Can B767 Be Converted to 2-4-2?

Overthecascades · Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:14 am

And would it sell better as a passenger airliner?

LAX772LR · Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:17 am

Some airlines operate them 2x4x2 now.

If you mean could the fuselage be widened?
Well, the walls maybe could be thinned, similar to the 77X...

...but as far as actually changing the fuselage; then no, no chance of that. It'd cost billions.
Boeing would never make their money back.

flyingclrs727 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:30 am

Ukraine International Airlines has 2-4-2 configured 767's. Based on reports from my wife's friends and family, I couldn't recomment it.

RamblinMan · Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:33 am

Shut up and don't give them any ideas.

Seriously though...it can be done, and it has been done. I don't have any desire to see what it's like.

flyingclrs727 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:38 am

RamblinMan wrote:
Shut up and don't give them any ideas.

Seriously though...it can be done, and it has been done. I don't have any desire to see what it's like.

My wife has a friend who is about 5'2" and a very thin build. Even she complained about how narrow the seats were on a flight from KBP to JFK.

aemoreira1981 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:02 am

flyingclrs727 wrote:
Ukraine International Airlines has 2-4-2 configured 767's. Based on reports from my wife's friends and family, I couldn't recomment it.

Meridiana also has a bunch of 8-abreast 767s. Most of the all-economy 767s in Europe are also 2-4-2 (in a Y326 to a Y336 configuration).

MaksFly · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:05 am

As others have mentioned... Ukraine International already converted to 2-4-2.

Mom flew on it and quickly noticed and discussed how uncomfortable it was... and she is completely oblivious to aviation.

NameOmitted · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:11 am

A couple of years back there was a bit of a splash made with the idea of offset seating patterns so that people were not shoulder to shoulder in economy.

Did they go anywhere outside of Popular Mechanics type magazines?

Lufthansa · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:12 am

It was an option from day 1 the 767 flew. The 767-200 original version was only intended to fly routes like US transcontinental at best. The seats are similar to what you'd get on a Dash 8 (Q400) or CRJ or an A330 at 9 abreast. This configuration was never originally intended for long haul use, but more aimed at charter carriers in Europe taking people down to Mediterranean destinations with the flight only being a few hours long. Of course as the aircraft was developed the capability remained.

RJMAZ · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:53 am

8abreast in the 767 is far to tight for most airlines. However in 8ab it is a very cost effective medium haul aircraft which is great for low cost carriers. There are a few 8ab 767's in service.

But for 8ab to be used by major airlines the 767 would need a cabin 6inch wider.

There are too many areas where the 767 is below average. Old engines, old wing, too narrow and overweight. You would need to touch each of these areas for it to sell in big numbers. Doing just one or two wouldn't sell very well. Doing all of them you may as well start fresh which is what they are doing with the 797. It looks to be a lightweight carbon 767.

There is no engine in the size range for the 767. The closest engine is 20-30% too big (genx) or 20-30% too small (GTF). If for instance the A340 was still produced with a new tech engine then there would be an engine perfect size for a 767NEO.

intotheair · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:56 am

Yep, certainly looks tight:

gadFly · Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:39 am

Even if it is still on Boeing's list of planes for sale, it IS a 35+ year-old plane... Regardless, 2-4-2 could work on the likes of Norwegian and the like, but they are going 787 ,or 330, or even A 350. There is always the possibility of a marketing wise guy saying yes, but why? As John Lennon put it, let it be....

opticalilyushin · Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:49 am

I did KBP-BKK on the UIA 767, it was ok, but 7 abreast is a dream

OA940 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:05 am

A few airlines have it, mainly Russian charter airlines and UIA. Compared to this, 10-abreast 777's are amazing.

Cush · Sat Feb 10, 2018 1:06 pm

I did JFK-KBP and KBP-JFK on the UIA 767 in 2-4-2 config and it was a total nightmare! NEVER fly UIA. I am tall / skinny ( 6 feet and 135 pounds), yet barely fit in the seat width wise. My knees couldn't fit behind the seat so had to sit sideways the entire flight. Ouch!!!

azz767 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:30 pm

Imagine being one of the poor souls whose been on a TOM or TCX example when they've had to sub for a 787 or 330 on a transatlantic flight from the UK. It was bad enough on a four hour journey to the canaries never mind double that to the caribbean or america

trnswrld · Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:52 pm

I dunno, that cabin picture above looks just like any other airplanes interior. Packed in there like sardines no matter what plane or airline.

