The 2-3-2 seating makes the 767 my favorite widebody.

@finalascent

3 жыл бұрын

I think it's very underrated for passenger comfort. Only flew on one once, but there I was in economy class, toward the back of the plane, EWR to Lisbon and back. Great flight, great crew (circa 2017)

@sergiolaurencio7534

2 жыл бұрын

the best plane for the economy, if it still today as a new plane, goodbye 350,787, and a330

I think the 787 Dreamliner might have been the final nail in the coffin of the - 400ERX project.

A 767-ERX?! I never know that until I watched this vid. This is an educational channel. Good job Simple Flying.

@SimpleFlyingNews

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the feedback! - JS

@Wall_T3mbok4556

3 жыл бұрын

Same, i also never knew this existed

I really would've loved to see the 767-400ERX had they built it. It's a shame that they canceled the project.

@palm1986

2 жыл бұрын

The 764 is my favorite plane I would’ve just loved to see Boeing continue it’s production, but they didn’t get enough orders

@ChrisZoomER

2 жыл бұрын

@@palm1986 It's one of my favorites too It's actually the first wide-body I've ever flown on so it holds a special place in my heart. I think it's prettier than the 787 or A350 despite being a smaller plane mainly because it resembles the much larger 77W which is one of my three favorite planes. The other two being the 747 (especially the 747-8I) and the A380.

If only 767-400ER re-engined with GEnx-2b, then imagining fuel burn rate reduced to 4-4.5t/hr 🛫😎

@wil8115

3 жыл бұрын

or the 772 with 2b67's. even crazier range.

@steinwaldmadchen

3 жыл бұрын

@@wil8115 772 is even heavier than 78J while GENx-2B is weaker than the -1B on 78J. That would be severely underpowered.

@wil8115

3 жыл бұрын

@@steinwaldmadchen you are correct. my mistake. I meant the 1B76
's. used on the 787-10, a very similar power level of the 772 classic but with even more take-off weight yet much better burn rates.

@nntflow7058

3 жыл бұрын

How would it compared to B787-8 performance? since they are soo similar in size?

@stradivarioushardhiantz5179

3 жыл бұрын

@@nntflow7058 788 has 120t OEW & 70,000 lb on engine thrust, while 767-400 has 100t so if powered by 67,000 lb thrust the fuel burn/ trip would be

It was the 757 that replaced the 727, not the 767. That United 767 at 1:40 Min is a 767-300 as well. The 767-400 is much more of an upgrade than just a stretch and new flight deck.

@StopIRSTaxProblems

3 жыл бұрын

I guess they totally missed the fact that that it was a replacement for the 707. I dont know if that makes me smart or old lol.

@widget787

3 жыл бұрын

@@StopIRSTaxProblems smart! ;-) Yes thats true, its a 707 replacement.

@widget787

3 жыл бұрын

@@momsspaghetti6507 that is NOT a 200, N643UA is a 300.

HOLDUP at 1:53, USSR-era Aeroflot operated 767s ?!

@imonymous

3 жыл бұрын

Notice the Russian flag on the tail. This was shortly after the end of the Union when Aeroflot started to consider western aircraft.

@jakenolan2572

3 жыл бұрын

The Soviet Union collapsed in 1992 I believe

@197pete

3 жыл бұрын

December 91

@herrhornbuckele5227

3 жыл бұрын

LOT and Interflug got some Western airliners before the collapse of the Eastern Block (767 and A310s) so maybe Aeroflot also got some? But there also were 777-200 around in the Soviet-era livery so they probably stuck with that livery for some time.

@imonymous

3 жыл бұрын

@@herrhornbuckele5227 I flew on Aeroflot as a child and the addition of non Soviet models is a significant memory for me. I am quite sure there were none ever carrying the red Soviet flag (whose loss was so upsetting to me I still get annoyed when seeing the old livery with the Russian flag). They did get the A310 as well, as you said. Also DC-10s. I think they had MD-11s but as freighters only. I don't know their current fleet makeup. My first flight on a 777 was on Aeroflot too. In fact, I can't remember flying it on any other airline!

The 767-400 has been refurbished by Delta. Its getting a second life right now. It's a good thing - I love the 764!!!

That bigger engine became the GEnX on the 787 and is used on the 747-8i as well, so in a way the 787-8 is the spiritual successor of the 767-400ERX. To wrap the story up in a bow, that's the aircraft of choice for Kenya Airways these days!

