User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:03 pm

Looking at Boeing's latest pricing updates, the 767-200ER and 767-400ER are no longer listed, which implies they have been removed from offer (bad news for 1337Delta764).

Boeing also added the 767-2CFX, which is the commercial version of the 767-2C that forms the foundation of the USAF KC-46 tanker. There is no price listed and no information has yet been released by Boeing. In March 2012, Major General Peter Bogdan, the USAF's KC-46 Program Manager, expressed support for such a commercial version.

During the RFP stage, Boeing had floated the idea of a 767-200LRF commercial freighter version of their original KC-X proposal that would have employed the 767-200 fuselage, 767-300F undercarriage and 767-400ER wings.

[Edited 2013-09-18 13:06:25]
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4921
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:25 pm

Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
Looking at Boeing's latest pricing updates, the 767-200ER and 767-400ER are no longer listed, which implies they have been removed from offer (bad news for 1337Delta764).

Boeing also added the 767-2CFX, which is the commercial version of the 767-2C that forms the foundation of the USAF KC-46 tanker. There is no price listed and no information has yet been released by Boeing. In March 2012, Major General Peter Bogdan, the USAF's KC-46 Program Manager, expressed support for such a commercial version.

During the RFP stage, Boeing had floated the idea of a 767-200LRF commercial freighter version of their original KC-X proposal that would have employed the 767-200 fuselage, 767-300F undercarriage and 767-400ER wings.

Should anyone want new 764ERs (not saying it will happen), Boeing will be happy to restart production for it. Boeing initially did the same for the 762ER, but restarted its production later on at the request of CO.

[Edited 2013-09-18 13:25:57]
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
User avatar
ODwyerPW
Posts: 974
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:26 pm

I noticed that the 737-600 is gone from the list, (bad news for WestJet736) as well as the 747-400 (equally bad for 7474Ever).

On a serious note:
The 767-2C has a fuselage that is longer than the 200, but shorter than the 300... correct? It's a slight stretch of the 200, no?

[Edited 2013-09-18 13:29:39]
learning never stops.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20241
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:28 pm

Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 2):
I noticed that the 737-600 is gone from the list as well.

That one is gone since 2012.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4921
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:28 pm

Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 2):
I noticed that the 737-600 is gone from the list as well.

The 736 I believe has been gone for at least a year as far as I know. Still, if anyone wants to order them (which is very unlikely), Boeing will happily honor their request.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:34 pm

Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 2):
The 767-2C has a fuselage that is longer than the 200, but shorter than the 300... correct? It's a slight stretch of the 200, no?

Yes, it is a 2m stretch (50.5m vs. 48.5m). The wingspan is the same (47.6m) as is the height (~16m).
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 3949
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:36 pm

Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 2):
as well as the 747-400 (equally bad for 7474Ever).

The 747-400 has been gone for a long time. It was replaced by the 747-8.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 1):
Should anyone want new 764ERs (not saying it will happen), Boeing will be happy to restart production for it.

They couldn't make the 764ER in it's current form. The 767-400 display system could not longer be purchased due to component obsolescence.
 
User avatar
ODwyerPW
Posts: 974
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:54 pm

My 736 and 744 comments were just jokes. OK, I don't tell very good jokes.

The two meter stretch is interesting. Puts it very close to the 767-300F at 54.9m. WIth just 4.4m seperating the two and the obviously higher MTOW of the proposed 2CFX... It will use the same 300F undercarriage.

Does this 2CFX become more of a shrunk 300F, rather than a stretched 200ER?

Peter

[Edited 2013-09-18 14:02:06]
learning never stops.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7705
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 9:55 pm

Does the general think it will reduce cost/risk for the program ? Does he hope for a joint civilian/military certification like the A400M ? Does he hope that will mean more spare parts in 30-40 years ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 9:57 pm

Quoting Aesma (Reply 10):
Does the general think it will reduce cost/risk for the program?

