na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9614 posts, RR: 10 Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 15795 times:
Why do you smell Fedex? There is no conversion program for old 772s and I doubt Boeing is in a hurry to start one looking at the mediocre sales of the 777F.
Maybe Biman wants another one or its chartered by a Hadj operator? Its the time for it.
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 15744 times:
Quoting na (Reply 10): doubt Boeing is in a hurry to start one looking at the mediocre sales of the 777F.
Who says that Boeing would have to be involved? Anyone can get an STC for any plane, as long as they've got enough engineering data to prove its safe. It would make tons of sense to get an STC for the 772 to turn it into a freighter. There are going to be lots of frames coming available in the next years.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10481 posts, RR: 20 Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 15431 times:
Quoting na (Reply 10): There is no conversion program for old 772s and I doubt Boeing is in a hurry to start one looking at the mediocre sales of the 777F.
Quote:
Boeing said a 777 conversion program is still in the preliminary phase as a development study.
A Boeing spokesman added that there's no timeline for a program launch but suggested that a 777 BCF probably would not be available to customers until the middle of the next decade, around the time earliest 777 aircraft would be entering their third decade of service.
IMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6203 posts, RR: 43 Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 15425 times:
With an eye on the sluggish 777F sales I´d think that Boeing would like delay that as much as possible. But its inevitable that we´ll see converted 772Fs in a few years. Half up to 3/4s of the MD-11Fs need to be replaced over the next decade, plus all the remaining DC-10s.
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9614 posts, RR: 10 Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 14862 times:
Quoting changyou (Reply 16): I saw SQA painted in full SQ livery and parked at F42 as I was arriving from JNB on the 11Oct2010.
So they just retired and/or sold too many 777 recently and dont have enough replacements at the moment. Just interim lift until another A333 arrives, it seems.
N471wn From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1185 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 14668 times:
Quoting na (Reply 17): So they just retired and/or sold too many 777 recently and dont have enough replacements at the moment. Just interim lift until another A333 arrives, it seems.
With the great citing of this a/c back in service and painted and this observation, this means that SQ really did not plan this very well---neutralizing the a/c and flying it VCV and then flying it back and having to repaint it---it tells me that SQ's business took an unexpected turn up as this was a costly blunder---not flying the a/c into and out of storage but having to repaint it just 9 months after it went to storage----could be a "canning" for a poor fleet planner!!
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5934 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 13003 times:
Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 11): Who says that Boeing would have to be involved? Anyone can get an STC for any plane, as long as they've got enough engineering data to prove its safe. It would make tons of sense to get an STC for the 772 to turn it into a freighter. There are going to be lots of frames coming available in the next years.
-DiamondFlyer
Yeah, but with de-rated Trents? SQ is purportedly less than happy with the performance of their early build 772's. They went to Boeing to get a thrust uprate (which is apparently simple to do on the Trents), but Boeing wouldn't sell it to them for a reasonable price. Apparenly, SQ must have gotten a substantial discount from Boeing for the low thrust rating That's okay, as SQ uses the older 772's for short-haul flying...lots of 1 and 2 hour segments from SIN.
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Vmcavmcg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 11849 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 20): Yeah, but with de-rated Trents? SQ is purportedly less than happy with the performance of their early build 772's. They went to Boeing to get a thrust uprate (which is apparently simple to do on the Trents), but Boeing wouldn't sell it to them for a reasonable price. Apparenly, SQ must have gotten a substantial discount from Boeing for the low thrust rating That's okay, as SQ uses the older 772's for short-haul flying...lots of 1 and 2 hour segments from SIN.
Not quite true. The early built SQ 772s are actually ERs that SQ purchased and Boeing certified them at much lower weights. In addition, the Trents were de-rated at SQ's request for the reasons you state.
SQ was very happy with the 772 but in the bigger scheme of things, the cost of doing heavy MX and the 330 deal from Airbus made the early 772 somewhat redundant in the SQ fleet plan.
Asiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1019 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 9965 times:
Quoting na (Reply 17): So they just retired and/or sold too many 777 recently and dont have enough replacements at the moment. Just interim lift until another A333 arrives, it seems.
SQ has received 18 A333 from Airbus now, and accordingly only one more is to be delivered from that order.
AFAIK only around 10 772s has been sold, so there should still be an excess of T7s with SQ.
Quoting PA515 (Reply 30): There were posts on an SQ related website about 6 weeks ago that CX wants eight of the 9V-SQ_ series.
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 9769 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 20):
Yeah, but with de-rated Trents? SQ is purportedly less than happy with the performance of their early build 772's. They went to Boeing to get a thrust uprate (which is apparently simple to do on the Trents), but Boeing wouldn't sell it to them for a reasonable price. Apparenly, SQ must have gotten a substantial discount from Boeing for the low thrust rating That's okay, as SQ uses the older 772's for short-haul flying...lots of 1 and 2 hour segments from SIN.
