I would love to see the A330-800 get some life-renewing orders to its books. I do believe as stated in the video that the 787 is a major factor in the lack of sales of the A330-800.
Hopefully they see an uptick in orders as the older A330-200’s & 300’s are retired. They’re certainly cheaper than 787’s & A350’s and some airlines might not need the added range of those aircraft. Hell, it would be nice if Delta & United would retire their 330’s & 767’s with these.
@@GuitarGuy4647 UA already has a huge order in place for the 787 and to some extent the 321XLR to replace the 767s. Delta is one of the few carriers replacing some of the 767's with the 330NEO. Can't really say the neos are cheaper than the 787. Boeing has been very aggressive on the pricing given the volume of sales.
@@GuitarGuy4647 actually the a330-800 have more range than the 787-8 and 9. So really for replacement the 787-8 mare more sense, of course that all depends on the airline want the the circumstances ñ.
while the idea behind it was good, later on, the airlines operated the plane as a full passenger one, converting it. It was only necessary once, when India had put an embargo on Nepal. Then, it was used for freighting fuel and cooking gas. Due to the niche type of aircraft, it had difficulty selling as well. All in all, even the Himalayan nation didn't need it.
Flew on Delta's 764 with the updated cabin and loved it! Glad they're keeping them around and I hope Boeing will consider a NEO option. Love the 2-3-2 configuration.
I’ve always said the 767X will be a thing in the next 3 years so Boeing can mount some challenge in the middle-of-market segment. The 767s longevity in its existing form in unreal, so a MAX / X variant would be super appealing.
They’re a nightmare to work into, for cabin crews, and, with the BAe-146: the WORST airplane regarding the purity of its cabin atmosphere. Want cancer? Fly the 767.
@@filledwithvariousknowledge2747 Because Delta was bellyaching about phasing out its 767s and the lack of a suitable alternative - I thought the 800 would fit the bill pretty well... :-/
It should! I think it will rack up more orders when the 200 variant gets retired in a few years because they are starting to age! I think in the long run it will do well.
B747SP sadly, before the 80's: 45 Flew on Qantas' 744ER. Gorgeous plane. my first long haul as well. Always get teary-eyed whenever they are mentioned or shown.
I don't see the B747-400D and ER as being necessarily unpopular. Each was designed for a particular customer/market and were never meant to be available worldwide. As opposed to the B767-400 or the A340 in general.
I agree, and same with the 737-700ER (which I didn't realise had existed), and several other models listed - they were just relatively minor modifications of existing aircraft, and sometimes done at the request of just one or two customers... they wouldn't have made them for a small number of customers if the modification costs would have been huge. I somewhat disagree on the A340 - at least the A340-300 - as it sold moderately well, and shares a huge amount in common with the A330-300 (which was developed alongside), including the fuselage and most other components, so it did fill a role for a while until ETOPS changes allowed for the 777 and A330 to flourish due to their better economics.
While the 747-8i didn’t sell very well I would still consider the airframe a success with the amount of 747-8f cargo planes that rolled out of the Everett factory. Just head to ANC in Anchorage, AK and they are everywhere.
Really the main reason the passenger version didn't do well was because it came late to the mark, a marked were there were better planes of the new future.
@@sergiolaurencio7534 couldn’t agree more! The introduction of twin engine long haul aircraft like the 777’s, the Korean Airline 747-8 is the aircraft you wanna fly long haul! It’s very beautiful and of course it’s the modern version of the Queen❤
I believe with the A330-800 there is a potential with Delta. They have their aging 767-300ER’s and A330-200’s, the -800 being a good replacement for both, not already operating the 787.
Considering they have already ordered the 737max, they could probably order the 787-8. But look at this, I'd don't matter what of the 2 they order, I am sure the both would be configuration of 2-4-2.
3:33 The 764 entered service with Continental in 2000, and Tulip United never had them. So it’s only ever had two customers: Continental (now United) and Delta. It was custom designed and built for those two airlines. With that said, should we be including custom planes (like the 73GER and the 764) as “poor sellers”?
The 737 is a stone-age plane that Boeing should have ceased producing 20 years ago. Should have kept producing the 757. Would have saved them the max disaster.
Being based in Sweden, I’ve flown on Boeing’s equivalent - the 737-600 - many times with SAS. I really liked them, they were stable and robust in the sky and service was always fast compared to the -700 and especially the -800 that SAS also operate(d).
flown on both the 767-400 and 747-8i and they are both wonderful. I understand the reasoning behind their lackluster orders but still think they should have sold at least a few more examples.
