B-787=premature death of 777???

[PowerRanger]

With the technological strides made with the new 787, and the lines really blurred between the two aircraft.

Does the 787 equal the premature death of the 777?

Which is a critcal success in it's own right.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

No the B777 is not dead by a long shot.

The B787 is 550,000lb aircraft. The B777 is a 750,000lb gross weight aircraft.

While the B787 might carry 300 pax in the -10 version it will never fly the 16+ hours the B777 could fly with the same 300 paxs.

An airline needs both the B787 and the B777. They complement one another.

The B787 also will not carry the freight needed on the long routes the B777 can carry.

Each aircraft has its purpose. The B777 is not done by a long shot.

 

[35khighpjc]

With the technological strides made with the new 787, and the lines really blurred between the two aircraft.

Does the 787 equal the premature death of the 777?

Which is a critcal success in it's own right.

787 is in my mind the replacement for the 767, and a widebody replacement of the 757 where the 737 -800 and -900 hasn't taken the 57's job yet. The 777's not going anywhere anytime soon, they would not have blown so much money into developing the LR and the freighter

 

[thepotato232]

Case in point: ANA plans to reduce their fleet to three different aircraft - the B737 for short haul, the B787 for medium range/medium load, and the B777 for the high-load long range work.

The two aircraft actually complement each other pretty well. With the new 777-300ERs, the 777 fleet will continue to handle the role we see it in now. As it has been stated before, it's the 57/67s we'll be seeing fewer of.

 

[PowerRanger]

Cool, so if Airbus actually gets the A350 Reloaded built, how then would the 777 fare against a more modern rival? With 20-25% better fuel economy and lower CASM?