Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA 767 Downrated  
User currently offlineRW774477 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1061 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2830 times:

Some UA 767's have been downrated from 'ER' configuration.
1. What is involved ?
2. Why do it ?

rw774477

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFlagshipAZ From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2762 times:

ER is "extended range".
#1. What is involved?.....the removal of the extra fuel tanks in the belly.
#2. Why do it?.....To save money. Savings of fuel costs & landing fees.
I'm sure there are more in-depth reasons why the 767 are now "non-ER".
Regards.



"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
User currently offlineUA744Flagship From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2725 times:

The UA 767-300s that have been derated are N664UA-N677UA (yes, there is a N666UA!), which are the 14 767-300ERs (derated) that United uses for domestic services.

Theoretically, these aircraft could be easily converted to serve international missions if demand warrants.

Also, it is my understanding that many, if not all, of UA's 16 777 international "A" market aircraft have had their huge PWs derated as well.


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2691 times:

I always thought that the ER versions of airliners had the center fuel tank utilized for more range instead of aux tanks.  Confused It's only been recently that liners added the auxilary tanks in the cargo hold.

User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7929 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2680 times:

I'm not surprised that UA's fleet of 777-200A's were switched over to primarily domestic operations. They would be perfect planes for the SFO/LAX-JFK routes and on the US West Coast to Hawaii routes.

User currently offlineUal777contrail From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2539 times:

777's switched over to primarily domestic ops? We fly them across both ponds daily, adding more flights like KIX-HNL using a 777. We don't use them primarily for domestic ops. i would say we use them primarily for international travel.

and second, I wish they would stop slicing up the 777 into two cabins. I wish they would stay three, but the company know what they are doing, sometimes.


User currently offlineN777UA From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2366 times:

The 777s that United has in a 2 class configuration are the ones going from SFO/LAX/DEN to Hawaii...they will not be used on international and KIX-HNL flights. There are only 6 of them...6 out of 60 777s in the fleet.

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2269 times:

You fly 777-200A's domestically, UAl777contrail. I don't think you still fly them across the pond due to cargo. What Ray said was right. You use them 2-class to Hawaii among other US destinations because of low yields.

The PW4077s on the 777As probably haven't been derated. That's the lowest possible configuration anyway, I believe.

The 767s have also had their engines derated to save fuel, since they won't need all that power just to cross the country.

N


User currently offlineUA744Flagship From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2132 times:

Gigneil:

Only 6 777As are used in a domestic configuration. They are N210UA-N215UA and all were delivered in 2000, as compared to the 16 "original" 3-class 777As which were delivered between 1995 and 1997.

These 16 non-ERs *are* most definitely used to Europe. Notably, they are the primary staple on the IAD-Europe and ORD-Europe flights along with occassional 777ERs. And like the 23 strong non-Pacific ER fleet, as well as the Pacific-configured 15 strong new interiored ER fleet, they do fly the US hub-hub routes.

The 16 3-class 777As are the only 3-class 777s with Economy Plus, as well as enhanced Business.

Reference my fleetguide here:


Also, there are some if not all of the 16 777As that have been derated, Gigneil. The thrust as they were delivered was not the lowest possible configuration.


User currently offlineGreenArc From United States of America, joined May 2000, 78 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2120 times:

FWIW,

All UA 767-300 aircraft are ER configuration and 180 minute ETOPS certified. Some of them are low gross weight models with derated 52,000 lb engines and 360,000 lb MTOGW. These aircraft are two class and fly domestic and Hawaii. The three class aircraft have 60,000 lb motors, gross at 407,000 lb and fly mostly international Atlantic. Systemswise, these aircraft are pretty much identical. The engines are interchangeable and "dialed back" for the low gross use. The engines are also used on the 747-400 at 56,000 lb.

"Some UA 767's have been downrated from 'ER' configuration."

Some 767-200 aircraft have been recently removed from ETOPS status, not ER configuration. These aircraft are used solely for domestic operations with a very occasional equipment substitution to London. Lack of proper VHF radios prevented them from going further east than LHR. They were (are) scheduled to go to Victorville and were removed from ETOPS status pending the final grounding.

Hope this helps.

GreenArc


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2115 times:

They derated the engines on the 777-200As to less than 77k pounds? That's really tough to believe.

N


User currently offlineN777UA From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

So anyone know when the 767-200s are going to go to VCV?

User currently offlineConcorde1518 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 746 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2033 times:

Hey, Flagship, could you possibly post the Regs of the Pacific and Atlantic ER's too?

Thanks
 Smile


User currently offlineConcorde1518 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 746 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2023 times:

GreenArc Wrote
"All UA 767-300 aircraft are ER configuration."
Looking at the Jet Airliner Database (it's a year old) 767 page, N664UA-N677UA have been downgraded from ER, so have they since put them back to ER?

