The A350-1000 is an A340-600 replacement and a 777-300ER competitor. So, there is a gap between the 360 seat 777-300ER and the 460 seat 747-8. But that gap doesn't look like it needs to be filled. At least the 747-8 is filling the 200 seat gap between 777-300ER and A380.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23075
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:21 am

The 777-300ER is already pushing the edge of the gate at 74m length and 65m width. As such, you can't really stretch her any more then she already is.

What would be interesting is to know if Boeing could put galley storage space (if not galleys themselves) into the crown area as they are offering on the 747-8I. The 777 already can take crew rest seats in the crown area, so if they could move more up there, they could free up even more floorspace for seats.

Whether or not the structural costs of doing so would balance out, I cannot say.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:25 am

Quoting DAYflyer (Thread starter):
Can or should Boeing develop a 777 variant (lets call it the 400ER for grins and giggle sake) with say 40 more seats and the same range as the 300ER?

I don't believe they will. That seating range will likely fall into Y3 territory.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:34 am

Thanks all. I just wondered if it were practicle. Sounds like a no except for the galley storage space idea....
One Nation Under God
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2637
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:44 am

To properly do it, it would in effect be a whole new aircraft. You would need a new wing. New wing box. New landing gear. New tail.

So you get to carry over the basic tube structure, and the cockpit. The basic tube is the "easy part" as it were, and the cockpit is already carried over from the 767 in basic structure, so might be time for a new one there.

My guess is Y3 will be a 11abreast single deck in Y class with a modest hump for a raised cockpit, and more equipment designed into the crown instead of the underfloor areas. I also guess that the 777 is done for major updates like the 777-300ER/777-200LR program.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:46 am

I thought I read that the 777 was stretched to its maximum with the 300 derivative. In fact, didn't Boeing install a tail strik to prevent damage to the rear of the aircraft on takeoff due to the length of the fuselage? If so, I don't see where Boeing could add another fuselage plug without making it impossible for the plane to rotate.

Can the fuselage be stretched further?
 
raffik
Posts: 1531
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:50 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:25 am

Like an A321-300?
I think it is better for the airline manufacturers to split aircraft into different models rather than one extension after another.
- Alec
 
EvilForce
Posts: 974
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:12 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:30 am

I think the 777 is a cash cow for Boeing right now. Spending money on a new version would likely only sell a few airframes, and likely not have a decent return on investment especially with Y3 coming down the pike. Best to keep it as is.
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today and was going to name it "Republican" but the fly trap is beneficial to the environment.
 
na
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:47 am

Such an aircraft would not fit in the 80m-box anymore, so very unpractical. And it would be a stretch too much in terms of being very tailstrike-prone besides being totally off balance visually. A 774 would look like a wiener with wings. This stretch, streeetch, streeeetch-fashion nowadays creates ugly things, although beancounters (who are naturally blind for everthing further away than their computer screen) like them.
 
EvilForce
Posts: 974
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:12 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:51 am

Quoting NA (Reply 11):
This stretch, streeetch, streeeetch-fashion nowadays creates ugly things, although beancounters (who are naturally blind for everthing further away than their computer screen) like them.

Commercial aircraft are capital equipment. Nothing more. An airline doesn't, nor shouldn't care about how a plane looks any more than it cares about how a tug looks, or fleet of company trucks are style like.
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today and was going to name it "Republican" but the fly trap is beneficial to the environment.
 
alangirvan
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 2:13 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:54 am

I do not know if it can be searched, but a stretched 777-300ER was discussed a few years ago. An Asian carrier (not named, and, no, I do not think it was Emirates), wanted a few more rows and the range to fly from their home city to London. It would have been a one for one replacement of 747-400, since the 777-300ER is about 90% of the seating capacity of 744.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2637
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:57 am

Quoting NA (Reply 11):
Such an aircraft would not fit in the 80m-box anymore

The speculation on the 777-400er was a 777 that was a hair under 80m.

and the last thing airlines care about is looks, as long as it looks safe to the customers.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:09 am

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 8):
Can the fuselage be stretched further?

