Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
139 Orders Of Upgrade-Package For 777 Classics  
User currently offlineAviationbuff From India, joined Mar 2008, 1425 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 13308 times:

Boeing secures over 130 orders for upgrade package for older-model 777s

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...grade-package-for-older-model.html

Quote:
A quarter of operators of older Boeing 777s have purchased a new performance improvement package that should boost the widebody airliner's fuel efficiency by 1%.

Boeing has officially launched the package for 777-200/200ER/300 models (dubbed "Classics") with orders for 139 aircraft from "at least seven" carriers, including launch customers Air New Zealand, Continental Airlines and Delta Air Lines. Boeing also confirms that Austrian Airlines, El Al and KLM have ordered upgrades for their 777 Classics.

Entry into service is targeted for early 2009 after Boeing completes a certification programme.


[Edited 2008-05-13 03:38:55]

37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSAN787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 616 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 13301 times:

If it saves the airline $300,000 annually, I wonder how much the upgrade costs initially...


those who don't get carried away should be.
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 13272 times:

I wonder if this includes raked wingtip retrofits?

Anyone know?



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2966 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 13001 times:

139 orders from 7 carriers - NZ, CO, LY, DL, KL, OS don't operate 139 777's between them... who is the seventh? AF or SQ?


A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineRamzi From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12911 times:



Quoting Cricket (Reply 3):
who is the seventh?

EK?



There will come a time when you believe everything is finished - that will be the beginning.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30565 posts, RR: 84
Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12864 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

GE also offers their own PiP for the earlier GE90 engines found on these planes.

User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2966 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12854 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
GE also offers their own PiP for the earlier GE90 engines found on these planes.

Did GE ever power any -300 model? I don't think EK, SQ, KE, TG or CX have GE's on their -300's.



A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineRscaife1682 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12820 times:

It just seems weird to me to here 777 classics  Smile


RYAN


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30565 posts, RR: 84
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 12669 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Cricket (Reply 6):
Did GE ever power any -300 model?

No. The bulk were Rolls-Royce with a handful of Pratt's.

Of course, GE has sold about 11 times as many GE90-115Bs on the -300ER program, so I expect they don't feel too bad. Big grin


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 12285 times:



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 2):
I wonder if this includes raked wingtip retrofits?

Doubtful, as APB has twice tried (and thankfully, thusfar failed) to attract a customer commitment for 777 blended winglets.

Quoting Cricket (Reply 6):
Did GE ever power any -300 model?

just the -300ER

Quoting Rscaife1682 (Reply 7):
It just seems weird to me to here 777 classics

...indeed. Might even sound weird to "hear" it too.


User currently offlineKrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 12063 times:

Most of KL 's B777 are only one to three years old.
I was under the impression that Boeing continuously upgrades their designs as they are manufactured so every aircraft that rolls of the assembly line is up-to-date.

KrisYYZ


User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11277 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
GE also offers their own PiP for the earlier GE90 engines found on these planes

CO has already rolled the GE PiP improvements across their whole 772ER fleet, so this is additional benefit on top of it.

(From what I can tell, the GE90 PiP involves bringing all older GE90-90s, 84s, etc...up to GE90-94Bs, and then some improvements that went out about a year after the 94B itself was certified.)



There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
User currently offlineRheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11130 times:



Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 2):
I wonder if this includes raked wingtip retrofits?

Anyone know?

The answers are no and yes.


User currently offlineSRT75 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11131 times:



Quoting Cricket (Reply 3):
who is the seventh? AF or SQ?

Any chance UA will update their 777 fleet? If any T7s deserve the label "classic," it's UAs!


User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11035 times:



Quoting KrisYYZ (Reply 10):
I was under the impression that Boeing continuously upgrades their designs as they are manufactured so every aircraft that rolls of the assembly line is up-to-date.

That's true. Any time any of the OEM's releases a service bulletin to correct something in the fleet, they usually roll the correction into production as well. There are also some upgrades that some in at production that aren't retrofitable. Both kinds of upgrades happen throughout the life of a program.

Tom.


User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9701 times:



Quoting SRT75 (Reply 13):


Quoting Cricket (Reply 3):
who is the seventh? AF or SQ?

Any chance UA will update their 777 fleet? If any T7s deserve the label "classic," it's UAs!

I would hope so... they have so many of them. Maybe they could get the MTOW numbers on their 772ER's taken up too (no mechanical changes needed)... no good reason for them not to.

Some of their 777-200s are old, but some are fairly new as well. In terms of the shape they are in, they are far from the least modern and pleasant 777-200s flying around.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2815 posts, RR: 10
Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9615 times:

Upgrade package? What have I missed? Is this the next big thing from Boeing? What other new aircraft have come out lately?

User currently offlineNighthawk From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 5126 posts, RR: 34
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 9195 times:

Ah yes - Boeing 777 SP1. Ive been waiting for this to come out for a while now, I think ill download it tonight! lol!


That'll teach you
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 8948 times:



Quoting Lemurs (Reply 11):
From what I can tell, the GE90 PiP involves bringing all older GE90-90s, 84s, etc...up to GE90-94Bs

No it doesn't... it "just" involves installing the 3D-Aero and equivalent support infrastructure. The airline is still free to choose the thrust output, and for a while, CO continued to op its PiPed engines at 90K before bringing them up.


User currently offlineSiren From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 312 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 8438 times:



Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
Maybe they could get the MTOW numbers on their 772ER's taken up too (no mechanical changes needed)... no good reason for them not to.