That beautiful bird is poetry in motion. I love all 74 variants, too. It is truly a magnificent plane, no matter the variant. My eyes start stinging whenever I see one.
It would seem to me as a highly experienced Canadian Arctic passenger (between 1966 and 2015) that in its day', the B757-M would have served Bradley Air Service (DBA AS First Air) and Canadian North Airlines (now amalgamated as Canadian North, would have well served the paved runways on their northern Provincial and Territorial routes. 'Couldn't be 'gravel kitted' like the B-737-200s that they still fly onto gravel and snow/ice covered runways (along with Norlinor and Air Inuit), however especially for the fly-in only regional hubs such as Inuvik, Norman Wells, Rankin Inlet, Cambridge Bay, Coral Harbour, Resolute Bay and Iqaluit, combis and combi-conversions are a very important part of the fleet 'Perhaps also still useful for Whitehorse-based Air North Airlines. Southern hubs include Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa fibreglass Montreal! My first flight on the Montreal, Frobisher Bay, Hall Beach, Resolute Bay route was during June and September 1966 on a Nordair Lockheed Super Continental combi! On that decade old place at that time, the freight on the main deck wasn't even separated from the passenger seating by a bulkhead! Our initial ton of gear and supplies for a three year long Arctic Wolf research program was strapped down amongst other freight under '6G' cargo nets almost within touching distance. [Included was the world's first Amphibious All Terrain Vehicle (AATV); a six-wheeled fibreglass hulled JIGER!] 🇨🇦 🦊 🐺 🦊 🇨🇦
I really love the A330-800. I always mention it in all of my old airplane videos. It is also my most favorite aircraft. I always think it should have performed better in terms of sales.
Its important to note that a variant that sells in small numbers only may still be profitable either because it fills a small but important niche that you can charge a lot per unit for, or because the change from a popular base model is small and the variant was therefore cheap to create, or a bit of both. A couple of those on this list were actually nice little earners while others were true money pits. It would have been good if the video was able to give some indication of which was which.
the 767-400ER is my favorite and interested version of 767s which sadly only two airliner are have it and i hope keep in service longest possible, speaking of 747-400ER they are an updated version of regular 747-400 with some 400ER features like boeing signature interior a smaller design of cabin which used in 777, 767-400 and an updated 767-200/300, and an updated cockpit's display using LCD rather than CRT displays, they didn't sell well because it was around end of the line of passenger version of 747-400 and many airliners switched to 777-300ER the Airbus A330-800 may have some (not huge) order for VIP and some airliners
The 767-400 is much more than just a 767-300ER stretch with a little more wingspan. They incorporated a lot of the new 777 tech into the -400. It has the flight deck and cabin of the 777, also it has a taller Main Gear with 777 tires/brakes. It had two problems: 1st it came a few years too late IMO and second, as already mentioned, the A330-200 which had the same passenger capacity but better/higher range/performance plus it can load the big containers. A 767-400ERX might have been more popular but it died with the 747-400X, which was supposed to use the same engine. The third customer of the 767-400 was not United, the original United never ordered the -400. But there was a third customer: Kenya Airways. They later switched their order to the 777. The 757-300s problem was 1st that it came to the market muuuch to late and second that there was no ER variant. Another key feature or even THE key feature of the 747-400D was a strengthened Landing Gear to allow for more cycles. The A330-800 will never become a big success. Just like the 777-8 it serves a niche which is very small. For just a few extra tonnes of empty weight Airlines get the A330-900 which offers 30-40 more seats and can fly 97% of the missions. Airlines would rather fly these extra seats empty on a few routes to have the range potential. Airbus was smart stopping the A350-800, I don't get why they realized the A330-800. The reason why the A330-200 sold much better is because the early A330-300 had much less range than today.
It’s not surprising that the 200LR & A350-900ULR aren’t big sellers - they’re niche planes and most airlines are interested in utilizing that sort of range for it to be a worthwhile investment.
@@GuitarGuy4647 The thing with the A350ulr is that Singapore Airlines requested the aircraft, like how Qantas asked Boeing to make the 747-400ER, there is also the 737-700ER.
It was always intended primarily for the F market. Boeing always knew that. Just not much demand for ULR aircraft. They would have never built it without the F version. It sold as they expected.
For Aircraft like B737-700C and Er variants, the 747-400 D and Er and A350 ULR have been specifically ordered to suit airlines demands in range, freighter or seating capacity hence they couldn't accumulated much orders. But for Aircraft like the A340-300,-500,A330-800 ,B737-900 non and Er 747-8i could have done/can do better in terms of sales but all in all it all comes down to the airline economics.