That would be my guess. He was thankful to FX for ordering the 767-300F because it allows Boeing to work out any bugs with the new FAL on their birds and not his.  
 
SXDFC
Posts: 1665
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:07 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:31 pm

Does anyone have any pictures as to what a "Boeing 767-2CFX" would look like?
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4991
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:45 pm

Quoting SXDFC (Reply 12):
Does anyone have any pictures as to what a "Boeing 767-2CFX" would look like?

One assumes exactly like a shorter 767-300F with winglets.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19065
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:01 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 2):
The 767-2C has a fuselage that is longer than the 200, but shorter than the 300... correct? It's a slight stretch of the 200, no?

Yes, it is a 2m stretch (50.5m vs. 48.5m). The wingspan is the same (47.6m) as is the height (~16m).

Are you sure the fuselage itself is 2m longer than the 762? I thought the KC-46 used the same fuselage as the 762 and the difference in overall length was only due to the refuelling boom that extends beyond the end of the fuselage when stowed. What source are you using for the KC-46 fuselage length, as opposed to the overall length? I couldn't find either in the Boeing website.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:47 pm

http://rpdefense.over-blog.com/artic...ity-of-kc-46a-tanker-76019616.html

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 14):
Are you sure the fuselage itself is 2m longer than the 762? I thought the KC-46 used the same fuselage as the 762 and the difference in overall length was only due to the refuelling boom that extends beyond the end of the fuselage when stowed.

The KC-767A operated by the Italian Air Force has a refueling boom, yet the length for that model is given to be the same as the 767-200ER at 48.5m.



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 14):
What source are you using for the KC-46 fuselage length, as opposed to the overall length?

Boeing, as referenced in this Flight International article.

Quote:
Boeing describes the 767-2C as a "minor" variation of the 767-200ER platform, but it is clear that the company has made significant changes. The maximum take-off weight is increased by 9,070kg (20,000lb) to just over 188,000kg, making the freighter version of the -200ER model even heavier than the 767-300ER. The length of the -200ER is also increased by 2m (6.5ft) to 50.5m for the KC-46A.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:23 am

Outrageous. Boeing should sue Boeing for this

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 1):
Should anyone want new 764ERs (not saying it will happen), Boeing will be happy to restart production for it.

For a hefty price Boeing would do anything. RIP 764
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4921
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:50 am

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 16):
For a hefty price Boeing would do anything. RIP 764

The 764ER shares the same tooling as the rest of the 767 line, and it wouldn't cost that much for Boeing to restart production should any airline be interested. Boeing did so for CO and the 762ER, and that cost Boeing almost nothing.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:16 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 17):

Your predictability and consistency is admirable. Even if your unrealistic optimism is not. RIP 764. Will miss you.

tortugamon
 
PEK777
Posts: 320
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:56 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:17 am

If Boeing can stop production of a model only to restart it if demand arises, why couldn't they do the same for the 757?


     
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4921
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:46 am

Quoting PEK777 (Reply 19):
If Boeing can stop production of a model only to restart it if demand arises, why couldn't they do the same for the 757?

Because the 757 had its own tooling that was separate from the 737 line, which has since been destroyed and replaced by more tooling for the 737. The 764ER on the other hand shared its tooling with the other 767 variants.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
Newark727
Posts: 1425
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:55 am

Kind of a shame, the 767-400ER is the coolest looking 767, but not exactly a surprise, since there are so many alternatives out there. Wonder if that one white tail that got sold to Bahrain will ever emerge again...
 
B2707SST
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 2:59 am

Any info on whether the 767-2C will get the 764's raked wingtips? I assume not since it's never been mentioned, but the extra span should be pretty useful given the MTOW bump. The -2C will be nearly as heavy as the 764, which apparently needs all the wing area it can get. I know Boeing was criticized for its "Frankentanker" proposal in the first KC-X round, but raked tips seem like low-hanging fruit; the P-8 even got them when they'd never been fitted on a 737 before.