It sure could. Boeing performed an industrial trade study of a hypothetical 777-400 and conclude it WAS possible to stretch the 777-300 to the limit of the 80 meter box. However, it wasn't considered a viable commercial product and never came close to leaving the realm of hypothetical.

Quoting NA (Reply 11):
Such an aircraft would not fit in the 80m-box anymore, so very unpractical.

The 777-300ER is 73.9 meters. That's 6 meters of possible stretching room before hitting the 80 meter box, which would allow several additional seat rows.

Quoting NA (Reply 11):
And it would be a stretch too much in terms of being very tailstrike-prone besides being totally off balance visually.

No more so than the A346, which is both longer and thinner than the 773ER. Besides, the 777 already has electronic tail-strike protection incorporated into the FBW system.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 8):
In fact, didn't Boeing install a tail strik to prevent damage to the rear of the aircraft on takeoff due to the length of the fuselage?

The tail strike protection is a preventative measure, the aircraft can rotate just fine. The 777-300 flew for years without tail-strike protection before it was implemented in the 773ER.
 
na
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:46 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 15):
Quoting NA (Reply 11):Such an aircraft would not fit in the 80m-box anymore, so very unpractical.
The 777-300ER is 73.9 meters. That's 6 meters of possible stretching room before hitting the 80 meter box, which would allow several additional seat rows.

Right, I have to agree, didn´t have the exact length of the 773 in my mind. But a hypothetic 774 would be damn close indeed.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 15):
No more so than the A346, which is both longer and thinner than the 773ER. Besides, the 777 already has electronic tail-strike protection incorporated into the FBW system.

I won´t deny that and I didn´t mention a certain manufacturer.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 15):
The tail strike protection is a preventative measure, the aircraft can rotate just fine. The 777-300 flew for years without tail-strike protection before it was implemented in the 773ER.

Yeah, but with a 774 it would most likely become a problem unless they´make its legs longer.
 
na
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 8:52 am

Quoting EvilForce (Reply 12):
Quoting NA (Reply 11):This stretch, streeetch, streeeetch-fashion nowadays creates ugly things, although beancounters (who are naturally blind for everthing further away than their computer screen) like them.
Commercial aircraft are capital equipment. Nothing more. An airline doesn't, nor shouldn't care about how a plane looks any more than it cares about how a tug looks, or fleet of company trucks are style like.

A deep sigh in the name of every true aviation enthusiast. Beancounters rule, thats why we have 773s and A346s, and 99% of cruiseships look like a block of hoilday flats (three cheers here to the 747-8I and the Cunard Line).
 
jbernie
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:09 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 9:25 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 15):
The 777-300ER is 73.9 meters. That's 6 meters of possible stretching room before hitting the 80 meter box, which would allow several additional seat rows.

Open question.....

To look at this from a different perspective, IF they did do the stretch to the 80m box, and got an extra 6m of length, how much would be usuable space for seats?

As you increase the number of passengers they would need to consider the number of toilets, room for meal preperation, emergency exits etc. Surely some of that space would be gained but then lost to non revenue generating functions? Which maybe when the numbers are run makes the plane less appealing and you jump to a 74x?

Though, in doing a stretch, maybe a slight reconfiguration of the facilities could allow for everything that is required without stealing much of the new space?
 
fridgmus
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:28 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 12:48 pm

A little off-topic but, wouldn't using composite parts on the 777 series reduce weight, increase range and possibly open up some more routes?

Please keep in mind I'm not in the Aviation Industry.

Thanks,

Marc
The Lockheed Super Constellation, the REAL Queen of the Skies!
 
NW727251ADV
Posts: 301
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 5:55 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:08 pm

Quoting DAYflyer (Thread starter):
Can or should Boeing develop a 777 variant (lets call it the 400ER for grins and giggle sake) with say 40 more seats and the same range as the 300ER?

