• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:02 pm

OA940 wrote:
OK but the 764 is literally the 788 of the family. If they wanna launch a re-engined 767 and not doing it on the -300ER platform I'm actually convinced they are dumb.

If it's for the freight world and freight world only, and NOT for the NMA, then it makes sense from a commonality and pilot training perspective. Freighters usually bulk out before they weigh out except on the 747Fs, so using the largest 767 family member makes sense on that dimension. That said, for the life of me I can't imagine Boeing seriously believe's there's THAT much demand for a freighter of the 767's size that is also restricted by wingspan to the point they can't just use a modified 788. I get freighters are always 15-20 years late to every party, but really?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18109
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:04 pm

A long time ago, when I was in tech development, we did all sorts of studies. These departments always take new entrants and run them through a plausible scenario. I spent a lot of time on a re-engine of the A340-600... Didn't happen. A320 too, launched 5 years after I left the program. A 767 re-engine too. BRX.... MRJ v1 (launched on V4)

So let us see if anything happens. About 1 out of 20 of these studiesoves forward.
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
ukoverlander
Posts: 383
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 10:57 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:07 pm

kjeld0d wrote:
My advice: Lengthen it a few frames. Then install a computer control system to keep it flyable.


......and then just don't tell anybody about the new computer control system. It should be just fine.

A 767 NG Neo Max............. another very exciting, progressive idea from the nice folks at Boeing :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2220
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:14 pm

keesje wrote:
I guess the "767-400ER based derivative" would be the glass cockpit, system upgrades, 777 style Signature interior, etc.

The fuselage lenght(s) capacity would probably more in the 767-200-300 area. The 400ER is serious overlapping the 787-8.

As said the USAF replaced a lot of legacy system already, they want to fly 767s for 40+ years.

Fedex, UPS, Delta, United and AA, the biggest 767 would no doubt applaud this initiative. As well as local authorities, DoD, congress..


This is how I understand it as well. When talking about the -400ER, they mean the updated 777/787 flight deck and other system improvements.

In size they would probably do a -300, even a -200 sized one would be interesting to fit neatly between the 737-10 and the 787-9. The 787-8 is not selling, so overlap isn't as important.

And those who're still fantasizing about a 757 MAX, the 757 is dead. It hasn't been in production for 15 years. The 767 is still being produced both for military and civilian use, and would fit better as a NMA/MOM aircraft.

Although I have to say, MAXing a 767 after the 737 MAX issues.. I'm not so sure it's a great idea. The whole irony is that this project is a way to free up funds for a replacement narrowbody for the 737 MAX.
 
musman9853
Posts: 825
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:29 pm

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.
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
User avatar
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:30 pm

ukoverlander wrote:
kjeld0d wrote:
My advice: Lengthen it a few frames. Then install a computer control system to keep it flyable.


......and then just don't tell anybody about the new computer control system. It should be just fine.

A 767 NG Neo Max............. another very exciting, progressive idea from the nice folks at Boeing :stirthepot:



You feel better now that you got that off your chest?
learning never stops.
 
User avatar
OA940
Posts: 1908
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:35 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
OA940 wrote:
OK but the 764 is literally the 788 of the family. If they wanna launch a re-engined 767 and not doing it on the -300ER platform I'm actually convinced they are dumb.

If it's for the freight world and freight world only, and NOT for the NMA, then it makes sense from a commonality and pilot training perspective. Freighters usually bulk out before they weigh out except on the 747Fs, so using the largest 767 family member makes sense on that dimension. That said, for the life of me I can't imagine Boeing seriously believe's there's THAT much demand for a freighter of the 767's size that is also restricted by wingspan to the point they can't just use a modified 788. I get freighters are always 15-20 years late to every party, but really?

I would agree, if not for the fact that Boeing seems to actively avoid the NMA/MoM. The market is most certainly there, and its upper level is wide open, considering the 338 doesn't really cater to the MoM except for the very upper bit. So if they won't launch the NMA they must be using this as the alternative, otherwise they've lost their minds entirely
A350/CSeries = bae
 
StTim
Posts: 3445
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:40 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
For grandfathering you just have to match fuselage dimensions and COG. And Boeing can re-sculpt the interior to eke out some additional passenger room and make it to 17.4" a seat like the 777X. The old tooling would likely be worthless anyway, so why not? Lead time on the 777X fuselage wasn't so bad and was not based on the original tooling at the end of the day.



I think you require far more than just that for grandfathering.

