Originally Posted by FlyingSlowly;[url=tel:3549040
3549040[/url]]We could certainly STILL pick up a bunch of USED 777-300s (to replace the old 772), then later transition the entire 777 fleet to A350s.
The 787 is not in the same category as the 777-300 or A350...
From where?
Originally Posted by Half wing;[url=tel:3549873
3549873[/url]]The 787-10 could easily fit more seats than our 364 seat cattle car 777’s. Max seating on it from Boeing is 440. We already put 318 in it and 2/3’s of the plane is business class and Polaris. The 787 is way more airplane than a 767. Look at the range difference. Let me see a 767 do LAX-SIN. 7772A/B’s can’t do that. 787 is a perfect match for our 777-200’s. The company said over and over the 777-9 is more airplane than we need. They have said we only need about 20 planes of that gauge. How many 777-300ER’s do we have again? The 797 was going to fit perfectly between the 757 and 767. An engineer in Boeing leaked the plans for the 3 797 variants on the 797 forum. All of those plans were scrubbed from internet after the second max crash. I managed to grab some pics of Boeings renderings before they took them down. The M.O.M. will be dominated by the 321 series now.
787 was never designed to replace the 767. It was Boeings counter to the A380. Airbus thought the future was high density hub to hub, Boeing (correctly) forecasted a shift to long thin routes.
The 789 is the only variant that can do SFO-SIN, and it’s in no way a 772 replacement. The -10 is close.
Boeing has said unequivocally there will be nothing even resembling a new airplane the rest of this decade. They’re still trying to turn a profit on the 787 program and they’ll probably never dig themselves out of the losses the Max created. The last thing they have the ability to do is outlay a few dozen billion for another new airplane, more so one that their bean counters will screw up again.