Re: A3XX vs B747-600 (was: Airbus lawsuit coming?)

From:         kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
Date:         23 Aug 96 13:45:00 
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Followups:    1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>It is my understanding that only charters are interested in a B757-300X,
>and that not enough would be ordered to justify the required R&D.

At least one major US carrier was very interested in the 757-300X a
few years ago.  From what I've heard, I'd be surprised if the 757-300X
is *not* launched by the end of 1997.

>BA and Qantas would love to fly SYD-LHR nonstop, and the B747-500X appears to
>have insufficient range to do so with a full payload. Perhaps a 777-100X
>could be built to fly the 10500mi between Sydney and London.

Unfortunately, such a plane would have a very small market, yet
would require a lot of development cost.  I think it's more likely
to see a trick like UA's ORD-HKG non-stop, which is limited to only
260 pax to keep the weight down -- fly a 747-500X SYD-LHR but don't
sell all the seats.  With a light load, perhaps the -500X can do it.

>Boeing decided to build the B777 because airlines rejected every Boeing
>proposal for a B767-400X. If Boeing builds a plane larger than the B767-300
>and smaller than the B777-200, it will be the B777-100X.

Good point, though a stretched 767 should be cheaper to buy and to
operate than a shrunken 777, though it most likely wouldn't have
the same range.  When it comes down to putting money on the table,
airlines often change their minds at the last minute, sometimes in
rather perplexing ways.

>A B777-200X with greater range than the B777-200IGW any time soon?
>I doubt it.

Folks at Boeing seem to think the engines are growing fast enough to
make an even longer range 777-200 a reasonable prospect much sooner
than they thought.  The latest proposals Boeing has been presenting
suggest the very long-range 777 will be much closer to the -200 in
size than the original 777-100X proposals.  That makes the airlines
much happier because they were worried about the -100X not giving
them enough capacity on the long routes.

--
Karl Swartz	|Home	kls@chicago.com
		|Work	kls@netapp.com
		|WWW	http://www.chicago.com/~kls/
Moderator of sci.aeronautics.airliners -- Unix/network work pays the bills