Re: Boeing cancels 747-500X/600X?

Date:         03 Mar 97 01:30:12 
From:         tschell@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Terry Schell)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

mba340@club-internet.fr (Ben) writes:
<snip>
>Boeing wants to devolop twin long range but there are many limits
>(ETOPS, engine,etc...). It can announce, but it can not do yet.
>More, 777 have many difficulties with fly by wire, a part of BQW and
>CPA is grounded.

Well, since they already have the IGW... why can't they use that extra
capacity for fuel?  The 777 engines were designed to have growth room.
ETOPS is already being delt with. I don't understand the problem here.

Can you point me to *any* published sources that report 777's that are
currently grounded for FBW reasons? Are BQW/CPA supposed to be airline
acronyms?  Please explain this claim.

<snip>
>One year ago, Boeing said the contrary to justify 747 600X. Boeing
>tries to convunce every one there is no market. But many airlines do
>not believe in it, and they are the customers....

Okay... which airlines "believe in it"?  How would you measure their
belief in #'s of planes ordered before the year 2000?  I cannot see a
market that is large enough to justify the development costs at this
point.  This new plane could cost twice as much as a 747-400 and carry
20% more passengers; even with substantial fuel savings, I just don't
see the airlines lining up.

BTW don't count the national airlines from the Airbus consortium
countries as a "market." They are committed to buying airbus products
and their 3XX orders will just subtract from their other airbus orders
(no net increase in profits for Airbus).  For the purposes of market
analysis you need to look at how much *new* revenue the new product
will bring in.


Sincerely,
Terry