A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What are Boeing's plans?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 17th 04, 05:11 PM
David Lednicer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What are Boeing's plans?

Here is an interesting question: the USAF KC-767 deal was supposed to keep
the 767 line open, but this deal is dormant. If the USAF doesn't act soon,
they won't be able to buy 767s as the line closes real soon. With this
in mind; how are they going to buy E-10s (767-400ERs) if the line is closed?


  #2  
Old September 17th 04, 05:21 PM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"David Lednicer" wrote in message
...
Here is an interesting question: the USAF KC-767 deal was supposed to keep
the 767 line open, but this deal is dormant. If the USAF doesn't act
soon,
they won't be able to buy 767s as the line closes real soon. With this in
mind; how are they going to buy E-10s (767-400ERs) if the line is closed?


From what I have read, the E-10 concept is not completely locked into the
767 platform--the first operational test and eval aircraft will be a 767
platform, but no firm decision regarding later procurement has been made. If
Boeing wants to continue to pursue the 767 tanker option, it has the ability
to temporarily kill the line and restart it later, as long as they keep the
tooling and jigs--there has also already been mention made of possible 7E7
use in the E-10 role, and more remotely as a future tanker platform.

Brooks




  #3  
Old September 17th 04, 09:22 PM
Pooh Bear
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kevin Brooks wrote:

"m pautz" wrote in message
news:EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51...


Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double decker.
Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's hope that
Boeing made the right decision.


From what I have read, Boeing is banking on the 7E7 being a more valuable
commodity than "supersized" air transports, and if you look at the extreme
number of current hub-feeder and smaller hub-to-hub aircraft out there that
are going to need replacement in the not-too-distant future, they may well
have made the better choice. Lots of DC-9's, older 737's, A319's, A320's,
etc., are going to be coming due for replacement in the next few years, and
with fuel economy being a growing concern in terms of meeting the bottom
line requirements, the 7E7 family will be well positioned to take a goodly
share of that market.


The 7E7 is a rather larger capacity a/c than those you mention. Hardly a
likely
replacement on a like for like basis.

Airbus may find itself in the unenviable position of
having a lock on the market for supers, but being a step behind in terms of
the larger share of the market that wants to recapitalize its smaller
airframe fleets.


Airbus doesn't seem to be short of actual orders.

http://www.airbus.com/media/orders_n_deliveries.asp A320 family is
doing esp
well.

Last I heard, Boeing had no actual orders for 7E7.


Graham
  #7  
Old September 18th 04, 02:50 AM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:

"m pautz" wrote in message
news:EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51...


Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double decker.
Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's hope
that
Boeing made the right decision.


From what I have read, Boeing is banking on the 7E7 being a more valuable
commodity than "supersized" air transports, and if you look at the
extreme
number of current hub-feeder and smaller hub-to-hub aircraft out there
that
are going to need replacement in the not-too-distant future, they may
well
have made the better choice. Lots of DC-9's, older 737's, A319's, A320's,
etc., are going to be coming due for replacement in the next few years,
and
with fuel economy being a growing concern in terms of meeting the bottom
line requirements, the 7E7 family will be well positioned to take a
goodly
share of that market.


The 7E7 is a rather larger capacity a/c than those you mention. Hardly a
likely
replacement on a like for like basis.


You are generally right (bang on head). I went back and reread the article
in question and the market they are looking at for replacement airframes is
the L-1011, DC-10, 767, and A300/310/330. But the 7E7-3 model would
presumably be of interest for replacement of some smaller capacity aircraft
like the 737, with roughly the same range as the smaller aircraft while
offering about one hundred more seats.


Airbus may find itself in the unenviable position of
having a lock on the market for supers, but being a step behind in terms
of
the larger share of the market that wants to recapitalize its smaller
airframe fleets.


Airbus doesn't seem to be short of actual orders.


Neither is Boeing (see below)...


http://www.airbus.com/media/orders_n_deliveries.asp A320 family is
doing esp
well.

Last I heard, Boeing had no actual orders for 7E7.


You heard wrong. All Nipon is the launch customer (with a fifty aircraft
order, Boeing's largest single launch order ever), Air New Zealand followed
(two aircraft). Two European airlines have also placed orders (ten total).
Sixty-two firm orders total. Over just around a one year period, before
metal was cut--that ain't bad.

Brooks



Graham



  #10  
Old September 18th 04, 04:38 AM
Pooh Bear
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kevin Brooks wrote:

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...
Jarg wrote:

Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates into
more jobs and more money for Americans!


*We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.


Trouble seeing past your nose, eh? Forest getting in the way of the trees?


Nope.


The folks at Smith's Aerospace (which last I heard was still a European
based firm) might like to see the 7E7 succeed, as they are providing a
couple of major systems for it.


If it doesn't succeed I'm sure they'll pick up business elsewhere. They're an
avionics supplier, their product isn't tied to a single airframe.


Likewise Rolls Royce would not mind continuing to sell engines for it.


Rolls Royce are probably rather more interested in the Trent 900 sales that'll
come from the A380 ( 4 per a/c too ! ) right now - and they're firm orders !
They are the launch engine provider after all.


Some ten nations have companies contributing to the 7E7 work right now.


But not making.


Graham


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
want to trade 601 plans for 701 plans [email protected] Home Built 0 January 27th 05 08:50 PM
Unused plans question Doc Font Home Built 0 December 8th 04 10:16 PM
Fly Baby Plans Off the Market Ron Wanttaja Home Built 9 June 6th 04 02:45 PM
Modifying Vision plans for retractable gear... Chris Home Built 1 February 27th 04 10:23 PM
Here's a silly question regarding plans David Hill Home Built 21 October 8th 03 04:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.