Quote: LAHORE - The B-777s delivered to PIA earlier this year are stated to be not up to the required specification and the management has expressed its concern over its quality, sources in the national flag carrier confided to The Nation here on Sunday.
As per sources, the planes cannot gain the required height during flight and are consuming more fuel, causing loss to the airline.
Two reasons are being attributed to not gaining the required height - the fuel burden and climate of the country. The plane was purchased to fly non-stop to New York, Toronto and Chicago, so it has to carry a huge amount of fuel; consequently cannot gain the required height during the initial three hours flight.
However, when a certain quantity of fuel was consumed, the plane could gain required height - ‘’when a plane makes low flight it consumes more fuel’’ an official of engineering department said.
Temperature and climate of the country was also described as hindrance in the take off of the plane. ...
Jacobin777 From United States, joined Sep 2004, 12730 posts, RR: 57 Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 27236 times:
.if there is a problem, I'm sure Boeing will come and assist to solve the problem as during the flight testing, the plane actually burned less fuel than orginally anticipated.
KrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1032 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 27159 times:
All of the 772LR flight test showed a lower than expected fuel burn. As always this sort of data only comes out once a type is in full operation. I would suspect that the Indian climate conditions have a large role to play in the TO and initial climb. Both the aforementioned issue and the lack of qualified pilots should of been more closely looked at before the LRs went into PIA's fleet.
OldAeroGuy From United States, joined Dec 2004, 2535 posts, RR: 50 Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 27096 times:
Interesting, since one of the two 772LR's that PIA flies met Boeing's predictions with fuel to spare in setting the world distance record for a commercial airplane.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
Aseem From India, joined Feb 2005, 2034 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 27075 times:
Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 3): Interesting, since one of the two 772LR's that PIA flies met Boeing's predictions with fuel to spare in setting the world distance record for a commercial airplane.
you mean PIA has the one that flew from HKG-LHR?
rgds
VT-ASJ
NAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 6191 posts, RR: 23 Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 26960 times:
As far as I know PIA has been routeing flights via Manchester (UK) anyway because of staff troubles etc.? A few more reasons also given in the article:-
"A PIA official requesting anonymity said the said planes were purchased specially for the non-stop flight from Pakistan to US, but after their delivery to PIA, US security forces did not allow direct flights from Pakistani International Airports to USA.
"According to the sources, US security forces declared Karachi airport as the only secured airport, and allowed direct flights from there - PIA was ready to operate its non-stop flights from Karachi but DG CAA took stand on the issue and did not allow operation from Karachi also.
"Besides this, there was also shortage of the skilled pilots to operate the B-777 as only senior pilots could fly such planes. A number of pilots have already left the Airline to seek better opportunities of job.
"According to the IATA rules the pilots operating B-777 were supposed to be relieved of duty three hours before and three hours after the flight in order to ready themselves for the next flight but the pilots were being given no such facilities.
To operate the B-777, a pilot will have to go through a training program. Some circles in PIA revealed that the airline was trying to come over the issue."
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
Jacobin777 From United States, joined Sep 2004, 12730 posts, RR: 57 Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 26884 times:
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 8): As far as I know PIA has been routeing flights via Manchester (UK) anyway because of staff troubles etc.? A few more reasons also given in the article:-
PK has had a problem with its nonstop Pakistan-United States route....not the other way around, nor its PK-YYZ-PK routes..
lack of pilots is also a problem for now..
and as mentioned, the -200LR's performed very well during the flight testing..probably some glitch which needs to be solved...
DfwRevolution From United States, joined Mar 2004, 7650 posts, RR: 55 Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 26860 times:
Quoting Blrsea (Thread starter): As per sources, the planes cannot gain the required height during flight and are consuming more fuel, causing loss to the airline.
If it's a climb performance issue, why can't the -110B engines be reprogramed to the full thrust capability of the mechanically identical -115B engine?
Boeing typically biases their aircraft for optimum cruise efficency and allow the engines to "power" their way to altitude. Ergo, remove the paper-derating and performance should improve.
The certification requirements for that sort of modification would be very limited.
Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 3): Interesting, since one of the two 772LR's that PIA flies met Boeing's predictions with fuel to spare in setting the world distance record for a commercial airplane.
Indeed! May this be the first time in recent history that a customer has ever publically commented about the B777 not performing to expectations?
I also wonder if their issue is with the advertized capability of the aircraft at launch in 2000 or with a capability later advertized by Boeing as performance of the B777LR began to exceed expectations in 2003? In other words: is it living up to the orginial specs, but perhaps not to some of the improvements that came later?
