B767 or B787
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: EHAM
B767 or B787
Dear all,
I'm new to this forum and have a question. Thanks for hearing (or is it reading) me! After having flown a few hundred hours on the B737 it was time for a change. I have done my A320 rating but didn't fly the actual aircraft due to some reasons.
Now I have the possibility to choose my new aircraft due to employer change (Yes I realize that I'm lucky
). The options are a 767 or the 787. Since I have not flown long-haul I have no idea what time zones would do to my body. The 767 is being used on short-haul and long-haul, the 787 mainly long-haul. It feels that the 787 would make more sense in my career path (I'm just 3 years in aviation by now). Still I'm not sure about long-haul, what are the pro's and con's of this choice?
Please let me know your thoughts
I'm new to this forum and have a question. Thanks for hearing (or is it reading) me! After having flown a few hundred hours on the B737 it was time for a change. I have done my A320 rating but didn't fly the actual aircraft due to some reasons.
Now I have the possibility to choose my new aircraft due to employer change (Yes I realize that I'm lucky
). The options are a 767 or the 787. Since I have not flown long-haul I have no idea what time zones would do to my body. The 767 is being used on short-haul and long-haul, the 787 mainly long-haul. It feels that the 787 would make more sense in my career path (I'm just 3 years in aviation by now). Still I'm not sure about long-haul, what are the pro's and con's of this choice?Please let me know your thoughts
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
From: Planet Earth
Three years in aviation and you could / will potentially be a heartbeat away from command of a 787 mid Atlantic , my how this industry has changed. Good for you , just a bit shocked about the rapid progression these days of new pilots into advanced flight decks.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Camel jockey
Don't see any mention of command in his post!! Absolutely go for the 787! As stated already it’s a no brainier!!!
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,068
Likes: 4
From: Hiding..... in one hemisphere or another
Forget the 767, it’s ancient
767 were awesome aircraft, with an incredible record over a long time. Anyone who's ever flown one loved it, but it wasn't always the easiest aircraft to fly. Each of the three versions Pratts, GE and RR, behaved quite differently especially in the flare and no one could really explain why it landed the way it did...... it almost never could be landed smoothly and generally plonked down quite solidly...... there were three different techniques used for the three versions that we had. The Rollers were the most "consistent" and the -300 was way better than any -200. GE's were the best. Awesome aircraft in a crosswind too!
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 276
Likes: 1
From: South of the North pole
Dont ever choose a job in flying for the equipment. Look at which is the more stable company, salary, benefits, perks etc. The 767 is a good aircraft and a 'HEAVY' so you would easily get another job due to heavy experience.
The 767 will be around for years in the cargo arena with a new upgraded cockpit for the 767, it looks like a G550.
Cargo operators are doing this as it allows the aircraft to be utilized in a more effective way. There are plenty of 767's in use outside of the US as well.
From purely an aircraft point of view go for the 787 but from a common sense point of view look at the stability and opportunities within both companies and where you want to go in life.
Dont let anybody tell you as a 767 pilot with say 4000 hours on type you are unemployable because it is an old design, thats just utter BS!!
The 767 will be around for years in the cargo arena with a new upgraded cockpit for the 767, it looks like a G550.
Cargo operators are doing this as it allows the aircraft to be utilized in a more effective way. There are plenty of 767's in use outside of the US as well.
From purely an aircraft point of view go for the 787 but from a common sense point of view look at the stability and opportunities within both companies and where you want to go in life.
Dont let anybody tell you as a 767 pilot with say 4000 hours on type you are unemployable because it is an old design, thats just utter BS!!
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: Uk
Dont ever choose a job in flying for the equipment. Look at which is the more stable company, salary, benefits, perks etc. The 767 is a good aircraft and a 'HEAVY' so you would easily get another job due to heavy experience.
The 767 will be around for years in the cargo arena with a new upgraded cockpit for the 767, it looks like a G550.
Cargo operators are doing this as it allows the aircraft to be utilized in a more effective way. There are plenty of 767's in use outside of the US as well.
From purely an aircraft point of view go for the 787 but from a common sense point of view look at the stability and opportunities within both companies and where you want to go in life.
Dont let anybody tell you as a 767 pilot with say 4000 hours on type you are unemployable because it is an old design, thats just utter BS!!
The 767 will be around for years in the cargo arena with a new upgraded cockpit for the 767, it looks like a G550.
Cargo operators are doing this as it allows the aircraft to be utilized in a more effective way. There are plenty of 767's in use outside of the US as well.
From purely an aircraft point of view go for the 787 but from a common sense point of view look at the stability and opportunities within both companies and where you want to go in life.
Dont let anybody tell you as a 767 pilot with say 4000 hours on type you are unemployable because it is an old design, thats just utter BS!!
