GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12715 posts, RR: 80 Reply 2, posted (11 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2460 times:
Depending on the usual weight and other factors, with max passengers and baggage - 3,500 NM, (4,030 SM). On the LHR-SIA routes a considerable part of the leg to Bahrain was overland at M0.95, so fuel burn was a lot higher, Bahrain was the best place for the refuelling stop. On the flight from Bahrain to Singapore, the cooler tropical air inproved engine fuel efficiency allowing a range of 3750 NM.
The max. recorded range on a normal passenger service was on 11 September 1984, when G-BOAB flying between Washington and Nice with 54 pax. covered 3,965 NM, (4,565 NM). The flight took 4 hrs and
7 min.
GJR From Netherlands, joined Mar 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (11 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2428 times:
Was that the flight where Capt. Warpole nearly ran out of fuel, or was that into LHR. I understand when they landed they were pretty unsure if the a/c would be a "tailsitter" due to the CoG being completely wrong with nothing they could do about it as they did not have enough fuel to pump forward.
Does anyone on the forums know if the range will be effected by the tank mods? will she still be able to fy to Barbados next year?
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12715 posts, RR: 80 Reply 4, posted (11 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
No, Capt. Walpole made his 'error' three years later on a JFK-LHR charter.
Ground tests on the effects of the liners on the unuseable fuel, plus of course the results of test flights, should tell us if we are OK for BGI.
Most people seem optimistic on this subject.
Sponsor Message: 
From Mexico, joined May 2001, 389 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12715 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2008, 0 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
