CloudNine From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 68 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 881 times:
Hello,I'm new to this forum and don't want to ask a redundant question-however.With all the aircraft on the market,I.E. B764,B777 ER's & the old standby B744's as well as the A340-500's & A380's,will the future of U.S. to Asia operations be dominated by the 350 plus passenger capacity aircraft or the smaller 250 seat varities?.Also,Is a Quad actaully safer crossing the Pacific over a twin and how doesthe economics work into a carriers epuipment desision for these routes?
Mason From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 748 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 850 times:
I can answer your question with the following information. From SEA, UA switched its 744 flights to NRT to 777s, and AA switched from MD-11 to the 777 on this route, as well. Asiana is switching to the 777 to SEL, replacing 744s. Now, KE operates 777s to SFO and LAX, replacing 744s. Although the 744 dominates the trans-Pacific market, the 777 has certainly found a niche on some of these routes. As far as which is safer, a large twin has yet to have problems with engine reliability. Keep in mind that with a four-engine aircraft, there is twice as much to go wrong than on a twin. I would feel equally safe on either, but I cannot say the same for everyone. I hope that helps. Welcome to the forum!
Modesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2794 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 832 times:
While some people get nervous about 207 ETOPS, I really don't have any problems with two engines. Ultimately, it's less fuel and cheaper. However, keep in mind that a larger passenger capactiy can only be transported with a 747. We have yet to see an aircraft (both two engine and four engine) that can rival both the 747's range and capacity.