Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Air Austral Order The Boeing 777-200LR  
User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4095 posts, RR: 90
Posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 14312 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Boeing and Air Austral have announced that the carrier has agreed to buy two B777-200LR for delivery in mid 2011 and 2012. This makes the carrier a new 77L operator and they will also take a third leased B777-300ER early 2011.

The 2 orders have been booked previously as UFO's

Boeing, Air Austral Announce Orders for Two 777-200LRs

FARNBOROUGH, United Kingdom, July 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Boeing (NYSE: BA) and Air Austral today announced orders for two Boeing Long Range 777-200LR Worldliners. The order is valued at $501 million at average list prices. The airplanes were previously listed on Boeing's Orders & Deliveries website as unidentified.

Source


Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGergely From Hungary, joined Jul 2010, 28 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 14074 times:

Good news as for the 772LR production

User currently offlinedkramer7 From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13710 times:

hey

does anyone have the order totals for each of the 777 variants?

it would be interesting to see


User currently offlineKFlyer From Sri Lanka, joined Mar 2007, 1226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13661 times:

But to where would they fly them ? I thought a considerable demand was non-existent from RUN to US/America or Japan.


The opinions above are solely my own and do not express those of my employers or clients.
User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4095 posts, RR: 90
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13661 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Quoting dkramer7 (Reply 2):
does anyone have the order totals for each of the 777 variants?

From the Boeing O&D spreadsheet (up to July 13) 777 order totals for each model currently are as follows;

61 777-200A
430 777-200ER
60 777-200LR
60 777-300A
429 777-300ER (will be 442 when Emirates 12 new orders are listed)
73 777F

Boeing

Regards



Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 7871 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13643 times:

I'm curious, why the 77L? Do they intend to start flying to N.America?

User currently offlinerom1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day ago) and read 13597 times:

Apparently they intend to fly from Mayotte island to Paris, the short runway would require a 772LR to fly non-stop to Paris, keeping a fleet of only B777

User currently offlinevarig md-11 From France, joined Jul 2000, 1581 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day ago) and read 13471 times:

Mayotte island is a new French "departement" (sort of district) after its people chose this new administrative status by referendum. It implies changes and developments for this island.

It means its status will be the same as any continental departement, it means also UU will receive subsidies to insure "territorial continuity" with mainland as it is the case with Reunion and French West Indies

Till now Mayotte has no direct airlink with mainland France, the 77L is the only jet powerfull enough and common enough with the other UU 777 to be used on this line.



AF TW AA NW DL UA CO BA U2 TP UX LH SK AZ MP KL SN VY HV LS SS TK SQ PC RG IW SE
User currently offlineHAM From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 22 hours ago) and read 12864 times:

Some research revealed that Corsairfly uses their A330 on the Mayotte flights. The outbound leg is non-stop, the inbound leg makes a technical stop (I assume due to the 2000m runway) - does anyone know where? And can a 77L really fly Mayotte-ORY nonstop, taking-off from a 2000m runway with a full load?

User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 7871 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 22 hours ago) and read 12864 times:

Quoting rom1 (Reply 6):
Apparently they intend to fly from Mayotte island to Paris, the short runway would require a 772LR to fly non-stop to Paris, keeping a fleet of only B777

Sounds like a huge waste of money to me for such an expensive airplane and what will likely be an expensive route to operate. I can't imagine there'd be such huge premium demand to operate this route non-stop rather than the much cheaper alternative with a connection.


User currently offlineDIJKKIJK From France, joined Jul 2003, 1745 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 18 hours ago) and read 11939 times:

Quoting KFlyer (Reply 3):
But to where would they fly them ? I thought a considerable demand was non-existent from RUN to US/America or Japan.
Quoting airbazar (Reply 5):
I'm curious, why the 77L? Do they intend to start flying to N.America?
Quoting airbazar (Reply 9):
Sounds like a huge waste of money to me for such an expensive airplane and what will likely be an expensive route to operate

You don't always have to operate an aircraft like the 772LR on an ULH flight to make it profitable/justifiable. EK is known to operate its 772LRs and its A340-500s to South Asian destinations sometimes, and AI is now operating its 772LRs on the DEL-CDG and DEL-NRT routes. These are hardly ultra long haul sectors.

Air Austral can use its LRs on the Paris-Reunion route. The additional capacity got by not filling the fuel tanks can be profitably used for cargo, for which there is very good demand on this sector.



