Sign In
Create Account
Hi All
Just reaching out to this group of knowledge to see if anyone can suggest a 767-200 replacement? As you may know it is quite a high performance aircraft similar to the 747SP, with a takeoff run as short as 4,450 ft. After 1995, the 767-200 is no longer in production. I used to fly them across Canada YVR-YYZ, YYC-YYZ, YEG-YYZ. on Canadian and later Air Canada, before they were considered too thirsty and phased out. Much more spacious than the A321s used today, especially in business class whereby the 767s were in international configuration.
Thanks in advance!
767-200 Replacement?
Started by mischkaffee, Aug 02 2010 05:57 AM
#1
Posted 02 August 2010 - 05:57 AM
I have traveled on: Airbus A300, A310, A318, A319, A320, A321, A330-200, -300, A340-200, -300; ATR-72, BAe Systems 146-200, Avro RJ 70; Boeing 717, 737-200, -200C, -300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -800, 767-200, -200ER, 300, -300ER, 747-400, -400M; Bombardier CRJ-200, -700, -900; Cessna 404, C208 Grand Caravan, Citation Bravo, Citation Ultra; de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver, DHC-3 Otter, DHC-6 Twin Otter, DHC-8 Dash 8-100, -200, -300, -400; Douglas DC-9-50, Embraer EMB-120, ERJ-170, -190; Fairchild Dornier Do-228, Fokker F28, McDonnell-Douglas MD-83, -88, -90; Piper Cherokee, Raytheon Beech 18, 1900D, King Air
Back to top
#2
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Posted 02 August 2010 - 08:25 AM
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Guest_Speed Bird_*
-
- Guests
Why not just buy 763s? They are bigger, but they're also a lot more efficient.
#3
Posted 02 August 2010 - 10:47 PM
conmanflyer
-
- Member
-
- 246 posts
C
you know, there isn't really a suitable replacement for the 767-200, its either the 757-200/300 or the 767-300/ER
#4
Posted 02 August 2010 - 11:02 PM
Spenser
-
- Veteran
-
- 516 posts
Global Forum Moderator/Data Collector
you know, there isn't really a suitable replacement for the 767-200, its either the 757-200/300 or the 767-300/ER
I would go with the 757 series
Flown in-A319, A320, 717, 737-300, 737-700, 737-800, 757-200, 757-300, 767-200ER, 767-300, 767-300ER, MD-11, MD-82, MD-83, MD-88, MD-90, L-1011 Tristar, DC-10, CRJ-200, CRJ-700, CRJ-900, Dash 8 (100 and 300), Saab 340, ERJ-175
#5
Guest_ccccccccccc_*
Posted 03 August 2010 - 04:42 AM
Guest_ccccccccccc_*
Guest_ccccccccccc_*
-
- Guests
757 is nice, so i will agree with spenser
#6
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Posted 03 August 2010 - 08:52 AM
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Guest_Speed Bird_*
-
- Guests
I'd buy both the 757 and the 763, as routes that can be upgraded will get the 763, and those can't or need downgrading can get the 752. Plus, you can retire the 762s quicker!
#7
Posted 03 August 2010 - 04:01 PM
The main issue is the takeoff length. There are several important international routes to airports with <5000ft runways.
I have traveled on: Airbus A300, A310, A318, A319, A320, A321, A330-200, -300, A340-200, -300; ATR-72, BAe Systems 146-200, Avro RJ 70; Boeing 717, 737-200, -200C, -300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -800, 767-200, -200ER, 300, -300ER, 747-400, -400M; Bombardier CRJ-200, -700, -900; Cessna 404, C208 Grand Caravan, Citation Bravo, Citation Ultra; de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver, DHC-3 Otter, DHC-6 Twin Otter, DHC-8 Dash 8-100, -200, -300, -400; Douglas DC-9-50, Embraer EMB-120, ERJ-170, -190; Fairchild Dornier Do-228, Fokker F28, McDonnell-Douglas MD-83, -88, -90; Piper Cherokee, Raytheon Beech 18, 1900D, King Air
#8
Posted 03 August 2010 - 05:25 PM
Spenser
-
- Veteran
-
- 516 posts
Global Forum Moderator/Data Collector
The main issue is the takeoff length. There are several important international routes to airports with <5000ft runways.