Do you have an aircraft design and engineering background?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21368
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:43 pm

keesje wrote:
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.

DarthLobster wrote:
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.

DCA350 wrote:
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.

musman9853 wrote:
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.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
AirwayBill
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:37 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:45 pm

anrec80 wrote:
ILNFlyer wrote:
I wonder why the are focusing on the -400....and the Genx-1b has been available since the launch of the 787, wonder why this wasn't studied much earlier....


Wouldn’t 787 engine be a bit too much for 767?


Just position it a bit up/forward to the wing, and slap a MCAS on it!
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:45 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
keesje wrote:
I guess the "767-400ER based derivative" would be the glass cockpit, system upgrades, 777 style Signature interior, etc.

The fuselage lenght(s) capacity would probably more in the 767-200-300 area. The 400ER is serious overlapping the 787-8.

As said the USAF replaced a lot of legacy system already, they want to fly 767s for 40+ years.

Fedex, UPS, Delta, United and AA, the biggest 767 would no doubt applaud this initiative. As well as local authorities, DoD, congress..


This is how I understand it as well. When talking about the -400ER, they mean the updated 777/787 flight deck and other system improvements.

In size they would probably do a -300, even a -200 sized one would be interesting to fit neatly between the 737-10 and the 787-9. The 787-8 is not selling, so overlap isn't as important.

And those who're still fantasizing about a 757 MAX, the 757 is dead. It hasn't been in production for 15 years. The 767 is still being produced both for military and civilian use, and would fit better as a NMA/MOM aircraft.

Although I have to say, MAXing a 767 after the 737 MAX issues.. I'm not so sure it's a great idea. The whole irony is that this project is a way to free up funds for a replacement narrowbody for the 737 MAX.


That doesn't mean the 757 is dead. A single-aisle craft is much more efficient in terms of fuel economy, but one that can fit 240-270 passengers will be very long and slow to load from only 1 side, so the logistics are not ideal unless a bunch of airlines want to follow Virgin's lead on loading from both ends. Using the overall type rating as the launch vehicle for the NSA manufacturing processes down the line is just good business too. The literal only problem with it is the 17.2" wide seats which have grown infamous on ULH flights. Boeing would need to sculpt the insides to find some extra space, but the idea it couldn't happen is ridiculous.
 
jagraham
Posts: 920
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:46 pm

keesje wrote:
I guess the "767-400ER based derivative" would be the glass cockpit, system upgrades, 777 style Signature interior, etc.

The fuselage lenght(s) capacity would probably more in the 767-200-300 area. The 400ER is serious overlapping the 787-8.

As said the USAF replaced a lot of legacy system already, they want to fly 767s for 40+ years.

Fedex, UPS, Delta, United and AA, the biggest 767 would no doubt applaud this initiative. As well as local authorities, DoD, congress..


The 767-400 already has the 777 glass cockpit. And the longer landing gear that would be required for ground clearance.

This is the 764ERX that Boeing bailed out of a while back, except with the (lighter) GEnX instead of the GP7200.

It would still have the M0.8 767 wing, but with winglets, that part is 6% better. And it is light enough as is. They could even mate the 763A fuselage with the 764 wing and landing gear, but I would bet on a 764 shrink.

I'm sure UPS and FedEx would rather have GEnX on their new 767 freighters . . so it isn't a completely insane idea.
For pax it would be better to limit the weight and get 44K lbs thrust LEAP engines (the GTF would do even better but politically LEAP has the inside track at Boeing) and be done with it. At the rate Boeing is going, I will be 100 years old before the 797 goes into revenue service.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1364
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:47 pm

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
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.

DarthLobster wrote:
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? 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.

DCA350 wrote:
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.


764 main gear is already 18" longer than 763. That may be what makes it easy to fit the bigger engines.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:49 pm

StTim wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
For grandfathering you just have to match fuselage dimensions and COG. And Boeing can re-sculpt the interior to eke out some additional passenger room and make it to 17.4" a seat like the 777X. The old tooling would likely be worthless anyway, so why not? Lead time on the 777X fuselage wasn't so bad and was not based on the original tooling at the end of the day.



I think you require far more than just that for grandfathering.

Do you have an aircraft design and engineering background?


I have evidence. See all 4 iterations of the 737, and the 777X and 777-300 families. Cockpit doesn't have to be similar, aerodynamics don't have to be a perfect match, length doesn't have to be exact, but look at COG and fuselage width. It seems you can pretty much get away with everything else given enough paperwork and manuals. And since you can retrain pilots for the differences, it ends up a wash.

