Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CX B744 Serivce Back On HKG-JNB  
User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3496 times:

I traveled about 2 weeks ago from PVG-JNB via HKG on CX . I was expecting to see a T7 and hoping not the A346 at the boarding gate. After resting at the lounge and finally at a gate. What a surprise to see the B744 there waiting and with the new Biz class never the less. It was a wonderful flight but not so much on the way back as we got an older B744 with the old interior.
Does any one know is the B744 is the scheduled aircraft on this sector for all of 2009 as well?
W


747SP
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9102 posts, RR: 75
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3489 times:



Quoting Warren747sp (Thread starter):
Does any one know is the B744 is the scheduled aircraft on this sector for all of 2009 as well?

744 for summer, 340 for winter, like it is always done.

Do not expect an 777 any time soon, they are very performance limited out of JNB.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineAirbus_A340 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2000, 1560 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3436 times:

You can also expect to see the new cabins on the A340 when they fly their in the winter sometimes, as they are progressively being fitted with the new product as we speak, with one in service already. Don't expect to see the A340-600's again though, and as Zeke said, the 777 is performance restricted out of JNB (hot & high).


People. They make an airline. www.cathaypacific.com
User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3156 times:

SQ flys T7 daily as well as AF out of JNB.


747SP
User currently offlineCX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6604 posts, RR: 55
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2979 times:



Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 3):
SQ flys T7 daily as well as AF out of JNB.

It can be done, but on a 14hr flight back to HKG, there would be severe weight penalties. It is a case where 4 engines is indeed better than 2.


User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2970 times:

But the seat of the pants feel the T7 have far superior take off performance than A343. Perhaps they worry about engine failure on take off?


747SP
User currently offlineCX flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6604 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2937 times:



Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 5):
But the seat of the pants feel the T7 have far superior take off performance than A343. Perhaps they worry about engine failure on take off?

Yes takeoff performance is always calculated to cater for an engine failure on takeoff. The loss of one engine on a 4 engined jet represents a much smaller loss of thrust than losing one on a twin....hence when a twin takesoff with two engines running, they are so much more powerful. Any twin will always be overpowered assuming there are no engine failures.


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9102 posts, RR: 75
Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2899 times:



Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 3):
SQ flys T7 daily as well as AF out of JNB.

That does not mean they are not performance limited, every aircraft is, just the quads are less so. For example the 346 on a hot day would have its MTOW reduced by about 4,000 kg, but for that aircraft it can still lift maximum structural payload, and fuel for JNB-HKG and reserves, it does not need full fuel for that sector.

The main problem for twins out of JNB is what is know as second segment climb gradient, to meet that requirement they keep the aircraft accelerating along the runway as the thrust loss after one engine out is too great to climb at normal rotation speeds. However you reach another limit, the maximum tyre speed (keep in mind that is a ground speed, not indicated speed, the indicted speed is less at that density altitude).

CX have opted for the extra thrust bump on the 77W engines, even with that, the amount of revenue payload the 77W can lift out of JNB is almost identical to the 340-300. The 77W MTOW is reduced by about 50,000 kg on a hot day when the density height is up around 9,000 ft, also the 77W burns more fuel than the 343 so it needs to lift more total payload (i.e. inc fuel) to take the same amount of revenue payload (pax/cargo).

Also the flight from SIN-HKG is another 3 plus hours.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2728 times:

It makes you wonder how CO makes money on their EWR-HKG route during the hot summer months and soon EWR-PVG with their B772.


747SP
User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3766 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2680 times:



Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 8):
It makes you wonder how CO makes money on their EWR-HKG route during the hot summer months and soon EWR-PVG with their B772.

I believe the 772 (non-LR) is limited on that long sector, but in this thread your point is irrelevant since it's takeoff performance is not limited at either these airports the way it would be in JNB.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9102 posts, RR: 75
Reply 10, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2638 times:



Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 8):
It makes you wonder how CO makes money on their EWR-HKG route during the hot summer months and soon EWR-PVG with their B772.

I will do some quick calculations for you, say each airport JNB/HKG/PVG/EWR had reported weather of 00000 CAVOK 30/10 Q1010 NOSIG

The airport elevations of each airport is

EWR 18'
PVG 13'
HKG 28'
JNB 5558'

Longest runway length

The airport elevations of each airport is

EWR 3353m
PVG 4000m
HKG 3800m
JNB 4418m

The density heights given the conditions above

EWR 2560'
PVG 2554'
HKG 2572'
JNB 9292'

Plot those numbers for the 777-200LR



Approx MTOWs from each airport under the conditions

EWR 323,000 kg
PVG 341,000 kg
HKG 337,000 kg
JNB 280,000 kg

Boeing ACAPS Spec OEW 145,150 kg

Approx Max payloads

EWR 177,850 kg
PVG 195,850 kg
HKG 191,850 kg
JNB 134,850 kg

Plot those numbers for the 777-200ER



Approx MTOWs from each airport under the conditions

EWR 273,000 kg
PVG 287,000 kg
HKG 283,000 kg
JNB 236,000 kg

Boeing ACAPS Spec OEW 138,100 kg

Approx Max payloads

EWR 134,900 kg
PVG 148,900 kg
HKG 144,00 kg
JNB 97,900 kg

If you need 100-120,000 kg of fuel for the sector, you soon see the limitations. (JNB-SIN you would need maybe 80-85,000 kg of fuel)



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineAnetter123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2419 times:



Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 3):
SQ flys T7 daily as well as AF out of JNB.

And soon next year, DL nonstop to ATL...which will be about 2 hours longer then CX's HKG flight. It will be interesting to see this T7's flight performance once the nonstop commences.


User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2383 times:

Can't wait to see the DL T7LR replace the B764 even though it's a great plane as well.


747SP
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...
CX To Go Triple Daily On HKG-YVR? posted Sat Dec 30 2006 05:17:18 by United Airline
CX B744 Tonight (14OCT) At Landmark Ramp posted Wed Oct 15 2008 01:11:33 by AznCSA4QF744ER
Lady Back On G-VFAB posted Wed Sep 17 2008 07:45:39 by Speedmarque
US Airways Puts The 757 Back On Transcons posted Tue Jul 15 2008 15:14:45 by PanAm330
CX Severe Turbulence Enroute BKK-HKG posted Thu Jun 26 2008 04:10:23 by Chilledflyer
DL And NW Pilot Union Talks Back On posted Wed Mar 5 2008 12:49:12 by Zone1
Unruly Pax Arrest On Mango JNB-CPT Flight - Video posted Thu Feb 14 2008 01:47:59 by JoKeR
Back In Time: JNB Airport 1984 - My Pics posted Sun Dec 9 2007 10:58:12 by Umfolozi
Shuttle America N862RW Back On Its Feet posted Sun Nov 18 2007 22:16:56 by Rampkontroler
Cathay Using Regional-config 330s On HKG-SYD? posted Tue Oct 16 2007 07:19:46 by QantasHeavy