I think 40 years is sorta that magic number. Ideally the 777 can last much longer due to the fact that there will be a large amount of spare parts available due to the production time and amount of aircraft. it is still a very real part of many airlines fleets but it is reaching the end especially a -200ER. The real problem is that United has to decide if hauling cargo is important to them. Because the only replacement for a 777-200 is an A350-900… or used 777s. The 757 and 767 will go before. That airframe is at end of life around the world. There are lots of spare parts but a 787-9 replaces a 767-300/400 and an A321 gets the domestic 757 and we have yet to see but based on Euro airlines flying the 321LR it does replace a 757-200 on an Atlantic crossings even without the XLR performance.

Here to give reality check to those who think the last 4 years are the norm and who haven't been through a downturn.

There is no history of US top tier mainline carriers flying aircraft for 40 years. It’s never happened. Northwest Airlines flew their DC-9’s to 35 years and probably ended up regretting it. I can’t even imagine opening up a 40 year old 767 for an invasive D Check. As far as comparing a 35 year old mainline 767 that flies around the clock 24/7 with a C5, N641UA has over 130,000 hrs on her, your average USAF C5 flys about 80 hrs a month. Guy/gals please do your research before posting on here, UAL is absolutely ready to replace every single 767 and 777-200 with a 787, they just cant get them fast enough…I get what you guy want to happen, I lived 14 years of my life on the 75/76, still my favorite, but time marches on, sadly.

Kirby said at a recent standards meeting that we'd probably get 100 more 787s before we replaced any 767s, and the 767-300/400 and 757-300 will probably fly until 2035. Even if we did, that's great because the 787 pays more than the 767. He also said that in addition to the 150 firm orders (6 of which have been delivered) we would probably take all 100 options we currently have.

No one is thinking that it’s normal. Just going off of empirical data straight from the source with regard to the direction we are headed as a company.

Glad we can count on your negativity despite a positive forecast though 👍

If those airplanes were flying 2 legs a day, every day, they would’ve been retired decades ago, and the USAF is not a for profit operation.

At Boeings current delivery rate, by the time the 100th one shows up the first 70 will be due for retirement.

I wasn’t trying to say that it’s ideal to keep an aircraft for 40 years. What I meant to say is 40 is probably the limit. Yes there are older planes flying with cargo even FedEx has gotten over 50. It can be done, it’s not ideal. I’m saying that probably all the 777s will be gone between 35-40 years of age and the 767s will do the same. I’m not advocating for keeping the 76 because it’s “cool”. I just meant if the numbers work and the airlines want to keep them there’s nothing saying that they won’t keep them for 40 years. In my opinion these airplanes will be shed from the fleet during the next downturn. Just like during Covid there was a mass retiring of the oldest aircraft flying in the US.

The 777A's are holding up pretty well. As has already been said, it has one of the lowest seat mile costs in the entire airline. It's efficient, and makes tons of money. We'd have to have new planes ordered if they were candidates to be retired. The plane you are talking about, 777UA was built in 1994, part of the flight test fleet. UA got it when the flight tests were done.

After doing the heavy MX on the 767-300's and -400's, they'll be around for some time. Next black swan event? Is it here now? No idea. But the 777A's aren't going anywhere.

And when you start believing in leaders blindly and not looking at the facts and environment its called Stockholm syndrome.