fiaz
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 2:34 pm

What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:59 pm

Hey

When we look at the introduction of this new aircraft. i just want to ask if the 787 really is a replacement of another aircraft that Boeing built , because many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.
What do you guys have to say?

Fiaz

[Edited 2007-07-15 05:59:50]
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:04 pm

Nothing... its a new market aircraft.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:18 pm

Quoting Fiaz (Thread starter):
When we look at the introduction of this new aircraft. i just want to ask if the 787 really is a replacement of another aircraft that Boeing built , because many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.
What do you guys have to say?

QF have said in their press release at the time the orginal order was announced that they were buying the 30 B787-9s ordered as direct replacements for their B767-338ERs

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8588
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:25 pm

Quoting Fiaz (Thread starter):
i just want to ask if the 787 really is a replacement of another aircraft that Boeing built , because many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.

While the 787 brings the range, payload, and economics to open a host of new city pairs, it is first and foremost a 767 replacement. Many, if not the majority, will be used for to replace aging aircraft of various types


787-8 will replace the 763ER, 764ER, and A332.

787-3 will replace non-ER 767, A300/A310

787-9 will replace A333, A343

787 will NOT directly replace the 757. The smallest 787 is still way larger than the 757-300.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:28 pm

Quoting Fiaz (Thread starter):
many say that its has the capacity of the 767, but far much range than it.

The smallest 787s, the 787-3/8, have more capacity than the largest 767, the 767-400.

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 1):
Nothing... its a new market aircraft.

I agree but, if I were forced to choose one, it would have to be the 777.
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:39 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
The smallest 787s, the 787-3/8, have more capacity than the largest 767, the 767-400.

Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:41 pm

The 787 is a replacement of the 767, but with greater capability so that it brings markets that needed a 777 or A340 into a smaller aircraft size with better economics. The 787 does not create a new aircraft size class, nor does it currently attempt to bridge two families, and even a 787-10 would still only "bump" into the next aircraft class.

The 787-8 and 787-9 can replace 763, 764, A300, A332, A333, A342, A343 and MD11, and serve the same markets as all those aircraft.

The 787 does not generally replace the much smaller 762, though you may find it doing so for airlines that want the range and abilities of the 762ER, and thus where the A321 and 739ER can't fit that bill in any way. Because the economics are far superior to the 762ER, a 788 that only carries the passenger load of a 762ER on a route would still be more profitable than the 762ER it replaced.

The A350X, BTW, is a straight replacement for the A340 family, with aircraft roughly in the size classes of the 342/3, 345 and 346 in terms of floor area (though obviously not 1:1). It will replace those planes directly in terms of range and payload, with extra range to spare for some models.

The issue for Airbus is not the strategy, but doing it with one engine for all uses when they weren't first to market for new engines. If they can get the right engine from RR and GE, their strategy should pan out just fine, as replacing an aging quad platform with an uber efficient twin is what made the 767 so successful as a 707 replacement.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
LAXspotter
Posts: 3227
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:16 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:42 pm

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):
The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.

I think so too, a 787 isnt meant for the higher density routes than a 772 or 772ER or a 773/ER can handle. It seems to fit into the 763-764 capacity quite well, expect for its outstanding performance.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8588
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:30 pm

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):
Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

Futurecaptain, the default 787 configurations have been selected to include a greater number of premium biz/first seats than the 767. For this reason, the 787-8 looks to be about the same size as the 767-300ER. In actuality, the 787-8 has more cabin floor area than the 764ER, and is bigger in exterior dimension.
 
brons2
Posts: 2462
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:02 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:38 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 8):
In actuality, the 787-8 has more cabin floor area than the 764ER, and is bigger in exterior dimension.

Yes, this is correct. Another reason to include a lower seating capacity is to make the range figures...at 9x in Y the 788 will have about the same range as a 763ER.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 2:47 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
I agree but, if I were forced to choose one, it would have to be the 777.

