C5LOAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 3 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 8620 times:
If this as been discussed before please disregard, but are there any airlines or cargo companies that plan to utilize the 777LR for its max. range. Correct me if I am wrong, but even with a full load and fuel, it's still able to fly around 9200nm. Will DL fly it that far or do most comapnies not want to risk it?
"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
Emirates flies their -200LR from DXB to SFO, LAX, and GRU which are all at a significant distance from DXB.
Qatar will be flying their -200LR on the new DOH-IAH route.
Air India flies their -200LR on flights from DEL and BOM to JFK.
PIA ordered the -200LR to operate direct flights from Pakistan to the US but the direct flights have yet to be approved. However they recently uploaded nonstop flights from Pakistan to JFK into Amadeus but I don't believe the flights have gone nonstop as of yet.
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12710 posts, RR: 80
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 8254 times:
Quoting C5LOAD (Reply 3): But I thought the purpose of that a/c was to carry a load a LOT further than most other airplanes with the efficiency of two engines rather than four?
As Stich said, it's mostly to carry more load over ranges that can currently be served by other aircraft. There are a few cases of routes that use the -200LR's extreme range, as AlitaliaMD11 listed, but there are a lot more -200LR's on the books than these few routes will require.
I suspect the far more lucrative use will be on long-haul (as opposed to ultra long haul) where the 200LR can still run with full payload where other models might end up being payload limited.
9 200Nm (possibly more) is the range with nominal 300 passengers only.
But that means that it can fly, say 275 pax and 20 tonnes+ of belly cargo, comfortably, over 7 500Nm sectors, with plenty in hand for headwinds.
This ability has allowed it to open up the sectors that AlitaliaMD11 described economically, many of which are in the 7 000Nm - 7 500Nm category, and its difficult to see another aircraft which could do that.
As Stitch pointed out, an A380 can haul a similar weight a similar distance.
But it will cost a LOT more in doing so.
But EK are electing to use it to replace the 772LR on some routes with high passenger demand, because it can carry 85% more passengers in their config, at the expense of leaving some belly cargo behind.
The 772LR can carry its full whack on these sectors, and is ideal if the passenger demand is still "being developed"..
SA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7839 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
When DL starts DL200 from ATL-JNB and DL201 from JNB-ATL on 1/2 June 2009 respectively, the 77L will face it's longest, non-stop pax revenue flights (@13582km) thus far?! I can't wait to see the 77L in JNB!
When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
FlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6763 times:
Some times of the year, DL's BOM-ATL has a block time of 17 h 55m, which is .... long. No other aircraft I know of, save A345, could do that, definitely not with DL's configuration, which is definitely not low density (it's not particularly high either, but the point is, not low).
As for the 77L, its value is more that it can carry a much higher load on long flights than the fact that it can carry a light load bizarrely far. Ultra-long haul is damned hard to make good money on. In essence, you have to clear a yield premium on your seats far enough above the fare for a 1-stop to pay for the additional fuel burned and for the lost cargo revenue. Not that easy to do for a lot of markets.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
747fan From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 1198 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6728 times:
Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 7): PIA ordered the -200LR to operate direct flights from Pakistan to the US but the direct flights have yet to be approved. However they recently uploaded nonstop flights from Pakistan to JFK into Amadeus but I don't believe the flights have gone nonstop as of yet.
LuisKMIA From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 107 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5896 times:
I also understand that in order for the LR to fly 9,200 nm, it needs additional fuel tanks that wind up sacrificing cargo space, and it's obvious that airlines prefer to haul more cargo for a lesser distance.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 32163 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5848 times:
Quoting LuisKMIA (Reply 21): I also understand that in order for the LR to fly 9,200 nm, it needs additional fuel tanks that wind up sacrificing cargo space, and it's obvious that airlines prefer to haul more cargo for a lesser distance.
Correct. You can put up to three fuel tanks in the aft belly hold, with each one using the equivalent of 2 LD3 positions in volume and a portion of your total payload in weight.
Flylku From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 870 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5754 times:
Aren't all for the published "extreme range" figures predicated on the assumption that the aircraft has all optional fuel tanks? Someone on an earlier forum had suggested that no customer has ordered it in this configuration. If that is the case, then we can't see it put into service on its longest possible route until a customer does. Darn.