Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What'll It Take For 77L To Fly LHR-SYD-LHR?  
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 11096 times:

I was wonder what Boeing could or would do to get the 77L to be able to fly LHR-SYD-LHR consistently with a decent payload? How much weight would need to be shed, or what kind of improvements would need in SFC for the GE90-11XB1s? Any threat from a A359R is too far out for the time. Perhaps there isn't enough demand to warrant Boeing to make those kinds of improvements. However, improvements in the 77L family are sure to come, and perhaps those improvements will bump range closer to 10,000nm. An operator could either choose to use the benefits to fly ULH or add more payload. I think it make the 77L even more attractive. I know some detractors look to the 77Ls rather poor sales, but the market in the 300 seat class was/is rather saturated. I know DL and AC love the flexibility the 77L offers in payload and range.

The baddest of them all...777-200LR



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29686 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 11100 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm just not sure the service is economically viable. Using BA's four-class 77Es as a guide, you'd be looking at around 226 people - 14F / 48C / 40Y+ / 124Y. A 500-seat A380-800 would crush that on a CASM and trip-cost basis so you'd need to find that many people willing to pay a double-digit percentage higher fare to save at most a few hours of travel.

User currently offlineoykie From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2673 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 10976 times:

There have been some speculation this month about V Australia trying out the 772LR for this route.

From an aviation geeks point of view, the performance and looks of those massive engines are just breathtaking. :  



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 10927 times:

I think BA should have got some 77Ls. I am sure they could have found dome routes to stick them on, LHR-SYD being the obvious one. Maybe HNL or even MPN too. I know the latter sounds strange but politics aside UK and other tourists going over there is on the rise.

[Edited 2010-03-11 13:11:48]

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24075 posts, RR: 22
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 10790 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 3):
I am sure they could have found dome routes to stick them on, LHR-SYD being the obvious one. Maybe HNL

You don't need a 77L for LHR-HNL. There are quite a few nonstop routes longer than LHR-HNL using the 77W and 772ER. A few examples:

LHR-HNL 6289 nm

JFK-HKG 7014 nm (CX 77W)
EWR-HKG 7009 nm (CO 772ER)
LAX-SYD 6507 nm (VA 77W)

The problem with leisure routes like LHR-HNL is that it's almost impossible to generate enough revenue from low-yield Y class traffic to offset the high costs of operating such longhaul flights. You need significant premium traffic and even Europe-Australia has limited volumes of that, as evidenced by all the European carriers that once served Australia and no longer do.


User currently offlinespeedbird9 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 10700 times:

The Falklands (MPN)thats interesting could work suppose i recently did a geography coursework (report) on the growth of tourism in Antarctica it could work i like the idea that BA should get some B77L maybe on the JNB route or PER would there be any advantages of flying to Perth like Business (is there a big demand both business and tourism) or if they could extend the range or a stop over then MEL
Speedbird9



Is the customer always right? Michael O'Leary: no the customer is nearly always wrong
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 10632 times:

Quoting speedbird9 (Reply 5):
The Falklands (MPN)thats interesting could work suppose i recently did a geography coursework (report) on the growth of tourism in Antarctica

MPN could be a runner if they did get some 77Ls e.g. twice per week from LHR. Having 100% market share on EU-MPN wouldn't be a bad thing in a growing market it could be a good one for BA. Did BA not send a 767 down to the falklands on a charter of some sort a few years ago?


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8090 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10226 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 777LR could probably do LHR to Sydney nonstop with a J and Y+ two-class configuration. The challenge is the Sydney to LHR flight. Sydney-Perth-LHR should be the return to LHR routing. Whatever happen the LHR to Aussie routes are evolving.

User currently offlineconcordechild From Italy, joined Aug 2009, 44 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8978 times:

i doubt you would get much Y traffic..... assuming that is leisure travel, i would think a "break" to stretch your legs in SIN or BKK is worth the extra 3 or so hours that you would save by going non-stop

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29686 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8885 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting concordechild (Reply 8):
i doubt you would get much Y traffic..... assuming that is leisure travel, i would think a "break" to stretch your legs in SIN or BKK is worth the extra 3 or so hours that you would save by going non-stop

I expect the higher fares would dampen demand. SQ's A345 Economy Class product was as good as domestic First Class here in the States and I'm told that load factors in that cabin were relatively poor as the fares were higher than SQ's connecting services with the 744, while Business Class experienced strong load factors, which is why SQ decided to go all-Business seating during the refit.