Despite being pre-1980s: Dassault Mercure - Just 13 bought by AirInter, a now defunct French regional Airline. Problem was this plane was in fact operable just from Paris, it was too specialized in short-haul flights to reach any other major city without intermediate stops.
My favorite one has to go with the A319neo because China Southern Airlines had 4 of these and Tibet Airlines had 6 of these. Also the A319neo is a shortened A320neo
The most 'shocking' poor performance here is definitely the A330-800. It doesn't really make sense since almost 600 airframes of its predecessor -200 were delivered, and obviously pretty old at this point. It deserves more orders, especially from the -200 operators.
To list the 747-400ER without talking about the 747-ERF is not a good idea. QANTAS really needed that craft, it was the first 747-400 able fly Sydney to Los Angeles with a full load.
My absolute favorite is the Boeing 777-200LR. Though I totally understand the anticipated reasons of why not many were ordered in terms of purpose and worth.
If that’s the case, shouldn’t the A350-900ULR be mentioned as well? Only 7 of them are in service. If not, maybe it’s because it’s still fairly new, and the range is only needed for Singapore’s longest routes.
Despite being a Boeing and Lockheed (hashtag #bring back the TriStar!) fan, I genuinely wish the A340 was more of a hit, although 764 delivered, all variants, is no slouch of a record. I get the efficiency of two engines, but my desire to see more built is strictly an emotional wont. It’s beautiful with its four engines, and just looks powerful and uber reliable (zero accidents involving fatalities, and only 6 hull losses, most of which appear to have happened on the ground). What a plane for military usage - a high performance, highly efficient 707 replacement for AWACS, EW, recce, tanker, and cargo. Was it ever used in such a fashion?
The only major reason why they failed is because there’s only a few marketing niche applicable for the variants. Boeing 747 400Er for example, for a short haul? Very rare
@@claxisthebesta Not really comparable. Just some minor tweaks to the software and engine tweaks and significantly reduced capacity on the ULR. The ER had much more extensive changes with option of one or two extra 12,300-liter fuel tanks in the forward cargo hold. The 747-400ER also had a strengthened fuselage, landing gear, and parts of its wings. There were also new, larger tires. The ER also had an F version.
Agreed. I learned there were only six hull losses out of 754 delivered, and zero fatalities. That has to be a record; if not, it’s still very impressive.
I wouldn't call the 767-400ER a failure, it specifically made to fill a gap in the market with legacy carriers retiring the tri-holers like the L1011 and DC10 used by both Continental and Delta while maintaining the existing type certificate with ETOPS180 and there wasn't anything available at that time that could do the job that was affordable (777-200 costs more than double a 767-400ER plus the wait time was long), not to mention neither Continental nor Delta operated the A330 at that time. It was never meant to be a long term solution as Boeing was working on the 787-8 that was meant to replace the 767 fleet for both airlines. United/Continental kept their 787 orders while Delta cancelled all of them and instead ordered the A350. Delta is slated to retire their 767-300ER's by 2025 and United has stated they will retire their 767-300ER's by 2030. Neither airline has said they plan to retire the -400ER's any time soon.
9:15 could someone please explain the differences between the 737-700 and -800 wings? I’ve read that line about the 737-700ERs wings being from the 800 but I can’t find any sources explaining the differences
Some of these are not intended to sell, just like phones, they are priced to entice airlines to spend more buying an A350 or 777. Or trying to keep airlines stay within their ecosystem.
Boeing 747SP and Lockheed L1011 Tristar were Introduced to Aviation world 🌎 and 45 Boeing 747SP and then 40 Tristar were first ordered due to the Size of the Airframe Fuselage of 747SP and Tristar S Shaped 2nd Upper Emgine Duck .
Didn’t Boeing already try catering to the Japanese market with the 747SP? Which was disappointing to say the least. To try it again with the 744D just seems foolish
Customer were Fussy about Range and Fuel efficiency and Boeing introduce the Biggest Twin jet Aircraft ,Boeing 777 family and was Successful and developed the Future Boeing 777-9 Variant of ETOPS rating.
Sometimes the sales people are killing their own products by diverting clients choices. Example Philippine Airlines wanted more 747 but sales people persuaded the 777. Sometimes political forced to get boeing because washington is limiting PAL access to us airports.