The 757 doesn't have the ground clearance limitation of the 737 either, so it's much easier to modify.
Last edited by patrickjp93 on Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1153
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:51 pm

texl1649 wrote:
The GEnX was first run around 2006. This is an engine that was largely developed roughly 20 years ago (more, from an EIS perspective on some 767 derivative). Who in their right mind would put a new model out with it's basis 40+ year old wings and a 20 year old engine?

Sure, they could easily throw it on some freighters, and GE would be happy to offer it as an upgrade to the KC-46 in another 10 (or 40) years, but it's silly as a passenger model consideration. The 787 itself is approaching an NEO/MAX age.


Who would consider it? A bunch of dumbass bean counters as described in the New Republic article.

Even though this concept was extensively studied and re-studied, and eventually shelved, sheer expediency may force them to do it.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21368
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 7:54 pm

jagraham wrote:
The 767-400 already has the 777 glass cockpit.

A.net pedantry rules require me to comment that the 767-400 has the 777 glass displays yet a very different cockpit.

jagraham wrote:
And the longer landing gear that would be required for ground clearance.

Same rules require me to point out that the fine article tells us this concept will come with gear mods beyond the -400 version.

jagraham wrote:
This is the 764ERX that Boeing bailed out of a while back, except with the (lighter) GEnX instead of the GP7200.

Can we also get the E-10A back as well? :biggrin:

jagraham wrote:
I'm sure UPS and FedEx would rather have GEnX on their new 767 freighters . . so it isn't a completely insane idea.

It would even give UPS compatibility with the GEnX-1B from their 747-8F.
Last edited by Revelation on Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 369
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:00 pm

Two thoughts

1) some sort of cozy suite arrangement 8 abreast in Y

2) staggered seating 3-2-3 in Y with traditional 2-3-2 for the upgraded coach cabin.
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
StTim
Posts: 3445
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:06 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
StTim wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
For grandfathering you just have to match fuselage dimensions and COG. And Boeing can re-sculpt the interior to eke out some additional passenger room and make it to 17.4" a seat like the 777X. The old tooling would likely be worthless anyway, so why not? Lead time on the 777X fuselage wasn't so bad and was not based on the original tooling at the end of the day.



I think you require far more than just that for grandfathering.

Do you have an aircraft design and engineering background?


I have evidence. See all 4 iterations of the 737, and the 777X and 777-300 families. Cockpit doesn't have to be similar, aerodynamics don't have to be a perfect match, length doesn't have to be exact, but look at COG and fuselage width. It seems you can pretty much get away with everything else given enough paperwork and manuals. And since you can retrain pilots for the differences, it ends up a wash.

The 757 doesn't have the ground clearance limitation of the 737 either, so it's much easier to modify.


I think you are displaying a lack of engineering understanding. Just because something has the same basic external shape does not mean it has the same stress bearing structure internally. This is the key not external dimensions.

I am not sure that Boeing has got away with grandfathering the 777X fusekage structure - given that they have produced stress and fatgue frames. The sidewall sculpting will have changed stress profiles quite significantly.
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1380
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:09 pm

This looks like a Boeing version of the A330 900 F stretch rumoured last year for Amazon and UPS.

Looks like a real competition for mid range freighters is underway.

https://www.aerotime.aero/ruta.burbaite ... boeing-767
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3151
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:11 pm

keesje wrote:
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..

Image


Boeing may prove you right after all Keejse. :D

Maybe Boeing has been reading Anet over the years. LOL.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1376671&p=19899493&hilit=767+max+767max#p19899493

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=606811&p=9681851&hilit=767+max+767max#p9681851
 
ikramerica
Posts: 14897
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:16 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
keesje wrote:
I guess the "767-400ER based derivative" would be the glass cockpit, system upgrades, 777 style Signature interior, etc.

The fuselage lenght(s) capacity would probably more in the 767-200-300 area. The 400ER is serious overlapping the 787-8.

As said the USAF replaced a lot of legacy system already, they want to fly 767s for 40+ years.

Fedex, UPS, Delta, United and AA, the biggest 767 would no doubt applaud this initiative. As well as local authorities, DoD, congress..


This is how I understand it as well. When talking about the -400ER, they mean the updated 777/787 flight deck and other system improvements.

