Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing 777-200LR First Flight Photos  
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9664 posts, RR: 68
Posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 21486 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Have been added to the database:

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?id=791890,791889,791888

72 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 21400 times:

Allright that's it, I'm moving to Seattle. Gotta get all the unfair advantage I can  Wink

User currently offlineLonghaulheavy From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 402 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21274 times:

5 passenger windows back from the front, on each side, there's an orange-colored insert with something sticking out of it. What is this? Extra instrumentation for the test flight?

User currently offlineMD11LuxuryLinr From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1385 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21240 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alan Ling



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jet City Aviation Photography



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jet City Aviation Photography



Geeeod thats the SH!T..  goodvibes 



Caution wake turbulence, you are following a heavy jet.
User currently offlineBronko From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 810 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21233 times:

A friend of mine, who does not upload to ANet anymore, took this shot. It really shows off the sheer size of this machine, when you look at the pilots. Also note that the PIC and lead pilot of the 777-200LR program is female.

See reply #8 for a clickable thumbnail that will open the full size version, highly suggested.



[Edited 2005-03-09 04:14:29]


Jet City Aviation Photography
User currently offlineCo7772wuh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21219 times:

To view a 777 from the front is an awesome site . You really get to realize the size of those giant engines !

Thanks for the photos .


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21200 times:

Clickhappy,

Thanks for this!!!

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21185 times:

Beautiful aircraft.

N


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21180 times:

For convenience (click on it for the larger size):



Bronko, I hope you don't mind!

Tony

[Edited 2005-03-09 04:25:42]


Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineBronko From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 810 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21162 times:

Don't mind at all. When I wrote the post, in the preview page the photo was compressed to fit the page, and clickable to see the full size image.

Now it is not.

How did you link the image to be clickable?



Jet City Aviation Photography
User currently offlineHiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2177 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21142 times:

beautiful aircraft but isn't this just a taxi test and not flight? may want to rename the header

User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21120 times:

Bronko,

I just e-mailed you with the details...

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21114 times:

No. The plane flew from PAE to BFI.

N


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21100 times:

Quoting Hiflyer (Reply 10):
but isn't this just a taxi test and not flight?


Looks like a flight to me!



The plane left from Everett and landed at Boeing field, where the pictures seem to have been taken.

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20822 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21098 times:

Quoting Hiflyer (Reply 10):
isn't this just a taxi test and not flight? may want to rename the header


From the remarks on one of the photos:

N60659 (cn 33782/519) The first 777-200LR, arriving at BFI after its maiden flight from Paine Field. The GE-90 engine, the most powerful in use today, is what made this aircraft possible.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 21069 times:

there was a short 10-15 second video clip on Fox News of the 777LR taking off, it was a beautiful sight to see Big grin


"Up the Irons!"
User currently onlineMalaysia From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 3377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 20936 times:

Sorry I just couldnt resist, I made the textures all today just in time when the LR made its first flight



[Edited 2005-03-09 04:51:34]


There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
User currently offlineHiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2177 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 20900 times:

dang press reported it as taxi tests...not as a ferry from renton to home field...beautiful!!! in this case love being wrong!!! great job boeing.....

can those motors get any bigger? grin.

beautiful bird...just beautiful. thanks everyone for the pix....


User currently offlineLN-MOW From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1909 posts, RR: 13
Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 20864 times:

The 777 is made at Everett - not Renton - and the flight was from Everett to Boeing Field.

A good turnout by the local spotters - and special guest Mr. Ling of YVR! A gorgeous day with temperatures in the sixties ... boy, the weather gods have messed up this year .....



- I am LN-MOW, and I approve this message.
User currently offlineN317AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 20776 times:

Here's a few others from BFI if you're interested. Sorry for not knowing how to post them here.

http://www.avphotos.net


User currently offlineFlybynight From Norway, joined Jul 2003, 1031 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 20592 times:

I saw her at Boeing Field while driving south on I-5 around 1 PM this afternoon. Are those engines even larger?
Wouldn't it have been cool to have a picture of the LR with the errupting Mount St. Helens this afternoon check-out the slideshow, imagine flying next to that

 stirthepot 



Heia Norge!
User currently offlineBOEING747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 20464 times:

Engines look too dangerously close to the ground! How high from the surface are they really? The wings ought to be raised higher!

