Back to Squawk list
  • 31

The Boeing 767: An Unlikely Port in the Current Storm

Enviado
 
Boeing has been building the 767 for four decades: an incredibly long time for a single generation of a commercial jet. In theory, it ought to be obsolete: Boeing and top rival Airbus have each introduced multiple new wide-body jet models since the 767 entered service in 1982. Yet despite the model's age, the 767 is still going strong, with a steady stream of orders and deliveries. Indeed, it has become an increasingly important contributor to Boeing's financial results lately.… (www.fool.com) Más...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


ianmcdonell
ian mcdonell 23
Because it is a bloody good, simple aircraft that pilots like to fly
johdgui
Johnathan Guif 13
It's a great aircraft, and it had the same flight deck as the 757 series. which meant pilots had to undergo little training when switching between the two.
RetiredCaptain
Jasper Buck 5
What we call a "common' type rating. See Advisory Circular (AC) 120-53A. The 757/767 and 777/787 both have common type ratings.


Best Regards

Capt J Buck

ATP DC-9 B757 B767
Flight Instructor
Ground Instructor
Aircraft Dispatcher
A&P Mechanic
Air Traffic Controller
FAA Aviation Safety Inspector (Ops & Aws) ((Ret.)
FAA certified accident investigator (Ret.)
ICAO Panel Member
Aviation Safety Consultant
darjr26
darjr26 1
I don’t believe the 777 & 787 have a common type rating.
RetiredCaptain
Jasper Buck 0
I agree.

Best Regards

Capt J Buck

ATP DC-9 B757 B767
Flight Instructor
Ground Instructor
Aircraft Dispatcher
A&P Mechanic
Air Traffic Controller
FAA Aviation Safety Inspector (Ops & Aws) ((Ret.)
FAA certified accident investigator (Ret.)
ICAO Panel Member
Aviation Safety Consultant
Quirkyfrog
Robert Cowling 19
The 757 could be 'still going strong' too...
GreggB57
Gregg Bender 5
Agree. Could have been the basis for a whole string of variants like the 737.
MultiComm
MultiComm 15
To bad both the 75 and the 76 were not re-engines to allow for such a successful airframe to continue the same way the 74 has after introducing the -800
jdriskell
James Driskell 11
Maybe 767 falls under the title, "If it aint broke, don't fix it!"
mbrews
mbrews 8
That is excellent advice. The 777-300. wasn’t broke when Boeing planned the 777x . What’s broke is Boeing’s balance sheet, with the expensive rigs to build 777x composite wings. With the ever-shrinking 777x order book, 777x will become a white elephant with folding wing tips
aurodoc
aurodoc 9
It is hard for me to believe (I am not an engineer) that you cannot keep a tried and tested airframe no matter how old the design is and replace fuel inefficient engines with new engines that pollute less and use less fuel. I am not sure why this could not be done since airlines have choices in which engines to purchase for a given aircraft. I like the 767 with 2 seats on the sides and a comfortable ride.
ppopsu01
pete popsuy 4
Kind of like the MD-95?
TorontoJeff
Jeff Phipps 4
You can, and they do. Look at all the NEO (new engine option) AB's. The issue is that they can make airframes and wings that are more efficient regardless of the engines, that they find it hard to put the genie back in the bottle.
chabig
Chris Habig 5
You can certainly do that, but at the price of only being able to incorporate advances technology on a limited basis. At some point, it becomes worth it to start over from a clean sheet of paper (so to speak). The 737 is an example of an airplane that is well past this point–limited redundancy compared to modern airliners, not as capable in low visibility weather, not a robust fly-by-wire flight control system.
RetiredCaptain
Jasper Buck 3
"I like the 767 with 2 seats on the sides and a comfortable ride."

I like the the 767 also. With only 2 seats in the front as well. A comfortable ride and lots of knobs, dials and switches to play with while whiling away the time.

Best

Capt J Buck

ATP DC-9 B757 B767
Flight Instructor
Ground Instructor
Aircraft Dispatcher
A&P Mechanic
Air Traffic Controller
FAA Aviation Safety Inspector (Ops & Aws) ((Ret.)
FAA certified accident investigator (Ret.)
ICAO Panel Member
Aviation Safety Consultant
deingy
David Ingram 3
Prime is also operating a bunch of the 767s in their cargo operations. CVG, ILN, etc.
sandylns
Brian Lager 2
One of my favourite aircraft. I worked from 1952 until 1997 in the industry and this is as good as it gets to work on.
SkyAware123
SkyAware123 1
Makes you wonder why the military selected an older model that will be out of production once they've been delivered. Couldn't they have select a 777 or 787 ?
Viperguy46
Jesse Carroll 1
Had an old friend that designed airplanes who told me the L1011 or/ MD80 was best suited for a tanker!
Load cap. and design much better than ANY other aircraft at the time!
SkyAware123
SkyAware123 1
Sure, but, what about replacement parts after the planes are out of production for a long time?
328thBS
Eric Dillinger 1
I am sure the USAF thought about that. They have a lot of experience flying long out of production aircraft such as the KC-135, B-52, B-1, B-2, KC-10, C-5, T-38, and others.
rwoollams
Interesting that what's keeping the 767 production going is all non-pax configurations.
musocat
Old? Nah, not compared to all those 737 orders lately - Boeing's been dressing *that* turkey for over 50 years!

Entrar

¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos y mucho más!
Este sitio web utiliza cookies. Al usar y seguir navegando por este sitio, estás aceptando su uso.
Descartar
¿Sabías que el rastreo de vuelos de FlightAware se sostiene gracias a los anuncios?
Puedes ayudarnos a que FlightAware siga siendo gratuito permitiendo que aparezcan los anuncios de FlightAware.com. Trabajamos arduamente para que nuestros anuncios sean discretos y de interés para el rubro a fin de crear una experiencia positiva. Es rápido y fácil whitelist ads en FlightAware o por favor considera acceder a nuestras cuentas premium.
Descartar