What potential impact would such an aircraft have with sales of the new 747-8I?

Open topic...all opinions welcome.

Sigh...how many times is someone going to bring this up?? It seems like this question is asked every other month. Please Please PLEASE conduct a search the next time. This has been discussed to death.
NWA   N O R T H W E S T A I R L I N E S
 
jetjeanes
Posts: 897
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:42 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:46 pm

A 747 can be outfitted for up to, or over 500 pax, but you still have airlines that want the 4 engines. Personally id reather see them drop the 767 line now and convert to 777 and have a military version refueler with it instead of the 767.

I guess they could stretch it but would probably have to be like the a340 and have stairs down to the lavs Big grin
With this 787 coming into the market boeing is going to have a lot of aircraft close or similar to the same number of seats
But since the military is locked in on the 767,s I would imagine the 777,s will go by the wayside when the 787 is out.. and you know they wont stop makeing 747,s for another 40 years They should have left the 757,s alone
i can see for 80 miles
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:04 pm

Quoting Jbernie (Reply 18):
To look at this from a different perspective, IF they did do the stretch to the 80m box, and got an extra 6m of length, how much would be usuable space for seats?

Assuming that the 6 meter stretch would fully translate into 6 meters of additional cabin length, you would gain about 35 SM or about 375 SF.

That would approximately correlate to your choice of the following:

- (7) 32" rows @ 9-abreast econ = 63 seats
- (8) 30" rows @ 9-abreast econ = 72 seats
- (2) 58" rows @ 6-abreast biz/first + (3) 32" rows @ 9-abreast econ = 39 seats

And don't forget cargo:

- 8 LD3 containers
- 4 LD11 pallets

All in all, just a little less than your typical incremental stretch. But really, an impractical aircraft from logistic standpoints even though it could hypothetically fit into the standard 80 meter box.
 
mauilono
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 1:23 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:13 pm

.

Quoting NW727251ADV (Reply 20):
Sigh...how many times is someone going to bring this up?? It seems like this question is asked every other month. Please Please PLEASE conduct a search the next time. This has been discussed to death.

I, for one, don't mind if some topics are re-posted. I forget about some subjects from time to time and when a new person brings it back up, it also adds fresh ideas and opinions to them. I like to bring up the forum page and see what's being discussed now, not what has been discussed some time ago. Just my opinion Smile

Stretching any aircraft is fine with me. It adds capacity to a proven airframe and keeps "like" aircraft in a company's fleet. Just like my company's B737s, -200C, -400, -400C, -700, -800 and -900. All stretched and improved, all filling their roles in our network.
 
User avatar
tjwgrr
Posts: 2002
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2000 4:09 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 10:02 pm

Wow!


Modified Airliner Photos:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Joe Perez
Template © Steve Dreier

Direct KNOBS, maintain 2700' until established on the localizer, cleared ILS runway 26 left approach.
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:39 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 15):
It sure could. Boeing performed an industrial trade study of a hypothetical 777-400 and conclude it WAS possible to stretch the 777-300 to the limit of the 80 meter box. However, it wasn't considered a viable commercial product and never came close to leaving the realm of hypothetical.

Ah, so it HAS been studied then. A lack of interest by the airlines then doomed any such project. Was it a lack of range that made it unviable? It would assume so with the increased operating weight.

Quoting Tjwgrr (Reply 24):
Wow!



Modified Airliner Photos:

Design © Joe Perez
Template © Steve Dreier

Kinda looks like a 757 on a huge case of steroids.
One Nation Under God
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:50 pm

IMO the stretch wouldn't need that much range. It could be interesting for Japanese carriers as it could finally reach the 744D's capacity. Even if it was based on the -300A, the range with max. payload (I assume some 5500 km) would be enough for most intra-Asia routes.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23075
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:37 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 26):
It could be interesting for Japanese carriers as it could finally reach the 744D's capacity.

