WestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2112 posts, RR: 8 Posted (6 years 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3642 times:
It looks like JA773J made her first flight today. Please correct me if I am wrong.
This aircraft (line no 635) is a 777-200 (non-ER) for JAL and is noteworthy because she may be the last of the specific type to be built since there are no other "A" Models on order.
Next week it will be exactly 12 years since the first 777-200 "A" model was delivered (to United) on May 15, 1995.
[Edited 2007-05-09 00:56:54]
The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
Carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2772 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3583 times:
Quite possibly. Both JL & NH have gotten rid of domestic 747-classics, so when the 744D replacement comes up next decade it will be 773A, 772A or 783.
Stay tuned.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3225 times:
Quoting WestWing (Reply 2): but I can't help feeling JA773J is the last.
Agreed. Price and weight notwithstanding, carriers such as SQ and TG have proven that they'd prefer to "abuse" low-MTOW 772ERs on regional routes rather than be bound by the limitations (both operational performance/flexibility and saleability) of the A-market variant.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3133 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3194 times:
777-200A is not all that appealing. Now it might get a second time at bat if the wieght reduction programs for the 777LR family gets serious results. I think if they can shave that 10K lbs off and maybe throw on some winglets or wingtips for 777-200A Mk2 it might sell some frames.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3125 times:
Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4): I think if they can shave that 10K lbs off and maybe throw on some winglets or wingtips for 777-200A Mk2 it might sell some frames.
Why bother when they can (in theory) do the same for the 772ER, discount it, derate it, and have a product with much higher market value?
Lufthansa747 From Philippines, joined May 1999, 3174 posts, RR: 47 Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3035 times:
Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 3): Price and weight notwithstanding, carriers such as SQ and TG have proven that they'd prefer to "abuse" low-MTOW 772ERs on regional routes
TG 777s on regional are 772/773A. Haven´t seen any of the recently delivered 777-200ERs on regional.
WestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2112 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2933 times:
The 88 777-200s were delivered over a period of 12 years (15 May 95 to 18 May 07).
The number of 777-300ER deliveries is currently 86 including EVAs B-16707. So if Boeing delivers two more 777-300ERs by the end of May, then 88 777-300ERs will have been delivered over a period of 3 years 1 month !
The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
Actually, I just put out what aircraft might be out on the market by the time replacement for the 744Ds come up.
With the number of slots set to increase after 2010 for HND, 744D will probably be replaced with something smaller like the 783 or perhaps 'domestic' version of the 789.
Jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7348 posts, RR: 7 Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2315 times:
Why would any airline order a 777-200A and not a re-rated 772ER ? Singapore has the right program, that way if they need more real "ER" they can just return it to "ER" standard engines ratings and configurations. With jal GOING TO 773ER 'S for their interbational flights more 772ER are going to be needed.
Ktachiya From Japan, joined Sep 2004, 1729 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 days ago) and read 2172 times:
Could it be partially due to noise restrictions? I don't know how the engines of the 777-246ER and 777-246 differs but there has to be somewhat of a difference. Besides, I know ITM is extremely noisy on noise restrictions and I am pretty sure that there are many other airports in Japan that are in a similar situation.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2112 posts, 
From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2772 posts, 
From Philippines, joined May 1999, 3174 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2425 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
