Re: 767-400ERX for SAS?

Date:         23 Apr 97 02:58:17 
From:         Alan Wong <Alan.Wong@anu.edu.au>
References:   1
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

Thomas.Enblom wrote:
> Boeing is offering the B777-200 with seats for 305-328 pax.
> Airbus is offering the A340 with seats for 232-295.
>
> The biggest incentive towards choosing the A340 to the B777-200 is
> that the B777 is too big. According to the article SAS wants a slightly
> bigger aircraft than its current B767-300ER.
>
> On the other hand an advantage for Boeing is that SAS operates B767
> today and has also placed orders for 41 B737-600. Adding B777 would
> be adding another Boeing aircraft adding to the commoniality of the
> aircraft types.
>
> My question is: WHY NOT CHOOSE THE B767-400ERX???
>
> It seats 254-303 pax, the same as the A340. Current B767-300ER pilots will
> be able to fly the stretched 767 with almost no additional training.  The
> range for the 767-400ERX will be (according to Boeing web) 10460 km
> compared with 11350 km for the -300ER. I don't think that decrease can be
> so critical for SAS or can it?

I've always wondered about the range of 767-200/300ERs. The range stated in
many places including Boeing's web page is up to 11350km for the -300ER.
However, several airline's web pages state the range as much lower, typically
8500-9000km for the -300ER (Qantas, Air New Zealand, British Airways). Qantas
states the range quoted is for a fully loaded aircraft - passengers and cargo
and also mentions in their inflight magazine that greater ranges are achieved
by limiting passengers and/or cargo. I do not believe there are several ER
versions that give significantly different range capabilities. So my
deduction is that the 767-300ER can fly 11350km with full passengers, but
only with limited cargo. And with full passengers and maximum cargo (whatever
that may be), it can only fly 8400-9000km. Similarly for the 767-200ER, but
with even lower ranges. Can someone confirm/correct this?

If my deductions are correct, then the existing 767ERs are rather compromised
as a long haul aircraft in that either freight capacity or seats have to he
left empty. This limitation will probably be carried to the 767-400 as well.
Maybe that is why SAS finds the A340 or 777-200IGW much more suitable
(assuming again that my deduction is correct).