This hypothetical plane also would have ended up competing with the 787-8 if developed.

Good job simple flying team

@SimpleFlyingNews

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the feedback! - JS

It was sad it never got to be built but now there are more new aircraft to come

Boeing should have continued with this type of planes plying high load sectors, medium or even short or even long haul with 1 stopover to pick pax up. Example:kul dxb cdg, or kul narita lax or honolulu or vancouver. Superb plane

Having worked the 767-400 many times, let me just say it was sadly UNDERPOWERED! It was quite a pig when full and could not cruise very high either. Many times stuck down in the 32-330 flight level in all the weather. Sadly it did not get an engine upgrade, probably would have made it more attractive to other carriers.

Malev (MA) and CSA (OK) were amongst the few airlines that were targeted by Boeing with advertisement of 767ERX. The 767-400ER world tour stopped at Prag and Budapest and Boeing made detailed offer of ERX.

I went on a United 767 to New York last year and it was excellent. Seems like a few planes that did not work out like the 400ERX and saw a video about a A380 that wasn't built that would've helped existing A380s. Maybe it comes down to money, but it's strange that these planes have better fuel efficiency and productivity compared with what is made .

Good video!❤️

@SimpleFlyingNews

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the feedback! - JS

@henrykaung9064

3 жыл бұрын

@@SimpleFlyingNews anytime!👍

Wait...the video lacks background music

@Cl4rendon

3 жыл бұрын

Hey!

Nobody wanted at the time. Now it'd be a hot seller.

Airlines need small widebody aircraft with current pandemic in mind 767 would be a perfect aircraft

@planelover4480

3 жыл бұрын

Not quite, as the A321ULR can fly nearly all of the longhaul routes that the 767 could, Airlines are using the 321 to fly transcontinental as soon as they get their aircraft. The 767 would only be used on routes between 8500 km (the range of the 321) and 11000 km (the 767s Range) On this small field of routes, airlines could also use the slightly bigger 788 or the 332)

@sergiolaurencio7534

2 жыл бұрын

@@planelover4480 I can't imagine flying a 3-3 for more than 5 hours (depending on how they put it)

Can the -400ERX still be built with GEnx engines?

An offering by airframe manufacturers and it not getting orders should not be considered a failure. It is simply a market examination to see where opportunities lie. To make 747X viable they had to cost share the upgrades with another platform. The new flight deck of the ERX would have required extensive SIM time, time best spent on the 777 from the airlines perspective. No cost share, no plane.the The decision to invest in the 747-8 using components from other newer models turned out to be the best arrangement. Just ask Lufthansa!

Goodness, the naming convention, ERX...how about just LR, like the 772LR

Boeing should build a 767-8 and 767-9.

Where does the B767-400ER/ERX start overlapping with the B777-200/300?

Hope they keep building them, 2-3-2 is the best seating ever

Hi

Once again, Boeing was ahead of the game. Fast forward 20 years and the 787 and the A350 are now in that niche.

If they thought of things right, they would’ve realized that the 767-400/ER is the perfect replacement for the 767-300 and -300/ER

I think if i knew the range figures i could make a decision on its merits

It makes sense because there wasn't a market for the plane, and airlines would have to pay too much money for it.

Isn’t there already a 767-400ER

@NaenaeGaming

3 жыл бұрын

Read the title again

When do you think the 777X will be retired let me know in replies

@itsnaveenn

3 жыл бұрын

3000

@itsnaveenn

3 жыл бұрын

Or 2080

@brassicaolaraceaolaracea1115

3 жыл бұрын

jokes apart, mid 2040's aviation is changing, very fast. who knows what technology is going to make the 777x commercially unviable....

@widget787

3 жыл бұрын

Seriously? It has not even entered service. If you ask me it will be in production until well into the 30s, so they will be around until at least into the 2050s.

@grozaphy

3 жыл бұрын

2040s? Probably entering service in Mid 2021. 29 years does not seem a lot but it is a big aircraft so not much airlines would use it especially because there will be more efficient aircraft

787 isn't really the hype everyone expected, they'll learn from their mistakes

I love the 767 too bad that passenger production ended

I still want to fly on a 777

The Boeing 767 has lovel launching 400 ERX deliveries future aircraft

They should go with the 787-9 instead.

Yah and lately HNL has been a 763 haven for DL. UGH! WHY DID THEY GIVE UP THE 777!!

it's been shelved into the pages of history, never to be taken out again.