In size they would probably do a -300, even a -200 sized one would be interesting to fit neatly between the 737-10 and the 787-9. The 787-8 is not selling, so overlap isn't as important.


Right. People sometimes forget that the 764 was a 1990s gen2 767 crippled by lack of viable engines.

My guess is that the plane would be based on the 767-300 sized fuselage with the 764 improvements, and if they were to add frames, they would do it differently for CG reasons and takeoff, possibly adding a few more frames but mostly before the wing.

767-8 and 8F, with a -9 in the future.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3151
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:16 pm

The only reason I see Boeing going this route is-

1. 737MAX grounding is going to hurt financially much more than Boeing letting on.

2. The business case is not there, Boeing cannot sell enough frames to cover the R&D

3. The engineers has put forth a compelling product case that will cater to different markets and relatively cheap to develop.

4. 767MAX will allow all hands on deck (more engineers) to engineer a 737 replacement and lower MOM aircraft
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3151
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:18 pm

Boeing will want to keep the R&D outlay low on this project, hence the using of parts on the market today. But what would be the cost of a new wing?
 
PhilMcCrackin
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:54 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:21 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
texl1649 wrote:
McDonnell Douglas is dead. Long live the McDD management!

A decent chunk of said MD management is now gone though. If this IS specifically for the freighter market, and not also intended to be the new NMA stopgap, then that's fine. The freighter market is usually running lots of inefficient, legacy hardware, so in the era of ultra high fuel prices, it's probably a good idea to re-engine the old beasts while new frames are being built in passenger land.


The freighter market makes sense as it doesn't have any direct Boeing competition for such a thing. It won't see the light of day on the passenger side because it will cannibalize 787 orders, if pax operators were even interested.
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3235
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:43 pm

UPS757Pilot wrote:
MD-11 replacement. The 767 can ft in existing parking infrastructure at the main hubs, where as the 777F, 787F?, A330F and A350F? wingspan is just too big. Add in fleet commonality and qualified crews and I can see UPS being very interested in this proposal.

We have a winner. MD-11 only has half a decade left with the cargo carriers. Unless folding wingtips become a normal thing, a 764F is the perfect replacement and keeps the crew flexibility that the airlines want.

It is interesting though if they do go for the larger option. Something in the 757 category is what the next order rush will be about. The 737 may be the answer, but I really don’t know about it to comment.
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3235
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:55 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
OA940 wrote:
OK but the 764 is literally the 788 of the family. If they wanna launch a re-engined 767 and not doing it on the -300ER platform I'm actually convinced they are dumb.

If it's for the freight world and freight world only, and NOT for the NMA, then it makes sense from a commonality and pilot training perspective. Freighters usually bulk out before they weigh out except on the 747Fs, so using the largest 767 family member makes sense on that dimension. That said, for the life of me I can't imagine Boeing seriously believe's there's THAT much demand for a freighter of the 767's size that is also restricted by wingspan to the point they can't just use a modified 788. I get freighters are always 15-20 years late to every party, but really?

Wingspan issues are a massive issue for both FX and 5X. When you have everything come in at once and everything leave at once every parking spot is critical.

You either eat the spots and move work to other hubs which require more aircraft, or hold out until you get an aircraft that fits.

Everybody likes to downplay the wingspan issues on here as not a big deal for the integrators, but it is a huge issue. And considering they are the biggest cargo carriers in the world, it matters for everybody.

I’m sure we’d love brand new 787s flying between our gateways. But if they mean we lose a parking position at even 25% of our facilities, it’s a no go. Cargo isn’t like pax, airports don’t accommodate us like pax carriers unless it’s SDF, MEM, or ANC.
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
GalebG4
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 8:59 pm

keesje wrote:
I guess the "767-400ER based derivative" would be the glass cockpit, system upgrades, 777 style Signature interior, etc.

The fuselage lenght(s) capacity would probably more in the 767-200-300 area. The 400ER is serious overlapping the 787-8.

As said the USAF replaced a lot of legacy system already, they want to fly 767s for 40+ years.

Fedex, UPS, Delta, United and AA, the biggest 767 would no doubt applaud this initiative. As well as local authorities, DoD, congress..


Also you need to take into consideration fuselage interior width. With 777X Boeing managed to make 5in more for interior cabin width making 777X 10 abreast standard. So if they manage to make 4in more for 767 they can make 8 abreast standard like they did with 777X. Now 767-400 is seriously overlapping with 787-8 but 767-400X* could be more for short to medium flights (perfect for trans-continental US and US-EU flights) wide body aircraft while 787-8 for medium to long haul flights. But even if they make 767X it is not going to make sense if it is not going to have same or smaller cost per seat km as 787.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:01 pm

StTim wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
StTim wrote:


I think you require far more than just that for grandfathering.