I disagree. The 777 is a much much bigger aircraft than the 787; it is almost the size of a 767. But I agree with EMBQA: It doesnt really replace anything, its a new market aircraft.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:14 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 3):
787 will NOT directly replace the 757. The smallest 787 is still way larger than the 757-300.

While its alot bigger than a 757-300, the Very low trip-costs for the 787 mean that its POSSIBLE to replace a 757-300 with one in most cases. I very much doubt that a 757 will ever be directly replaced by a 787, yet it remains it (just barely) has enough reach "down" to do it.

The problem is that lots of lovely comparisons that work on paper, don't in real life, as the 787 has 3243432 better things to do for an airline than be placed on a route currently served by a 757. The 787 IMO won't even replace much if any 767 for the first few years as the 787 is better used on new routes, or right-sizing other routes, than sending 767s to the desert. I suspect for the first few years the A300/A310 are in the most danger of getting shipped to storage, with a few high cycle/hour 767's needing D checks and engine overhauls joining in. 10 years from now though, Old 767 and even the oldest A330 will be going. Old A340 "classics" I suspect will be joining smaller "3rd tier" airlines instead of seeing storage unless the MX costs to remain in service are too high. For the 1st tier airlines, I would guess the A340 classic is the first plane to get dumped for only running cost reasons (IE fuel-burn) as the 767/A330 are too useful for shorter haul flights of which fuel burn isn't as big of a concern over the short/medium term.

The one I am wanting to watch for is how many 747's leave due to 787's. I would normally assume nearly 0, but with high fuel costs, its possible that an airline would use a 787 to replace a slightly larger airplane (777 for example) on one route, then use the replaced plane to put the 747 in line for a freighter conversion. I have no idea how common this might be, but its just within what I think is reasonable to happen.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 3:51 pm

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 2):

QF have said in their press release at the time the orginal order was announced that they were buying the 30 B787-9s ordered as direct replacements for their B767-338ERs



Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
The smallest 787s, the 787-3/8, have more capacity than the largest 767, the 767-400.

While the floor area of the 787-8 is greater than the 764, it isn't quite so simple. The 787 cabin width results in seat widths different from the 767 in different classes, so area doesn't tell you everything.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
I agree but, if I were forced to choose one, it would have to be the 777.

I would say the 767, when one takes into account increased space requirements for different classes. 8Y economy gets 777 seat width. And a lot of the space is used to bring business class to what used to be first class seat width. The 767 and 787 are both 6 abreast in business class despite the latter being much wider, which means a similar number of business class seats requires about 17% more area.

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):

Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.

Your ranges for the 787 are only for 3 class with 8 abreast economy versus 9 abreast. The ranges for the 767 are for 3 class and 1 or 2 class layouts. It's apples and oranges.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
nema
Posts: 479
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:18 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:24 pm

Most people are seeing this as a new concept aircraft rather than a replacement...

The technological side means you have to veiw it as a new era which is why Mr. Gallois of Airbus Industries chose to offer Boeing the congratulations, shown below from another thread.. This doesnt happen with a replacement!



"With the 787 rollout only hours away Sunday, Airbus sent a nice message to Boeing about its new plane."

"On behalf of the global Airbus team, I would like to offer you and your Boeing colleagues our congratulations on the rollout of your first 787 aircraft. Today is a great day in aviation history. For, whenever such a milestone is reached in our industry, it always is a reflection of hard work by dedicated people inspired by the wonder of flight. Even if tomorrow Airbus will get back to the business of competing vigorously, today is Boeing's day - a day to celebrate the 787."
There isnt really a dark side to the moon, as a matter of fact its all dark!
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:32 pm

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 5):
Huh?
767-200 - 181-255 pax
767-300 - 218-350 pax
767-400 - 245-375 pax

787-8 - 210-250 pax
787-9 - 250-290 pax
787-3 - 290-330 pax

The 787 is aimed in the middle of the 767 market as far as capacity is concerned. 787-8 replaces the 762 and the 789 replaces the 763 nearly perfectly IMO.