The 747 was already in the phase of being retired all over the world when PAL retired theirs, also the Philippines already has the FAA Type 1 certificate, it's just that PAL doesn't need any more routes to the Americas other than Hawaii, LA, NY, Vancouver and Toronto though it rarely appears on the schedule. They don't have enough aircraft for more routes to the US and simply caters to the routes that Filipinos would likely travel to. The "sales people" have no say in what aircraft airlines buy in the end, it's the people in charge of the airline's economics. The 747 was retired for the same reason why every other airline was retiring it; too large (especially for Philippine airports, one 747 is enough to get the whole terminal congested), ate up lots of fuel and too old. PAL took the 777 because it was more modern, was the perfect size, carried enough passengers and is economical.
I would love to see the A330-800 get some life-renewing orders to its books. I do believe as stated in the video that the 787 is a major factor in the lack of sales of the A330-800.
Hopefully they see an uptick in orders as the older A330-200’s & 300’s are retired. They’re certainly cheaper than 787’s & A350’s and some airlines might not need the added range of those aircraft. Hell, it would be nice if Delta & United would retire their 330’s & 767’s with these.
@@GuitarGuy4647 UA already has a huge order in place for the 787 and to some extent the 321XLR to replace the 767s. Delta is one of the few carriers replacing some of the 767's with the 330NEO. Can't really say the neos are cheaper than the 787. Boeing has been very aggressive on the pricing given the volume of sales.
@@GuitarGuy4647 actually the a330-800 have more range than the 787-8 and 9. So really for replacement the 787-8 mare more sense, of course that all depends on the airline want the the circumstances ñ.
A330* You said A300-800
@@claxisthebesta Appreciate you 🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️
Love that 757-200M on list as one clearly understands why it was needed and same time why nobody else needs it.
while the idea behind it was good, later on, the airlines operated the plane as a full passenger one, converting it. It was only necessary once, when India had put an embargo on Nepal. Then, it was used for freighting fuel and cooking gas. Due to the niche type of aircraft, it had difficulty selling as well. All in all, even the Himalayan nation didn't need it.
Flew on Delta's 764 with the updated cabin and loved it! Glad they're keeping them around and I hope Boeing will consider a NEO option. Love the 2-3-2 configuration.
Boeing or GE are not pursuing a NEO version. Idea was rejected.
767-400 needs to be retired. I’ve worked on that thing and it’s a maintenance nightmare
@@Frostmear really? More so than the -300 or just a comment regarding how long they have been flying?
@@tomoconnell2320 more so than the 300. The 400 constantly has issues, more than the 300 despite it being a newer model.
I’ve always said the 767X will be a thing in the next 3 years so Boeing can mount some challenge in the middle-of-market segment. The 767s longevity in its existing form in unreal, so a MAX / X variant would be super appealing.
The 767-400ER is one of the most underrated aircraft in the world. They're gorgeous airplanes and are extremely comfortable to be on.
They’re a nightmare to work into, for cabin crews, and, with the BAe-146: the WORST airplane regarding the purity of its cabin atmosphere.
Want cancer? Fly the 767.
i don’t give a shit i still like the 767
I like the 767 a lot. But prefer the -300ER. Delta’s premium economy (premium select in a 2-2-2 config is quite nice).
A330-800 neo should be selling better
I much prefer the 2-4-2 seating of the A330 to the 3-3-3 of the 787 and A350!
Why? It has far too much range and the -900 is better
@@filledwithvariousknowledge2747 Because Delta was bellyaching about phasing out its 767s and the lack of a suitable alternative - I thought the 800 would fit the bill pretty well... :-/
It should! I think it will rack up more orders when the 200 variant gets retired in a few years because they are starting to age! I think in the long run it will do well.
Sadly, the 787 is way better
B747SP sadly, before the 80's: 45
Flew on Qantas' 744ER. Gorgeous plane. my first long haul as well. Always get teary-eyed whenever they are mentioned or shown.
I don't see the B747-400D and ER as being necessarily unpopular. Each was designed for a particular customer/market and were never meant to be available worldwide. As opposed to the B767-400 or the A340 in general.
I agree, and same with the 737-700ER (which I didn't realise had existed), and several other models listed - they were just relatively minor modifications of existing aircraft, and sometimes done at the request of just one or two customers... they wouldn't have made them for a small number of customers if the modification costs would have been huge. I somewhat disagree on the A340 - at least the A340-300 - as it sold moderately well, and shares a huge amount in common with the A330-300 (which was developed alongside), including the fuselage and most other components, so it did fill a role for a while until ETOPS changes allowed for the 777 and A330 to flourish due to their better economics.