Do you have an aircraft design and engineering background?


I have evidence. See all 4 iterations of the 737, and the 777X and 777-300 families. Cockpit doesn't have to be similar, aerodynamics don't have to be a perfect match, length doesn't have to be exact, but look at COG and fuselage width. It seems you can pretty much get away with everything else given enough paperwork and manuals. And since you can retrain pilots for the differences, it ends up a wash.

The 757 doesn't have the ground clearance limitation of the 737 either, so it's much easier to modify.


I think you are displaying a lack of engineering understanding. Just because something has the same basic external shape does not mean it has the same stress bearing structure internally. This is the key not external dimensions.

I am not sure that Boeing has got away with grandfathering the 777X fusekage structure - given that they have produced stress and fatgue frames. The sidewall sculpting will have changed stress profiles quite significantly.


And you don't necessarily NEED the same structure internally either. Al-Li use in fuselages changed that calculus quite a lot in the last couple decades. And no, it's external dimensions that are key. Again, we have the evidence that this is true with multiple aircraft families.

The stress frame comes with every iteration of every craft family. The fatigue frame is necessary on the 777X for the new composite wing, but it still maintains type rating with the 777-300, so it's grandfathered.
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:11 pm

jetblueguy22 wrote:
patrickjp93 wrote:
OA940 wrote:
OK but the 764 is literally the 788 of the family. If they wanna launch a re-engined 767 and not doing it on the -300ER platform I'm actually convinced they are dumb.

If it's for the freight world and freight world only, and NOT for the NMA, then it makes sense from a commonality and pilot training perspective. Freighters usually bulk out before they weigh out except on the 747Fs, so using the largest 767 family member makes sense on that dimension. That said, for the life of me I can't imagine Boeing seriously believe's there's THAT much demand for a freighter of the 767's size that is also restricted by wingspan to the point they can't just use a modified 788. I get freighters are always 15-20 years late to every party, but really?

Wingspan issues are a massive issue for both FX and 5X. When you have everything come in at once and everything leave at once every parking spot is critical.

You either eat the spots and move work to other hubs which require more aircraft, or hold out until you get an aircraft that fits.

Everybody likes to downplay the wingspan issues on here as not a big deal for the integrators, but it is a huge issue. And considering they are the biggest cargo carriers in the world, it matters for everybody.

I’m sure we’d love brand new 787s flying between our gateways. But if they mean we lose a parking position at even 25% of our facilities, it’s a no go. Cargo isn’t like pax, airports don’t accommodate us like pax carriers unless it’s SDF, MEM, or ANC.


Then optimize your routing of cargo such that filling those 787s to the brim is possible. No one is going to build you a new MD-80F or MD-11F. Find some new solutions. There's room on plenty of trains, trucks, and pax aircraft all over the world. Even if it just comes down to an open-air bidding market that's digitally run, you can easily get packages where they need to go in a timely manner without constraining yourself to 50-year-old planes. I'm also sure Boeing can modify the wings of the 787 to have folding tips to make the problem largely, if not entirely, go away when converted to a freighter anyway.

I realize Amazon is a bit of an edge case, having the money to build their own cargo airports, but if the other cargo carriers don't get their butts in gear, they're gonna get steamrolled because their costs are too high from fuel.
 
LightningZ71
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:59 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:22 pm

I see this as a GE and UPS pushed project.

The 747 line is coming to an end. GE has a financial interest in extending the life of the production "line" perhaps including development funding for a PIP. Having the 747-8f and this hypothetical 767-400erxf sharing an engine will be very attractive for ups and any other freight companies that operate the -8f. In addition, with GE on the hook to supply spares for AF1, which will also use the 2B, GE needs something else to help them make money with the line.

As for the actual business case, we see that the -300 is very popular for freight conversions, largely because of the extra volume over the -200. I could see them choosing to apply the lessons learned from the -400 itself, the erx study, and the conversion market as a whole to make the conjectural -400erxf. Then, using the same lessons on the -300 to address the MOM frame.

How does this work financially? Typically, a major portion of the purchase cost of an airframe is the engines. If GE is trying to keep the 2B in production, I can see this as being quite attractively priced from an engine standpoint. Boeing already has most of the needed pieces in place, so development costs should be reasonable, meaning that until costs shouldn't be too high on the per frame side.

