|Quoting longhauler (Reply 139):|
But as runways lengthened and engines became more powerful, the B707 could then fulfill this role as well. The thick wings and powerful engines the VC-10 which got it off the ground quickly, became a high fuel burn detriment during cruise. This made the aircraft hard to sell, as it's one main function was no longer necessary.
|Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 140):|
Everyone who was associated with the VC-10 had nothing but praise for it as an aircraft. On a typical LHR-JFK segment it burned 8% more fuel than a 707 (as I recall). However, its passenger appeal probably translated into higher loads which offset the fuel burn.
Is that versus a Conway-powered 707? I know the Conway 707 beat the JT4A by about 6-7%, and the JT3D leapfrogged about another 6-7%, so the VC10 couldn't have been tooooo bad.
|Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 144):|
Back to the thread, I wonder if BA has regretted buying the 767-336ER with RR engines. Whilst essentially the same as used on the 747-400 (BA would switch engines from the 767 to the 744 prior to overhaul I believe), the RR powered 767 is the least efficient.
The 763 and the 744 both had the same engine choices, so if they regretted them on the 763 they probably also would on the 744. From what I've read, the GE engines were best on that generation, which explains the sales breakouts.
To expand the topic a bit, there are certain engine buys I bet people regretted:
JT3C 720s a year before the JT3D came out
Conway 707s and DC-8 for the same reason
Jury's still out, put PW1100G on the neo
[Edited 2016-05-18 22:04:42]