Zeke From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Dec 2006, 3724 posts, RR: 49 Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 26860 times:
Quoting 474218 (Reply 7): Sounds as if PIA is concerned with the B777's performance, not its QUALITY
This not a simple cut and dry issue, they have been complaining about this for a couple of years. As part of the deal, Boeing was to provide fee parts and service, which didn't turn out exactly as they thought.
This has been reported before in the Satribune newpapers with problems they have had with other 777s. Have a look at this link to see how the locals view the situation deal....http://flightsimpakistan.com/fsp/aviation/taj/blunder.htm
Maybe something in it, maybe not. One does wonder how one of the poorest third world countries that relies heavily on international aid was able to become the launch customer of the 772LR.
Cathay Pacific celebrates expansion of services to India
PolymerPlane From United States, joined May 2006, 770 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 26860 times:
With basically the same engine and basic aircraft design as B773ER, I am really surprised about this claim, especially with the intial climb performance.
B772LR has 110klbs of thrust with 766klb of MTOW, while B773ER has 115klbs of thrust and 775klb of MTOW. The thrust to weight ratio is very similar between the two and we already heard that 773ER exceeds its performance expectation.
NAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 6191 posts, RR: 23 Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 26806 times:
Looks like this is the real reason:-
"US security forces did not allow direct flights from Pakistani International Airports to USA. According to the sources, US security forces declared Karachi airport as the only secured airport, and allowed direct flights from there - PIA was ready to operate its non-stop flights from Karachi but DG CAA took stand on the issue and did not allow operation from Karachi also."
For once, can't say I blame the US authorities.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
Jacobin777 From United States, joined Sep 2004, 12730 posts, RR: 57 Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 26710 times:
Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):
Maybe something in it, maybe not. One does wonder how one of the poorest third world countries that relies heavily on international aid was able to become the launch customer of the 772LR.
they got a great deal on the plane..and they aren't a country in a complete need of handouts.....
not to mention, they have been pioneer flyers of Boeing jets in the Asian region for decades
Khobar From United States, joined Mar 2006, 1754 posts, RR: 2 Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 26489 times:
Quoting Blrsea (Thread starter): PIA claims that its new Boeing 777-200LR doesn't meet specifications...
This is old news. There was a discussion about the "scandalous" PIA purchase not too long ago where "super sekrit" papers were relased to the press by the opposition party proving that Boeing was bribing officials in promising to fix various deficiencies - under warranty. LOL.
Jacobin777 From United States, joined Sep 2004, 12730 posts, RR: 57 Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 26408 times:
I like from the article...
"One of the staffer, serving in the said plane said that in-flight entertainment system was not properly working from the very first day of its operation."
not only have I not read this anywhere except for this article, a few of my family have flown on the -200LR a few times already and none have complained about the in-flight entertainment system not working...
" As cargo section of the plane is also very small, the cargo business has also been reduced, as per the sources."
yah...sure, cargo on the -200LR is terrible, especially considering PK didn't have the auxiliary tanks installed......
Ikramerica From United States, joined May 2005, 15603 posts, RR: 49 Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 25877 times:
Quoting Blrsea (Thread starter): However, when a certain quantity of fuel was consumed, the plane could gain required height - ‘’when a plane makes low flight it consumes more fuel’’ an official of engineering department said.
This is how the freaking plane is designed to work! It's as if they've never flown a long range jet before. They ALL start at a lower altitude until fuel is burned off and then climb to a higher altitude over time until they reach optimum cruise.
The 747 does this, the 340, the MD11, the 772ER.
It's the point many made in the first place about the ineficiency of flying such long distances non-stop, as you burn a lot of fuel to just carry that extra fuel to get you further, and restricts revenue payload.
It's as if they want non-stop routes to the USA to be just as fuel efficient on a per mile basis as flights to London. That is not going to happen with current technology.
But if you read further, there are many, many, many reasons that they can't achieve operational efficiency, and most of them are due to the nature of their airline in the region of the world they are based.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
JumboForever From France, joined Jul 2005, 189 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 25681 times:
I'm really puzzled by this article.
Let alone the typing mistakes (2004 instead of 2006) I don't see what's the cargo capacity has to do here. I mean, the cargo size is known way ahead. Maybe PIA didn't realize that cargo can't be filled up when you're full of fuel.
As for the Board not being informed about the details of the deal of the plane!!! Come on, who's running that airline ?
This is only bashing because they can't fly direct to the US.
Sponsor Message: 
From India, joined May 2005, 887 posts, 
From United States, joined Sep 2004, 12730 posts, 
From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1032 posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 6191 posts, 
From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Dec 2006, 3724 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From France, joined Jul 2005, 189 posts,