Swedish Steve you are absolutely right, a typo.
I saw it, but a picture isnīt that easy to correct and relink.. Imagine the climb performance on short trips
Matt, the greenliner would suck compared to the 330/787 as a cargo aircraft indeed, just like the 757. I was considering a payload range diagram but became lazy.. max range would be with a "typical" optimistic full passenger load of about 250 passengers. Range with cargo would decline.
On the short high density with cargo market (I think you aim LD3 & pallets) : in other discussions looking at the numbers it became clear the good old A300 isnīt so bad.. Ask AA and LH, they are looking to replace it & will likely have to give in at the cargo department.. and for now opt to accept the rising maintenance / availability /upgrade costs of the old A306s ..
What I understand is the 787-3 was a special Japanese requirement that Boeing filled in return for big launch orders and state support (via MHI etc). I can not imagine what the ROI for the 787-3 stand alone would be. None were sold during the economic boom of the last three years.
Itīs twin brother the 787-8 can fly nearly three times as far & has superior payload range. Do you have an idea how / why Boeing killed the range so dramatically? What did it gain by doing so?
I think preserving an additional 1500nm would have made it a serious option for e.g. the big DL, AA, UA etc fleets and its resale value alone would get more acceptable.. Iyt could also do South America, Western Europe etc.. Maybe a 787-5 will emerge one day.. Maybe AA or LH would be stronge enough to convince Boeing.
On the Greenliner being a fantasy : you are damn right
Interstingly I did a similar pp on a 747 successor "ecoliner" (do a google) and got nice / inquiring feedback from not so amature / unknown folks.
Thing is I have a partner in crime (Henry Lam, kaktusdigital.com) that can make fantasies look pretty convincing..