PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6753 posts, RR: 65 Posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2529 times:
Here's something slightly odd.
Many a long year ago ANA chose PW for their 777s. (They were heading towards an RR order until BA chose GE for their 777s but that's another story.)
They have -281s with PW4084s, -281ERs with PW4090s and -300s with PW4090s.
Their more recent order for -300ERs was necessarily with GE.
So far, so ordinary.
But some months ago I noticed on the Boeing website that they listed ANA as having ordered 2 (just 2) 777-200s with GE. I wrote to Boeing suggesting it was a mistake. I didn't get a reply.
Now I look at my 2006-2007 jp Fleets and on page 241 it lists ANA as having 2 777-281s with GE90-85Bs on order for delivery in 2007. "Aha," I think, "that confirms what's on the Boeing website," and I go there to check. But now there's no mention of any ANA order for GE 777-200s.
Raggi From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 959 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2507 times:
Interesting.
I've always wondered, what is the MTOM of their 200ERs? Can you get the 656.000 lbs "variant" with the PW4090? If not, I can see why they would want the GE9094B and the higher MTOM. Not unlike what JL did for their 200ERs.
But these were to be 200A with the GE9085B? Hmmm, that's very peculiar. I would assume the lighter PW would be just as good on the short domestic and regional routes.
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6753 posts, RR: 65 Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2328 times:
Quoting Raggi (Reply 1): I would assume the lighter PW would be just as good on the short domestic and regional routes.
Especially when they already have a load of them. Yes, two orphan 777-200s with GE90s make a little more sense in view of the GE90-115 already in the fleet - but it still seems an eccentric thing to do.
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6753 posts, RR: 65 Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2132 times:
Quoting Andrewtang (Reply 4): It would be great to see a 777-281ER with GE90 engines
Not so fast. Both the Boeing website some months ago and the current jp Fleets indicated 777-200s with GE, not 777-200ERs. Indeed, jp Fleets
specifically lists planes with GE90-85Bs.
Carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2779 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2096 times:
While it wouldn't be all that unordinary to have GE-powered -200ERs as they would have commonality with their -300ERs, but I would doubt any -200 (non-ER) will be ordered with GE; as all -200 series have so far been powered by PW. Why have a sub-type on the domestic routes.
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1970 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 6): Not so fast. Both the Boeing website some months ago and the current jp Fleets indicated 777-200s with GE, not 777-200ERs. Indeed, jp Fleets
specifically lists planes with GE90-85Bs.
Sorry, but that info is not correct at all. NH's two newest 777-200ER's, JA716A and JA717A are PW4090 powered with a MTOW of 648Klb. The two ships are NRT-SFO-NRT rotation presently. I've seen the airplanes myself and the PW eagle is there plain as day...
-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
Brendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1903 times:
Quoting Raggi (Reply 10): Is 648Klb the highest MTOM you can get on a PW4090-powered 772ER?
As far as I know, yes, it's the highest MTOW. The reason is the engines, which couldn't be certified for a higher thrust rating, since that would lead to too high NOx emissions.
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1895 times:
Quoting Brendows (Reply 11): As far as I know, yes, it's the highest MTOW. The reason is the engines, which couldn't be certified for a higher thrust rating, since that would lead to too high NOx emissions.
Right, and it should be pointed out that the PW4090 is the only engine on the 777 to have achieved the highest current ETOPS certification, ETOPS 207. Both NH and UA have achieved ETOPS 207 with their 777-200ER fleets.
-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25869 posts, RR: 79 Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1861 times:
Quoting Raggi (Reply 1): I've always wondered, what is the MTOM of their 200ERs? Can you get the 656.000 lbs "variant" with the PW4090?
No you cannot. 648K is the highest available on the 4090.
Quoting PM (Reply 2): Yes, two orphan 777-200s with GE90s make a little more sense in view of the GE90-115 already in the fleet - but it still seems an eccentric thing to do.
Possible 772LR order?
Quoting Raggi (Reply 10): Is 648Klb the highest MTOM you can get on a PW4090-powered 772ER?
Yes
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6753 posts, RR: 65 Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1821 times:
Quoting Widebodyphotog (Reply 9): Sorry, but that info is not correct at all. NH's two newest 777-200ER's, JA716A and JA717A are PW4090 powered with a MTOW of 648Klb.
I don't have the book to hand but the two GE90-85 planes (if they exist) are intended for delivery next year. All -281s and -281ERs delivered so far have indeed PW4000s.
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1794 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 14): I don't have the book to hand but the two GE90-85 planes (if they exist) are intended for delivery next year. All -281s and -281ERs delivered so far have indeed PW4000s.
NH has four more -200A on order but I am positive those will be PW4084 powered. An engine change is highly unlikely as they would have to start from zero in terms of ETOPS certification.
IMO NH should have gone GE from the begining. It would have made some route planning decisions much easier and in the long run would have been more profitable for them. It also probably would have delayed the introduction of the -300ER...So maybe PW was a better choice after all! LOL
-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
MCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8557 posts, RR: 14 Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1784 times:
Agreed. I think that P&W is a good engine, but the GE makes better sense as all of you have indicated.