That’s my whole point. Don’t go for equipment , so forget the 767. I was TR on 75/76. The fantastic jobs I got offered on the 76 were Ethiopian , air Astana and Chinese stuff. Doesn’t matter if it flies like a dream....Look to the future .
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
From: in the barrel
Maybe so, but built like a brick $hithouse!
767 were awesome aircraft, with an incredible record over a long time. Anyone who's ever flown one loved it, but it wasn't always the easiest aircraft to fly. Each of the three versions Pratts, GE and RR, behaved quite differently especially in the flare and no one could really explain why it landed the way it did...... it almost never could be landed smoothly and generally plonked down quite solidly...... there were three different techniques used for the three versions that we had. The Rollers were the most "consistent" and the -300 was way better than any -200. GE's were the best. Awesome aircraft in a crosswind too!
767 were awesome aircraft, with an incredible record over a long time. Anyone who's ever flown one loved it, but it wasn't always the easiest aircraft to fly. Each of the three versions Pratts, GE and RR, behaved quite differently especially in the flare and no one could really explain why it landed the way it did...... it almost never could be landed smoothly and generally plonked down quite solidly...... there were three different techniques used for the three versions that we had. The Rollers were the most "consistent" and the -300 was way better than any -200. GE's were the best. Awesome aircraft in a crosswind too!
767 would be a great machine to retire on, though.
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: EHAM
Thank you all for the great replies. It gives me great insights on what points to consider. Eventually my preference will go out for the 787 due to a better roster and future proof. And, but not as a first argument, because it's a technical master piece of this time. As well the better humidity is point to consider, we are up there for quite some time 
Didn't think of the 777/787 same rating point btw, thanks for that as well!
@6000PIC : Due to the fact that these newer aircraft have rising use of computerized interfaces I think that younger people can more easily adapt to these cockpits than older people. Young guys are raised with computers But maybe handling characteristics of the heavy's is something you need more experience for.
Didn't think of the 777/787 same rating point btw, thanks for that as well!@6000PIC : Due to the fact that these newer aircraft have rising use of computerized interfaces I think that younger people can more easily adapt to these cockpits than older people. Young guys are raised with computers
But maybe handling characteristics of the heavy's is something you need more experience for.
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
From: UK
I’ve only ever flown in “advanced flight decks” and the training in the U.K. 20 years ago to allow me to start in one was excellent so I had no problem, despite me not being a Skygod.”
On the topic, it goes without saying the 787 is the way to go. It’ll still be here in 10 years time.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 14
From: Europe
There are literally 4 airlines in Europe operating 767 which can be considered as a first tier: Austrian, TUI, Condor and DHL. Two of them are phasing out 76s and one possibly will change an ownership. Do you really need any more thoughts?
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 149
Likes: 2
From: Oran
Dear all,
I'm new to this forum and have a question. Thanks for hearing (or is it reading) me! After having flown a few hundred hours on the B737 it was time for a change. I have done my A320 rating but didn't fly the actual aircraft due to some reasons.
Now I have the possibility to choose my new aircraft due to employer change (Yes I realize that I'm lucky). The options are a 767 or the 787. Since I have not flown long-haul I have no idea what time zones would do to my body. The 767 is being used on short-haul and long-haul, the 787 mainly long-haul. It feels that the 787 would make more sense in my career path (I'm just 3 years in aviation by now). Still I'm not sure about long-haul, what are the pro's and con's of this choice?
Please let me know your thoughts
I'm new to this forum and have a question. Thanks for hearing (or is it reading) me! After having flown a few hundred hours on the B737 it was time for a change. I have done my A320 rating but didn't fly the actual aircraft due to some reasons.
Now I have the possibility to choose my new aircraft due to employer change (Yes I realize that I'm lucky
). The options are a 767 or the 787. Since I have not flown long-haul I have no idea what time zones would do to my body. The 767 is being used on short-haul and long-haul, the 787 mainly long-haul. It feels that the 787 would make more sense in my career path (I'm just 3 years in aviation by now). Still I'm not sure about long-haul, what are the pro's and con's of this choice?Please let me know your thoughts
But seriously I flew the B767 for 22 years moved to the B787 one year ago. Both aircraft are nice to fly.
For the future 787 is the aircraft to have on your license so many jobs out there.
longhaul versus short haul, well as a young guy with no ties Longhaul is great with nice layovers around the world But it’s also a trap..
A) you can loose your social life back home
B) jet-lag will eventual destroy your bodies ability to sleep
C) current FTL can have you flying to the Caribbean and
Deadhead back on the same aircraft
D you could also end up flying as passenger around the world in economy class ( Depending on which airline )
E As a F/O you may be lucky to get 1 landing a month ( most flights these days carry 3 man crew )
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 246
Likes: 15
From: phoenix, AZ, USA
That is the best advice I have seen. Most of the F/Os I fly with have thousands of hours and hundreds of landings yet the simulator is more of a challenge for them because they do not get many takeoffs and approach/landings due to augmented crews.
