NMA= 767x ???

Subscribe
1  2  3  4 
Page 1 of 4
Go to
https://www.google.com/amp/s/simpleflying.com/boeing-767x-nma/amp/
Reply
Lipstick On A Pig, Part Deux.
Reply
From the Flight Global article:

"As these engines would be larger than the current CF6 engines, the 767X would require a modified landing gear, to give greater clearance below the plane."

Why not just move the engines further forward and abov... Nevermind.
Reply
Quote: From the Flight Global article:

"As these engines would be larger than the current CF6 engines, the 767X would require a modified landing gear, to give greater clearance below the plane."

Why not just move the engines further forward and abov... Nevermind.
Too soon?......
Reply
Quote: Too soon?......
No I'm just impressed that Boeing learned something.
Reply
Quote: Lipstick On A Pig, Part Deux.
I would say the significant difference is it wouldn’t have to fly 160+ kt finals or have artificially high Vr speeds to avoid tail-strikes.

The 767-400 mentioned has very tall gear (airplane appears to be about 1-degree nose-down when parked). It probably gives the clearance they are looking for, to avoid the Max debacle.

I’ve read the estimated development costs for a 797 and they were huge. With their butt currently wedged in the porta-john, Boeing might be cash-strapped and risk-averse to a totally new design.

I’d say this might happen, and would likely be a good product.
Reply
I’m down with it just as long as they stick with current nomenclature and call it the 767 MAX
Reply
Quote: I’m down with it just as long as they stick with current nomenclature and call it the 767 MAX
Ha. Solid bet
Reply
If you compare a 767 to a 787, what percentage of the fuel efficiency gains is a result of the engine's compared to the aerodynamics and advanced wing design?

And to add to that, wouldn't a 767MAX just a worse version of a 787? How could that be a success?
Reply
Quote: If you compare a 767 to a 787, what percentage of the fuel efficiency gains is a result of the engine's compared to the aerodynamics and advanced wing design?

And to add to that, wouldn't a 767MAX just a worse version of a 787? How could that be a success?
With all the financial damage Boeing has done to their customers, 787-8’s should be dished out as massive discount to make them that much more competitive vs bringing back an ancient design like the 767. A 767-400 isn’t much smaller than a 787-8 so you’re question is indeed valid.
Reply
1  2  3  4 
Page 1 of 4
Go to