New 767-300 coming?
11-07-2017, 01:00 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 942
The restarting of a 767 passenger line is not a risk to the 787-8 for Boeing.
The problem for the 787-8 is that the 787-9 is too good! On equal stage length flights, they have almost identical trip costs. So the -9 can do any flight the -8 can go for the same cost while generating more revenue and the 787-9 can go farther then the -8 when needed, so nobody is ordering the 787-8 anymore.
The problem for the 787-8 is that the 787-9 is too good! On equal stage length flights, they have almost identical trip costs. So the -9 can do any flight the -8 can go for the same cost while generating more revenue and the 787-9 can go farther then the -8 when needed, so nobody is ordering the 787-8 anymore.
11-07-2017, 04:09 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
We should order them, then in 6 months....defer/convert them into future deliveries of xxx as they are old technology, and therefore foolish to actually take delivery of. 
oh...and then sign a new code share deal with xxx for medium range widebody jets to SA and Europe.
oh...and then sign a new code share deal with xxx for medium range widebody jets to SA and Europe.
11-07-2017, 04:29 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B777 Capt
Posts: 844
Didn’t a lot of you guys complaining about early section 6 were the same guys saying we shouldn’t have signed a mid term TA, that we should have done a full section 6. So now you get your wish and suddenly it’s a bad idea.
The inherit risk of a section 6 negotiations is give and take. Be careful what you ask for.
The inherit risk of a section 6 negotiations is give and take. Be careful what you ask for.
11-07-2017, 04:40 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,725
Didn’t a lot of you guys complaining about early section 6 were the same guys saying we shouldn’t have signed a mid term TA, that we should have done a full section 6. So now you get your wish and suddenly it’s a bad idea.
The inherit risk of a section 6 negotiations is give and take. Be careful what you ask for.
The inherit risk of a section 6 negotiations is give and take. Be careful what you ask for.
11-07-2017, 05:16 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,202
Didn’t a lot of you guys complaining about early section 6 were the same guys saying we shouldn’t have signed a mid term TA, that we should have done a full section 6. So now you get your wish and suddenly it’s a bad idea.
The inherit risk of a section 6 negotiations is give and take. Be careful what you ask for.
The inherit risk of a section 6 negotiations is give and take. Be careful what you ask for.
It’s technically not early it’s actually 6 months late.
11-07-2017, 06:22 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,159
11-07-2017, 08:20 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 163
It goes straight up to FL360 and will be at FL410 by the half way point at full weight. it cruises at .86 can do .90+. burns 30% of the fuel and can fly 4+ hours further with required reserves.
So no they are not the same category......I loved flying the 767, would be thrilled to get more and fly it again, but it is NOT a cheaper 787.
So no they are not the same category......I loved flying the 767, would be thrilled to get more and fly it again, but it is NOT a cheaper 787.
They are both in the same category of airliners, widebody seating less 230 pax.
Are you saying it’s a different category because of it’s extra capability even though that capability is used for less than 10% of operations?
By your logic a 737-700 is in a different category than a 737-300.
11-07-2017, 08:53 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,244
I don’t think you’ve read the facts that I stated. The 787-8 is currently being flown like a 767-300er with the exception of a handful of ultra long haul routes. The 787-8 is a widebody airliner with 219 seats, the 767-300 is a widebody airliner with 214 seats, both are used on routes averaging 8-10 hours in length.
They are both in the same category of airliners, widebody seating less 230 pax.
Are you saying it’s a different category because of it’s extra capability even though that capability is used for less than 10% of operations?
By your logic a 737-700 is in a different category than a 737-300.
They are both in the same category of airliners, widebody seating less 230 pax.
Are you saying it’s a different category because of it’s extra capability even though that capability is used for less than 10% of operations?
By your logic a 737-700 is in a different category than a 737-300.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