Who could be a customer? Well, for the freight version, assuming -400 length, it's a drop in replacement for the md-10 and 11f, so anyone operating them could use them. Whoever uses the -8f will see economies of scale with engine commonality, and anyone that already is setup for the 767 freighter would naturally appreciate it's compatibility with their infrastructure. My thoughts are that this would see significant sales to UPS, FedEX, Amazon/atlas/abx. Between all of them, that's easily well north of 100 frames of demand.

On the passenger side, the case is less compelling. The -300 length fits the market better. There, it's going to have to win against newer 321xlrs and heavily discounted 330-800s and 900s. If they can split the difference in pricing and maintain decent fuel burn numbers, I can see it making sales.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1152
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:30 pm

PhilMcCrackin wrote:
The freighter market makes sense as it doesn't have any direct Boeing competition for such a thing.

If there is no competition for the 767F - which is quite true IMHO - why would Boeing even bother with this upgrade? They've proven that the existing 767F still sells well, although production rates remain far below other widebodies.
 
iberiadc852
Posts: 269
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 8:23 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:38 pm

KlimaBXsst wrote:
Two thoughts

1) some sort of cozy suite arrangement 8 abreast in Y

2) staggered seating 3-2-3 in Y with traditional 2-3-2 for the upgraded coach cabin.



I always thought you can gain a lot of efficiency by getting 8ab in a 767 external width, but I wonder if it can be achievable with acceptable comfort. (A330 killed the 767, as many say here, yes, but with newer technology and better use of space. This would be another story)

On the other hand, how could be that staggered seating? 7-8-7-8-7-8 abreast and so on? Doesn't it kill the aisles?

Wouldn't it be better with that fuselage thinnering, just 2-4-2 ab. for Standard Economy, and 2-3-2 for Premium Economy --> An improvement of the former 767's already best economy Y in the market?
variety is the spice of life; that's what made the "old times" so good
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6520
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:43 pm

After all the indignation and loathing when a GEnx-2b powered 767MoM was first broached on this board, Boeing seems really intent on moving ahead with the idea (and now a 764 at that). Our friend from over the border must feel vindicated. :laughing:


OA940 wrote:
The market is most certainly there, and its upper level is wide open, considering the 338 doesn't really cater to the MoM except for the very upper bit.

Both OEM's views on the size of the market differ markedly (maybe depending on the phase of the moon). But it's rather curious that B is mulling this at a time when gloomy news abound about the cargo business. Is it to deflect attention from the NMA and their other worries? I'm rooting big for the continued existence of 7-abreast Y...but won't the -2b require a derate for a pax version given past assertions here that it had too much power (and weight) for the job :?: Perhaps A would rush the A338 through the certification process now that B has placed its bet. :box:
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Bradlee102896
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun May 05, 2019 4:13 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:50 pm

Wouldn’t Boeing want to incorporate the raked wingtips instead of blended winglets? Unless the wingspan would be too long.
 
iberiadc852
Posts: 269
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 8:23 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:53 pm

jagraham wrote:
It would still have the M0.8 767 wing, but with winglets, that part is 6% better. And it is light enough as is. They could even mate the 763A fuselage with the 764 wing and landing gear, but I would bet on a 764 shrink.


How would this aircraft have the 763 fuselage or a 764 shrink with the 764 wing?
If retains a mininum of the MOM philosophy, with better engines and weight improvements, it could fly much longer than a 763, just keeping the 763 wings, let alone the 764 ones.
So for me it's clear they should optimize wings for the a 763ER like range, by reducing them, with the subsequent additional weight gain. Or just keep them, if they want to spend nothing on that. But for me it seems there's a lot of margin to invest in an optimized reduced wing.
variety is the spice of life; that's what made the "old times" so good
 
User avatar
msp747
Posts: 416
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 9:54 pm

Bradlee102896 wrote:
Wouldn’t Boeing want to incorporate the raked wingtips instead of blended winglets? Unless the wingspan would be too long.