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 10):
The 777 is a much much bigger aircraft than the 787; it is almost the size of a 767.

Cabin floor areas in square meters:

767-200 154.9
767-300 184.5
767-400 214.1
787-3/8 223.8
787-9 257.4
777-200 279.0
787-10 291.0
787-11X 324.6 (hypothetical)
777-300 330.4
 
acidradio
Crew
Posts: 1595
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 3:19 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:10 pm

Quoting NEMA (Reply 13):

The technological side means you have to veiw it as a new era which is why Mr. Gallois of Airbus Industries chose to offer Boeing the congratulations, shown below from another thread.. This doesnt happen with a replacement!

Even in an industry as cut-throat as aircraft, everyone involved is still an airplane junkie and given the enormity of any undertaking of either Boeing or Airbus, they tend to let each other have their "day in the sun" with an unveiling.

The 787 sizewise seems to be a 767 replacement, but which can do the work of a 777 or even better. Look at how popular the 767 has been, as well as the 777. It seems that there are many customers though who would like something that is the size of a 767 which can do the range and efficiency of a 777. This bird though is slated to do even better than the 777.

We can't directly compare it to the 767 or 777 because it is completely new and has more to offer. That is not to say that the 767 and 777 are not great aircraft, they are wonderful! It's just that the 787 has the benefit of all sorts of new technology, design and improved processes.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
The 787 does not generally replace the much smaller 762, though you may find it doing so for airlines that want the range and abilities of the 762ER, and thus where the A321 and 739ER can't fit that bill in any way. Because the economics are far superior to the 762ER, a 788 that only carries the passenger load of a 762ER on a route would still be more profitable than the 762ER it replaced.

In certain fleets, the 787 is planned to take the place of the 767 and 777. For example, CO has just taken delivery of its 20th and last 777. CO plans to acquire a number of 787s. These 787s are supposed to beat the 777 in range and efficiency by a significant margin and everyone is very excited for them to come on the property, as that will enable much international expansion. 762s may disappear eventually, as they are spendy to fly and 752s with winglets (at least for CO) are doing many similar routes at a significant cost advantage. I hate to see that kind of replacement, but then again, we might see some 787s doing Europe routes for CO simply for the sake of fleet utilization. CO seems to be a one-stop-shop in the sense of taking one kind of a/c (767, 777) and putting it on all routes, as it is less costly to have specialized fleets like some other airlines (ie. NW with trans-Atlantic [333] and trans-Pacific fleets [332, 742, 744]).

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 11):

The one I am wanting to watch for is how many 747's leave due to 787's. I would normally assume nearly 0, but with high fuel costs, its possible that an airline would use a 787 to replace a slightly larger airplane (777 for example) on one route, then use the replaced plane to put the 747 in line for a freighter conversion. I have no idea how common this might be, but its just within what I think is reasonable to happen.

Whenever you bring in another more efficient widebody, interesting routes are now economically possible and/or more viable. The rumors I hear are that NW plans to move much of its trans-Pacific flying from 744s to 787s when they arrive. That is a significant shift, as NW has been quite a 744 powerhouse for years, besides being the launch customer of the type. Interesting new Asia routes are even predicted, as it will be more economical to transport smaller numbers of people on these trans-Pacific routes. Somewhere I read that SQ really didn't want 777s, that they felt they were too big, that in essence they wanted something the size of a 767 but which could do the work of a 777. I don't have the exact quote off hand, so I will probably receive flame  Smile
Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:25 pm

The most obvious type, as mentioned, is the 767. Boeing always compares performance of the 787 with the older 767.
I believe it will also touch on the 777 market share.

I also don't rule out that the smallest version will end up replacing larger 737s and A320s at charter/low-cost airlines.
 
olle
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:31 pm

But if the 783 has worse performance the A300 how shall it replace the B737 or A320 for the sam missions?