User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3598 posts, RR: 66
Reply 22, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 20216 times:

Quoting Longhaulheavy (Reply 2):
5 passenger windows back from the front, on each side, there's an orange-colored insert with something sticking out of it. What is this? Extra instrumentation for the test flight?


It's a flight test total pressure probe added to check the ship system total pressure probes. It's also shielded so it works well at high angles of attack for stall testing.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2728 posts, RR: 46
Reply 23, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 20007 times:

It looks cool indeed, but to be fair, it looks just like any other B777 too me:
an obese twin riding on a rigid wing.

BTW, Is there any VISUAL difference from the regular B777-200?


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17174 posts, RR: 66
Reply 24, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 19964 times:

Engines look too dangerously close to the ground! How high from the surface are they really? The wings ought to be raised higher!


First of all, I hope you're joking. Secondly, they are not really that close. Thirdly, you'd think the Boeing designers and engineers have a clue.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
25 Greaser : It looks like a 777 because it IS a 777. Raked wingtips are the most obvious differences.
26 Sabenapilot : Engine ground clearance is only an issue if the distance between the main landing gear and the engine would be greater than is the case here. It does
27 Karan69 : Nice photos, see does look awesome
28 Karan69 : Nice photos, she does look awesome
29 Mrniji : This Boeing Livery looks awesome... some careers could take it as modell to relaunch their boring liveries
30 Post contains links SK A340 : http://www.aftonbladet.se/atv/player.html?catID=10&clipID=227 Movie only in Swedish, but the only thing she says is what's different compared to the r
31 Erikwilliam : that´s one big engine, is it the same as the older 772/773??? Wich is the major modification besides the range in this 772-lr, wings, engines??? nice
32 Greaser : Aside from having a variant of the GE-90 family which so happens to have the world's most powerful and largest engines, it is basically a 777-200ER o
33 Post contains images KFLLCFII : Engine size difference between the LR and the ER: Amazing!
34 SNATH : Actually, I believe that El Al has Rolls Royce engines on their B777s, which are smaller than the GE90s that some of the ERs have. Tony
35 IL76TD : For all those that like to talk about how big the A345/346 engines are... ...they don't hold a candle to these babies now those are some HUGE engines
36 Tjwgrr : Here 'tis: ------------------------------- Aircraft ID BOE001 Aircraft Type B772 Owner/Operator Boeing Commercial Airplane Group Flight Plan Received
37 Post contains images SK A340 : Should Boeing start an airline? They sure took off and landed on time! /Micke
38 Post contains links and images Sabenapilot : Why should they? The A340 has 4 of them 4 longhaul! View Large View MediumPhoto © Peter Unmuth - VAP BTW, are the engines on the 777-200LR the s
39 Post contains images SNATH : The A340 has 4 of them 4 longhaul! Not for long, as the A350 will replace the A342s/A343s with 2 engines 2 make money. Tony
40 DAYflyer : Brings back memories of Kai-Tak and the engine strike photos. There are a few pilots there who would have appreciated this engineering attribute of t
41 Post contains images Boeing nut : Very nice play on words!
42 Post contains images Sabenapilot : For its ultra longhaul and for high capacity planes however, the market leader won't bet on reliability alone, but also on redundancy....
43 SNATH : The reason A went with 4 engines on the A380 and the A345 has nothing to do with redundancy. In the case of the A380, it's not currently technologica
44 Sabenapilot : SNATH- Like you say, it's a play on words, don't take it too seriously.... I think everybody is perfectly away of the reasons for 4 engines on the A38
45 Post contains images SNATH : Oh, don't worry, it's hard to take anything on this board seriously! As for your comment on you preferring seeing two engines under the plane's wing
46 Post contains images DeltaWings : Wow; those engines are huge!! Looks better then any 4-engined aircraft ~DeltaWings