Here is the link:


 Smile


User currently offlineMEL From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 1095 posts, RR: 13
Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2014 times:

Usually the 777s used for Transpac are 2820 N220UA and higher. I believe they are configured for F10/C49/Y216 which means two less First Suites, and no Economy Plus. I've wondered why no E+ ---> maybe because there's no competition among other transpac carriers for an E+ product (with the exception of MRTC on AA). Sorry to get off topic.


NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2005 times:

Concorde1518- that's pretty much the point of this thread. They have downrated engines, but they're still 767-300ERs.

N


User currently offlineFlyguy1 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1736 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 1970 times:

With the UA 767-200's going to the desert, what type will be replacing them on the transcon flight's? LAX, SFO-JFK or 8x per day this summer, will the 767-200 still be around than?


727, L1011, MD80, A300, 777-200, 737-300, 737-700, 747-400, 757-200, 737-800, A320. E190, E135, 767-200, CRJ9
User currently offlineN777UA From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1948 times:

The 767-300s will be used for TransCon, and maybe a "nicer" 757 will be introduced, with biz seats instead of dom first.

User currently offlineGreenArc From United States of America, joined May 2000, 78 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1926 times:

"All UA 767-300 aircraft are ER configuration."
Looking at the Jet Airliner Database (it's a year old) 767 page, N664UA-N677UA have been downgraded from ER, so have they since put them back to ER?


JP Airline fleets correctly lists all the 767-300s as ER aircraft (as does Philip Birtles in his book). N664UA-N677UA are all capable of being upgraded to the same thrust and weight of the other 763s in the fleet. The change would involve paying Boeing for the certification, dialing up the thrust and reloading the software. Fuel capacity and equipment are identical. It boils down to this: they were cheaper to buy, they are cheaper to operate and they do everything req'd for domestic and Hawaii with plenty of margin.

With the UA 767-200's going to the desert, what type will be replacing them on the transcon flight's? LAX, SFO-JFK or 8x per day this summer, will the 767-200 still be around than?

They were planned to be replaced by a combination of 757 (poor choice, I know) and 767-300. There is a chance of a reprieve however. All the aircraft leases are being reviewed and anything can happen.

GreenArc


User currently offlineAA717driver From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1566 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1911 times:

I believe all 767-300's are "ER"'s. Some are just 'more' ER than others. The first 767-200's that TWA got were truly not ER models. They were modded to become "ER"'s later(I don't know what they did to get them there, though).

Most up or downgrades to weight and power are software and paperwork issues. TWA upgraded some 757-200's to "international" status by upping the MTOW by 7k/lbs.(I believe that was the number). It was just a matter of informing Boeing and paying several thousand bucks more per month on the lease.

Now, the only true 767-200ER aircraft are the -200's Continental has. They have really long legs and are worthy of the name. SmileTC



FL450, M.85
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 20, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1867 times:

There are lots of "true" 767-200ERs. US's for example.

N


User currently offlineUA744Flagship From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1845 times:

Please see my fleetguide for all reg & seat config information.



MEL:

The transpac 777s have pilot bunks in place of the original F class lavatory, with a new lavatory being placed in place of the 1st row of center First Suites. In Coach the crew rests are in a lower lobe cargo compartment.

You're right about why there currently is no E+/C+ on these planes -- they are going on routes downgauged from 747-400s so United figures the loss in perceived product quality will be more than compensated by almost guaranteed "good" loads as a result of a downgrade from larger equipment.

Correction: the transpac 777s with the nwe interiors are N216UA-N229UA, 15 in total.

Note that transpac just means the 777 configuration; it does not limit the plane's rotues. You will sometimes see transpac 777s to Europe, and you may even see 777ER (non transpac) aircraft on the shorter routes to NRT, such as SEA-NRT and occassionally on SFO-NRT when there was a 777 on the route.


User currently offlineUA744Flagship From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1839 times:

What's up with airliners.net linking?

My united fleet guide is at

http://fleetguide.imkeww.com


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
ATA Taking Four UA 767's? posted Sun Nov 6 2005 13:42:06 by LN-MOW
UA 767's Returned To Lessors- Who Will Grab Them? posted Thu Jun 2 2005 22:25:55 by TAN FLYR
Is This The First UA 767 New Colours? posted Thu Mar 31 2005 09:20:27 by MauriceB
UA 767 Incident In EZE: 2nd In 3 Days! posted Tue Mar 15 2005 12:14:08 by EZEIZA
UA 767-300 International First Class posted Fri Nov 26 2004 21:00:24 by Flyfirst
UA 767 ORD-PDX? posted Thu Sep 23 2004 05:14:23 by Flyboy80
UA 767-300s posted Wed Apr 7 2004 05:37:55 by Ozzie
Any UA 767-400's? posted Fri Jan 16 2004 04:42:04 by UniTED
UA 767 And 777 At PHL posted Fri Jun 13 2003 03:30:27 by Wagz
UA's 767-200 Retirement posted Sun Apr 20 2003 02:38:34 by FLY777UAL