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

From:         m@ml.com (M Carling)
Organization: Merrill Lynch
Date:         03 Sep 96 01:16:53 
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) wrote:
>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.

Since an empty 747-400 has flown LHR-SYD nonstop, clearly a 747-500X could
fly the route with some pax. Perhaps enough to be profitable, perhaps not.

>a stretched 767 should be cheaper to buy and to operate than a
>shrunken 777....

Why so? I would expect a 777 to have greater efficiencies and hence lower
operating costs than a 767 of equal capacity.

>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.

I take it you mean the proposed length of the 777-100X has grown, but remains
shorter than the 777-200?

M Carling