Airport landing fees charge based on the rated weight of a given aircraft. I'm guessing UA is saving money by going this route.


User currently offlineGkyip From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 8330 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I guess CX could be a big potential customer for these upgrades. 17 777 classics and a load of 77Ws on order.

Gary



The strength of the turbulence is directly proportional to the temperature of your coffee
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 8330 times:



Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
Maybe they could get the MTOW numbers on their 772ER's taken up too (no mechanical changes needed)...

No, they cannot

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
no good reason for them not to.

Actually, there's a very good reason:
a PW4090-powered 777 cannot op with higher than a 648K.lb MTOW

Quoting Siren (Reply 19):
I'm guessing UA is saving money by going this route.

No.
They wanted 656K (which GE and RR can grant), but after they witnessed the abysmal performance of the PW4098, they figured they'd be better off with stifled MTOW (since they were apparently staying with PW at all costs) than taking a born-loser such as that engine.


User currently offlineFRAspotter From United States of America, joined May 2004, 2342 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 8150 times:

Hmmmm... I'm surprised that AA hasn't said anything about this program....


"Drunks run stop signs. Stoners wait for them to turn green."
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 6909 times:



Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 21):

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
no good reason for them not to.

Actually, there's a very good reason:
a PW4090-powered 777 cannot op with higher than a 648K.lb MTOW

You ought to go tell Korean about that, their PW4090s are 656k lb MTOW....

Quoting FRAspotter (Reply 22):
Hmmmm... I'm surprised that AA hasn't said anything about this program....

No kidding, they have a large 777 fleet that could certainly benefit from this - likewise, they are spending money to upgrade their 757 and 767 fleets with winglets... so go figure.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 6575 times:



Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 23):
You ought to go tell Korean about that, their PW4090s are 656k lb MTOW....

meant in the vein of 772, not 773


25 Gigneil : Wingtip upgrades would require strengthening of the wing... that might be more than a $300k upgrade might cover. It would be safe then to say that th
26 Qantas744ER : Yes their 772s are 656k Leo
27 ConcordeBoy : Eh, the question then becomes how far into semantics do you want to take it for the sake of technical accuracy... if one wishes to truly be accurate,
28 Flighty : Getting a 772 for Winglet certification would be hard because the aircraft are so expensive. Although the winglets would probably be highly useful....
29 Gigneil : Korean also isn't necessarily required to limit their engines to less than 85k pounds of thrust as a result of NOx emissions, since they're not an FAA
30 RSBJ : I wouldn't think so, the raked tips on the 767-400 are said to improve overall drag by 6.5%. I wonder if it is a new wingtip, but nothing fancy like
31 TristarSteve : Yes I agree. It is a Flight invention. Flight started calling the B737-3/4/500 Classics, and after a couple of years it caught on. Now they are tryin
32 CHRISBA777ER : In fairness I've been using it in credit reports for a year or so in reference to the 777. I dont use it for the 757 or 767 yet and I have always use
33 Stitch : Well I guess you can call them "Shorter Range 777s" to contrast with Boeing's "Longer Range 777" used to describe the 77L and 77W.
34 RJ111 : The 772ER has a comparable range to the 773ER though really.
35 Gigneil : The 777-300ER beats the majority of 777-200ERs pretty handily - 200nm at least. NS
36 Hamlet69 : The key here would be "at least 7" carriers. One I think we can add to the list is TAAG, for AFAIK, it is TAAG's third aircraft that Boeing has lease
37 FlyDreamliner : I meant their 777-200ERs, not their 777-300s.
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...
Terms Of The Package For LH And MX At PDX? posted Wed Nov 19 2003 23:39:13 by ConcordeBoy
Orders Of Boeing 737s For Garuda Indonesia posted Thu Apr 26 2001 17:43:46 by Wolfy
US Orders 7 Sets Of Blended Winglets For 757s posted Wed Nov 1 2006 16:56:27 by Mah584jr
What Kind Of Upgrade Do You Get For FF Miles? posted Thu Jul 10 2003 12:50:38 by Rabenschlag
Any Sort Of BTS Website For Intl Flights? posted Tue May 6 2008 16:56:09 by Longhornmaniac
Flight Deck Update For 777 Possible? posted Sun May 4 2008 15:45:29 by CARST
New Picture Of Fokker100NXT - Time For An Update posted Mon Apr 28 2008 03:57:27 by OyKIE
The Beginning Of The End For Commercial Aviation? posted Sun Apr 27 2008 04:34:19 by Peterinlisbon
Feasability Of E-170/190 For LCC Startup? posted Sat Feb 16 2008 11:49:08 by CitrusCritter
Origin Of 'J' Symbol/RBD For Business Class posted Sun Jan 27 2008 09:09:56 by Fly2CHC
Flight Deck Update For 777 Possible? posted Sun May 4 2008 15:45:29 by CARST
New Picture Of Fokker100NXT - Time For An Update posted Mon Apr 28 2008 03:57:27 by OyKIE
The Beginning Of The End For Commercial Aviation? posted Sun Apr 27 2008 04:34:19 by Peterinlisbon
Feasability Of E-170/190 For LCC Startup? posted Sat Feb 16 2008 11:49:08 by CitrusCritter
Origin Of 'J' Symbol/RBD For Business Class posted Sun Jan 27 2008 09:09:56 by Fly2CHC