It is like putting a A380 on a B777 route...
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Why do you think it performs less than an A300? That wouldn't make sense.

I friend of mine who used to work at Transavia suggested they were looking at the 787 to replace their 737 fleet. (don't know when that will happen, probably after 10 years or so).

For charter flights, where you'r dragging as much tourists as you can to a certain destination, I can imagine a small 787 would be a good choice.
 
A388
Posts: 7190
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 3:48 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 pm

I also remember the 787-3 being offered as 757 replacement as it is designed to operate in similar markets the 757 is currently used. Even though it is much larger than the 757 it operates the routes at lower costs and offers some growth to due to it larger capacity. The 757 was also introduced as the 727 replacement aircraft which is a much smaller aircraft. The 787-3 as 757 replacement aircraft would not surprise me as well.

A388
 
DTWAGENT
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:16 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:05 pm

I thought the 787's where a new class of aircraft of their own. I did not think that it was made to replace anything. Since 763's and 764's are still being made. At least that is what I read from Boeing in our newspaper.

Chuck
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:15 pm

I guess that's what they want to communicate, as they don't want to stir any unrest when it comes to the 767 production line. However, it is a very similar aircraft in terms of size and range.
 
User avatar
SLCUT2777
Posts: 3407
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:17 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:19 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 10):
I disagree. The 777 is a much much bigger aircraft than the 787; it is almost the size of a 767. But I agree with EMBQA: It doesnt really replace anything, its a new market aircraft.

 checkmark  I especially have to agree with the latter. The 777 is MUCH bigger on the whole, and the range of the 787 is much more capable than that of the 767. BUT it appears most carriers will be using the 787 to replace their older 762s and 763s. This is the plan for AC, and most expect DL to announce a 787 order to start replacing their 763s before the end of the year.
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:43 pm

I think there will be a bigger version of the 787 in the coming years. Not too soon, as it would then compete with the 777
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Sun Jul 15, 2007 11:46 pm

Quoting A388 (Reply 19):
I also remember the 787-3 being offered as 757 replacement as it is designed to operate in similar markets the 757 is currently used. Even though it is much larger than the 757 it operates the routes at lower costs and offers some growth to due to it larger capacity. The 757 was also introduced as the 727 replacement aircraft which is a much smaller aircraft. The 787-3 as 757 replacement aircraft would not surprise me as well.

Given the history of the 757 and the 727 replacement market, I'm sure Boeing doesn't want to make that mistake again. The 757 was too large to serve as a 727 replacement, and allowed the A320 to get a foot hold. Trying to sell the 787-3 as a 757 replacement is a mistake as it is not a replacement capacitywise. They will likely need something to replacement the 752/753 and the non ER 762/763.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2087
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:52 am

There is a difference in what Boeing designed the 787 to do, and what airlines will do with the 787.

Boeing meant the 787 to have more space and comfort per passenger. So, in a standard 2-4-2 layout:

787-8 = 767-300ER / A300
787-9 = 767-400ER / A330-200
787-10 = A330-300, A340-300. 777-200ER

Now, for example, the 787-8 is technically "bigger" than what it is replacing, but that is the whole point. It is supposed to offer more space per pax as opposed to previous aircraft.


^^^Now, this is what Boeing designed the 787 to do. Some airlines will use the 787s with denser seating or with a 3-3-3 layout. This will enable things like the 787-9 to replace A340-300s and ect.
 
Mike89406
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:05 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:06 am

Quoting NEMA (Reply 13):
Most people are seeing this as a new concept aircraft rather than a replacement...

I think the same because it is paving the way for future generation aircraft to fly higher faster and eventually across the globe in quicker time thats what the aviation industry is aiming towards.

The 787 is just the beginning of that in my opinion.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:11 am

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 26):
I think the same because it is paving the way for future generation aircraft to fly higher faster and eventually across the globe in quicker time thats what the aviation industry is aiming towards.

