Why is B767 still available in AS as new aircraft ?
According to Boeing website (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/767/), the plane is available only as a -300F variant. All PAX versions are no longer being offered.
I asked the same question to the support (i asked for 400ER and 300 PAX models), the answer is:
As other Boeing 767 models are still being made, I guess it would still theoretically be possible for an airline to order them.
I hope it's legal to quote the answer from AS support on forum
I very much doubt thst.
Only the -300 line is still open, so this theory only applies to -300 PAX variant.
However, I am pretty sure, that Boeing would instead sell a B787 to a potential customer. They would not revive a 30 year old design for an odd order.
In real life, I guess if there's any airline willing to pay a 767 pax at list price, Boeing would be happy to allocate a slot along the 767 freighter/tanker production line. In AS, with 787 cost slightly more at list price, but burn around 15% less fuel, faster cruising speed, longer range, doubt anyone would order 767 in AS except for nostalgic reason. So don't see any problem 767 still being offered in AS.
I am a 767 operator. There was an airline with new 767s that went under and I took the aircraft. Then because I already had the maintenance category in my fleet I ordered some just to increase my long haul capability. The A330s and 787s are a lot better than the 767s but they are both a lot bigger and it might be some trouble on filling them on lower demand routes. On Stapleton 767s are extremely popular (a lot more than A330s and 777s) they are almost as popular as 767s. As demand grew I drastically needed a larger long haul fleet so I got myself some 787s and replaced the 767s at Malaysian but I fly other 767s for other airlines.
I also belive that Boeing would produce a 767 without any problem as they at them moment produce 2 of the 3 models, but I do not think they would offer you any discount near what they offer for their 787s. So basically the 787 is cheaper to buy, cheaper to run and offers more capacity so I see it as a win, win situation.
Confirming what CBE said, I also use 767-200ER and even -300ER (Aspern), as my best choice for long-haul connections (airline based in ASU, Paraguay, connecting to European cities), where anything larger like A330 or B787 would not get filled sufficiently. Yes, they burn more, but with an overall margin around 30% across my airline, I don't want to maximize further given the current fuel prices.
Seems like one of my competitors also followed suit. I would agree I only started doing this when quite a few of these planes were available used and with quite some discount.
So I am also happy to keep this one available even if in reality, they might not make them any longer.
I always wondered that 767-200/300 is still in production cause they are old (even 1 year older than 757) and similar to 757 (which looks way betther in my opinion).
Now i know it isnt.
IRL, 757 is a narrow-body plane, typically configured 3-3 abreast. The 767 is wide-body, typically 2-3-2-configured in economy.
That said, but surely it must have been answered at one point in the past, why is AS listing 757 as a widebody in the overview of aircraft?
757 and 767-200/300 share the same pilots, which are paid with widebody salary. So the 757 is flown by widebody pilots, and that's how the classification works. At least this would explain that.
So the 757 is flown by widebody pilots, and that's how the classification works. At least this would explain that.
Yep, that's the reason.
Though a little off-topic, but IMO 767 is still one of the best long haul family available in AS. 764 has economics comparable to 788, whilst also providing cargo variant and smaller 762 for thinner routes.
In production right now are the following civil* versions of the 767:
767-2C
767-300ER Freighter
The logic would dictate keeping the 767-300ER in production in AS - both PAX and Freighter - since the possibilty to order both is always there (if anyone in reality would still want new 767 - that's the issue). If Boeing decides to finally close down production and putting the 767-300ER to the history books, then they shall go. :unsure:
767-200 and -400 are not being produced in their "passenger" configuration at all. The -2C has the wings of the -300, so no -200 PAX anymore and the -400 has been out of production for some time now, neither is anything related in production.
*built by Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Gosh... I'm a Boeing 767 operator. For nostalgic reason. Hehehe.
It's still a good plane, though. It works best in lower demand long haul routes.
It still gives me 30% profit margin.