Mdjtlj From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 12 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1096 times:
Last week I took the EWR-GIG and GIG-EWR flights on the new CO764 (which still smelled new btw). All in all, a pleasure to fly and quite comfortable for the time in the air (9hrs 30m).
===Following comment is based on perception rather than quantatitive numbers=====
The 764 felt a bit sluggish on take off in comparision to the 777 or 757, or for that matter the 762. Not to start any B vs A wars, but the 764 did not feel as sluggish as the 343
I realize that two takeoff's in this aircraft is not a population large enough to form any opinion of performance, as this may vary between airline procedures and even individual pilots, but does anybody have the thrust to weight ratios of these various aircraft to give some type of comparison of the aforementioned types?
If this is not a fair comparison, I would be very interested in hearing about a fair comparison.
Modesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2740 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (13 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1006 times:
I was just wondering how you can determine whether an aircraft has slow climb characterisitcs based on the "feel" of the aircraft, in the cabin. I'm not doubting your observation, just questioning it. I'm sure that certain aicraft climb at steeper angles than others. But are you aware of any extenuating circumstances that may have "limited" the aircraft's performance? Weather, weight, runway conditions? I know OAK has a SID with a 2000' altitude restriction. Thus, any aircraft that's executing this procedure would not be inclined to climb at a fast rate. Anyways, I'm just wondering... Thanks.
Mdjtlj From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 12 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (13 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 992 times:
Thanks, your right, I should clarify this. I was simply referring to the takeoff roll (about 9000') and the first few minutes of altitude gain. The climb off the deck was a bit sluggish as compared to the other types previously mentioned. Like you said and I've said before, it was the "feel", nothing that can be quantified.
As for conditions, in both instances, conditions were clear with no weather or adverse runway conditions.
Wingman From Spain, joined May 1999, 2035 posts, RR: 5 Reply 3, posted (13 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 970 times:
You might be the first forum member to fly long-haul on the 764. Tell us more about the other parts of your flight. How was the cabin, setaing layout, comfort, inflight services, noise levels etc. How does it compare to the 763?
Mdjtlj From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 12 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (13 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 957 times:
Per your request, I did find the overall experience comfortable. Being a last minute trip, BusinessFirst was not available so coach was the class of travel.
The cabin was quite nice and seemed very spacious, since she had the "777 style interior". Having taken the 777 on the IAH-NRT previously in coach a couple of times, I personally prefer the 764 due to the layout 2-3-2 due to the higher window and aisle ratios and decreased center seats.
One complaint with respect to seating: At the floor level, attached to the seat support, the PTV's have a component box that does restrict the leg space. This can be quite annoying in terms of trying to get comfortable on a long flight. Although, it's nothing that a blanket can't soften.
The one thing I would say is that this plane is long! It's very humbling standing at the front and looking towards the back.
As for the inflight services, typical CO, i.e. outstanding. Traveling 100K+ per annum, the one thing that I would also say about CO inflight is that the service is consistent.
It was quite nice to have the PTV's for this flight, this really shortened the flight for me. On the flight down, they did have the Aircraft diagnostics on showing you the operating parameters (speed, distance, wind direction, wind speed, times, and about 15 other basic parameters). This did not have the map however. On the return, there was a reduced set of parameters and the map.
The 764 was not very noisey at all, especially when compared to the DC10-30 that was formerly used on that route. Other's have reported that the plane rides turbulance fairly well, I'd have to agree with this, but I'm not sure how you'd measure this.
From the cabin, you can't fully appreciate the swept back tip of the wings. It is evident from the window, but since you are at the same, or close to, the level of the wing, it is not as pronounced as if you were looking up at it.
All in all, a pleasant experience. I've booked my next trip in a couple of weeks to GIG in BusinessFirst, so if there are any additions, shall keep you posted.
CALPilot From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 996 posts, RR: 14 Reply 7, posted (13 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 898 times:
Well I have now completed the Boeing 767-400 check out...
Last week I had my oral exam, and simulator training, followed by a line check to GIG with a great Check Airman.
I would say that the training we have here at CO is something I am very proud of, and am glad I was perpared for my first flight in the -400. The sim was one of the better I've trained in, it flew very close to what I found the airplane to feel like.
To answer the question, I don't think the airline or Boeing can say I'm giving away any secrets to the enemy. So here are a few feelings about the takeoff. Last week at 61deg.F. we had a max takeoff of approx. 439,000lbs and this was a climb limit at flaps 20degs. Now I don't think this is to bad when max structural is 450,000. Rates of climb if I remember on my flights during the four legs I did were "not bad" heavy I saw like 3000fpm heavy and almost 1000fpm up at 31,000ft. We used approx 8,500ft of runway for the T/O roll, again not bad...
Flying light at approx 320,00lbs, 85degF. I saw approx 4,000fpm. Now compared to the B757, the -400 is a little behind, but remember its Alot bigger. But boy does it fly like a dream. Very light on the controls in pitch, and roll. Very interesting how they get such a large aircraft to be so nemble on the controls.
My landings were not bad either... I thought!
Now all you engineers don't hold Boeing or CO to these numbers when comparing to Airbus or anything else. I did'nt record this information, I'm just recalling some things that stuck out. If anything tell people that it flys great.