User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8555 times:

Quoting speedbird9 (Reply 5):
The Falklands (MPN)thats interesting could work suppose i recently did a geography coursework (report) on the growth of tourism in Antarctica it could work i like the idea that BA should get some B77L maybe on the JNB route or PER would there be any advantages of flying to Perth like Business (is there a big demand both business and tourism) or if they could extend the range or a stop over then MEL
Speedbird9

Come to think of it I wonder why BA had never shown interest in MPN before as a GIG/ GRU tag on.

[Edited 2010-03-12 08:49:40]

User currently offlineMYT332 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 9112 posts, RR: 71
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 8268 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 10):
Come to think of it I wonder why BA had never shown interest in MPN before as a GIG/ GRU tag on.

Because sheep and penguins can't afford Club World?  



One Life, Live it.
User currently offlineag92 From India, joined Jul 2006, 1317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7829 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
I expect the higher fares would dampen demand. SQ's A345 Economy Class product was as good as domestic First Class here in the States and I'm told that load factors in that cabin were relatively poor as the fares were higher than SQ's connecting services with the 744, while Business Class experienced strong load factors, which is why SQ decided to go all-Business seating during the refit.

From experience, it was actually Economy + was doing very good with sold out flights, however Business Class was doing just that bit better and like any true business, SQ went with J rather then Y


User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7003 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 4):
The problem with leisure routes like LHR-HNL is that it's almost impossible to generate enough revenue from low-yield Y class traffic to offset the high costs of operating such longhaul flights.

And ULH flights are inherently inefficient because of the proportionately higher cost of hauling all that extra fuel around. It costs fuel to carry fuel, so that ULH will always be a higher-priced alternative to long distance air travel. Given a high enough cost of fuel like the USD 140 spike of the summer of 2008, ULH could even disappear altogether...

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 745 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6647 times:

Quoting MYT332 (Reply 11):
Because sheep and penguins can't afford Club World?

I did think that myself before posting . Y class would probably get some healthy loads however especially since globespan don't do the charters for the RAF anymore.


User currently offlineFerroviarius From Norway, joined Mar 2007, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5568 times:

Good evening,

a question related to this issue, which I have asked sometimes but to which I never could find an answer:


How large is the percentage of travellers that, indeed, would travel from the larger London area to the larger Sydney area. For those, and those only, the LHR-SYD would be an interesting option. The same, of course, is true for MEL or PER.

However, any passenger not located within British Rail distance from LHR would anyway have to take a flight first to LHR, where she or her would have to change to the LHR-SYD (-MEL, -PER). Hence, travellers from CPH, OSL, ARN, DUB, CDG, FRA, MUC, AMS, MXP, MAD, ... at first would have to fly to LHR and then go on for SYD, MEL, PER.

Now, my question is:
The plane from LHR to SYD, MEL, PER would anyway have to take the route via HEL and pass over HEL at some 12000 meters or the like (I am a physicist and strictly refuse to use non-metric units).

HEL-SYD (-MEL, -PER) appears to be much more feasible than LHR-SYD, (-MEL, -PER).

So, why would e.g. Finnair not get an improved 345 with TRENT560s (no, I don't like the 77anythings with their 2-5-2 or 3-3-3 configs and comparatively noisy engines) and offer HEL-Australias direct? For any traveller from CPH, OSL, ARN, DUB, CDG, FRA, MUC, AMS, MXP, it would make much more sense to change in HEL than take the additional distance via LHR.

Why specifically LHR? Is, indeed, the vast majority of LHR-Australia travellers at home in the greater London area?

Thank you, indeed, for your consideration.

Best wishes,

Ferroviarius


User currently offlineVictorKilo From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 301 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5323 times:

Would it be possible for a startup airline to buy some of the available 345's on the marketplace on the cheap, turn them into an all business cabin (a la SQ), and run the 345's nonstop LHR-SYD (or, if you can't get the slots, STN-SYD or LGW-SYD)? With 345's in very low demand, could someone attempt to be the Eos/Maxjet of down under?

User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 16939 posts, RR: 48
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5271 times:

Quoting BA174 (Reply 10):
Come to think of it I wonder why BA had never shown interest in MPN before as a GIG/ GRU tag on.

Probably because there are more weekly seats on the plane to GRU than people on the island

Quoting VictorKilo (Reply 16):
With 345's in very low demand, could someone attempt to be the Eos/Maxjet of down under?