The dreamliner is hardly faster, if faster at all. The sonic cruiser didn't make it, and no one is making a new concorde (except maybe a supersonic bussiness jet)
 
Mike89406
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:05 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:51 am

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 27):
The dreamliner is hardly faster, if faster at all. The sonic cruiser didn't make it, and no one is making a new concorde (except maybe a supersonic bussiness jet)

Not significantly but mach .085 is still faster than most legacy airliners now, but thats not the point of my remark even though I mentioned speed. Just to clear things up I was referring paving the way to the future generations making future travel faster higher, hey eventually the reality of touching space and coming down is somewhere in the future.

I think if you re-read my post there is clearly more than one meaning to my prior remarks, savvy?

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 26):
I think the same because it is paving the way for future generation aircraft to fly higher faster and eventually across the globe in quicker time thats what the aviation industry is aiming towards.


[Edited 2007-07-15 19:52:40]
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13220
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:07 am

The 787 "might" be able to bridge part of the 757, all of the 767 line and part of the 777 line. Carriers who operate the 757-300 "might" consider eventually replacing them with 787-3s, CO's 757-300s have the lowest CASM in their fleet which perfectly suits EWR-Florida, Las Vegas, IAH-California, IAH-Florida etc.. I've flown on CO A300s back in the day and the 757-300 is doing similar routes albeit at a significantly reduced CASM, not too mention the commonality with the 757-200s and 767s.

For CO with their 25 orders (8 787-8s and 17 787-9s) I don't see a immediate replacement of either the 767-200 or 767-400 unless market conditions deteriorate, eventually though the 787-8 will replace the 767-200, some 757-200 routes and launch new routes the 767-200 was unable to reach and that the 777-200ER are too big for.

It's possible if things would out that one day in the future CO can have as few as two fleet types.

A 737 replacement which can cover the short haul 737-300/737-500, Intermediate markets (737-700,737-800) and routes of up to 4,000nm (757-200 replacement).


The other type would be the 787, the 787-8 would replace the 757-200 (Trans-Atlantic), 767-200, the 787-9 would replace the 767-400 and the proposed 787-10 would replace the 777-200ER.

RIght now though CO only has 25 787s on order, which too me are for pure growth.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:20 am

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 28):
Not significantly but mach .085 is still faster than most legacy airliners now, but thats not the point of my remark even though I mentioned speed. Just to clear things up I was referring paving the way to the future generations making future travel faster higher, hey eventually the reality of touching space and coming down is somewhere in the future.

I think if you re-read my post there is clearly more than one meaning to my prior remarks, savvy?

you are mistaken: the Convair 880 and 990 for example flew much faster than today's airliners, and there has been a tendency of slightly slower speeds ever since.

The 787 does nothing new in this respect. It's the same old subsonic transporter concept. What it is revolutionary new in, is the material used.

For the stuff that you are reffering too, you need to think about rather different concepts, not involving a long tube with 2 wings.

Something that will "touch" space (ie go to an altitude of 100 km) is bound to look very different. 787 has nothing to do with this.
 
RICARIZA
Posts: 2023
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:56 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:27 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 3):
787-8 will replace the 763ER, 764ER, and A332.

787-3 will replace non-ER 767, A300/A310

787-9 will replace A333, A343

I would say:

787-8 will replace the 763ER, 764ER, and could replace an A332.

787-3 will replace non-ER 767, could replace an A330/A310.

787-9 will replace A333, A343 could replace an A333, A343

 Wink
I miss ACES, I am proud of AVIANCA & I am loyal to AMERICAN
 
WAH64D
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:29 am

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 23):
I think there will be a bigger version of the 787 in the coming years. Not too soon, as it would then compete with the 777

They're going to have to use a B787-10 to kill off the B777, they have no choice unless they want to hand the entire market to the A350 and we know thats not going to happen.
I AM the No-spotalotacus.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:32 am

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 32):
They're going to have to use a B787-10 to kill off the B777, they have no choice unless they want to hand the entire market to the A350 and we know thats not going to happen.

that is a very probable developement
 
keesje
Posts: 8854
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:39 am

The press is learning the world the A350 is the answer to the succesfull 787.

