<article_title>Boeing_767</article_title>
<edit_user>Andros 1337</edit_user>
<edit_time>Sunday, June 6, 2010 7:50:03 PM CEST</edit_time>
<edit_comment>/* 767-400ER */ add about 777-100X rejection</edit_comment>
<edit_text>The 767-400ER is the final extended variant and was launched in 1997 on an order for Delta Air Lines and Continental Airlines to replace their aging Lockheed L-1011 and McDonnell Douglas DC-10 fleets<strong>, respectively, following both airlines rejection of Boeing's previous [[Boeing 777|777-100X]] proposal</strong>. Other airlines also placed orders, but these were eventually canceled or converted to other Boeing models.&lt;ref name=Flug767-400/&gt; The 767-400ER is a major development over the 767-300. The -400ER was stretched from the -300 for a total of . It also featured a new glass cockpit, redesigned wings with a wingspan increase of over the previous two variants, larger passenger windows, new passenger cabin and redesigned landing gear. The -400ER is the only 767 variant to also feature &quot;raked&quot; wingtips for increased fuel efficiency. Its first flight was on October 9, 1999,&lt;ref name=&quot;Fraw_civil_767-400&quot;&gt;Frawley, Gerald. &quot;Boeing 767-400ER&quot;. The International Directory of Civil Aircraft, 2003/2004. Aerospace Publications, 2003. ISBN 1-875671-58-7.&lt;/ref&gt; and entered into service with Continental Airlines on September 14, 2000. This variant is only available as the 767-400ER, as there was no 767-400 variant. However it has less range than the other two ER variants.</edit_text>
<turn_user>Andros 1337<turn_user>
<turn_time>Sunday, June 6, 2010 7:45:55 PM CEST</turn_time>
<turn_topicname>NPOV issue</turn_topicname>
<turn_topictext>I have removed a sentence that compares the 767-400ER's sales to the A330-200, as it falsely misleads readers into believing that the 767-400ER was a failure, which we all know is not true as Boeing designed the aircraft primarily to suit the widebody trijet (L-1011 and DC-10) replacement needs of Delta and Continental, respectively. The 767-400ER in fact wasn't originally supposed to exist; Boeing strongly urged both airlines to order the 777-200ER to replace their widebody trijets, which both airlines snubbed due to the fact that it was too large for that need. Boeing then offered them a possible 777-100ER, which was again snubbed due to lack of efficiency vs. the 777-200ER. Thus, the 767-400ER was born. color:redfont-family : Trebuchet MS;ANDROS1337 19:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC) Thanks for the insight. I had not thought too much about the -400ER being a niche market version. Delta and Continental got a larger 767 for commonality with their 767s. Though the 767-400ER has a different cockpit systems, based on the 777's systems. -Fnlayson (talk) 20:04, 6 June 2010 (UTC)</turn_topictext>
<turn_text>I have removed a sentence that compares the 767-400ER's sales to the A330-200, as it falsely misleads readers into believing that the 767-400ER was a failure, which we all know is not true as Boeing designed the aircraft primarily to suit the widebody trijet (L-1011 and DC-10) replacement needs of Delta and Continental, respectively. The 767-400ER in fact wasn't originally supposed to exist; Boeing strongly urged both airlines to order the 777-200ER to replace their widebody trijets, which both airlines snubbed due to the fact that it was too large for that need. Boeing then offered them a possible 777-100ER, which was again snubbed due to lack of efficiency vs. the 777-200ER. Thus, the 767-400ER was born. </turn_text>