Boair · Sat Feb 10, 2018 3:20 pm

Many airlines have 2-4-2 767, in particular low cost in Europe
Flew on Euro Atlantic 2-4-2, that was not so terrible (I was on the window).

Channex757 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 3:24 pm

azz767 wrote:
Imagine being one of the poor souls whose been on a TOM or TCX example when they've had to sub for a 787 or 330 on a transatlantic flight from the UK. It was bad enough on a four hour journey to the canaries never mind double that to the caribbean or america

Those things used to go UK-Australia as well!

The real nightmareLiner was the old BY 767-204 in 2-4-2. Now they were real slave ships....

FabDiva · Sat Feb 10, 2018 3:37 pm

Am I right in thinking that the 2-4-2 config required a strengthened floor at the factory?

Also IIRC HD 767s could turn up on long haul TOM and TCX flights

DL_Mech · Sat Feb 10, 2018 3:53 pm

2-4-2 in the 767 requires new PSUs in the center rows. Four reading lights in the center also takes away the gasper nozzles (if equipped).

tphuang · Sat Feb 10, 2018 3:57 pm

And to think I thought 2-3-2 was too uncomfortable.

cledaybuck · Sat Feb 10, 2018 4:43 pm

gadFly wrote:
Even if it is still on Boeing's list of planes for sale, it IS a 35+ year-old plane... Regardless, 2-4-2 could work on the likes of Norwegian and the like, but they are going 787 ,or 330, or even A 350. There is always the possibility of a marketing wise guy saying yes, but why? As John Lennon put it, let it be....

Paul McCartney

Overthecascades · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:30 pm

It’s a 35 year old plane. True. But who’s still manufacturing the engines for the 767? This entire 35 years?

Kno · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:36 pm

OA940 wrote:
A few airlines have it, mainly Russian charter airlines and UIA. Compared to this, 10-abreast 777's are amazing.

I gotta say, I had my first 10 abreast 777 on Qatar a couple days back on a very long doh-jfk and I really didn't notice much difference from the a350s we took over or the a346 we had on the prior flight from bkk. Didn't feel more cramped than 9 abreast 777s I had went on either other than a slightly narrower arm rest. I was pleasently surprised given the horrible complaints I'd heard, and I am 5'10 and 185 with a 36 waist so I'm not a huge guy but certainly not skinny.

PC12Fan · Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:45 pm

NameOmitted wrote:
A couple of years back there was a bit of a splash made with the idea of offset seating patterns so that people were not shoulder to shoulder in economy.

Did they go anywhere outside of Popular Mechanics type magazines?

http://www.thompsonaero.com/cozysuite

Don't think anyone ever bit but to me it would solve a couple issues. People reclining into your "space" and "elbow wars" just for starters. Could benefit narrow bodies by providing wider isles too.

LOWS · Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:18 pm

PC12Fan wrote:
NameOmitted wrote:
A couple of years back there was a bit of a splash made with the idea of offset seating patterns so that people were not shoulder to shoulder in economy.

Did they go anywhere outside of Popular Mechanics type magazines?

http://www.thompsonaero.com/cozysuite

Don't think anyone ever bit but to me it would solve a couple issues. People reclining into your "space" and "elbow wars" just for starters. Could benefit narrow bodies by providing wider isles too.

Apparently, Richard Anderson tried those back when he was in charge of Delta, but they weren't great. I can't find the source, sorry.

jeffrey0032j · Sat Feb 10, 2018 7:07 pm

tphuang wrote:
And to think I thought 2-3-2 was too uncomfortable.

How did you survive the Y class on other planes? A 2-3-2 767 is as good/wide as Y class can get. Not even the 8 abreast 330 or 9 abreast 777 can beat this.

Channex757 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 7:18 pm

Just an aside...the BY and MT aircraft were not conversions. They came out of the factory in that format. I think there have been conversions but those high density 767s were all factory option

tphuang · Sat Feb 10, 2018 7:56 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
tphuang wrote:
And to think I thought 2-3-2 was too uncomfortable.