The 764 already has raked wingtips, so there would be no need to incorporate them. That's part of what makes the wing longer on the 764 vs a 763
 
FLALEFTY
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:06 pm

Also you need to take into consideration fuselage interior width. With 777X Boeing managed to make 5in more for interior cabin width making 777X 10 abreast standard. So if they manage to make 4 in more for 767 they can make 8 abreast standard like they did with 777X. Now 767-400 is seriously overlapping with 787-8 but 767-400X* could be more for short to medium flights (perfect for trans-continental US and US-EU flights) wide body aircraft while 787-8 for medium to long haul flights. But even if they make 767X it is not going to make sense if it is not going to have same or smaller cost per seat km as 787.[/quote]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_B ... deliveries

There are only 61 undelivered 788's on the books and 788 orders have declined from 26 in 2017, to 10 in 2018, to just 4 YTD in 2019. This variant appears to be following the trend that the 762 did after the 763 was introduced back in the mid-1980's. I think Boeing will probably be focusing on the 250-passenger, 789 and 300-passenger, 78X models going forward and let the 220-passenger, 788 model gradually fade out.

This 76X study probably has FedEx and UPS very interested. Both have large fleets of A306F's & MD11F's that will become more and more expensive in terms of MRO costs as the spares supply chains for those obsolete aircraft dries up. If Boeing can match the MD11F's range, then a 76XF program launch could be inevitable. As for passenger airlines, I imaging both Delta and United will study the 76X option carefully. I think the potential market is around 500 to 750 planes if development of both variants proceeds.
Last edited by FLALEFTY on Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
mtzguerrero
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:56 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:06 pm

Good to read that, for acommodating the larger turbofans, they'll extend the landing gear instead of mounting the engines ahead. #LessonLearned
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 794
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:08 pm

Hmmm...

I'm excited yet not excited. On the one hand, this would keep one of my favorite designs flying for many more years. On the other hand, Boeing really needs to release something new to address the middle of the market muddle. Lets call that the, "MoMM."

Really, what we're looking at here is a low hanging fruit approach. They know that they can get such a plane out of the door and into the skies relatively quickly compared to a new design. Cargo operators and United have requested or at least discussed such a plane previously, so the chance of orders is certainly there. Boeing is also possibly a bit short on engineering talent with so much going into the MAX and 777X programs, so producing an updated 767 instead of a clean sheet design may alleviate that. The engineering shortage has been discussed here many times, though I have no first hand knowledge of it, so take that as you will. One also wonders if the 737's replacement is further along than we may know, and if engineering talent is being sent there, as well.

So, while I'm excited at the prospect of the grand 'ol 767 flying for many more years, I do wish that a clean sheet design would see the light of day.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 463
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:10 pm

Im getting the feeling their MOM project is becoming harder to justify. A re-engined 767 makes sense imo. Cheaper and easier to deliver. Take funds and work on 737 replacement.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7098
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:26 pm

It would have been a great idea in January 2005. Now it is just extending the life of a 70s design. I suppose BCA is responding to current market conditions.

IMHO, the raise of Gulf carriers and the general obsession with wide-body aircraft stifled innovation in aviation at least for a decade. The world would have been better connected with a more capable narrow-body aircraft.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1864
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:27 pm

OA940 wrote:
OK but the 764 is literally the 788 of the family. If they wanna launch a re-engined 767 and not doing it on the -300ER platform I'm actually convinced they are dumb.


Wouldn't using the -300 push you into the same problem that always happens when the new engines are larger than the old ones, i.e., adding engine weight without adding seats eats into the efficiency gains of the new engines? Hence why the NEO and MAX have sold relatively better in the longer variants than the CEO/NG did? I'm no expert on the math, but the pattern seems pretty consistent across models.
 
jagraham
Posts: 920
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:27 pm

iberiadc852 wrote:
jagraham wrote:
It would still have the M0.8 767 wing, but with winglets, that part is 6% better. And it is light enough as is. They could even mate the 763A fuselage with the 764 wing and landing gear, but I would bet on a 764 shrink.


How would this aircraft have the 763 fuselage or a 764 shrink with the 764 wing?
If retains a mininum of the MOM philosophy, with better engines and weight improvements, it could fly much longer than a 763, just keeping the 763 wings, let alone the 764 ones.
So for me it's clear they should optimize wings for the a 763ER like range, by reducing them, with the subsequent additional weight gain. Or just keep them, if they want to spend nothing on that. But for me it seems there's a lot of margin to invest in an optimized reduced wing.