Cope
@@vincevanderperre8660 He really isn't coping with anything, he is stating a fact.
God the A340-500 and 600s are such nice-looking planes
Out of all of these, my favorite is the 767-400ER, because it’s the only one on this list that I have flown on.
The A340-600 is a wow majestic machine!
While the 747-8i didn’t sell very well I would still consider the airframe a success with the amount of 747-8f cargo planes that rolled out of the Everett factory. Just head to ANC in Anchorage, AK and they are everywhere.
they make so much money for us, freight carriers that found a niche for them, utilize them to the max, also 747-400 pilots can dual type it
Really the main reason the passenger version didn't do well was because it came late to the mark, a marked were there were better planes of the new future.
@@sergiolaurencio7534 couldn’t agree more! The introduction of twin engine long haul aircraft like the 777’s, the Korean Airline 747-8 is the aircraft you wanna fly long haul! It’s very beautiful and of course it’s the modern version of the Queen❤
@Rodrigo Hiyas I also agree! Would fly the 747 over anyone any day!
@@bonzrh68 That one or the Lufthansa one for us from Europe.
I believe with the A330-800 there is a potential with Delta. They have their aging 767-300ER’s and A330-200’s, the -800 being a good replacement for both, not already operating the 787.
But the -800 has no difference with -900 when it comes to economics
They have had plenty of time to order them and chosen not to so doubtful.
Considering they have already ordered the 737max, they could probably order the 787-8. But look at this, I'd don't matter what of the 2 they order, I am sure the both would be configuration of 2-4-2.
Both the A318 and B737-600 were not sensible designs being with the same problems: both too small and too heavy
3:33 The 764 entered service with Continental in 2000, and Tulip United never had them. So it’s only ever had two customers: Continental (now United) and Delta. It was custom designed and built for those two airlines. With that said, should we be including custom planes (like the 73GER and the 764) as “poor sellers”?
Surprised you didn't give an honorable mention to the 737-600 with only 69 orders!
Or the 757-300
i love 69 😂
The 737 is a stone-age plane that Boeing should have ceased producing 20 years ago. Should have kept producing the 757. Would have saved them the max disaster.
EYO
Nice
I Like the A318. As a passenger experience it is identical to the A320/1 but it can get into smaller airports like London City.
Being based in Sweden, I’ve flown on Boeing’s equivalent - the 737-600 - many times with SAS. I really liked them, they were stable and robust in the sky and service was always fast compared to the -700 and especially the -800 that SAS also operate(d).
The a318 is like a320's lil' brother
@@jatterhog I thought about that too. The smaller the plane the quicker is onboarding and deboarding. Service may be faster also.
@@Playing096 It is.
@@k9killer221 that too - especially since SK usually use both the front and aft doors for 737/A320 boarding in most Scandinavian airports
flown on both the 767-400 and 747-8i and they are both wonderful. I understand the reasoning behind their lackluster orders but still think they should have sold at least a few more examples.
Enjoyed this video Simple Flying. Thank you. Very informative.
5:05 Continental had the 764s, legacy United had 763s.
Yes UA never ordered the 767-400. Their DC-10s were replaced by the 777
Some of these like the 747-400D, 747-400ER, and the other 2 737-700 variants, I never knew these existed
Having a higher MTOW is not a bad thing _per se._ Maybe you meant OEW (Operating Empty Weight)?
I just love the look of 747s let it be any type 100,200,300,400,SP,8,8i,400f,8f etc
That beautiful bird is poetry in motion. I love all 74 variants, too. It is truly a magnificent plane, no matter the variant. My eyes start stinging whenever I see one.
Very True
Weren't there only a few 747SP's produced for certain airlines?
He said earlier aircraft were not covered and those came out in the late 70s
@@johniii8147 1975-76 plus they build 45 and the cutoff was 40.
The 764 is a really nice longhaul ride.
The 2-3-2 configuration is as good as it gets.
It would seem to me as a highly experienced Canadian Arctic passenger (between 1966 and 2015) that in its day', the B757-M would have served Bradley Air Service (DBA AS First Air) and Canadian North Airlines (now amalgamated as Canadian North, would have well served the paved runways on their northern Provincial and Territorial routes.
'Couldn't be 'gravel kitted' like the B-737-200s that they still fly onto gravel and snow/ice covered runways (along with Norlinor and Air Inuit), however especially for the fly-in only regional hubs such as Inuvik, Norman Wells, Rankin Inlet, Cambridge Bay, Coral Harbour, Resolute Bay and Iqaluit, combis and combi-conversions are a very important part of the fleet
'Perhaps also still useful for Whitehorse-based Air North Airlines.
