Date: 23 Apr 97 02:58:17 From: Alan Wong <Alan.Wong@anu.edu.au> References: 1 Followups: 1
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).