Anyway, RIP 767-400ER - a beautiful airplane and a delight to fly on, but ultimately too little, too late against the mighty A330. Still, the futile 764 World Tour did give us one of the great special liveries of all time:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Yama-p


-B2707SST
Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4921
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:04 am

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 22):
Still, the futile 764 World Tour did give us one of the great special liveries of all time:

Now here is the most beautiful aircraft/livery combination of all time:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Maurits Vink
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Anthony Barrett

The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19832
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:15 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 18):
Your predictability and consistency is admirable. Even if your unrealistic optimism is not. RIP 764. Will miss you.

But he is only stating a fact. And he is admitting that it's strikingly unlikely.

Boeing can still build 772's and 762's and 764's because they have the tooling for it. Much as they will talk you into ordering something else, if you really insist that you want a vintage 762 and fork over what they ask, it's not as if they're going to turn away money.

As for the 757, the specific tooling has been destroyed, as has the tooling for the 727, 707, and 737 Jurassic/Classic programs.

The 767 is a great plane for passengers, at least on mid-haul routes. The 2-3-2 seating is really passenger-friendly, and the wide-body architecture feels open, yet somehow intimate, not like these massive ballroom-sized cabins in the A380 and 747. With the new Signature Interior upgrade, they are even more passenger-friendly with larger bins and a more attractive overhead. And with some passenger 767's delivered just in the last few years, I'm happy to say that we'll all be flying 767's for years to come.  

The 767 is dead, long live the 767!
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
mli717fan
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:30 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:27 am

I find it interesting that just recently DL announced their A330 order and now Boeing announces that that 764 is dead. It could just be a coincidence though.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:31 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 24):

I agree.

tortugamon
 
bkflyguy
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:25 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:40 am

I could be wrong, but I think an oft overlooked issued in terms of additional passenger 767s is incompatibility with LD3s, used by all other wide-body aircraft. I heard that is one reason why NW never ordered them. I would be curious to hear from anyone involved in ops about how big an issue this really is.
 
User avatar
American 767
Posts: 3928
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:27 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:51 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 4):
The 736 I believe has been gone for at least a year as far as I know. Still, if anyone wants to order them (which is very unlikely), Boeing will happily honor their request.

They will, as long as the other three models of the current NG family, the 700/800/900 Series, are still in production. But once Boeing shuts down the current NG production and continues to build only the MAX variants, the 600 will definitely be dead which means that if an airline wants to buy those Boeing will say no. There won't be a 737-6MAX. It's like ordering a meal at the restaurant when the kitchen closes.

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 22):
Anyway, RIP 767-400ER - a beautiful airplane and a delight to fly on, but ultimately too little, too late against the mighty A330. Still, the futile 764 World Tour did give us one of the great special liveries of all time:

It wouldn't surprise me if Delta picks up additional 764s from United. I see Delta as being the sole 764 operator in the world for a number of years to come, like they will soon be the sole operator of the 717 and the MD-90. Indeed, the A330 killed the 764.

Ben Soriano
Ben Soriano
 
Max Q
Posts: 5645
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:54 am

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 21):
Kind of a shame, the 767-400ER is the coolest looking 767,

Couldn't agree more, and a delight to fly as well.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 4:31 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 17):
The 764ER shares the same tooling as the rest of the 767 line, and it wouldn't cost that much for Boeing to restart production should any airline be interested. Boeing did so for CO and the 762ER, and that cost Boeing almost nothing.

To my knowledge the 767-400ER does have some unique parts and if the suppliers are now shut down (perhaps Boeing is no longer supporting them keeping their production capability intact), that might impact the ability for Boeing to continue to build the model.

I expect Boeing kept the 767-200ER alive for the KC-X program and have now retired it as they no longer need it - the 767-2C has a longer fuselage, a different cockpit and uses 767-300F landing gear.