Southern hubs include Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa fibreglass Montreal!
My first flight on the Montreal, Frobisher Bay, Hall Beach, Resolute Bay route was during June and September 1966 on a Nordair Lockheed Super Continental combi!
On that decade old place at that time, the freight on the main deck wasn't even separated from the passenger seating by a bulkhead! Our initial ton of gear and supplies for a three year long Arctic Wolf research program was strapped down amongst other freight under '6G' cargo nets almost within touching distance. [Included was the world's first Amphibious All Terrain Vehicle (AATV); a six-wheeled fibreglass hulled JIGER!]
🇨🇦 🦊 🐺 🦊 🇨🇦
I really love the A330-800. I always mention it in all of my old airplane videos. It is also my most favorite aircraft. I always think it should have performed better in terms of sales.
Its important to note that a variant that sells in small numbers only may still be profitable either because it fills a small but important niche that you can charge a lot per unit for, or because the change from a popular base model is small and the variant was therefore cheap to create, or a bit of both. A couple of those on this list were actually nice little earners while others were true money pits. It would have been good if the video was able to give some indication of which was which.
the 767-400ER is my favorite and interested version of 767s which sadly only two airliner are have it and i hope keep in service longest possible, speaking of 747-400ER they are an updated version of regular 747-400 with some 400ER features like boeing signature interior a smaller design of cabin which used in 777, 767-400 and an updated 767-200/300, and an updated cockpit's display using LCD rather than CRT displays, they didn't sell well because it was around end of the line of passenger version of 747-400 and many airliners switched to 777-300ER
the Airbus A330-800 may have some (not huge) order for VIP and some airliners
Great video 👏❤️
UA never ordered the 767-400 on it's own. Only CO and DL placed orders in the US
Embraer: “pick me, pick me”.
The 767-400 is much more than just a 767-300ER stretch with a little more wingspan. They incorporated a lot of the new 777 tech into the -400. It has the flight deck and cabin of the 777, also it has a taller Main Gear with 777 tires/brakes. It had two problems: 1st it came a few years too late IMO and second, as already mentioned, the A330-200 which had the same passenger capacity but better/higher range/performance plus it can load the big containers.
A 767-400ERX might have been more popular but it died with the 747-400X, which was supposed to use the same engine.
The third customer of the 767-400 was not United, the original United never ordered the -400. But there was a third customer: Kenya Airways. They later switched their order to the 777.
The 757-300s problem was 1st that it came to the market muuuch to late and second that there was no ER variant.
Another key feature or even THE key feature of the 747-400D was a strengthened Landing Gear to allow for more cycles.
The A330-800 will never become a big success. Just like the 777-8 it serves a niche which is very small. For just a few extra tonnes of empty weight Airlines get the A330-900 which offers 30-40 more seats and can fly 97% of the missions. Airlines would rather fly these extra seats empty on a few routes to have the range potential. Airbus was smart stopping the A350-800, I don't get why they realized the A330-800. The reason why the A330-200 sold much better is because the early A330-300 had much less range than today.
777-200LR is my fave from them all.
777-200LR should have performed better
Technically it sold much better, if you consider that the 777F was based on it.
It’s not surprising that the 200LR & A350-900ULR aren’t big sellers - they’re niche planes and most airlines are interested in utilizing that sort of range for it to be a worthwhile investment.
@@GuitarGuy4647 The thing with the A350ulr is that Singapore Airlines requested the aircraft, like how Qantas asked Boeing to make the 747-400ER, there is also the 737-700ER.
It was always intended primarily for the F market. Boeing always knew that. Just not much demand for ULR aircraft. They would have never built it without the F version. It sold as they expected.
I was expecting to see the 737-600 on that list!
For Aircraft like B737-700C and Er variants, the 747-400 D and Er and A350 ULR have been specifically ordered to suit airlines demands in range, freighter or seating capacity hence they couldn't accumulated much orders. But for Aircraft like the A340-300,-500,A330-800 ,B737-900 non and Er 747-8i could have done/can do better in terms of sales but all in all it all comes down to the airline economics.
Despite being pre-1980s: Dassault Mercure - Just 13 bought by AirInter, a now defunct French regional Airline.
Problem was this plane was in fact operable just from Paris, it was too specialized in short-haul flights to reach any other major city without intermediate stops.