The whole idea of a GEnX 767 is minimal change.
Range is not the issue; if you need much longer than 8 hours, get a 787.
This is about low cost and medium range. Apparently the engine change lowers cost enough to justify the change.
As for wings,the 764 has raked wingtips, which Boeing considers best. However, as other posters have noted, both UPS and FedEx have parking considerations at their hubs. A 787 size wing loses too many parking spaces. So something that fits where a 763 fits is a big deal for them. Other than raked wingtips (and perhaps some spar strengthening to handle them) the 764 wings are the same as the 763 wings.
 
KFTG
Posts: 180
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 12:08 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:40 pm

danipawa wrote:
Interesting, what they should do with the 757..

They can't do anything with the 757, because all of the tooling to build it has been destroyed. It was built at Renton, not Paine Field like the 767.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17474
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:44 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
That doesn't mean the 757 is dead.


patrickjp93 wrote:
The 757 doesn't have the ground clearance limitation of the 737 either, so it's much easier to modify.


The 757 is dead. Just. Let. It. Go.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1183
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:45 pm

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome your NMA/mom to the market! :roll: :white:
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2485
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:58 pm

There is no doubt Boeing are also trying to preempt a possible A339F, which would finally provide the range and size the A332F has always been a bit short of.

One forwarder is, however, in the process of replacing 767F with A333F conversion on the Atlantic services. And it was always a given, just as it was on the passenger side, that when an A333F with reliable trans-Atlantic range came along, the 767F would be under pressure. It's major advantage right now is that you can get one from new, whereas the A332F is only just about as good on those 4000NM legs, but more expensive to buy and run.

Whether the -400FNG could get the upper hand in such an environment, would largely depend on its performance and value against A333F conversion and, if Airbus goes ahead with the A339F, if it can be first to market and still be the 'cheaper' option. But there's no doubt a -400FNG has the potential to be quite an attractive proportion for an Integrator or Amazonian type company.
Signature. You just read one.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5456
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:15 pm

The idea of putting GEnx engines on a 767F makes sense, as it is still selling, albeit at a leisurely pace. But I fail to see how a re-engined 767 pax version will fare any better against the A330NEO than the original 767 did against the original A330. Just because United might want it does not mean it will be a success.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5827
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:20 pm

iberiadc852 wrote:
KlimaBXsst wrote:
Two thoughts

1) some sort of cozy suite arrangement 8 abreast in Y

2) staggered seating 3-2-3 in Y with traditional 2-3-2 for the upgraded coach cabin.



I always thought you can gain a lot of efficiency by getting 8ab in a 767 external width, but I wonder if it can be achievable with acceptable comfort. (A330 killed the 767, as many say here, yes, but with newer technology and better use of space. This would be another story)


You guys have your comparisons wrong. The 767 killed the A300/310. The 777 killed the A330/340. The 330neo and 350XWB are Airbus' response to the 787.

The 'original' A350 was panned:

The design Airbus came up with was based on its existing A330 model, but with a lighter fuselage, new wings and new engines, in an attempt to match the Dreamliner's fuel efficiency.

But potential customers weren't impressed. Among the fiercest critics was Steven Udvar-Hazy, then head of International Lease Finance Corporation, which buys huge quantities of aircraft.

A very powerful figure within the industry, he suggested publicly that the A350 as planned simply wasn't up to the job. Several airline chiefs agreed - and in mid-2006, Airbus went back to the drawing board.


Every investment analysis is supposed to look at alternatives. For many parties the goal isn't maximizing sales - it's maximizing Return on Investment. I wonder what the time to market would be vs. the 6+ years for all-new NMA? That has to be important to DL and UA.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21368
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing examines GEnX powered 767

Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:25 pm

mxaxai wrote:
PhilMcCrackin wrote:
The freighter market makes sense as it doesn't have any direct Boeing competition for such a thing.

If there is no competition for the 767F - which is quite true IMHO - why would Boeing even bother with this upgrade? They've proven that the existing 767F still sells well, although production rates remain far below other widebodies.

As mentioned above, Airbus is showing A332F and potential A339F plus stretch to UPS.

How long does one really expect airlines to stay happy buying CF6s?

Devilfish wrote:
After all the indignation and loathing when a GEnx-2b powered 767MoM was first broached on this board, Boeing seems really intent on moving ahead with the idea (and now a 764 at that). Our friend from over the border must feel vindicated. :laughing:

Easy on those victory laps, my friend.

TFA says:

Boeing declines to comment on the 767 project, but says it is "always studying the marketplace and looking at how we can best serve our customers".

Which is the same thing they've said about NMA, 2011-ish NSA, Sonic Cruiser, etc.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 8

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos