Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Can CX Use Newer 77W For DFW?  
User currently offlinecx828 From Hong Kong, joined May 2007, 167 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8707 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Boeing will introduce a 5,000lb increase in the maximum zero fuel weight of the 777-300ER, providing an equivalent payload increase of 20 to 25 passengers. The General Electric GE90-115B1 engines that power the 777-300ER will increase thrust by 1%-2.5% as part of an Enhanced Thrust Management (ETM) package designed to increase take off weight at higher-altitude airports, and will be available in both new production and as a retrofit.

Can CX use the newer version of 77W to launch HKG-DFW (of course, if approved) to avoid the penalty of the payload as Emirate did on DXB-LAX (they carry 10 abreasts can did it)??

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15831 posts, RR: 27
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8689 times:

Quoting cx828 (Thread starter):
Can CX use the newer version of 77W to launch HKG-DFW (of course, if approved) to avoid the penalty of the payload as Emirate did on DXB-LAX (they carry 10 abreasts can did it)??

I'd say that there is a good chance they could pull it off with an economically viable load, though things could get dicey in poor weather. You'd likely see a routing like sometimes happens on HKG-JFK where there is a more southerly routing eastbound and a polar routing westbound to take advantage of winds.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8494 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5501 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

IF there was ever a route AA should fly those new 777-300ER they are waiting for its Hong Kong. Since Cathay has every other gateway AA could make it work from DFW would be the one left with no HKG flight.

User currently offlinedfwdfw From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5102 times:

I think AA and CX should both fly to DFW from HKG kind of like BA and AA to Heathrow.

User currently offlinecx828 From Hong Kong, joined May 2007, 167 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4467 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

what i mean is can the route still profitable with the extra 5000ibs increase can offset payload penalized ??

User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13520 posts, RR: 100
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3907 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Is there any fuel burn improvement in the package?

Quoting cx828 (Thread starter):
Can CX use the newer version of 77W to launch HKG-DFW (of course, if approved) to avoid the penalty of the payload as Emirate did on DXB-LAX (they carry 10 abreasts can did it)

I suspect EK is the launch customer for the improvement with a proven need for better payload at range. Somehow I suspect the 'hot' part of hot/high thrust improvement is required too.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9229 posts, RR: 76
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3903 times:

An increase in MZFW does nothing on a ULH flight (i.e. 7000 ish nm like HKG-DFW) when the aircraft is either MTOW or fuel volume limited.

The increase in MZFW will be beneficial more for flights 5000 ish nm

This is a direct counter to the A350-1000 payload/thrust increase announced at PAS11.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinePVG From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2004, 728 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3791 times:

Quoting cx828 (Thread starter):
Boeing will introduce a 5,000lb increase in the maximum zero fuel weight of the 777-300ER, providing an equivalent payload increase of 20 to 25 passengers. The General Electric GE90-115B1 engines that power the 777-300ER will increase thrust by 1%-2.5% as part of an Enhanced Thrust Management (ETM) package designed to increase take off weight at higher-altitude airports, and will be available in both new production and as a retrofit.

Any chance that we start to see these on the HKG/JNB route?


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8494 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3542 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dfwdfw (Reply 3):
I think AA and CX should both fly to DFW from HKG kind of like BA and AA to Heathrow.

Both airlines flying from DFW to Hong Kong is very ambitious. AT some point AA needs to fly to HKG, since Cathay already flies from JFK, Chicago, SFO and LAX, CX needs to allow one city for AA.


User currently onlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 3020 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3415 times:

Quoting PVG (Reply 7):
Any chance that we start to see these on the HKG/JNB route?

I doubt that a current 77W would an issue with JNB. They turn up there from time to time as it is...


User currently offlineSUNRISEVALLEY From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5216 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3329 times:

There is very little difference between DFW-HKG and JFK-HKG .Probably less than 100nm in airways terms. CX are on the low end of the 77W scale so far as passenger load and DOW are concerned. They are not operating the type out to it's limits.
I notice that yesterday both their ORD and JFK -HKG flights operated eastbound on an airways track of 7357 and 7358nm respectively in 15hr 16min which gave a tail wind of ~12k. and comfortably inside the timetable times of 15h 25m and 15h 55m respectively


User currently offlineflythere From Hong Kong, joined May 2010, 443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3226 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 8):
Both airlines flying from DFW to Hong Kong is very ambitious. AT some point AA needs to fly to HKG, since Cathay already flies from JFK, Chicago, SFO and LAX, CX needs to allow one city for AA.

The reasons for AA not coming to HKG yet are that AA can have a "for-sure" gain by selling tickets on CX metal under AA codeshare but operating AA own's 77W not only need approval from the pilot union, but also not guarantee profit as the AA's yield advantage over UA for the same route is not as appealing as operated by CX. More so, at ORD, CX's service can serve as a better reason for pax to connect on AA metal, hence extra revenue. Win-win for CX/AA, so that's the way to go.

Quoting SUNRISEVALLEY (Reply 10):
I notice that yesterday both their ORD and JFK -HKG flights operated eastbound on an airways track of 7357 and 7358nm respectively in 15hr 16min which gave a tail wind of ~12k. and comfortably inside the timetable times of 15h 25m and 15h 55m respectively

      Either more westward if headwind is not strong or more eastward if tail wind is great.

But DFW-HKG is for sure at the very marginal position for 77W.


User currently offlineSUNRISEVALLEY From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5216 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3070 times:

Quoting flythere (Reply 11):
But DFW-HKG is for sure at the very marginal position for 77W.

Not at all in my view. Assuming an ESAD of 7500nm which is probably a bit high on most days, The CX version should be good for 42 t payload which is max passenger ( in their configuration) plus about 13t of cargo . Not a bad load in my view.


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...
Can I Use My Skymiles For An Upgrade On CO/CM posted Wed Oct 19 2005 01:04:18 by Luisca
Can 7E7 Customers Use Plane Not For Range? posted Tue Jan 25 2005 06:33:12 by Lehpron
Can Airlines Pre-Block Seats For Crew? posted Tue Dec 14 2010 08:33:53 by Soxfan
U2 Can Only Use U2 Branded Aircraft? posted Sun Aug 22 2010 14:03:38 by vv701
AA Applies For DFW-GIG Nonstop B763 posted Fri Jul 9 2010 02:55:48 by hardiwv
Is there a CX / AA To HKG/ORD/DFW Update? posted Thu Sep 10 2009 18:25:05 by Nomorerjs
When Can DL Use NW Jets On DL Routes? posted Thu Dec 18 2008 10:04:46 by DL767captain
CX To Fly 77W To LAX Eff 26Oct08 posted Sun Sep 14 2008 02:17:53 by The777Man
FSD Gets $500,000 Grant For DFW Service posted Wed Sep 10 2008 21:04:51 by Airbusaddict
Can NonRevs Use Int'l Lounges posted Mon Aug 18 2008 18:17:27 by N104UA