The A330-800 will leave this list for sure
My favorite one has to go with the A319neo because China Southern Airlines had 4 of these and Tibet Airlines had 6 of these. Also the A319neo is a shortened A320neo
if 7400km is barely being able to fly across the atlantic, then I guess Detroit and Milan are practically in the middle of it then.
B767-400 is an outstanding aircraft
Still is.
The most 'shocking' poor performance here is definitely the A330-800. It doesn't really make sense since almost 600 airframes of its predecessor -200 were delivered, and obviously pretty old at this point. It deserves more orders, especially from the -200 operators.
It's the same reason the 737 max still sells despite everything against it. Fleet commonality and availability. Even better if the price is better.
You forgot the 737-600
It did better than the standard 737-900, but could have made the "honorable mention" category.
To list the 747-400ER without talking about the 747-ERF is not a good idea. QANTAS really needed that craft, it was the first 747-400 able fly Sydney to Los Angeles with a full load.
And by the way United never ordered the 767-400s they simply inherited those from their merger with Continental Airlines in 2010 my friend
I will be on the 767-400ER with United from IAD to MAD and back this summer
The 757-200M sits deserted at Tribhuvan International Airport
The 767-400er should've been the double decker Boeing considered before production of the Boeing 777
747-8I is an amazing aircraft with new 787 systems including wings, engines, cockpit and others
My favourite aircraft is the a318 100,a319neo,a340 500,777 200lr,a330 800neo and 737 900
My absolute favorite is the Boeing 777-200LR. Though I totally understand the anticipated reasons of why not many were ordered in terms of purpose and worth.
If that’s the case, shouldn’t the A350-900ULR be mentioned as well? Only 7 of them are in service. If not, maybe it’s because it’s still fairly new, and the range is only needed for Singapore’s longest routes.
Where is the fuel aux tanks located at 737-700ER?
A340-500 is too underrated. This plane has long range, good safety, and not that bad performance. Seriously tho, it is pretty strong.
Despite being a Boeing and Lockheed (hashtag #bring back the TriStar!) fan, I genuinely wish the A340 was more of a hit, although 764 delivered, all variants, is no slouch of a record. I get the efficiency of two engines, but my desire to see more built is strictly an emotional wont. It’s beautiful with its four engines, and just looks powerful and uber reliable (zero accidents involving fatalities, and only 6 hull losses, most of which appear to have happened on the ground). What a plane for military usage - a high performance, highly efficient 707 replacement for AWACS, EW, recce, tanker, and cargo. Was it ever used in such a fashion?
Don't forget the influence of the famous Boeing Brown Envelopes
The main issue for the A330-800 is that a lot of regular A330-200 are yet pretty new so they still have few years of service remaining
Exactly, and it didn't cost much to develop, so will work out well for Airbus in the end
Don't think United ordered any 764, they simply inherited them from Continental.
The only major reason why they failed is because there’s only a few marketing niche applicable for the variants. Boeing 747 400Er for example, for a short haul? Very rare
A350-900ULR: Am I a joke to you
It's not a separate varinet. It's just a 900 with fewer seats and some software changes to the engines.
It was only requested by Singapore and no one else ordered it
It was a request by Singapore Airlines similar to the Qantas and 747-400ER
@@claxisthebesta Not really comparable. Just some minor tweaks to the software and engine tweaks and significantly reduced capacity on the ULR. The ER had much more extensive changes with option of one or two extra 12,300-liter fuel tanks in the forward cargo hold. The 747-400ER also had a strengthened fuselage, landing gear, and parts of its wings. There were also new, larger tires. The ER also had an F version.
I wondered why the 747-400D was mot use on American soil
I believe it could have cut back a lot on Flight frequencies on certain routes...
It was real surprise when I saw the a330. It seems popular and also the b777-300.
I love the A340 such a beautiful plane ✈️ ❤
3:00 the 767-300F did not enter service in the early 80s first flight was june 1995 with UPS
Canada 3000 sounds like it should be the title of a movie not an airline! 😂
7:58 Aloha Airlines tried a 737 convertible much earlier than Boeing did.
I like 787-10 best and 767-400 should be remastered with new technologies both in cockpit and engine, to get the good number of order from customers.
Never gonna happen. The 767 is on it's last legs.
You forgot that Air HongKong has A330-200F
A340 is a beautiful aircraft, one Air France ver. crash landed here in Toronto a few years ago unfortunately... everyone survived.
Agreed. I learned there were only six hull losses out of 754 delivered, and zero fatalities. That has to be a record; if not, it’s still very impressive.
I’ve seen the 757-200M in Kathmandu Tribuvan Airport.
