Sure.
Posted on 12/22/2004 7:55:57 AM PST by KwasiOwusu
TOKYO (Reuters) - Boeing Co. could sell up to 50 of its new 7E7 planes to Japan Airlines Corp. (JAL) under a deal announced on Wednesday worth as much as $6 billion at list prices.
Asia's biggest airline joins key Japanese rival All Nippon Airways as one of the first carriers to choose the sleek 7E7, a mid-sized airliner expected to offer low fuel and operating costs when it debuts in 2008.
"We chose the 7E7 after carefully considering both it and Airbus's aircraft," a JAL spokesman said.
A firm order for 30 planes and options to buy 20 more will be signed next spring with delivery beginning around April 2008. The planes are worth about $120 million each.
JAL plans to replace 36 Boeing 767 jets and 22 Airbus A300-600s in its fleet.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Buy and Airbus today and they will through in for free the special tail seperation feature...
Damn. The 767 is not exactly a fuel hog like the L-1011 was. The 767 is more efficient than the A300-600 which they will also be replacing.
RE: Engines "To be announced" . . .
Look like they already did announce this:
Boeing Selects Two 7E7 Dreamliner Engine Partners
Everett, Wash., April 6, 2004 -- Boeing [NYSE:BA] has selected two engine types, the General Electric GENX and Rolls-Royce Trent 1000, for its all-new Boeing 7E7 Dreamliner, an airplane that will provide the world's airlines with exceptional efficiency and environmental performance.
Boeing's decision follows months of collaboration with the leading manufacturers of large commercial airplane engines.
"The General Electric and Rolls-Royce engines will enable the 7E7 to fly higher, faster, farther, cleaner, quieter and more efficiently than comparable airplanes," said 7E7 Senior Vice President Mike Bair. "Having an engine choice is a key consideration for our customers. We're now offering two excellent options for the 7E7."
Both engine types will be capable of providing between 55,000 and 70,000 lbs. of thrust, which will allow the three planned 7E7 models to use the same basic engines . . .
For the first time in commercial jet history, both engine types will use the same standard interface with the airplane, allowing any 7E7 twinjet to be fitted with either engine at any point in time. Engine interchangeability makes the 7E7 a flexible asset that can easily be moved among carriers, an attractive feature for financiers, leasing companies and airlines. Other 7E7 innovations include the elimination of traditional bleed air systems in favor of an efficient, more-electric architecture.
General Electric's new engine, called the GENX (GE Next Generation), is derived from the ultra-high-thrust GE90 engine, which has a proven track record on twin-engine aircraft. The GENX technologies include composite fan blades, the highest pressure-ratio compressor in aviation, and a unique single-annular combustor (where compressed air and fuel are mixed) to achieve dramatically lower emissions. The GENX will have its first full-engine test in 2006. The engine is being designed and tested at GE Transportation's world headquarters in Evendale, Ohio. Final assembly will occur in Durham, N.C.
"Our engine for the 7E7 represents the culmination of new technologies for which GE has made considerable investments over many years," said David Calhoun, president and CEO of GE Transportation. "Needless to say, this is one of the biggest days in the history of our jet engine business."
Rolls-Royce will produce a new variant of its successful, high-thrust Trent engine series to power the 7E7, the Trent 1000. Designed to deliver optimum performance with minimum development risk, it will be the fifth member of the Trent family to enter service, once again featuring the three-shaft design layout unique to Rolls-Royce. The engine will be the most efficient and environmentally advanced Trent ever built.
Mike Terrett, president of Civil Aerospace for Rolls-Royce, said, "This is a special day in the long and rewarding relationship between our companies. Now, once again, our focus is on bringing a new generation of Trent successfully to market."
I don't understand why the US Air Force doesn't buy the best used 767s for conversion to tankers. Why do we have to buy new 767 tankers at the end of the 767 production run that will last 50 to 60 years after the line closes? The military puts a lot less time on their transport planes than commercial users do. They could save lots of money by buying used aircraft that still have lots of life left in them.
More good news for Boeing.
Agree. I would like to see the official number crunching to dispute this. Remember that lease deal regarding these tankers? This is what happens when government types make decisions instead of corporate types.
Especially considering that spare parts will get harder and harder to find. The KC-135s still have lots of time left on their airframes, but they require lots of maintenance and upgrades due to the obsolescence of systems and even diappearance of suppliers.
The first option if you like hex, and the second option if you like beer (obscure ham reference there).
I thought the US Air Force tanker deal was to take existing 767 airframes and convert them.
Try TWO billon dollars over budget.
When I first saw all the documentaries on the A3XX I was outraged that Boeing was stupid enough to rest on their laurels and let Airbus steal the market from them. But from the looks of the market now, Boeing is perfectly placed.
No, they were going to take new 767-200ERF freighters and convert them to tankers. Lease them for a few years, then buy them at the end of the lease. Other countries are considering converting existing commercial 767s to tankers.
You had a Pentagon bitch who tried to sleep her way into being a Boeing lobbyist after her retirement from the Pentagon.
The lease deal idea is now dead, but Boeing is not assured of getting the tanker deal. Believe it or not, it is possible that Airbus may get all or part of the deal. How would you like to be a Senator and explain that to your people (the Air Force flying Airbus jets), even if some of the Boeing people and Pentagon people screwed up.
Plus Boeing is considering developing an updated 747 based on technologies developed for the 7E7 that would have a longer range than the A-380 and be sized between a 777 and an A-380.
I couldn't locate anything on Boeing's site so maybe the deal isn't finalized yet.
Ping?
Competition is good, even if it is subsidized.
You are kidding, right!?
How can it be called competition if it's subsidized?
We're all equal - some of us are just a little more equal than others?!
ARGH!
More good news for Boeing.I have never rooted so hard for a company in my life!
Sure.
Do you have a link for that article?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.