Quoting B2707SST (Reply 22):
Any info on whether the 767-2C will get the 764's raked wingtips?

No. The span is the same as the 767-200ER.



Quoting MLI717fan (Reply 25):
I find it interesting that just recently DL announced their A330 order and now Boeing announces that that 764 is dead. It could just be a coincidence though.

Far more likely is FX ordering the 767-300F instead of Boeing's proposed 767-400ERF. At that point, Boeing knew they would not sell enough 767-400ERs to justify keeping the special parts in production.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 4:50 am

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 1):
Should anyone want new 764ERs (not saying it will happen), Boeing will be happy to restart production for it.

That is not correct. Once it is removed from pricing list, it is no longer on offer. 787-8 is the replacement for 767-400 and Boeing will be more than happy to sell this one instead, simplifying its civil airliner portfolio.

Same will happen for 767-300ER in due time, once backlog is cleared.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 1):
Boeing initially did the same for the 762ER, but restarted its production later on at the request of CO.

Again, incorrect.
767-200ER was still on offer at the time Continental opted to purchase it, with clear backlog though.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14026
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:24 am

I guess the good news is the -300ER/F is on the price list so FX and anyone else can still fill top-off orders...

Quoting Aesma (Reply 10):
Does the general think it will reduce cost/risk for the program ?

I don't think it's about de-risking the KC-46 program, it really was about winning the KC-46A program in the first place. The USAF put down some very specific criteria for that program after the KC-45 bid was overthrown. Boeing did what it needed to do to try to meet those very specific criteria, which presumably turns out to best be filled via a 50.5m fuse instead of 48.5m for the -200 or 54.9m for the -300. I imagine there were some frowns that it turned out to be that length, but it's all about winning the business first.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
User avatar
1337Delta764
Posts: 4921
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:02 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:53 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 31):
Again, incorrect.
767-200ER was still on offer at the time Continental opted to purchase it, with clear backlog though.

Not from what I heard; I have always heard that Boeing restarted production specifically for CO.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19832
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:55 am

Quoting American 767 (Reply 28):
like they will soon be the sole operator of the 717

You forget HA.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:59 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 31):
767-200ER was still on offer at the time Continental opted to purchase it, with clear backlog though.
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 33):
Not from what I heard; I have always heard that Boeing restarted production specifically for CO.

You heard incorrectly, then.

The last 767-200ER had been delivered about four years prior, however the plane was still on offer because Boeing was developing the KC-767 (which used the 767-200ER airframe) for the USAF, the Italian Air Force and the Japanese Air Force.

So the plane was available for CO to order, as it was for Kazakhstan Airlines, who ordered one after CO did and before the KC-767s started production.
 
columba
Posts: 5045
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:07 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
I expect Boeing kept the 767-200ER alive for the KC-X program and have now retired it as they no longer need it - the 767-2C has a longer fuselage, a different cockpit and uses 767-300F landing gear.

Frankenplane indeed  
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
User avatar
DexSwart
Posts: 609
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:08 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:13 am

Quoting American 767 (Reply 28):
like they will soon be the sole operator of the 717

You also forgot QantasLink.

But most of the 717 frames are surely not that old, are they?


Back on topic:

Is there really still a market for this? I thought the 787 filled this gap and made up for it's larger size with better fuel economy? Or have I got the cat by the wrong end again?
Durban. Melbourne. Denver. Hong Kong.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:47 am

Quoting DexSwart (Reply 37):
You also forgot QantasLink.

And Volotea.
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/380
 
XFSUgimpLB41X
Posts: 3961
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2000 1:18 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:49 am

Quoting American 767 (Reply 28):
It wouldn't surprise me if Delta picks up additional 764s from United. I see Delta as being the sole 764 operator in the world for a number of years to come, like they will soon be the sole operator of the 717 and the MD-90. Indeed, the A330 killed the 764.

The 764 is extremely efficient. UA loves theirs, DL loves theirs. There certainly won't be more orders, but I doubt either carrier will be parting with them any time soon.