I wouldn't call the 767-400ER a failure, it specifically made to fill a gap in the market with legacy carriers retiring the tri-holers like the L1011 and DC10 used by both Continental and Delta while maintaining the existing type certificate with ETOPS180 and there wasn't anything available at that time that could do the job that was affordable (777-200 costs more than double a 767-400ER plus the wait time was long), not to mention neither Continental nor Delta operated the A330 at that time. It was never meant to be a long term solution as Boeing was working on the 787-8 that was meant to replace the 767 fleet for both airlines. United/Continental kept their 787 orders while Delta cancelled all of them and instead ordered the A350. Delta is slated to retire their 767-300ER's by 2025 and United has stated they will retire their 767-300ER's by 2030. Neither airline has said they plan to retire the -400ER's any time soon.
The 767-4ER was basically the test version of a 777-3.
The Airbus a330 is the most comfortable aircraft for passengers in economy class.
9:15 could someone please explain the differences between the 737-700 and -800 wings? I’ve read that line about the 737-700ERs wings being from the 800 but I can’t find any sources explaining the differences
Airbus shot itself in the foot by extending the range of the A321LR, which diminishes the appeal of the A330-800.
"airbus a330-200f: the aircraft. right now"
*38 UNITS SOLD CONGRATULATIONS AIRBUS*
no offense to airbus they're cool
I Love Boeing B747-8I the most, the Queen of the sky, the second is B777-200LR, Long-Range Player.
Some of these are not intended to sell, just like phones, they are priced to entice airlines to spend more buying an A350 or 777. Or trying to keep airlines stay within their ecosystem.
Id like to fly the 747 8
A330-800
First?
Whyyy
damn i think so
What are you doing here, commenting first?
Man, ANA is a very special customer for Boeing, huh! They just customize the planes for them!
How many 747SPs were made?
Boeing 747SP and Lockheed L1011 Tristar were Introduced to Aviation world 🌎 and 45 Boeing 747SP and then 40 Tristar were first ordered due to the Size of the Airframe Fuselage of 747SP and Tristar S Shaped 2nd Upper Emgine Duck .
coz lots of airlines no demand for replace fleet/ expand service and airlines still receiving the current order in these 5-10 years.
A319LR only a few ordered. Actual/Ex operators such as Qatar Airways (2), Air France (1), Tunisair (2?), Privatair (2?).
A330-800 deserves a lot more than what it’s getting
Didn’t Boeing already try catering to the Japanese market with the 747SP? Which was disappointing to say the least. To try it again with the 744D just seems foolish
Customer were Fussy about Range and Fuel efficiency and Boeing introduce the Biggest Twin jet Aircraft ,Boeing 777 family and was Successful and developed the Future Boeing 777-9 Variant of ETOPS rating.
I personally think the a338 would be perfect for aeronlineas argentina😊 or even indigo
Surprised they didn’t mention the 787-3
It never was built it was canceled
My most favourite least popular aircraft on the list is the Boeing 747-8 Intercontinental
Singapore 🇸🇬 Airlines did operated 5 Airbus A340-500 then.
767F beats A332F
A332 beats 7674.
Now we’re even.
Sad, they could have easily kept the 747 flying
The A330-800neo should be selling better but I have a feeling it will pick up in orders.
It could probably be if airlines like aerolinias Argentinas, for example, need to do something with new technology
I thought the Boeing 767-400 entered service with Continental Airlines in 2000 i thought 🤔
All of United’s 767-400’s were inherited from Continental
What about the A320-100?
United never bought the 764 they only have them from the merger with continental
Sometimes the sales people are killing their own products by diverting clients choices. Example Philippine Airlines wanted more 747 but sales people persuaded the 777. Sometimes political forced to get boeing because washington is limiting PAL access to us airports.
The 747 was already in the phase of being retired all over the world when PAL retired theirs, also the Philippines already has the FAA Type 1 certificate, it's just that PAL doesn't need any more routes to the Americas other than Hawaii, LA, NY, Vancouver and Toronto though it rarely appears on the schedule. They don't have enough aircraft for more routes to the US and simply caters to the routes that Filipinos would likely travel to.
The "sales people" have no say in what aircraft airlines buy in the end, it's the people in charge of the airline's economics. The 747 was retired for the same reason why every other airline was retiring it; too large (especially for Philippine airports, one 747 is enough to get the whole terminal congested), ate up lots of fuel and too old. PAL took the 777 because it was more modern, was the perfect size, carried enough passengers and is economical.