Page 1 of 1

777 vs the 777x

Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 4:08 pm
by Pat Carry
Whats the difference in the two?

Re: 777 vs the 777x

Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 8:18 pm
by The Inspector
The X, longer (Outer 21 feet folding to fit gate slots) all carbon fibre wings, more powerful engines (GE9X @ 105,000 S.T.) with better fuel burn numbers (9300 mi range), stretched fuselage (400 seats), lighter weight. :heart:

Re: 777 vs the 777x

Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:01 am
by bdk
And still to be built in Washinton State.

Re: 777 vs the 777x

Posted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:41 pm
by The Inspector
Proving conclusively that if you are a big enough international corporation you really CAN get away with extorting a state government and the folks who's labors keep you in old Scotch and expensive shiny shoes-

Re: 777 vs the 777x

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 8:54 pm
by The Inspector
In an interview shown on Seattle's KING TV evening news, Alabama's Governor Robert Bentley said he's certain that Boeing 'played' Alabama on the 777X potential move.

Re: 777 vs the 777x

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 9:39 pm
by Kyleb
The Inspector wrote:In an interview shown on Seattle's KING TV evening news, Alabama's Governor Robert Bentley said he's certain that Boeing 'played' Alabama on the 777X potential move.


Of course they did. I've been on the "company" side of these negotiations (not in the aviation field). You play hardball and ultimately accept the offer that is best for your company. To achieve that, you have to keep at least one reasonable alternative (Alabama) to pit against your preferred solution (Washington).

If I ran the world, communities wouldn't be allowed to offer incentives for companies to move in. I think the communities outsmart themselves. The "winning" communities often end up incenting the manufacturer for locating where the manufacturer was going to locate anyway due to other factors.