It has been uncovered that Boeing is currently studying new engines for the 767 Freighter, with discussions also being held about passenger models.
FlightGlobal was the first to learn about the study, which currently exists under the project name “767-XF”, and is aimed at boosting efficiency of an existing platform for continued cargo use in the future.
The aircraft proposal is based on the 767-400ER and would be powered by two General Electric GEnx engines. To compensate for the larger engines a new taller landing gear would be implemented into the 767 design.
Since Boeing already produces the new 767-300 Freighters for UPS and FedEx, as well as the military KC-46 tankers, the introduction of a 767-X would see minimal impact to the existing production systems.
This is partly due to Boeing targeting an absolute basic re-engine scheme, with no major structural changes to the airframe. The 767-XF would even use the existing forward cargo maindeck door found on the 767-300F.
Boeing already has a modern cockpit available for the 767, which bares similarity to the 787 and 737 MAX platforms with its large format displays.
Just like previous 767 variants the fight control system would likely remain fly-by-cable, with only electronically controlled spoilers; mainly due to the significant amount of work required to convert to a fly-by-wire system and the retraining aspects.
Should Boeing secure interest in the project, and possibly orders for a launch, the company would target a service entry somewhere in the mid-2020s.
Perhaps the most significant part about this story is Boeing’s study into a potential passenger variant of the 767-X, this would be a cheap alternative to developing a clean sheet new midsize airplane (NMA).
For quite some time now, Boeing has been studying whether they should go all in with a new aircraft to counter Airbus’ A321XLR and A330neo offerings for the middle of the market segment.
FlightGlobal notes that, if Boeing were to launch the 767-X instead of a new aircraft the cheap and low-risk product would allow financial and engineering resources to be poured into a future 737 replacement.
With the 737 MAX in its current situation, this would be a viable idea to secure the fate of the company’s narrow-body success stories and would put Airbus in a tight situation.
When contacted by FlightGlobal, Boeing declined to comment on the project but added that they are “always studying the marketplace and looking at how we can best serve our customers”.
Boeing is still receiving orders for the 767 Freighter so there is still demand in the platform, which was first introduced to the world in 1982 when United Airlines first took delivery.
Since then, Boeing has delivered 1,165 aircraft with their current backlog sitting at 105 orders; consisting of 60 767-300 Freighters and 45 767-2C tankers for the United States Air Force and Japan.
Similar projects to this study include the 737 MAX and 777X programs, which involved taking an old airframe design and modernising it to a certain extent.
In terms of the 777X, Boeing opted to perform a variety of changes such as designing a new composite wing with folding wing tips, installing larger cabin windows and implementing new avionics.
The 737 MAX is perhaps a case of one stretch too far, after Boeing opted for engines so large they had to be mounted high and forward of the wing causing unpleasant handling characteristics.
Consequently, the Manoeuvring Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) was added to the aircraft; however due to significant design flaws, this resulted in the death of 346 people.
What are your thoughts on the 767-X project?
The 767 will benefit from a more efficient engine, not necessarily a more powerful one. Unfortunately, there has not been much R&D on the 60,000lb thrust class of engines. The Rolls Royce Trent family is an option, but there is probably not enough improvement in fuel efficiency as customers want. The A-330neo is evidence of this. For this most perfect airliner, in my opinion, there will need to be a new engine in this class and not just slapping a bigger engine on the airframe.
I have always been a fan of the B767, the -200 being my favorite. A re-engined 767 for commercial passenger operations would bring Boeing back on a par to counter Airbus’ A330 and A321XLR middle of market tandem strategy. Now if there were at least an airline that would configure its 767 with a single, wide aisle and six-abreast seats of 21 inches in width, we in cattle class would have it made.
I think it is a great idea ! Everyone loves the 767 wide body , two aisle , container cargo and proven aircraft . BUT the only way it works is with proven engines that have been slightly modified in a truly unique way that changes aviation as we know it . GEnx engines that are 35% or more fuel efficiency than todays GEnx engines . The modified GEnx engines would make this 767X so popular that Boeing could not make them fast enough to keep up with demand ! ! !
The question will for boeing will they introduce mcas system the new 767 considering they are placing bigger engines? Would there be any issues with the flight controls?
Don’t forget that Boeing has acquired a significant stake in Embraer. Eventually they might have something above the E195-E2 that could be announced within the next year. This would take pressure of the 737MAX-program.
clearly boeing did not learn its lesson. its refusing to do another clean sheet design. both the 777x and the 787 are doing fine, and the 747-8 program will produce freighters for many years to come – why do they refuse to clean sheet a 757/middle-of-market replacement and for god’s sake clean sheet that ancient garbage 737 platform. its time, boeing, get up and get going with the clean sheets for the medium and small aircraft already. its sad to see the A220 and A321neos utterly destroying the 737, 737-max10 and 757.
We heard the same song about the MAX. New engines, but limited changes, right?
Enjoy your comments and Ideas that you have expressed here. I am probably what you would call a Transportation geek, mainliey land (trains), sea (ships) and Air (focus of commercial/freight Air transports).
I have retired recently after a great career in the railroad sector.
I wrote schedules,timetables etc both public and employee. Later years I managed day to day operations for a major (Union Pacific) class 1 railroad here in the USA.
I have lately took ! Look at Norwegian Airlines and their struggles to keep their head above the clouds.
My findings and recommendations is.
The 737 max grounding was a bad hit for this company along with the engines on their 787. Using 3rd party airlines (ie) Hi Fly Wamos, priviledge to name a few has cut into their earnings.
But mostly I think they have focused on the west coast of the USA instead of staying east of the Mississippi River which would give each aircraft an additional 8 to 10 hours of utlization.
They also try to fly to too many destinations with their long haul fleet.
If they utilized LGW and possibly Stolkholm or Oslo where they &have hubs they could again use these places for long haul destinations from the US and other countries and then have the consumers transfer to one of there 737 fleet.
Of course this works well here in the US as long as weather air traffic control and other factors allow for on time of arrivals and departures.
Feel free to use this for what endeavor you would wish to use it for
I would be interested in hearing your thoughts
Thanks
Tom