In reality the 787 is the answer to the succesfull A330

The A350 is aimed at the 777.

[Edited 2007-07-15 20:40:49]
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:50 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 34):
The press is learning the world the A350 is the answer to the succesfull 787.

In reality the 787 is the answer to the succesfull A330

The A350 is aimed at the 777.

The 787 goes far beyond the A330 in capabilities and will cover a greater market range.

The A350 clearly overlaps the 787, but the majority of models clearly target the 777 space. But then again they have to given the noncompetitiveness of the A340 family.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:51 am

In it's simplest form and in available variants it replaces the 767-300 (787-3), 767-300ER (787-8) and 767-400ER (787-9). Outside of that it represents a whole new ballgame. From a market perspective, airports are getting congested. The 787 in such a market serves two rolls. It allows a larger 787-3 to be operated using the same schedule occupied by 757's and 767-200's as a growth aircraft, where appropriate it can supplement existing domestic schedules by serving as a point to hub or point to point bird at an off peak time shifting traffic which by extension creates more domestic capacity using the same schedule and same aircraft in place today.

Current (simplistic example):

Existing flight option:

LAX-ATL 757 11:00am
ATL-FRA 777 5:00pm

Growth option A:

LAX-ATL 787-3 11:00am
ATL-FRA 777 + 787-8 5:00pm + 7:00pm

Growth option B:

LAX-ATL 757 11:00am
ATL-FRA 777 5:00pm

plus

LAX-FRA 787-8 3:00pm
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8588
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:57 am

Quoting RICARIZA (Reply 31):

I would say:

787-8 will replace the 763ER, 764ER, and could replace an A332.
787-3 will replace non-ER 767, could replace an A330/A310.
787-9 will replace A333, A343 could replace an A333, A343

You should either say "could" for all of them, or just accept that airlines have ordered 787 to replace all the aircraft I mentioned.

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 32):

They're going to have to use a B787-10 to kill off the B777, they have no choice unless they want to hand the entire market to the A350 and we know thats not going to happen.

For the foreseeable future, the 787 can only "kill off" the 772ER when the 787-10 variant is developed. The 787 lacks the capability to replace the 777LR which are still selling quite well. If you have followed airline purchasing trends, the 772ER sales peaked in 1999-2000 simply because the B-market is saturated. Everyone who wanted the 772ER already has them.If anything has killed 772ER sales, it's the 772ER. And if anyone should finish her off and introduce a new airplane, it should be Boeing (from Boeing's standpoint, of course)

Quoting Keesje (Reply 34):
In reality the 787 is the answer to the succesfull A330

Or the inevitable, long-term replacement to the 767.

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 28):
Not significantly but mach .085 is still faster than most legacy airliners now,

A typo, I'm sure, because I drive Mach .085 on the highway daily  Wink
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:18 am

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 30):
The 787 does nothing new in this respect. It's the same old subsonic transporter concept. What it is revolutionary new in, is the material used.

It does do something new.

While old planes flew faster, they were not efficient.

The 1970s saw a shift in priorities, so Aircraft like the 757 and 767 were designed with a slower speed but as far more efficient aircraft. The same thing happened with cars in the USA, and the lowering of the speed limits. The A330/340 were designed with the same tradeoff in the 1980s.

The 747 was always a fast jet, and made up for it with CASM due to size. When Boeing designed the 777, their goal was to build a plane that was as fast (almost) as the 747, so that it could complement VLA fleets, and yet be efficient. But because the fuel crisis was many years past, the focus on efficiency wasn't quite as high a priority as it was with the 767.

What the 787 does is brings long range jet speed back to the mid-size market, but with the focus on efficiency. At 0.85 mach cruise, it's far faster than the jets it will be replacing (767, A342/3, A300). Not only is is faster, but it's more efficient at that speed than the other aircraft are at the slower speeds.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 36):
In it's simplest form and in available variants it replaces the 767-300 (787-3), 767-300ER (787-8) and 767-400ER (787-9).