47 Tockeyhockey : Why should they? The A340 has 4 of them 4 longhaul! twice as many engines, twice as many things to go wrong! most catastrophic airline accidents happe
48 Sabenapilot : Oh me too, I will be the last person to step aside in case my flight is on a twin only, because I know I should be perfectly safe too... However, I h
49 OldAeroGuy : It's the trailing cone for a remote static pressure system to measure flight static pressure away from airframe/engine influences. For recording flig
50 Post contains images PyroGX41487 : twice as many engines, twice as many things to go wrong! most catastrophic airline accidents happen because of a failure in engines (think iowa city).
51 Post contains images SNATH : Hey Sabena, Oh, I believe you. And, despite feeling safe on twins, I'm also getting unconfortable with some of the ETOPS extension proposals. I think
52 Post contains images JBirdAV8r : Eh. The 777's catch phrase is more like 2 Safe 2 Need 2 Extra
53 Dimsum : The 777's catch phrase is more like 2 Safe 2 Need 2 Extra oh geez, this could go on forever! LOL! good one, guys!
54 Boeing7E7 : Those are some big damn engines. Holy crap!
55 Jderden777 : hahaha nice one jon! the LR is such a sweet airplane....how can you not like those huge engines....congrats to boeing!
56 Post contains images Vorticity : I watched the take-off live on a webcast, it was kind of funny listening to the tower chatter... several times re-iterated the point that he was clear
57 Pensacolaguy : Congratulations Boeing on the first successful 777-200LR flight. The engines do look amazing. What is the comparison in size, between the engines on t
58 Tockeyhockey : I think you mean Sioux City, and it was a THREE engined DC-10 that had it's #2 engine shoot fragments into the HYDRAULIC systems that caused the FLIG
59 Erikwilliam : will there ever be a 773LR or there´s no need for it???? This GE-90 is the same the powers the A-380 right?!?! thx for the replies
60 Vorticity : No, they are not the same engines. Engine options on the 380 are the RR Trent 900 and the GE/P&W GP-7200.
61 Starlionblue : This GE-90 is the same the powers the A-380 right?!?! The A380 has far weaker engines than the 777. Four engined planes have much less power per weigh
62 Starlionblue : To expand on the previous, the A380-800 has powerplants in the 80000-85000 lb class. The weakest GE90s for on the 777-200 are 75000 lb thrust units, b
63 777WT : It's the 777-300ER that has the most powerful jet enigne. The GE90-115B which puts out 115,300 lb of rated thrust. Testing have shown it can put out
64 Post contains images Starlionblue : 777WT, yes I got it wrong and edited it, but it seems this forum just a very fast paced place.
65 ChrisH : Arent the PW engines on Koreans 773s even stronger?
66 Aerofan : so is the industry moving to a two engine design then? Does this mean tha SRB will have to eat crow and we will see a 777 in VS colours? Oh I wish tha
67 Post contains images Glideslope : Ugh, ok.
68 777WT : Yes but the fuel burn is the worst than GE and RR's.
69 Erikwilliam : that´s my mistake, the same Nº: 90 and 900 thx for clearing that up
70 Post contains images Francoflier : Ok now, at the risk of sounding repetitive.... MAN, THOSE ENGINES, MAAAAAAN!!!
71 OldAeroGuy : Nope. The KAL 777-300 PW4098 engines are rated at 98,000 lb as opposed to the 110,000 lb. rating of the GE90-110B on the -200LR
72 Icebird757 : Looks like Boeing go the only photos of the plane actually taking off.
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...
777-200LR - First Flight - 08.03.2005 posted Mon Feb 21 2005 22:30:14 by Clickhappy
SQ Boeing 777-200ER First Flight posted Wed Aug 1 2001 15:26:16 by QantasA3XX
Boeing 777-200LR Breaks Longest Flight Record posted Thu Nov 10 2005 19:51:56 by Darrenthe747
EVA Air Boeing 777-200LR? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 15:57:46 by VivaGunners
Boeing 777-200LR Ready For Take-Off! posted Fri Feb 3 2006 05:35:04 by NWDC10
Boeing 777-200LR Now Certified To Fly posted Thu Feb 2 2006 22:51:41 by AirlineAddict
Boeing 777-200LR Due @ LHR Thursday 11/10 posted Tue Nov 8 2005 21:01:49 by SmithAir747
Boeing 777-200LR - Certification - When? posted Fri Nov 4 2005 00:54:40 by United787
Boeing 777-200LR Orders posted Sat Aug 20 2005 21:36:49 by DeltaDude8
777-200LR Record Flight Known posted Thu Aug 11 2005 04:05:28 by Sq212