Wouldn't that work well for the domestic DC-10 routes flown by FedEx? No need for the range of the 777-200LRF for the domestic widebody flights. Just pick up the old 772A's at low cost, convert them and be good.
coopdogyo From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 189 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 8944 times:
The 777-200BCF would be a great package freighter however that is pretty much all it would be. The max cargo density to fill the plane is about 8 pounds per sq foot. There is no floor loading issue now that Boeing plans to put in a 77LRF floor into the BCF. However, the OEW would be reached before the full volume of the plane could be filled. Last I heard from Boeing was that they had quoted a price to one customer. Considering the cost of acquiring a 772 and the cost of conversion which I am told is very high it is unlikely that we will see any 777BCF's for a while.
cysafan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 6428 times:
Quoting fxramper (Thread starter): Singapore Airlines have brought a Boeing 777 out of storage at Victorville, CA, where it has been since January 2010, returning to Changai as SQ788.
The aircraft was without Singapore Airlines logos or titles and may probably be going to another airline.
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9614 posts, RR: 10 Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 6280 times:
Quoting coopdogyo (Reply 19): Last I heard from Boeing was that they had quoted a price to one customer. Considering the cost of acquiring a 772 and the cost of conversion which I am told is very high it is unlikely that we will see any 777BCF's for a while.
They want to protect the 777F. Fully understandable. If there´s a 777BCF at attractive prices, the mediocre 777F sales would fall to a minimum. In five years the first dozens of 772ERs are due to be retired, and latest by then its prices will fall considerably. Likely even before due to the 787-9.
Quoting PA515 (Reply 15): There were posts on an SQ related website about 6 weeks ago that CX wants eight of the 9V-SQ_ series.
Interesting. That´ll mean the high-cycled non-ER 772s of CX will finally be dumped, something that was reported from sources within CX already two years ago here.
CXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2195 posts, RR: 4 Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 6046 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHAT OPERATOR
Quoting na (Reply 21): Interesting. That´ll mean the high-cycled non-ER 772s of CX will finally be dumped, something that was reported from sources within CX already two years ago here.
Not necessarily. I think buying the 772ERs would complement, rather than replace CX's 772As. If anything, I have a feeling that the 772ERs will start to take over some of the A343's routes, before they'll both get replaced with the A359 further down the track.
To me, it doesn't make sense to replace the 772A with the 772ER if they are going to be used on the same missions. 772ERs are far more capable than just hauling around passengers on regional routes, so using it as a replacement for A343 on medium-long routes makes more sense to me.
cysafan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5383 times:
BTW, Would you think its FedEx? If FedEx wants more B777 , they will buy it brand new directly from manufacturer. Why would they want to get used B777-200 when the B777 is still in production and lastly FedEx only uses B777-200F so please keep things clear.
nicoeddf From Germany, joined Jan 2008, 1051 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 4891 times:
Quoting cysafan (Reply 23): BTW, Would you think its FedEx? If FedEx wants more B777 , they will buy it brand new directly from manufacturer. Why would they want to get used B777-200 when the B777 is still in production and lastly FedEx only uses B777-200F so please keep things clear.
Because buying aircraft used is considerably cheaper then buying them brand new? Why do you think are B727, A300B2 and the like still hauling cargo?
By the way - there is no B777-200F. The freighter is called B777F and is, true, the 772LR frame.
So I guess cysafan kept all things clear?
Obsequium amicus, veritas odium parit!
25 PlaneHunter: That could also mean that some more A343s will be retired which are not as capable as 777-200ERs on long-haul missions. One of the older frames is al
26 DiamondFlyer: Exactly. The very oldest of the 777's will be very cheap (when compared to a new 77F), that it will make sense to convert them to freighter service.
28 N471wn: Does anyone know if the a/c flew non-stop to Singapore from VCV?
29 fxramper: Right now it looks like the ptf isn't cost affective with converting the floors. Like you said, Boeing protecting it's 77F. We still got whalejet dep
30 KELPkid: I'm guessing that just about any 772 could do that with nobody but essential flight crew on board, no cargo, and full tanks
31 N471wn: Oh I know that but sometimes when an a/c has been stored, they do an intermediate stop and that is what I was wondering about.
32 wrenchon727: Boeing and FedEx have been working on a PtoF mod for the 777, The last power point presentation showed them using the same procedures for the floor as
33 United_fan: Usually Int'l departures/arrivals to/from VCV go to PHX/LAX for Customs. (AFAIK)
34 FX1816: Nope I gave this one their clearance and they went non-stop from VCV. They don't have to clear US customs when leaving the country. We do get some ai
35 nicholaschee: Nice figment of imagination but -SQA is in revenue service. At this very moment, it should be somewhere over Peninsular Malaysia 5 sold (EA & UN)
36 N471wn: Thanks so much for this information and I thought this is what they did---it must have felt good to have this proud bird leave the a/c prison!!
37 FX1816: I actually do enjoy it very much. I hate when we get inbound strips for aircraft that are most likely going to be parked. FX1816
38 N471wn: And it has now been confirmed that she returned to active service yesterday!!
39 srbmod: And on this note, the thread is locked.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7027 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2002, 494 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 9614 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Nov 2003, 262 posts, 
That's okay, as SQ uses the older 772's for short-haul flying...lots of 1 and 2 hour segments from SIN.
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2007, 695 posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2195 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