Yep. And the 788 also replaces the 762ER. Though it's larger, the original 762ER with the 1980s 3-class layout holds more pax than a 762ER can now with a modern 3-class product. When outfitted with 3-classes of 21st century seating, at 8Y, the 788 holds all of 175 pax, a similar count to the 3-class 762ERs of the 80s.

In that respect, the 788 replaces the original CONCEPT of the 762ER, though the 788 is necessarily larger to accommodate the changing nature of the market.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Mike89406
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:05 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:40 am

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 30):
you are mistaken: the Convair 880 and 990 for example flew much faster than today's airliners, and there has been a tendency of slightly slower speeds ever since.

The 787 does nothing new in this respect. It's the same old subsonic transporter concept. What it is revolutionary new in, is the material used.

For the stuff that you are reffering too, you need to think about rather different concepts, not involving a long tube with 2 wings.

Something that will "touch" space (ie go to an altitude of 100 km) is bound to look very different. 787 has nothing to do with this.

I said and I'll say it again its not mainly about speed. Inevitably the aircraft of the future will fly at a higher altitude which will in fact travel faster than say 747 traveling 37,000-40,000 and 600 or so knots for example.

I think you misunderstood me I'm not comparing a 787 to a Concorde, Convair etc..anything supersonic. The 787 is not too much different than todays aircraft but has a little edge on the older aircraft 737, 757, 767 etc...I agreed the 787 is not too much quicker than todays AC but it is a little faster than say the subsonic mainline Boeing/Airbus jets of most airlines of past. Mach .85 is what the 787 flys at,and ceiling at about 50,000 but the difference is this jet is more fuel efficient etc. (More Green if you will)

Lastly the 787 is a new generation transport A/C and will lead the way to better efficient and more futuristic aircraft someday it is only the beginning of a series of different aircraft that will emerge. Also I do understand something that will travel in to space will be different I didn't think I had to explain that us A nuts all know that.

[Edited 2007-07-15 21:44:13]

[Edited 2007-07-15 21:51:56]
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:41 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 38):
Yep. And the 788 also replaces the 762ER. Though it's larger, the original 762ER with the 1980s 3-class layout holds more pax than a 762ER can now with a modern 3-class product. When outfitted with 3-classes of 21st century seating, at 8Y, the 788 holds all of 175 pax, a similar count to the 3-class 762ERs of the 80s.

In that respect, the 788 replaces the original CONCEPT of the 762ER, though the 788 is necessarily larger to accommodate the changing nature of the market.

Also what makes it more confusing is that the 787 is definitely geared to being efficient at both "domestic" and "international" configurations. Given that the domestic F/C/Y is still much and the same as it was back in the day, even a 3 class 787 will pack in the numbers. But its still very good at doing modern international F/CY+/Y configurations. Though I suspect most airlines for longer international routes will have little choice but to go with 8Y (Y+ basically) as their default coach configuration due to weight concerns.
 
Mike89406
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:05 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:47 am

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 30):
The 787 does nothing new in this respect. It's the same old subsonic transporter concept. What it is revolutionary new in, is the material used.

We've been doing this with military jets for a long time but only now commercial avaition is starting to use it.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:40 am

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 39):
I think you misunderstood me I'm not comparing a 787 to a Concorde, Convair etc..anything supersonic. The 787 is not too much different than todays aircraft but has a little edge on the older aircraft 737, 757, 767 etc...I agreed the 787 is not too much quicker than todays AC but it is a little faster than say the subsonic mainline Boeing/Airbus jets of most airlines of past. Mach .85 is what the 787 flys at,and ceiling at about 50,000 but the difference is this jet is more fuel efficient etc. (More Green if you will)

This is only a marginal gain and I think they will hardly fly at the maximum speed, if they can save even more fuel by flying a little but slower. Which 747 flies at max speed? Making airplanes more fuel efficient is an ongoing trend, and has mostly to do with the engines achieving a higher by-pass ratio. This was one of the new things in the 70's - the vast usage of turbo-fan engines.

