RJMAZ wrote:seahawk wrote:We should not look at that rumour in isolation, but consider the rumour about a 737-9ERMAX. The 737 would be the direct competition to the A321 and the 767MAX would try to fill the gap in capacity between the 737 and the 787.
I see where you are coming from. But 221m2 vs 232m2 the 767-400ER nearly has the same cabin area as the 787-8. It does not really fill the gap below the 787.
The 787-8 would easily carry 10% more passengers due to its better cabin width optimisation while burning the same if not less fuel than this hypothetical 767-400MAX. The bigger wing on the 787-8 allows it to fly higher and burn less fuel despite having an empty weight 10% greater than the 767-400ER.
Purchase price would have to be extremely cheap to make the 767-400MAX attractive. Boeing could just further improve production efficiency on the 787-8 instead.
Unless we are talking about 767-200MAX and 767-300MAX. They would fill the gap in terms of cabin area however they would most likely have a range of 8000nm and 7000nm respectively. Like I know we have a surge in point to point routes but is there demand? Airlines might actually be desperate to open more long thin routes which is being held back by the lack of suitable small long haul aircraft. We do not know demand as it is a chicken before the egg situation. New routes might open up that people here might laugh at.
Lets take Australia to the USA. Currently we have a dozen routes between the two countries with about half going to and from Sydney. A 767MAX would allow Brisbane to connect to four or five of the current US cities. Melbourne and Sydney would then connect to a few additional US cities. It is really hard to predict as we have not had a small widebody with competitive fuel burn for 30+ years.
I would not interpret "based on the -400" as having the same fuselage length as the -400, more like the 400 being the baseline (landing gear, avionics, wingtips) from which they start and I see no reason why they could not do a -300 length fuselage. And do you remember the customer feedback surveys for the MOM from a few years ago- They indicated that a larger group of airlines wanted a direct A321 competitor, while a sizeable group wanted a 767 replacement. The combination of 767MAX and 737-9ERMAX would appeal to each group and together would be quite cheap to implement and rather fast to the market.
Due to the conflicting wishes the 797 could always appeal to one group only and the costs would be a lot higher, while the time to the market would be a lot longer. Considering the financial consequences of the MAX grounding, cheap and fast might be the better option, especially if Boeing has reached a consensus that they need the NSA by 2030.