Never flown in the 767, would love to though!

@widget787

3 жыл бұрын

Amazing plane to fly, my absolute favorite to fly longhaul in Economy due to its great 2-3-2 config. Flown on 767s between HAM and ATL, DUS and ATL and AMS and ATL.

great news, Boeing always seem to get hundreds of orders for any of there current planes. It seems American airlines prefer Boeing rather than Airbus. It would be good if Airbus could get many more orders for their jets, apart from A380.. Though Airbus have had a few orders from some of American airlines have a few Airbus jets. I do not know how may Airbus jets are used by American airlines. You probably guess that I am British and here in Britain we make all the wings for Airbus jets and of course RollsRoyce make a lot of engines.

@travelbugjay4300

3 жыл бұрын

Hey, American airlines is the largest operator of A321s, and they have a big order for the A321xlr.

The 767-400ERX just too overlapped with the 777-200 models. That's why airlines didn't want the 767-400ERX.

@steinwaldmadchen

3 жыл бұрын

764 is more a 332-class aircraft, while 772 is slightly larger than 333.

Turns out airplane companies from 1970-2000 really liked the letter X

1:08 WHY IS THE 767'S GEAR TILTED BACKWARDS?!

@charliemolda297

3 жыл бұрын

For the same reason that the a330 gears are and the 747 outer main landing gear, it’s to put it in the correct position for storage in the wheel well

@Lee247Jamaica

3 жыл бұрын

Thats how boeing desinged it

@wil8115

3 жыл бұрын

can guess partly due to landing stress with the nose slightly up, the gear is nearer vertical, better transferring the shock loads to the struts.

@n0nsense721

3 жыл бұрын

Bcs its gear tilted backwards like the a350 and a380. Why u ask ? Bcs of gear space at retraction

@mmm0404

Жыл бұрын

For stowage. Allows the wheels to align with the landing gear compartment/ bay before being retracted.

B767-400ERX, Would have worked, they could have went with the GE NX Engines same used on the B747-8, & B787 Dreamliner Aircraft. Also re-engine the B767-200 & 300 Aircraft with the same Wings like the B767-400ER & B787 Dreamliner Aircraft, it would be more cheaper, and be able to compete with AIRBUS

@steinwaldmadchen

3 жыл бұрын

No. One big issue is 767 can't fit LD-3 efficiently. That greatly hinder their sales in Asia where cargo are more needed.

@marquisstamps4153

3 жыл бұрын

@@steinwaldmadchenB767 is a good aircraft and I had no trouble loading LD3's in the Cargo Bin

@steinwaldmadchen

3 жыл бұрын

@@marquisstamps4153 Wrong. A300 is the narrowest fuselage that capable of fitting 2 LD-3 in a row. And in Asia, cargo capacity is in higher demand thanks to strong export demand and lack of alternative cargo transportation (e.g. rail or highway). While A300/310have considerable sales in the region, 767 is a rare stay outside Japan (they built parts for Boeing), and 757 is near to nonexistent. But even for Japan, while airlines ordered large amount of 787, showed no interest on NMA.

The Boeing seven-two-seven, also known as the seven-twenty-seven 😏😁

they should've made it

@MasterofBlitz

3 жыл бұрын

Would have cut into the demand of the B777 series. A B767-400ERX would have been in size comparable to a B777-200/B777-200ER.

When Boeing was actually decent.

1st Or second

In short: cause nobody wanted it.

@widget787

3 жыл бұрын

No, in short: the engine that was supposed to power the 400ERX got canceled -- and that was the end of the 400ERX.

@HydroSheep

3 жыл бұрын

@@widget787 and no one wanted it

Good the 400 is gone. Not required. The 330 and 340 killed it.

@filledwithvariousknowledge1065

3 жыл бұрын

The A340 didn’t kill it. The A330-200 did

@indranilchakrabarty4196

3 жыл бұрын

@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 Back then ETOPS wasnt as generous as it is today. The 340 was and remains a useful go anywhere plane like these Japanese 4WDs

@mmm0404

Жыл бұрын

But now it could be a seller , considering now how much more weight has been added to the a330-800 , the 767-400 is now close to 30 tons lighter , perfect for short to medium routes

With Boeing knowing *stifled idiot laughter*

Bc lol dreamliner.

I'm single 😥😥😥😥😥

Why did they cancel? Because, thanks to the 737-MAX, they’ve learned you CAN overstretch an old design.