I think you just answered your own question 



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5271 times:

Quoting VictorKilo (Reply 16):
Would it be possible for a startup airline to buy some of the available 345's on the marketplace on the cheap, turn them into an all business cabin (a la SQ), and run the 345's nonstop LHR-SYD (or, if you can't get the slots, STN-SYD or LGW-SYD)? With 345's in very low demand, could someone attempt to be the Eos/Maxjet of down under?

You'll likely never see a start-up airline go for ULH. There's far too much expense and risk for a start up. I do think that the 345s will find good homes anyway though. It's a shame the 345s aren't as flexible (economically speaking) as the 77Ls because the 345s are quite the nice looking plane!

Quoting Ferroviarius (Reply 15):
Finnair not get an improved 345 with TRENT560s (no, I don't like the 77anythings with their 2-5-2 or 3-3-3 configs and comparatively noisy engines) and offer HEL-Australias direct?

Well you wouldn't have to worry about 2-5-2 or 3-3-3(77L) or even 2-4-2 (A345) on a flight this long. As well, for an airline to order the 345 over the 77L at this point seems rather ludicrous. To quote DfwRevolution in another thread:

"In summary, the A345 needs 17% more fuel to move 12% less payload 6% a shorter distance than the 772LR. How impressive..."



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 7874 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5156 times:

Quoting Ferroviarius (Reply 15):
How large is the percentage of travellers that, indeed, would travel from the larger London area to the larger Sydney area. For those, and those only, the LHR-SYD would be an interesting option. The same, of course, is true for MEL or PER.

As large as it may be, in an airplane as "small" as a 77L there would have to be a fare premium even for Y seats which the typical Y passenger is not willing to pay for it. Most passengers are not willing to pay such a premium to shave a couple of hours on such a route.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 18):
Well you wouldn't have to worry about 2-5-2 or 3-3-3(77L) or even 2-4-2 (A345) on a flight this long. As well, for an airline to order the 345 over the 77L at this point seems rather ludicrous. To quote DfwRevolution in another thread:
"In summary, the A345 needs 17% more fuel to move 12% less payload 6% a shorter distance than the 772LR. How impressive..."

Apparently it's impressive enough for SQ   
However, whatever saving the 77L may provide would be entirely wiped out as a tiny subfleet in a predominantly Airbus fleet like Finnair's.


User currently offlineThe Coachman From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1421 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5069 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 4):
You need significant premium traffic and even Europe-Australia has limited volumes of that, as evidenced by all the European carriers that once served Australia and no longer do.

Incorrect to an extent.

The reason why European carriers that once served Australia and no longer do is because of:

1. The formation and increase in co-operation between in alliances;
2. The formation and growth of the Middle East carriers;
3. The strength of the Asian carriers and their recognition of the large market that exists; and
4. The immense amount of competition on the route.

To say that European carriers pulled out due to limited volumes is not entirely correct, because no other route in the world is as competitive.

QF/BA
VS
SQ
CX
MH
JL
OZ
KE
EK
EY
TG

To have that choice to fly between SYD-xxx-LHR isn't matched anywhere else in the world; and I haven't even included the 2 stop options. MEL also has QR.

The actual amount of traffic is quite a lot; but spread that out amongst that amount of competition with often lower cost bases, of course European airlines are at a disadvantage.

Add to that the fact that a daily Europe to Australia flight requires 3 aircraft and it's evidently more than just limited premium traffic.



M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
User currently offlinepeterjohns From Germany, joined Jan 2009, 189 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5059 times:

Hello Guys
One thing is often forgotten and perhaps underestimated-
The longer a flight takes- the more uneconomical it gets- for the carrier!!
Let me give you an example.
A Flight FRA-SFO/LAX takes around 11hrs. The operator could save around 10% of the operational costs if the the flight could do a refueling-stop in the NY area.
At Flight lengths above 14hrs it would be better to make two refuelling stops in order to be economic.
The longer the flight time, the more uneconomic the flight gets, and so the more expensive the ticket.
Technically it is possible, economically a nightmare.
Don´t under estimate the enormous cost of carrying an extra 40-55 tons of fuel


User currently offlinetayser From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 1123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5021 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 4):
You need significant premium traffic and even Europe-Australia has limited volumes of that, as evidenced by all the European carriers that once served Australia and no longer do.

