I think I created posts on that 13, 7, 2, 1 years ago. First I had the Dreamliner crowd all over me (787 = 767 replacement) later on the MOM/NMA crowd.
Always felt it was a reasonable idea. The 767 is 30t lighter than the A330/787, right sized, got significant updated for the -400ER and KC-46.
And it has an existing production line and supply chain. And United asked for it.. and can do serious cargo.. and lacks expensive composites infrastructure.. and has a much better MCAS..
I guess your new project grandfathering concerns only extend to 90s era 777 tech, not to 70s era 767 tech or 80s era A320 tech.
Based on the 764??? Good lord, talk about aerospace necromancy. Boeing REALLY doesn’t want to launch the NMA...
The 763/763F already has gobs of range. Now we add a +25% more efficient engine compared to the CF6s on those birds so what to do with all that big and empty fuel tankage space you've created by being +25% more efficient? Well, stretch the fuse add more room for cargo/pax for more earning potential at the cost of some more drag and so more use of that empty fuel space.
It's the same thing we see with single aisles: as you add more efficient engines, the market shifts from A320 to A321, 737-7 to 737-8/9/10, etc.
TFA says extended gear is needed for bigger engines, also helps deal with 764 long tail potential dragging issues.
This is interesting.. but considering the A330 kicked the 767's @ss ,leading to Boeing building the 787 I can't see how the passenger 767MAX would be that successful except for the most ardent 767 customers like UA. Delta and AA have already moved on with the NEO and 787. Cargo could be interesting.. Airbus has apparently given up on the A330F, they won't even upgrade it to the highest MTOW of the newest passenger models so a 767FMAX would have the market to itself.
Yes, in cargo Team B is kicking Team A's butt, it makes sense to do what it takes to further the trend.
I think cargo customers can be talked into a 764F with GEnX engines to complement the 763F with CF6 engines.
i find this difficult to believe regarding nma, simply because a big factor of nma is developing the system to build composite planes fast, eventually for nsa.
I do believe Boeing must be looking around at various Plan Bs because of the huge fiscal hole MAX has created.
Yet we don't know that this 767MAX will pencil out to be a better idea, for the very reason you suggest, it doesn't help Boeing develop tech it surely knows it needs to develop to replace 737MAX.
As Lightsaber says, most studies remain studies.
Last edited by Revelation
on Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.