Never argue with idiots. They will bring you down to their level, and beat you with experience.
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8089 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 17 hours ago) and read 11610 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DIJKKIJK (Reply 10):
You don't always have to operate an aircraft like the 772LR on an ULH flight to make it profitable/justifiable. EK is known to operate its 772LRs and its A340-500s to South Asian destinations sometimes, and AI is now operating its 772LRs on the DEL-CDG and DEL-NRT routes. These are hardly ultra long haul sectors

Delta flying any USA to NRT route with a 777LR is not ultra long haul but an LR can carry more then a 777-200ER. ATL to J'berg is the ultimate ultra long haul do to the altitude, nonstop all the way back to ATL.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 7871 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 10776 times:

Quoting DIJKKIJK (Reply 10):
You don't always have to operate an aircraft like the 772LR on an ULH flight to make it profitable/justifiable. EK is known to operate its 772LRs and its A340-500s to South Asian destinations sometimes, and AI is now operating its 772LRs on the DEL-CDG and DEL-NRT routes. These are hardly ultra long haul sectors.

True but EK and AI, and SQ, and DL, and many others who operate ULH aircraft on short routes are much much bigger carriers than Air Austral so the higher operating cost one 1 or 2 routes gets diluted more easily over the entire network. And they don't have to take tax payer subsidies to make it work either. If I were a French tax payer I'd be royally upset.


User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 10625 times:

Quoting DIJKKIJK (Reply 10):
Air Austral can use its LRs on the Paris-Reunion route. The additional capacity got by not filling the fuel tanks can be profitably used for cargo, for which there is very good demand on this sector.

Great point.    The 77L's can carry a helluva lot of cargo too.

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 4):
From the Boeing O&D spreadsheet (up to July 13) 777 order totals for each model currently are as follows;

61 777-200A
430 777-200ER
60 777-200LR
60 777-300A
429 777-300ER (will be 442 when Emirates 12 new orders are listed)
73 777F

I found it interesting that the 777F has already out sold the 77L.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineFlying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 2389 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 10442 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm quite sure there is only a marginal difference of price between a 77E and a 77L nowadays.

A bit like Airbus that only sells HGW variants of the A330 at the moment as well.

The 77E will slowly die in favor of the 77L. The question is: will PW and RR ever power a 77L ?



Life is great at 41.000 feet...
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 10314 times:

Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 14):
The 77E will slowly die in favor of the 77L. The question is: will PW and RR ever power a 77L ?

No way. Not at this point, and not given the exclusivity GE has with LR 777s.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2169 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 14 hours ago) and read 9328 times:

Quoting KFlyer (Reply 3):
But to where would they fly them ?

I think it's been discussed here before that the 772LR generally becomes cheaper to operate than the 772ER after a distance that is substantially inferior to the max range to the 772ER. No idea what the consensus numbers were (could have been around only 8000 km/5000 mi, not sure at all), so for the long-haul routes between Reunion/Mayotte and Paris, I'm pretty sure the 77L is now the way to go over the 77E (the 77E does it fine for sure, but the 77L probably does it better).

That's the same reason why the sales of the 773 almost instantaneously died as soon as the 77W became reality. The 773 has a max range of over 10,000 km (in no way it's a short range airliner despite what some tend to think : http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=107), a range which is fine for most routes of most airlines, yet all airlines then looking to get a 777-300 fleet preferred the 77W despite its higher cost (and even those already operating the 773A). Pushing an aircraft close to its max theoretical range usually means a higher operating costs, and sometimes payload restrictions as well...

Plus the issues with Mayotte's short runway, apparently, which i was not aware of.

Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 14):
The 77E will slowly die in favor of the 77L

hasn't it already?

[Edited 2010-07-21 15:05:56]


When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineicna05e From France, joined Feb 2006, 296 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 12 hours ago) and read 8837 times:

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 16):
the sales of the 773 almost instantaneously died as soon as the 77W became reality.


Hadn't it died about 3 to 5 years BEFORE the 77W was born?


Anyways, amazing how the 77E was king of its "sub-"generation, and how this title now belongs to the 77W over the 77L. Few of the traditional ER customers jumped ship to the bigger one though (yet?)


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6676 posts, RR: 46
Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months ago) and read 6562 times:

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 16):
I think it's been discussed here before that the 772LR generally becomes cheaper to operate than the 772ER after a distance that is substantially inferior to the max range to the 772ER.

