Motorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 2748 posts, RR: 10 Posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4285 times:
What are the most obvious and not so obvious city pairs for these two aircraft?
SIN, BKK & KLI to LAX & JFK, but what else?
SYD-AKL-JFK?
SYD-PRT-LHR?
YVR-SYD?
What have Air Canada, Emirates and Qatar got planned?
And who's ordered the 777-200LR?
Boeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4240 times:
Other possible routes are ones the 777-200ER serves as well. The LR variant will be able to carry more payload on these routes. For example, CO flies from Newark to Hong Kong non-stop now, but they would have advantages using an LR variant on the same route.
I'm sure ConcordeBoy will be able to tell you more. He's a 777-200LR fanatic.
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1834 posts, RR: 7 Reply 5, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3937 times:
Qatar hasn't ordered any 345, but I know somewhere down the road they might be interested in Doha to the US East Coast and West Coast using the 345 or 772LR. Emirates' near-term and mid-term plans include DXB-SYD and DXB-JFK and other North American destinations. EVA Air and PIA have ordered the 772LR. I believe EVA's plan for the 772LR is Taipei and the US East. I believe PIA's plan is also for the US East Coast.
Motorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 2748 posts, RR: 10 Reply 6, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3738 times:
Tsentsan
Apologies, PRT should read PER. Referring to a possible SYD - PER - LHR route where QF could fly Australia UK direct/non-stop.
Dynkrisolo
Qatar hasn't ordered any 345, but I know somewhere down the road they might be interested in Doha to the US East Coast and West Coast using the 345 or 772LR.
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1834 posts, RR: 7 Reply 7, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3574 times:
The Qatar government has ordered one 345 for official use not for commercial services.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3345 times:
BR and PK have ordered the 772LR
BR is currently said to be calculating the use of the bird for nonstop service to PTY (yes, Panama) on behalf of the Evergreen group. The original plan to use it nonstop to EWR was reconsidered due to improvement in 773ER specifications.
PK has issued statements about using the birds from KHI to either IAH or LAX nonstop, but nowhere near finalized.
Yahoo Orders Group reports that KU is considering ordering the 772LR to expand their N.American services. Also, QR is to decide between the 772LR and A345 (despite already operating the A346) in 2004... stating that commonality is of little interest to them (the chatter QatarAirways can expand on that more than I)
Rickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 10 Reply 10, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3317 times:
Any truth that the 772LR only meets its specified range with two optional tanks that replace 4 LD3 containers ? someone mentioned this and it would impact the cargo space compared to the A345 if true ?
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3271 times:
Any truth that the 772LR only meets its specified range with two optional tanks that replace 4 LD3 containers ?
Boeing makes it very clear that the 772LR's greater range is provided by two optional tanks in the cargo hold, though they only replace two LD3s, not four.
Some consider this an advantage, as the aircraft can be operated as a superhigh-powered 772ER* without the fuel tanks, with an enormous MTOW (the 772LR will have a higher MTOW than any twinjet ever designed); and don the extra tanks should an operator desire to use the bird for ultralonghaul.
*The disadvantage here, is that even the de-tanked 772LR is significantly more expensive than a GE90-94B powered 772ER with all options standard.
someone mentioned this and it would impact the cargo space compared to the A345 if true
To some extent. Though keep in mind that this is offset by two other factors:
1) the 772LR can hoist more cargo by weight than the A345
2) the A345 must take up valuable cabin or cargo area for crew rest, while the 772LR doesnt have to
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7694 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3238 times:
Well, we'll find out what will it be like to fly a really long flight when SQ starts its LAX-SIN non-stop service using the A340-500 in 2004. You have to wonder will it be able to make it west bound, or will SQ need to use HKG as a technical stop for fuel during the winter months?
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 13, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3231 times:
The A340-500 will be able to make LAX-SIN easily year round.
It will likely be able to make it JFK-SIN year round.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 15, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3210 times:
As a frequent business traveller I will say I unequivocally choose nonstop travel whenever possible.
I need time at home, and I need time at my destination. I can only spare time at another airport when travelling for leisure.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3141 times:
Well, we'll find out what will it be like to fly a really long flight when SQ starts its LAX-SIN non-stop service using the A340-500 in 2004
SIN-LAX (8770mi) is fairly long, but it's not as if ATL-JNB (8439mi) and EWR-HKG (8065mi) arent already significant indicators of what ultralonghaul nonstops are like in their own right...
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1834 posts, RR: 7 Reply 17, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3135 times:
Gigneil:
The A340-500 will be able to make LAX-SIN easily year round.
It will likely be able to make it JFK-SIN year round.
I can assure you this will not be the case. If so, SQ would not configure their 345 with 190 or so seats.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 18, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3101 times:
I think they're shooting for more of a luxurious experience than anything else.
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1834 posts, RR: 7 Reply 20, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3044 times:
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 21, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3030 times:
So assumably the 777-200LR will have similar issues negotiating SIN-LAX and will likely not be able to do SIN-JFK at all either?
Its not a substantially more capable aircraft.
I can't believe both manufacturers would come to market with a plane not capable of traversing this, the single most pointed at route in the world in this range class.
B2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1350 posts, RR: 60 Reply 22, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3015 times:
The latest specs give the 772LR about 300nm more range than the A345. This doesn't sound like enough to make the difference between an A345 payload restriction to 200 pax and a 772LR full load of 300. Perhaps the 772LR has a flatter payload-range slope than the A345. Published charts don't look very different, though.
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2991 times:
SQ will initially be severely discounting the flights out of LAX at least until they determine demand (our travel department received our corporate discount scheme a month ago). Apparently, they want Raffles to develop a large following with the nonstop service (how can they not!).
As much as I'm not a fanatic of SQ--the nonstop flight will save hours off the travel time. We'll use it.
Irishpower From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 377 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (9 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2944 times:
25 STT757: "DXB-JFK" Malysian already flies EWR-DXB with a 777-200ER, on the way to Kula Lumpur.
26 Motorhussy: One thing I know for sure, the A345 has the ability to fly SIN - LAX return year round with a normal full three-class configuration including standar
27 Rickb: Concordeboy, Just checked Boeing's website and it specifically mentions that each optional fuel tank takes the place of 2 LD3 containers - in which ca
28 FLYSSC: Air France has fleet of 25 B777, all are -200ER version waiting April 2004 to be the launch company for the brand new -300ER The longest ever flight o
29 Motorhussy: FLYSSC What's that got to do with this thread? MH
30 Dynkrisolo: Motorhussy: One thing I know for sure, the A345 has the ability to fly SIN - LAX return year round with a normal full three-class configuration includ
31 ConcordeBoy: It will be faster than a 772LR too due to no ETOPS constraints across that vast expanse of the Pacific. Too bad there will be no such ETOPS "constrain
Sponsor Message: 
From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 2748 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Taiwan, joined Mar 2001, 335 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Jan 2002, 2016 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2003, 195 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