You've been duly corrected on the 717.  
Chicks dig winglets.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:43 am

Quoting columba (Reply 36):
Frankenplane indeed.    

That was more their earlier proposal for KC-X which used the 767-200ER fuselage, 767-400ER wings and 767-300F undercarriage (which is still necessary on the 767-2C / KC-46 to support the significantly higher MTOW compared to the 767-200ER).
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:46 am

I'm really wondering if the KC46 will really have a 2 m stretch fuselage ?
No news of that since the outcome of the RFP ... and the length of the KC46 is necessarly a bit more than 767-200 because the boom protubes behind the tail cone...

So ?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:40 am

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 41):
I'm really wondering if the KC46 will really have a 2 m stretch fuselage?

Boeing says it will and they should know.  
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:43 am

They said it once

And the latest press release statede "based on 767-200ER"
So ?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:50 am

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 43):
And the latest press release statede "based on 767-200ER"

Which is correct. It is based on a 767-200ER. But that does not mean it is identical to a 767-200ER (which it will not be).

We do have folks who work at PAE so once Boeing loads the first 767-2C into the FAL, one of them can run a tape measure and prove it once and for all.  
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 788
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:51 am

All right

I think I will survive till then !
:d
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:24 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 16):
For a hefty price Boeing would do anything. RIP 764
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 17):
The 764ER shares the same tooling as the rest of the 767 line, and it wouldn't cost that much for Boeing to restart production should any airline be interested. Boeing did so for CO and the 762ER, and that cost Boeing almost nothing.

As evidenced by the fact that they restarted 767-400ER production for the E-10 airframe, which was later sold for VVIP use.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:28 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 46):
As evidenced by the fact that they restarted 767-400ER production for the E-10 airframe, which was later sold for VVIP use.

If I remember correctly, the E-10 was built around the time final 767-400s were being delivered. Then it went to storage until VVIP decided to take it, due to E-10 programme cancellation.

So - again - the statement with "Boeing restarting production" is incorrect.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 23214
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:36 pm

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 47):
If I remember correctly, the E-10 was built around the time final 767-400s were being delivered.

It was completed in 2008, about 6 years after the last CO 767-400ER rolled off the line.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 2:12 pm

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 29):
Same will happen for 767-300ER in due time, once backlog is cleared.

I think it will stay on offer as long as they have excess capacity on the 767 line. If the 76F, 2CFX/Tanker are filling capacity then you may see it retired but I think Boeing will want to have the valve at their disposal so they can run the line as optimally as possible. The end is certainly in sight but I don't think it is imminent.

tortugamon
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 1978
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 2:20 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
Quoting B2707SST (Reply 22):
Any info on whether the 767-2C will get the 764's raked wingtips?

No. The span is the same as the 767-200ER.

Can anybody elaborate on why there won't be any type of wingtip device on the -2CFX? Doesn't make sense to me why any attempt to add efficiency would not be taken advantage of.
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14026
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Boeing Drops 767-200ER / 767-400ER. Adds 767-2CFX

Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:03 pm

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 45):
If I remember correctly, the E-10 was built around the time final 767-400s were being delivered. Then it went to storage until VVIP decided to take it, due to E-10 programme cancellation.

So - again - the statement with "Boeing restarting production" is incorrect.

Indeed true, but it seems they must have had a plan to restart production should they have been awarded a contract for batches of E-10s, no?

Quoting PC12Fan (Reply 48):
Can anybody elaborate on why there won't be any type of wingtip device on the -2CFX?
http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/...-wont-have-winglets-aviation-week/ says

Quote:

“Based on the USAF refueling requirements, the missions were not of sufficient duration nor conducted at altitudes that optimize the benefits derived from winglets,” Boeing told Aviation Week.

See also

Shady Boeing: No Winglets On KC-46A (by AirRyan Apr 7 2011 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!