The 767-200ER has an impressive MTOW takeoff and landing length. DCA really is the airport that airlines would worry about. I know the 757 can land at DCA , which has a runway length of 6,868. What many airlines to is for short/medium haul they fly smaller aircraft at higher frequency.
Example-
Example-KIAH-CYYZ
Air Canada/ 4 daily CRJ-900 flights
Continental/ 4 daily ERJ-145 fights
Typically you would think the IAH-YYZ route would be served by smallest a Continental 737-500, but they have learned passengers prefer more daily departures and more times to choose for departure than aircraft size/type.
Flown in-A319, A320, 717, 737-300, 737-700, 737-800, 757-200, 757-300, 767-200ER, 767-300, 767-300ER, MD-11, MD-82, MD-83, MD-88, MD-90, L-1011 Tristar, DC-10, CRJ-200, CRJ-700, CRJ-900, Dash 8 (100 and 300), Saab 340, ERJ-175
#9
Posted 03 August 2010 - 09:20 PM
The 767-200ER has an impressive MTOW takeoff and landing length. DCA really is the airport that airlines would worry about. I know the 757 can land at DCA , which has a runway length of 6,868. What many airlines to is for short/medium haul they fly smaller aircraft at higher frequency.
Example-
Example-KIAH-CYYZ
Air Canada/ 4 daily CRJ-900 flights
Continental/ 4 daily ERJ-145 fights
Typically you would think the IAH-YYZ route would be served by smallest a Continental 737-500, but they have learned passengers prefer more daily departures and more times to choose for departure than aircraft size/type.
I think this issue would be addressed in a payload/range feature. If the extra tanks of the -200ER were not full, it would have better takeoff performance. Still, I can't think of any replacement until the longer range RJs come along.
I have traveled on: Airbus A300, A310, A318, A319, A320, A321, A330-200, -300, A340-200, -300; ATR-72, BAe Systems 146-200, Avro RJ 70; Boeing 717, 737-200, -200C, -300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -800, 767-200, -200ER, 300, -300ER, 747-400, -400M; Bombardier CRJ-200, -700, -900; Cessna 404, C208 Grand Caravan, Citation Bravo, Citation Ultra; de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver, DHC-3 Otter, DHC-6 Twin Otter, DHC-8 Dash 8-100, -200, -300, -400; Douglas DC-9-50, Embraer EMB-120, ERJ-170, -190; Fairchild Dornier Do-228, Fokker F28, McDonnell-Douglas MD-83, -88, -90; Piper Cherokee, Raytheon Beech 18, 1900D, King Air
#10
Posted 14 August 2010 - 05:53 AM
ThePilotGuy
-
- Veteran
-
- 140 posts
Sometimes here, most of the time not.
- Skype Name:thepilotguy2
- Website:http://axsel.net/
I would go with the 757 series
I agree!
#12
Posted 18 August 2010 - 07:41 AM
conmanflyer
-
- Member
-
- 246 posts
C
it would, but not rangewise, or in the same time period
#13
Posted 01 October 2010 - 01:02 AM
lshlarson
-
- Member
-
- 928 posts
#1 Railfan
I have a hub at DCA, and most of my international routes are with the A310-300. (or 757-200 for Europe) I didn't see that in here so I thought I'd bring it up. The A310 is nowhere near the runway restriction of the 762 but it may be useful
#14
Posted 27 October 2010 - 09:17 PM
lshlarson
-
- Member
-
- 928 posts
#1 Railfan
#15
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Posted 27 October 2010 - 09:57 PM
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Guest_Speed Bird_*
-
- Guests
Yeah, and have you tried using them? Problem is, the CASM's simply just too high to make them any good.
#16
Posted 28 October 2010 - 01:04 AM
lshlarson
-
- Member
-
- 928 posts
#1 Railfan
Yeah, and have you tried using them? Problem is, the CASM's simply just too high to make them any good.