The 773D can hold 550 folks in an all-Economy config, which is pretty close to the 568 the 744D carries.
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:45 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 27):
The 773D can hold 550 folks in an all-Economy config, which is pretty close to the 568 the 744D carries.

I thought the 744D can carry 624 or 630 in all-eco config ? Maybe the 568 seats figure is for a two-class layout.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2637
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 1:30 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 28):
I thought the 744D can carry 624 or 630 in all-eco config ? Maybe the 568 seats figure is for a two-class layout.

I don't have the exact number but the 744 was limited to 560-570 passengers by the number and size of the emergency exits. This will likely hold for the 748 is not expected to pick up extra exit doors. Might just pick up a handful if they switch to larger main doors for commonality with the other current Boeings.
 
jfk777
Posts: 5840
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:00 am

How much bigger does the 777 have to be, given all the pacific airlines using 773ER to replace 744's. Given the twin engine efficiency of the 773ER, its reached its optimal size.
 
na
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:18 am

Quoting Tjwgrr (Reply 24):
Wow!

Indeed, a hot contender "ugliest plane of the new millennium"-competition.
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:33 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 27):
The 773D can hold 550 folks in an all-Economy config, which is pretty close to the 568 the 744D carries.

 crowded   crowded   crowded 

Holy sardine can, batman.
One Nation Under God
 
JAM747
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 12:17 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 2:11 pm

I believe that a 777-400 was considered when Boeing was considering the 747-8 launch. From what I recall there were some isues such as the availability of powerfull engines to make it a real ER, if such a platform could be a credible platform for a cargo version compared to a 747-8, wing loading and a few which I do not remember. It is possible that in the future that new technology in weight saving materials and powerfull engines might warrant another look at such a plane. Maybe a future Y3 will be a very large twin longer than the current B773-ER. I am glad that the 747-8 was launched to fill the gap above the 777-3ER .
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 11:07 pm

Boeing once went to this -400 stretch on the 767, and that wasn't a success story. I still do not really understand why the 764 failed so completely.

If there was the decision 774 OR 748, most of us will prefer the actual outcome.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23075
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Thu Feb 22, 2007 11:21 pm

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 34):
I still do not really understand why the 764 failed so completely.

It offered similar passenger capacity to the A330-200, but less range and less underfloor cargo storage.

Also, the 777-200ER was a better "step-up" for 767-300ER operators looking for capacity, since it carried more folks and more cargo farther. So many 767-300ER operators who might have chosen the 767-400ER instead chose the 777-200ER.
 
na
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:05 am

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 34):
If there was the decision 774 OR 748, most of us will prefer the actual outcome.

Definitely so.
 
andz
Posts: 7626
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:19 am

Quoting NA (Reply 11):
This stretch, streeetch, streeeetch-fashion nowadays

Hardly a "nowadays fashion", remember a certain aircraft called the DC-8? Fuselages ranged from around 45 to 57 metres in length. That was a 27% stretch in length which is more than the 772 to 773 (16%) and comparable with the 342 to 346 (26%).
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
Strathpeffer
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:10 pm

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Fri Feb 23, 2007 2:06 am

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 34):
Boeing once went to this -400 stretch on the 767, and that wasn't a success story. I still do not really understand why the 764 failed so completely.

I'm pretty sure the 767-400 was developed to meet the needs of Continental and Delta, as a replacement for their L1011s and DC-10s. It was never expected to be a wild seller.

PJ
Another Technical Problem?
 
SP90
Posts: 351
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 12:39 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Fri Feb 23, 2007 3:49 am

Let assume for a moment Boeing did decide to make a 400 version, would the current generation of engines be enough to get it off the ground? Would we see a pair of GE90-120 hanging under the wings?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23075
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: What If... A 777-400ER Existed

Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:40 am

Quoting SP90 (Reply 39):
Let assume for a moment Boeing did decide to make a 400 version, would the current generation of engines be enough to get it off the ground?

Depends on how much extra MTOW two GE90-115B's can lift, as well as how much more one can in an engine-out situation at V2.