How did you survive the Y class on other planes? A 2-3-2 767 is as good/wide as Y class can get. Not even the 8 abreast 330 or 9 abreast 777 can beat this.

I don't know. The last couple of times on 767 Y, I've found the seats to be more comparable to 10 across 777 than 9 across 777.

Motorhussy · Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:03 pm

jeffrey0032j wrote:
tphuang wrote:
And to think I thought 2-3-2 was too uncomfortable.

How did you survive the Y class on other planes? A 2-3-2 767 is as good/wide as Y class can get. Not even the 8 abreast 330 or 9 abreast 777 can beat this.

In the middle seat you’ve still got to get past one person to get to the aisle which is the same as the 2-4-2 in Y on the A330.

With regard to the 2-4-2 on a 767, it would be marginally more comfortable if the centre four seats were staggered in a 2-2 configuration, where shoulders were given a bit more room because of the gap between the seats. Confused as to why no airline appears to have done this.

deltatim · Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:19 pm

That sounds ghastly. 2-4-2 on a 767???? Awful. It's just not that wide of a fuselage... I remember when an L-1011 had 2-4-2. Now that was comfortable - at least relatively speaking...

RamblinMan · Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:22 pm

Motorhussy wrote:
In the middle seat you’ve still got to get past one person to get to the aisle which is the same as the 2-4-2 in Y on the A330.

With regard to the 2-4-2 on a 767, it would be marginally more comfortable if the centre four seats were staggered in a 2-2 configuration, where shoulders were given a bit more room because of the gap between the seats. Confused as to why no airline appears to have done this.

Yes but if you're in the middle of a center set of 3, and one person is sleeping, you can bother the other person. Makes a difference. The main difference though is that with 7-across the flight can be at 85% LF before anybody has to take a middle seat.

Agreed on staggering a center section of 4...perhaps they could try something like that on the 777. Combined with the new wider cabin, could make 10-across comfortable.

questions · Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:51 pm

deltatim wrote:
That sounds ghastly. 2-4-2 on a 767???? Awful. It's just not that wide of a fuselage... I remember when an L-1011 had 2-4-2. Now that was comfortable - at least relatively speaking...

And 2-2-2 in F on the L-1011 was really comfortable!

Channex757 · Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:16 pm

A 763 with 2-4-2 and a full set of bags can easily cope with UK-Barbados. The aircraft is more than capable of the work demanded of them by the Eurocharter companies and do so to this day.

Their speciality however has been as understudies to the 787 recently. If a 787 at BY goes tech, a 763 high density can be slotted in. It's no Dreamliner but it gets people to where they want to be. Otherwise it's the 4 to 5 hour flights around Europe for most of them.

b4thefall · Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:56 pm

I flew a couple of UK- Orlando round trips on 2-4-2 767s belonging to Airtours International. The lack of legroom bothered me more than the seat width.

In the days before the modern slim seats, the British charter airlines and their max density aircraft were truly cramped! The seats were quite thick compared to more recent models, and my knees were jammed into the seat in front for the entire flight. I can't imagine flying all the way to Australia on one. I know Airtours and Britannia operated their 767s on that route.

BawliBooch · Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:40 am

At 2-4-2, the seats themselves are similar to the 777 at 3-4-3. But on the 767's smaller cabin, it feels more claustrophobic. There was barely an A319 load worth of passengers on my one & only flight DEL-KBP so it didnt feel so bad.

2-3-2 ofcourse is a DREAM configuration. Very cosy. But i guess not very efficient wrt real estate.

Airbus struck gold with their choice of cabin-width on the A300-330.

Jet-lagged · Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:22 am

I flew one I think it was ANA. It wasn’t so bad but then they were one hour flights.

My one flight on a 787 was 9ab and I thought that was awful.

jeffrey0032j · Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:39 am

BawliBooch wrote:
At 2-4-2, the seats themselves are similar to the 777 at 3-4-3. But on the 767's smaller cabin, it feels more claustrophobic. There was barely an A319 load worth of passengers on my one & only flight DEL-KBP so it didnt feel so bad.