If these 200A are GE powered, then good. I'll be blend in with the 300ER a/c. The 200/ 200ER/ 300 a/c will stand out with those P&W engines. I'd gotta see this one.
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6753 posts, RR: 65 Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1727 times:
Quoting Widebodyphotog (Reply 15): NH has four more -200A on order but I am positive those will be PW4084 powered. An engine change is highly unlikely as they would have to start from zero in terms of ETOPS certification.
Do they do ETOPS with 'A' models? Isn't that what the -200ERs are for?
Quoting Widebodyphotog (Reply 15): It would have made some route planning decisions much easier and in the long run would have been more profitable for them.
How so?
Quoting Widebodyphotog (Reply 15): It also probably would have delayed the introduction of the -300ER...
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25869 posts, RR: 79 Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1723 times:
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6753 posts, RR: 65 Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 16): Agreed. I think that P&W is a good engine, but the GE makes better sense as all of you have indicated.
It never ceases to amaze me how people forget that on the -200/-200ER/-300 (i.e. before the GE monopoly) RR comfortably outsold both PW and GE.
Of the 526 non-2LR/3ER 777s currently flying, 154 (29%) have PW, 161 have GE (31%) and 211 (40%) have RR! On the -200ER RR and GE are neck and neck with 40% each and PW have 20%.
I read again and again how superior the GE90 is alleged to be but the market seemed to think otherwise.
Raggi From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 959 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1680 times:
I guess the fact that a PW4090 772ER is restricted to 648Klb was part of the reason why JL switched from PW to the GE9094B when they ordered 772ERs. That, and commonality with the 773ERs they had on order.
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1632 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 17): Do they do ETOPS with 'A' models? Isn't that what the -200ERs are for?
Some, not all NH -200A models are ETOPS certified as well and are used on medium range routes where ETOPS planning is required. Also for charter work on occasion. The bulk of ETOPS work is handled the now seven strong -200ER fleet.
Payload/range performance became an issue with the introduction of their -200ER to the US East coast routes. The premium seats made for higher OEW airplanes and the lower deck crew rest sacrificed cargo revenue and created wicked weight and balance problems when pax loads were low and cargo loads were high. Runway performance near MTOW was always an issue leaving IAD (especially in summer and fall) and as a result payloads on the longest range routes suffered and NH did not get as much out of the aircrafts as they would have if they were GE powered with higher MTOW (and better fuel burn BTW). NH was between a rock and a hard place because the operating costs were too high to change/continue 747-400 operation to the US East coast but PW4090 777-200ER was not the optimal aircraft for the routes. Enter 777-300ER...
However, if NH had chosen the more capable GE powered aircraft from the begining the discussion might have been weather or not to add additional frequencencies to the US East coast with additional GE powered 777-200ER's rather than replacing them with 777-300ER, and more orders for the GE90 777-200's for Asia medium range routes.
But that is not the way it happened and 777-300ER has become the heavy hauler for NH's longest routes and is now being used to build capacity inter-Asia. The -300ER has become a great money maker for NH, nearly doubling cargo payloads and increasing pax capacity without significant performance restrictions where it has replaced 777-200ER. It has also cut fuel costs by about 30% where it has replaced 747-400 with the added benefit of vastly increased cargo volume and payload.
As an additional note the last three 777-281ER were delivered with overhead crew rests at long last...
-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7737 posts, RR: 27 Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1610 times:
Why did NH opt for the lower deck crew rest in the first place? Surely the operational issues associated with them would have been realized prior to order so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
Widebodyphotog From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, RR: 68 Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1587 times:
Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 22): Why did NH opt for the lower deck crew rest in the first place? Surely the operational issues associated with them would have been realized prior to order so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
You would have thought so but when they were ordered the -200ER it was never intended to be operating on ANA's longest routes so it was never assumed that required performance would reach the edge of the commercially viable envelope. The US West coast was the planned cope of operation of their -200ER airplanes. The realities of September 11 and rising fuel prices forced ANA's hand with regards to fleet planning. It made their low density 747-400 seating unviable for the North America market so they had to cut capacity and costs. Also a point to remember is that three of the first four 777-281ER, JA708A, JA709A, and JA710A, were flipped to ER from A models. ANA never intended to utilize the -200ER in they way it turned out so they had to make the best of it until the -300ER became available.
-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
Imiakhtar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1577 times:
slightly off topic but why does BA have a 777 fleet with both GE and RR engines?
25 N1120A: The GE90 is superior in that it has the lowest SFC and was by far the most scalable to what Boeing needed for the over 700,000 pound 777s because of
26 Carpethead: Also not to mention why NH went with PW for the 777s is that NH signed with then JAS & JL for an agreement on engine maintenance/parts/spares. Hence,
Sponsor Message: 
From India, joined Feb 2005, 6753 posts, 
From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 959 posts, 
From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2779 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 457 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 917 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