Quoting Mike89406 (Reply 41):
We've been doing this with military jets for a long time but only now commercial avaition is starting to use it.

well heck, we've been building gliders out of it in Europe since the 60's and also applying it in commercial (airbus) and military aircraft since the '70s as did the Americans and Russians.

What is new, is that they build an entire passenger aircraft of this size out of composite. We are talking about a fully pressurized fuselage made out of composites. That is new. The material itself is not new, the the way they are using it is revolutionary.
 
HughesAirwest
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:55 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 10):
I disagree. The 777 is a much much bigger aircraft than the 787; it is almost the size of a 767. But I agree with EMBQA: It doesnt really replace anything, its a new market aircraft.

Actually the 787's width is between the 767 and the T7, however it is NOT a new market aircraft. Boeing has stated that the 787-3/8 were designed to replace the aging 767/A300 series of airliners. The 787-9 might be considered new market because it bridges a gap between the 767 and 777,
"One man practicing Teamwork is far better than fifty preaching it."
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:47 am

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 16):
Boeing always compares performance of the 787 with the older 767.

That's just good marketing. Boeing would be foolish to compare the 787 with the 777.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
The 787 lacks the capability to replace the 777LR which are still selling quite well.

Boeing certainly could build a 787 with all the payload/range performance of the 777-200LR and much lower operating and purchase costs. Boeing have sold 48 777-200LRs in a period of just over seven years. I don't know how fewer than seven per year can be considered "selling quite well" even with the very low marginal development cost (since the 777-300ER would have been developed anyway).
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:37 am

...add the 48 aforementioned -200LR's with the 77 B777 -200F's (same platform) sold so far and that is a good 125 frames...I think Boeing has done quite well with it in terms of an ROI....
"Up the Irons!"
 
RICARIZA
Posts: 2023
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:56 am

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:44 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 37):
You should either say "could" for all of them, or just accept that airlines have ordered 787 to replace all the aircraft I mentioned

Wrong.. not all of them....
I miss ACES, I am proud of AVIANCA & I am loyal to AMERICAN
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:47 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 45):
...add the 48 aforementioned -200LR's with the 77 B777 -200F's (same platform) sold so far and that is a good 125 frames...I think Boeing has done quite well with it in terms of an ROI....

If one is to analyze the RoI, then add in the 270 777-300ERs ordered so far. There is no question that the 777-200LR/F/300ER have produced a very nice RoI for Boeing. That, however, is irrelevant to the question at hand.

That the initial 787-10 will have payload/range performance somewhere between the 777-200ER and 777-200LR (while about 5% larger than either) does not in any way support the (false, IMO) assertion that the 787 will not replace the 777. I expect that someday a 787-10ER will have better payload/range performance than the 777-200LR. I would not be surprised if a 787-11 might someday have better payload/range performance than the 777-300ER.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:01 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 47):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 45):
...add the 48 aforementioned -200LR's with the 77 B777 -200F's (same platform) sold so far and that is a good 125 frames...I think Boeing has done quite well with it in terms of an ROI....

If one is to analyze the RoI, then add in the 270 777-300ERs ordered so far. There is no question that the 777-200LR/F/300ER have produced a very nice RoI for Boeing. That, however, is irrelevant to the question at hand.

..I was only augmenting the statement by DfwRevolution.... Smile

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 47):
does not in any way support the (false, IMO) assertion that the 787 will not replace the 777.

...I never made that assertion.... Wink
"Up the Irons!"
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: What Is The 787 A Replacement Of?

Mon Jul 16, 2007 10:04 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 48):
...I never made that assertion....

I didn't mean to suggest that you had. The assertion was made by several in this thread though.