No, a 2-4-2 767 is worse than a 3-4-3 777. A 2-4-2 767 is right at the bottom of the cesspool (ie the narrowest seats you can squeeze on any plane), together with the 9 abreast A330 and 10 abreast A350.

flyingclrs727 · Sun Feb 11, 2018 7:18 am

Cush wrote:
I did JFK-KBP and KBP-JFK on the UIA 767 in 2-4-2 config and it was a total nightmare! NEVER fly UIA. I am tall / skinny ( 6 feet and 135 pounds), yet barely fit in the seat width wise. My knees couldn't fit behind the seat so had to sit sideways the entire flight. Ouch!!!

My mother in law got tickets for herself and my father in law KBP-JFK round to visit us a couple of years ago. I knew how tight the configuration was and would not have booked it for myself, but her travel agent convinced her that the tickets were a good deal. I decided not to say anything to them ahead of time. I just figured it was better for them to learn first hand. My father in law is about 6'3" and not thin but not obese either. Needless to say, they won't be booking UIA's flight to JFK to visit their friends in NYC before heading to Texas to visit us.

trnswrld · Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:56 pm

I know this question would be difficult because how long the 767 has been in operation and how many airlines have flown them, but does anyone know what the highest seat count on any 767 has been? I would imagine a 2-4-2 763 probably has more than a normally configured 764 at DAL and UAL?

NameOmitted · Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:02 pm

PC12Fan wrote:
NameOmitted wrote:
A couple of years back there was a bit of a splash made with the idea of offset seating patterns so that people were not shoulder to shoulder in economy.

Did they go anywhere outside of Popular Mechanics type magazines?

http://www.thompsonaero.com/cozysuite

Don't think anyone ever bit but to me it would solve a couple issues. People reclining into your "space" and "elbow wars" just for starters. Could benefit narrow bodies by providing wider isles too.

Yeah... not sure who the genius was who thought that "cozy" was a good brand-name for airline seats. I like the idea of 20" wide seat in coach on an A321, though!

FabDiva · Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:18 pm

trnswrld wrote:
I know this question would be difficult because how long the 767 has been in operation and how many airlines have flown them, but does anyone know what the highest seat count on any 767 has been? I would imagine a 2-4-2 763 probably has more than a normally configured 764 at DAL and UAL?

Thomson all Economy B763 has 328 seats (8 abreast at 33" Pitch) - https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Thoms ... 0ER_V4.php
The two class version has 287 seats.
They also get 233 seats on a B752 (28" Pitch)

A DAL B764 has 246 seats for comparison and the UAL version has 242

DL747400 · Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:33 pm

LOWS wrote:
http://www.thompsonaero.com/cozysuite

Apparently, Richard Anderson tried those back when he was in charge of Delta, but they weren't great. I can't find the source, sorry.

DL investigated the Thompson Cozy Suite, but it never went anywhere and was never used in revenue service on any DL aircraft. Not even certain whether that seat was ever certified by the FAA? Perhaps someone else knows.

trex8 · Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:01 pm

Is an 8 across 767 worse than a 10 across DC10 or L 1011 having flown a Sun Country and Cathay one. Anyone know what seat width those were? Fortunately only squashed in there MSP - LAX and HKG-MNL.

ILNFlyer · Sun Feb 11, 2018 7:01 pm

tphuang wrote:
And to think I thought 2-3-2 was too uncomfortable.

What about 3-3-3?

WWads · Sun Feb 11, 2018 7:52 pm

DL747400 wrote:
LOWS wrote:
http://www.thompsonaero.com/cozysuite

Apparently, Richard Anderson tried those back when he was in charge of Delta, but they weren't great. I can't find the source, sorry.

DL investigated the Thompson Cozy Suite, but it never went anywhere and was never used in revenue service on any DL aircraft. Not even certain whether that seat was ever certified by the FAA? Perhaps someone else knows.

Probably decided that the seat would be too comfortable and would cut into Comfort+/premium economy sales.

oldannyboy · Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:17 am

Being of a light build myself, I don't particularly mind narrow seats. I am personally more interested in legroom....

seahawk · Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:58 am

Yes it can be done and expect a similar configuration to become standard on the MoM.

flyingclrs727 · Tue Feb 13, 2018 2:53 pm

seahawk wrote:
Yes it can be done and expect a similar configuration to become standard on the MoM.

I bet the MOM would have at least a 17.0" seat in an 8 abreast configuration.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net