Will the Boeing 777-8 passenger program now be cancelled given that Emirates' cancellation leaves only 8 orders for the type?
Posted by MarkSalt4250@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 71 comments
Today, the official Emirates media report (https://www.emirates.com/media-centre/emirates-orders-65-additional-boeing-777x-aircraft-worth-us-38-billion-at-dubai-airshow-2025/) for the additional 777-9 order shows only 270 777-9 orders and no 777-8s.
So will the passenger 777-8 program now be cancelled given that there are now only 8 orders left (all from Etihad whose 777X order's situation is disputed, the airline had earlier announced its intention to cancel it).
This will allow Boeing to focus on the 777-10 feasibility and possibly its development.
Also, this program's cancellation won't even affect Boeing much as no 777-8s have been introduced yet & there were no plans for its introduction before the 2030s either.
adjust_your_set@reddit
I don’t think so. I think they’ll still certify it since it is the base for the new F variant.
kimenyi@reddit
Can they shift the - 9 to be base for f now?
SerDuckOfPNW@reddit
The 8F is already based on the -9
Reasonable-Start2961@reddit
Shorter.
SerDuckOfPNW@reddit
From a certification perspective, the 777-8F is a derivative of the 777-9.
Reasonable-Start2961@reddit
Oh, absolutely. I didn’t mean for certification purposes. It’s always easier to certify a derivative than it is from scratch, which is basically what the -9 has ended up being anyway.
I meant more than the original design intent of the -8F is from the -8, but too much has changed since then and they need to implement the changes from the -9 and any lessons learned.
SerDuckOfPNW@reddit
The-9 is actually a derivative of the -300ER
Reasonable-Start2961@reddit
It really isn’t.
SerDuckOfPNW@reddit
I am engineer assigned to certifying the 777-9. I assure you from a regulatory perspective, it is a derivative of the 300ER.
Reasonable-Start2961@reddit
Uh huh. I think someone missed the point. From a “regulatory perspective” isn’t quite as meaningful when it takes so long to certify because it’s effectively a new plane with few similarities.
“Actually”
sploysa@reddit
That’s one loooooong aircraft
GregTheIntelectual@reddit
Get to your destination by boarding the aircraft in the rear, walking to the front, then disembarking.
eatmynasty@reddit
757 is back baby
PotatoFeeder@reddit
757-300
LikeLemun@reddit
757-3000
GregTheIntelectual@reddit
757-30000
sharkov2003@reddit
757000
-smartcasual-@reddit
757->9000
GrafZeppelin127@reddit
And this time it’s a widebody!
GregTheIntelectual@reddit
Why make it wider when you could just make it longer?
eatmynasty@reddit
A HyperLoop is really just a 757 Max.
GrafZeppelin127@reddit
The 777-9 is already over 250 feet long. How big would a -10 be?
…Now I’m imagining a 777 pencil edition where the the ends fold up to go along with the folding wingtips.
mgs112112@reddit
The tail strikes are going to be 🔥
GrafZeppelin127@reddit
Simple fix! Just like the Concorde had a droop snoot, simply make the 777 have a tail lift! Just like a cat when you scratch its lower back.
mgs112112@reddit
Or they can always:
_DoodleBug_@reddit
😂 Rows 50-100 are going to have a wild ride after touchdown on a windy day
ddadopt@reddit
Depends on the fuel state...
ShadowKraftwerk@reddit
Fold the nose up. Then have the tail fold around to the side.
For the wings at least, I'm hoping any update has wings folding like a Fairey Gannet.
Blackhawk510@reddit
Nah, Grumman fold them like the Avenger, Hawkeye and Greyhound. Make it impossible for the ramp crew to put the loader on the aft cargo door for literally no reason at all.
sploysa@reddit
It was a typo. 80m instead of 8.0
Caspi7@reddit
There is no competition for the -10 variant. That alone gives it an advantage/chance to be sustainable
mexicoke@reddit
Ah yes, exactly what Airbus said about the A380. How'd that go?
Aat117@reddit
Well, Emirates at least would like more of those, and if an A380NEO isn't coming (it isn't) then they'll have to go for the mext best thing, which would be a B777-10.
mexicoke@reddit
Ask Airbus how successful an aircraft is when half the order book is a single airline. The similarities between the 77x and 380 order book are striking.
Python_07@reddit
Do you think the gear modifications required will add a 3rd bogie?
1t_@reddit
-8F will be certified before the -8.
Klutzy-Residen@reddit
Wouldn't the -8 passenger variant require a lot of separate certification work from the freighter?
Skycbs@reddit
Yes
JohnHazardWandering@reddit
At what point did Boeing start cursing themselves for naming products like 7X7 and having to shoehorn in all the varieties into that naming convention.
AdhuBhai@reddit
That hasn't happened yet, and besides, design wise the 777X is still fairly similar to the original 777 that launched in the 90s. The real question is why they are skipping variants 400-700 and going directly to 8, 9, and 10. The same thing they did for the Dreamliner. Probably the idea of some overpaid marketing executive. Going forward, there's still room for a 797, although given Boeing's difficulties we likely won't see that until week into the 2040s. After that, if Boeing's still around as a company, it's probably either 2707 (unlikely, since it's already been used for a concept) or 808.
ClassIINav@reddit
The way I understand it the new suffix scheme is because of leasing firms. Airliners used to be almost entirely custom built to the purchasing airline's spec. However now that leasing has become popular aircraft need to be interchangeable. They need to be able to take a plane build for United and resell it to Copa then later some no-name airline in some developing country. Also it helps reduce complexity of the build process if they're all identically equipped.