I have, in fact I was the launch of the 737ER. I have about 50 and they're some of my best and most profitable airplanes because they can fly domestic and then TATL, or TPAC from my base in HNL.
#17
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Posted 28 October 2010 - 09:17 AM
Guest_Speed Bird_*
Guest_Speed Bird_*
-
- Guests
Well, in that case, I'd suggest buying something a lot bigger... that is if you care about profits.
#18
Posted 15 November 2010 - 04:38 PM
http://www.youtube.c...k&v=nUpScNgvgj4
Takeoff Roll starts 0:45. Impressive performance from this 767-200. Regarding a replacement, yes the 737-700ER is a good solution, although I agree they are higher cost if you plan to haul only Y traffic. The 762 has only marginally superior economics for a much larger aircraft which would mean fewer flights.
UA 747 16-17 second takeoff roll
Takeoff Roll starts 0:45. Impressive performance from this 767-200. Regarding a replacement, yes the 737-700ER is a good solution, although I agree they are higher cost if you plan to haul only Y traffic. The 762 has only marginally superior economics for a much larger aircraft which would mean fewer flights.
UA 747 16-17 second takeoff roll
I have traveled on: Airbus A300, A310, A318, A319, A320, A321, A330-200, -300, A340-200, -300; ATR-72, BAe Systems 146-200, Avro RJ 70; Boeing 717, 737-200, -200C, -300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -800, 767-200, -200ER, 300, -300ER, 747-400, -400M; Bombardier CRJ-200, -700, -900; Cessna 404, C208 Grand Caravan, Citation Bravo, Citation Ultra; de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver, DHC-3 Otter, DHC-6 Twin Otter, DHC-8 Dash 8-100, -200, -300, -400; Douglas DC-9-50, Embraer EMB-120, ERJ-170, -190; Fairchild Dornier Do-228, Fokker F28, McDonnell-Douglas MD-83, -88, -90; Piper Cherokee, Raytheon Beech 18, 1900D, King Air
#19
Posted 15 November 2010 - 04:54 PM
lshlarson
-
- Member
-
- 928 posts
#1 Railfan
http://www.youtube.c...k&v=nUpScNgvgj4
Takeoff Roll starts 0:45. Impressive performance from this 767-200. Regarding a replacement, yes the 737-700ER is a good solution, although I agree they are higher cost if you plan to haul only Y traffic. The 762 has only marginally superior economics for a much larger aircraft which would mean fewer flights.
UA 747 16-17 second takeoff roll
I think that the 737ER is probably the best replacement of the 762, even though it's much smaller. I operate them in F4C8Y126 and I can make a +$600k daily profit with one flying JFK-HIO and JFK-AYT. This is why I love the 737ER
#20
Posted 15 November 2010 - 05:00 PM
I think that the 737ER is probably the best replacement of the 762, even though it's much smaller. I operate them in F4C8Y126 and I can make a +$600k daily profit with one flying JFK-HIO and JFK-AYT. This is why I love the 737ER
The photo for this aircraft in AE is of the ANA Business Jet service, all J class. ANA has some in 24 J / 20 Y, and others are 38 J....unusual for a real world airline. I have a number of mine in F/J premium configuration, which makes them very profitable indeed. They fit perfectly with my business plan to focus on premium passengers.
I have traveled on: Airbus A300, A310, A318, A319, A320, A321, A330-200, -300, A340-200, -300; ATR-72, BAe Systems 146-200, Avro RJ 70; Boeing 717, 737-200, -200C, -300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -800, 767-200, -200ER, 300, -300ER, 747-400, -400M; Bombardier CRJ-200, -700, -900; Cessna 404, C208 Grand Caravan, Citation Bravo, Citation Ultra; de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver, DHC-3 Otter, DHC-6 Twin Otter, DHC-8 Dash 8-100, -200, -300, -400; Douglas DC-9-50, Embraer EMB-120, ERJ-170, -190; Fairchild Dornier Do-228, Fokker F28, McDonnell-Douglas MD-83, -88, -90; Piper Cherokee, Raytheon Beech 18, 1900D, King Air
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
