Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yet there are airlines that say they don’t want to wait that long for a new airplane.What are their choices?
...
American Airlines is one such opportunity. Officials publicly said they “can’t” wait until 2025 for the 797; they need to replace aging 767s and Boeing 757s starting around 2020. AA officials also said the A321LR is too small and slightly short on range to replace international 757s.
Instead of rehashing this lengthy article from about ten weeks ago, the conclusion was that American was the most likely customer, but they couldn't rule out United. Delta and Boeing are unlikely to be on speaking terms for some time.
Not really, different plane for a different era. The 767 is wildly fuel inefficient compared to the NEO.
Well, you'd want updated engines for it... and modern IFE, etc. Perhaps it still wouldn't match the 321 for fuel efficiency, but it might come close (especially at full capacity). Because remember, the 321 is not a clean-sheet-of-paper design either; the A320 family and the 767 are about the same vintage (whereas, e.g. the 737 is comparatively ancient).
It's a business decision and not an engineering one. You know how much extra the fuel is going to cost you, but you don't have to retrain your pilots or your mechanics. You are not forced to buy a larger plane than you can fill. The price of the planes even if they restart the passenger line is critical. In addition the resale value might be pretty good.
They are not going to restart the -400 production. They stopped making the passenger -300 units in 2014, but they are still making the cargo units. It might not be that big of a deal to keep the production line going a little longer and cranking out 50 passenger units.
The article said basically American Airlines is not happy with the A321neo long range, the B787-8 is too expensive and has too many seats, and they can't wait until 2025 (which is always subject to delays) for the new B797s to be released. They just need a stop gap solution.
The article said basically American Airlines is not happy with the A321neo long range, the B787-8 is too expensive and has too many seats, and they can't wait until 2025 (which is always subject to delays) for the new B797s to be released. They just need a stop gap solution.
It seems a little nuts to re-start a production line for the B767. It would seem much easier to give a discount on the current planes.
AA 209 seats; 11,000 km; $201.4 million; 767-300ER
AA 226 seats; 14,500 km; $229.5 milllion; 787-8
since there's no contemporary aircraft that seems to suit AA...
I wonder if it would make business sense to "remanufacture" old 757s and 767s -- not just update the interiors and attach winglets, but e.g. install newer-model engines also. Not the same as a new plane, but perhaps with a service life of 10 to 12 years. Something like that could be ready relatively soon, and could do the job through the next decade, until an all-new aircraft is ready.
I wonder if it would make business sense to "remanufacture" old 757s and 767s -- not just update the interiors and attach winglets, but e.g. install newer-model engines also. Not the same as a new plane, but perhaps with a service life of 10 to 12 years. Something like that could be ready relatively soon, and could do the job through the next decade, until an all-new aircraft is ready.
The 767-300F (cargo version) entered service in 1995 is still in production. As of November 2017, 767-300F deliveries stand at 131 with 61 unfilled orders. Also over 50 passenger versions have been converted to freighters.
The 767-300ER, the extended-range version of the 767-300, entered service with American Airlines in 1988. Typical routes for the type include Los Angeles to Frankfurt.[48] The combination of increased capacity and range offered by the 767-300ER has been particularly attractive to both new and existing 767 operators. It is the most successful version of the aircraft, with more orders placed than all other variants combined. As of November 2017, 767-300ER deliveries stand at 583 with no unfilled orders.There were 412 examples in service as of July 2017. The type's main competitor is the Airbus A330-200.
The 767-300ER is the only variant under consideration for re-manufacture. The 767-300, 767-400ER, and 757 have been out of production for too long. The last 767-300ER was delivered less than three years ago.
American airlines flies 24 Boeing 767-300ER
The oldest being 24.9 Years delivered in Mar 1993
The youngest being 14.4 Years delivered in Aug 2003
United airlines flies 35 Boeing 767-300
The oldest being 26.8 Years delivered in Apr 1991
The youngest being 16.3 Years delivered in Nov 2001
Delta flies 59 Boeing 767-300
The oldest being 27.7 Years delivered in Jun 1991
The youngest being 16.4 Years delivered in Aug 2001
Delta also flies 21 Boeing 767-400ERs that average less than 15 years old
American, Delta, and United also fly 238 B757s that average 20 years old
Airbus is targeting the A321LR to replace the B757s and hopes to sell a thousand of that variant around the world.
By restarting the production line, Boeing hopes to take a few hundred of those sales.
But American only has 17 more seats in their B787-8 compared to the B767-300ER. It's a much newer plane and much more fuel efficient for about 10% cash outlay. The B787-8 burns less fuel per mile the the B767-300ER per mile despite having a larger passenger load. So in the operational history it will cost less to fly.
Last edited by PacoMartin; 01-07-2018 at 06:56 AM..
I didn't mean to resume building new ones, I mean remanufacturing old ones, to modernize them and extend their lives by maybe a decade... as a bridge to that eventual Boeing MOM or Airbus A-322. Remanufacturing can be done for, e.g. rail transit cars, although I haven't actually heard of it in the context of airliners.
I'm an airline fan, but in no way an expert on the industry. Perhaps the numbers wouldn't pencil out. Maybe the cost of remanufacturing and re-engine-ing an old 767 would be more than the price it could command on the market. It would have to be priced somewhere below the A321LR too, so maybe $100 million.
But I'm surprised that there isn't a bigger price spread between 767s and 787s... are you sure about those numbers, Paco Martin?
But I'm surprised that there isn't a bigger price spread between 767s and 787s... are you sure about those numbers, Paco Martin?
Well, those are the pricess on the website. Now it is commonly regarded that actual sale prices can differ wildly from the website numbers. Actual sale prices are one of the biggest secrets of the industry.
United configures the two planes so that they only differ by 5 seats.
214 seats Boeing 767-300ER
219 seats Boeing 787-8
It's even more difficult to understand why United might want to buy brand new B767s instead of the slightly more expensive B787-8.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
since there's no contemporary aircraft that seems to suit AA...
