Kacee

I love the 340. It is extremely quiet in flight. It's also IMO the most graceful looking passenger aircraft out there (though less visually unique than the 747).

Since LH has redone the J cabins on theirs, they're really quite nice. LX's are also quite well maintained, though the cabin is rather dated at this point.

fumje

I confess I don't share your aesthetic regarding the 340—I would say it looks somewhat undistinguished—but as an aircraft I wouldn't find any fundamental fault with it. Indeed it is quite quiet and comfortable, given the right interior.

helvetic

LX's 343 is among my least favorite, with the uncomfortable J seats and the cabin air which invariably cause me throat inflammation. I literally can't breathe in the LX 340s. I am so so glad they upgraded to the 77Ws on the SFO-ZRH route I fly many times a year (though I find the J seats extremely cramped; but the F very comfortable).

And I say this as a proud Swiss person who counts the LX 77W F as one of the very best F experience.

helvetic

It's horribly fuel inefficient and most airlines have horribly dated cabins.

Kacee

All I said is that the LX 340 cabin is well maintained. LX keeps its cabins in much better shape than UA. I don't recommend it. Very hard seats and awful IFE. Their 77W is a much nicer J cabin (though the food and service still leave much to be desired).

EWR764

Again, the 767 pax model never went out of production; Boeing just delivered all outstanding orders. If a pax customer were to come along seeking to place a small order, it would fall into a delivery slot in the existing backlog. In this case, the rumored customer is apparently demanding deliveries in a shorter timeframe than current production rates would allow, and interested in placing a large enough order that doing so would either be economical or commercially important enough to carry out.

The issue is thus not so much "restarting" production as it is increasing production rate, which requires a great deal of coordination.

N104UA

Mark this under Rumor:

Seattle Business Journal is reporting that UA could be looking at buying 50-100 new 767s (yes seven-six-seven) due to no MOM aircraft as a fix until the 797 is released (most likely around 2030). UA just bought new 77Ws from Boeing because they could get them fast (vs waiting years for more 787s), it would be interesting to see if this occurs, UAs 767 fleet is old with the youngest 764 being 15 years old (2002 delivery), 763 16 years old (2001 delivery) and the oldest being 26 years old (1991 delivery). https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2017/10/19/boeing-767-production-increase-everett-united.html

Besides this, I wonder if UA would commit to buying the 797 (possibly launch customer) as I am sure they would get a heck of a deal on these.

Bunky

I wonder how much more weight and cost it is for the reinforced floors for cargo and a main deck cargo door. CO had DC-10s with cargo doors as they were available for military if needed. Quick sale for top dollar to cargo carriers.
Will UA buy these aircraft or have a guaranteed trade-in with Boeing? Maybe these come with a trade in of the older 763ERs - the Polaris and other seats could be removed and placed on the new aircraft.
The 764ER appears to have a CASM advantage over the 763ER with a minor range reduction and UA has plenty of ULH aircraft for ULH routes. UA could pick up new build 764s and move 763s to transcons giving a seat bump for both TATL and Transcons. I'd suggest Polaris be added to the entire 764 fleet and move sCO style lie flats to 763s dedicated to Transcon and Hawaiian service.
I would assume UA would buy these new aircraft as ER units for flexibility. But 767 non-ERs (3900nm range - same as 752 and much better than the proposed 787-3) could fly anything Transcon and West Coast-Hawaii with reduced landing fees and reduced fuel costs.

N104UA

I highly doubt any of these orders would be for the non-ER version, especially if potential customer and Boeing are expecting them to be resold as freighters in 15 years.

EWR764

Further, because there is no 764F (nor a conversion), it is almost assured that any new build would be a 767-300ER, which has a P2F conversion certified. If the goal is to facilitate freighter conversions at the end of pax life, we might see some of the structural improvements incorporated into a prospective pax model to make for a more desirable cargo hauler.

spin88

I just found this piece (from Jan 2017), which suggests they are looking at ER replacement, perhaps this has been posted before, but is relevant IMHO to the current rumor:

"United Airlines is evaluating options for a replacement of its Boeing 767 fleet, as part of its on-going widebody fleet review.

The 767 is the only aircraft that the Chicago-based carrier does not have a “line of sight” in terms of a replacement in its fleet, said president Scott Kirby in a recorded question and answer session with employees in Denver viewed by FlightGlobal.

"The big open question for us is what’s going to replace our 767s," he said at the event earlier in January.

United operates 35 767-300ERs with an average age of 22 years and 16 767-400ERs with an average age of 16 years, the Flight Fleets Analyzer shows.

“It’s a great airplane [but] it’s getting a little old and if we’re going to keep flying them longer we’re going to need to make some investments in extending the life,” says Kirby. “But it also serves missions that the other aircraft would be hard-pressed, at least in today’s economics, to find.”"

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...review-433417/ entire article is worth reading, particulary its discussion of other options.

I do wonder though why if UA was really in the market for a 763 size plane that Boeing did not try to leverage this as a launch customer for the MOM/797, unless that plane is not far enough along. A major US carrier (which UA still is) would seem a prime target for being a launch customer, and I assume Boeing could cut them a hell of a deal to get the MOM off the drawing board.

EWR764

The problem is that even if the development process goes smoothly and the program were to be launched today, the 797 won't see its EIS for at least five years, and by that time I think United would be looking to phase out its highest-time 757/767s, not to mention interim expansion in the category. It was burned by the 787 delays and won't put all its eggs in one basket again.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a stopgap 767 order as part of a larger 797 launch order from UA.

radiowell

I didn’t know what to think of this, but if UA can get them for a deep, deep discount from Boeing, why not? Just hope that they don’t stick narrow domestic F seats in 2-2-2 layout, a la DL.

halls120

If they are buying them to replace the older 767 and the 757s with lie flat seats, it would be kind of stupid to go 2-2-2 up front on the 767, wouldn't it?

3Cforme

Delta has about five 763s in domestic config with 2-2-2 config in First. Word is they're all retired after Super Bowl 2018. All the rest of the 763s and 764s (about 75 in total) are international lie-flat/aisle access configs up front.