The 3 digit suffix addressed the unique customer configuration. N777UA, the first 777 for United is actually a 777-222 with the -222 being the sub-type and customer configuration.
But now, the 777X only comes in two flavors, the -8 and the -9. Customers can't decide if they want cupholders in the cockpit or if it should have an optional aux pump or taxi light.
EspiM777@reddit
Not quite true. There’s still plenty of customer options on airframes, and removing 2 digits from the marketing material didn’t change the fact that these still exist and create issues. Pax doors, cargo doors, oxygen systems, avionics specs, water and waste tank config, engine types ( ie 787).
FZ_Milkshake@reddit
I think it depends how much commonality there is between the freight and passenger version. I think there is a good chance of cancellation though. Shortened versions seem to have a tough time right now, adn if the numbers are low they may not even be any cheaper than the base model, A350-800 has been cancelled, A330-800 is doing poorly while the 777-8F and -10 are definitely in demand.
Cautious_Use_7442@reddit
The lack of success of smaller versions is more of a sign that both Airbus and Boeing fail to right size new types: A319 NEO, a330-800 neo, a350-800, boeing 737-7Max, boeing 787-3…
st_owly@reddit
A220 is basically an A319 neo.
adjust_your_set@reddit
In size yes. In everything else no. There’s still family commonality benefits for the A319. It’s probably why American still flies the type instead of looking at the E195-E2 or A223.
Ramenastern@reddit
Well, the A319neo, 737-7, A330-800 are all small versions of reworked/regengines planes, and those tend to come in a bit short in terms of performance, as they're carrying a lot of structural weight and benefit less from the efficiency gains. 777-8 may be a victim of this, too.
787-3 was basically a de-rated -8, so the only actual from scratch new plane here is the A350-800 - and for that, yup, I would agree Airbus got the sizing a bit wrong. In fairness, the -900 and -1000 are doing fine, but originally baselining around the -900 with a shrink offering alongside was not optimal. Captain Hindsight to the rescue, of course.
FZ_Milkshake@reddit
Or maybe they do know how to size them and the base model is already not too large for almost all prospective customers.
caverunner17@reddit
A350-800 and the 787-3 never made it off the drawing board.
The 737-7 still has around 300 orders
Cautious_Use_7442@reddit
Still 300 737-7 are peanuts compared to more than 6k 737 Max ordered (despite all of the issues it had/has).
Not to mention that WN would probably have ordered 737-8 if Boeing had offered the 737-7 in the first place
Brave_Meet8430@reddit
I don’t understand the economics of 778s, is it going to be a replacement for 788 ? I don’t think so..
hibob729@reddit
It’s nearly identical in size/capacity to the 77W, many of which still have plenty of useful life left in them. The 779 is a ‘replacement’ for the 744 to which only Lufthansa still flies in passenger service
testthrowawayzz@reddit
I wonder why Boeing didn't make a replacement that is the exact length of the -300ER given how popular it is.
(since I found the -8 is a bit shorter than the -300/ER but -9 is longer)
hibob729@reddit
Most 77Ws are too young to need a replacement now, hence why the 777-8 is struggling with sales. When they need to be replaced in 15 years, today’s technology (or rather the technology of a decade ago since the 777X was supposed to be out in 2020) would be considered outdated
Brave_Meet8430@reddit
WTAH is all these downvotes. It was just a question out of curiosity.
🙄
Klutzy-Residen@reddit
It's the way you phrased the question. The last sentence just comes of as dismissive rather than wanting a answer.
Brave_Meet8430@reddit
Thank you. I removed it
AWildDragon@reddit
It replaces 747-8 and 777-2/3.
Whiteyak5@reddit
You think the jet that holds just shy of 400 people and can fly 8700+ NM is competing with the jet that seats 240 people and can "only" fly 7300NM?
JooSerr@reddit
Surely it’s a replacement for the 777-200, which is a pretty old plane at this point
ElSquibbonator@reddit
I'm worried the whole 777X program might be in jeopardy.
CA_LAO@reddit
I would expect a 777-9igw instead. 15 years ago the -8 made sense as it was the only path to 8000nm which was necessary to not cede the market to AB. Even then, it never took. Evolution of the -9 is the more likely scenario. Especially when bundled with the 789igw.
Badrear@reddit
777-10 announced in 2027; certified in 2102.
G_Rubes@reddit
Oh they're gonna fast track them?
Planeandaquariumgeek@reddit
It’ll still get certified since it’s the basis of the 777X freighter but other than that it’s probably dead in the water
SerDuckOfPNW@reddit
The basis of the 777-8F is the 777-9.
Nice_Classroom_6459@reddit
These early variants seem to be "paper types" to get investor/lender patience.
Skycbs@reddit
Yes. 777-8 is dead. They’ll build the 777XF but not the -8. Clearly there is more demand for a -10
CavalrySavagery@reddit
Only 270 orders from a single airline… yeah, only.
aye246@reddit
I think OP was just saying they’re “only” ordering the 787-9
ClassIINav@reddit
I would imagine there's minimal differences besides some fuselage plugs and maybe up-rated engines (which is basically just a software selection in the EECs). Plus the freighter will be based on the -8 so again, they're essentially building 99% of the plane anyway so why not?
The -10 is going to be an interesting development if it comes to pass. Again just like the -8 it should have minimal development costs unless they need to do something goofy like add a 3rd main gear a la the MD-11. But something just shy of a typical A380 capacity with 2 engines and common type as the rest of the 777 lineup would be epic. I can see why Emirates is pushing for it.