As soon as you exceed the range where your payload has to be reduced below MZFW you are trading cargo for fuel. With the 77L this point is much farther out, and hence the 77L becomes more profitable. That is why the 77F is based on the 77L rather than the 77E; cargo operators seldom need ULH range, but every bit of payload helps.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9564 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6346 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 12):
True but EK and AI, and SQ, and DL, and many others who operate ULH aircraft on short routes are much much bigger carriers than Air Austral so the higher operating cost one 1 or 2 routes gets diluted more easily over the entire network.

My thoughts precisely. Either way, it's good to see another 77L operator.

A388


User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6222 times:

Quoting icna05e (Reply 17):
Hadn't it died about 3 to 5 years BEFORE the 77W was born?

I think closer to 2 years before the first 77W was produced. The 77W's biggest advantage is its much higher MTOW which allows it to tank much more fuel, or take on much more payload. Likewise however, you haven't seen 773A operators stop flying them even in the wake of 77Ws in the same fleet. The 773A is much cheaper to operator than the 742/743s it was designed to replace. The 77W is more of a 744 replacement.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineBMIFlyer From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6130 times:

Just so people get an idea.....



[Edited 2010-07-22 12:41:52]


Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24061 posts, RR: 23
Reply 22, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6030 times:

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 20):
Quoting icna05e (Reply 17):
Hadn't it died about 3 to 5 years BEFORE the 77W was born?

I think closer to 2 years before the first 77W was produced.

The last 773 order was 13 years ago (1997).


User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4095 posts, RR: 90
Reply 23, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5924 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 22):
The last 773 order was 13 years ago (1997).

To clarify, the 777-300A has received 8 orders since 1997 the last being 2 for Cathay Pacific in March 2004. The last 777-200A order was ANA for 2 in December 2001.



Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3038 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5772 times:

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 15):
Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 14):
The 77E will slowly die in favor of the 77L. The question is: will PW and RR ever power a 77L ?

No way. Not at this point, and not given the exclusivity GE has with LR 777s.

Which just makes the A333 more attractive as a 77E, 772 replacement.

Quoting KFlyer (Reply 3):
But to where would they fly them ?

Would the 77L would be better on the RUN-SYD-NOU run than the 77E due to the ETOPS diversion?

Regards
MH



come visit the south pacific
25 Viscount724 : You're right. I had the Boeing orders data sorted by carrier instead of by date.
26 sunrisevalley : This list frequently does not give the airplane manufacturer and the operator credit for knowing their product/ business. Assuming 300-passengers and
27 KFlyer : Thanks for everyone's responses. Perhaps they are taking it without the auxiliary fuel tanks then ?
28 BMI727 : Almost every operator so far has gone without the tanks. EK might have had some woth one tank, but those have been removed if they were ever installe
29 OldAeroGuy : I think some AI birds had one.
30 AA777223 : It will not carry a larger volume, but it will sure carry more dense cargo.
31 sunrisevalley : I should have noted that the 77E would be right at MZFW of 195t with a TOW of ~283t for that sector length. That TOW needs a runway length of ~9500 f
32 BMI727 : Actually, due to the fact that the 77L and 77E have the same MZFW (I think) the 77E can carry slightly more payload on shorter routes.
33 OldAeroGuy : Although the 772LR has a higher OEW than the 772ER, its MZFW is also higher. The 772LR can a carry more payload on all routes: 772ER: MZFW - 430.0 KL
34 Post contains links BMI727 : http://www.boeing.com/commercial/startup/pdf/777_payload.pdf According to this chart, the 77E can carry a bit more on shorter routes, but that is a 77
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...
EVA Air Boeing 777-200LR? posted Thu Nov 9 2006 15:57:46 by VivaGunners
Will KLM Order Any Boeing 777's In The Future? posted Thu Feb 22 2001 18:59:13 by AIRNZ_747-800
16 Years Later....The Boeing 777 posted Sun Apr 11 2010 08:52:15 by CodyKDiamond
Air Austral Order 2 738s posted Sat Dec 12 2009 16:39:41 by FCKC
Air Austral & The A380 posted Mon Nov 16 2009 11:42:17 by KissK
Air Canada And Their Boeing 777-300ERs posted Mon Jun 16 2008 20:16:14 by SYfan100
Delta Wants More Range From Boeing 777-200LR posted Mon Mar 17 2008 04:11:16 by ClassicLover
Will Air India Order The A380 This Week? posted Fri Jan 25 2008 03:03:37 by Beaucaire
GE Exclusive Deal For The Boeing 777 LR posted Sun Jan 20 2008 06:09:08 by AT
Travel Service Order The Boeing 787-8 posted Wed Mar 28 2007 11:18:20 by PanAm_DC10