View Single Post
Old 04-20-2019, 07:03 PM
  #46  
BeatNavy
Covfefe
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,001
Default

Originally Posted by TrojanCMH View Post
Close enough. Maybe just make a shorter 787 with less fuel capacity and call it a 767 replacement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think you are talking about something like the 787-3 (same size as a -8 but with less fuel, lower weight, shorter wings), which got shelved after a lack of interest. The 787 is a 9 abreast plane (except at JAL where it’s 8), the 767 is 7 abreast. Apples and oranges.
BeatNavy is offline