European carriers retreating from flying to Australia probably has more to do with Middle Eastern and Asian carriers offering superior service (and frequency) and the fact that most European carriers are partnered with one of the ME or Asian carriers and the European airlines can fly as far as Asia and the ME, turn their planes around thus only using 1 plane for a daily service and simply connect and move the Australia-bound traffic onto their partners plane than "limited volumes of premium traffic"....


User currently offlineaviasian From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1483 posts, RR: 15
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4803 times:

Besides hauling a whole lot of fuel to be burnt at the later stage of the flight and the impact of this on the fare . . .
Besides pondering the issue of range of the B777-200LR and the A340-500 . . .
Besides wondering if there is indeed enough demand point-to-point . . .

We also need to ask ourselves if indeed one is willing to be in an aircraft flying nonstop for such a long time. Perhaps the limiting factor is the human body and mind. Beyond a certain limit, every additional hour is sheer torture and the mind perceives each hour to be significantly longer than it actually is.

And for such an ultra-longhaul flight, airlines will have to completely re-invent the art of service delivery far more than Singapore Airlines did when they first introduced the Singapore - Los Angeles nonstop flights on 3 February 2004.

KC Sim


User currently offlineincitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 3964 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4750 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
I'm just not sure the service is economically viable. Using BA's four-class 77Es as a guide, you'd be looking at around 226 people - 14F / 48C / 40Y+ / 124Y. A 500-seat A380-800 would crush that on a CASM and trip-cost basis so you'd need to find that many people willing to pay a double-digit percentage higher fare to save at most a few hours of travel.

You are right on the CASM comparison but the A380 will be helped by its relatively different configuration, with a higher share of steerage seats. A comparable A380 configuration to the 777 mentioned would be 31F 106C 88Y+ 274Y. No airline configures A380s with such a premium config.

Quoting Ferroviarius (Reply 15):
How large is the percentage of travellers that, indeed, would travel from the larger London area to the larger Sydney area. For those, and those only, the LHR-SYD would be an interesting option

There are more passengers that would be interested in this service. LHR-SYD nonstop may bring 1-stop service to markets that can only be served with two stops currently. BA would also have a more competitive offering in many markets. For example, someone prefering to fly BA CDG-SYD has to make two stops now and might as well end up one-stop in another carrier. BA would have a 1-stop offering increasing its market share in that market.


25 airrail : what would happen to all the people who want to go to ascenscion island e.g. military personel and st helenians who are returning home, and the one w
26 BA174 : I was talking about maybe extending one of the services per week to MPN. With regards to the comment above where do LAN divert to when the winds are
27 Pellegrine : 77L will never fly SYD-LHR in commercial service. Plane needs 15-20,000 lbs more fuel than the maximum capacity with all auxiliary tanks. MTOW would h
28 Ferroviarius : Sure, EA772LR, but how big would this market be as related to the market that e.g. Finnair could expect. Or, in other words, wouldn't HEL be a hub mu
29 rutankrd : I read this circular argument every month. I would wager that there will NEVER be an in atmosphere non-stop LHR-SYD service ever ! It will take the ne
30 gemuser : I don't have a definitive answer, however on this end the majority of travelers would fall into one of three categories: 1) Those whose final destina
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...
How Long Does It Take For A Crash To Get Cleaned? posted Mon Jan 15 2007 06:03:40 by TZ757300
How Long Does It Take For A Plane To Get Repainted posted Wed Oct 25 2000 05:12:21 by Qantas777
Wouldn't it make more sense for BA to fly DFW - ORD - LHR? posted Fri Feb 20 2004 04:38:07 by ORDnDFW777
What Will It Take To Get AS Flying To SLC? posted Wed Nov 5 2008 11:45:09 by Rgreenftm
What Would It Take To Reopen 717 Prod'n? posted Fri Mar 2 2007 00:11:01 by QantasA380
What Would It Take To Get An Airline Started? posted Tue Jan 9 2007 00:07:57 by Speedbird747BA
What Does It Take To Be Airline Management posted Wed May 24 2006 22:44:28 by PAHS200
How Long Would It Take For A King Air To Impact? posted Sat Apr 15 2006 17:47:04 by Lenbrazil
What Will It Take To Revive The Airlines? posted Thu Aug 15 2002 22:29:59 by Matt D
Flying: What Does It Take To Be A Good Pilot? posted Mon Sep 3 2001 07:06:56 by NorthwestMSP