delta764 From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 38 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7856 times:
I'm sure its an error, but the DL website shows the range of their 47's as 5,343 miles. The 67's are 6,408. What is the range of the 747 and which is their longest route (ATL-NRT?)
spacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3251 posts, RR: 14 Reply 2, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7297 times:
SonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1177 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7129 times:
The ATL-NAT flight is 6,850 miles. This is within the 744's range and is what they fly on that route. That number quoted by the OP isn't correct.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8746 posts, RR: 52 Reply 5, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7125 times:
Someone can't convert between miles and kilometers because 5,343 miles is certainly not 11,853km. 11,853km is closer to the realistic range since that is 7,365sm, which is relatively close to the real range of a 747-400.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7411 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6795 times:
A lot of the aircraft data seems to be incorrect on DL.com currently, it's being fixed.
As for our 744 range; 7,365 miles at 100% load factor.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4277 posts, RR: 4 Reply 7, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 6603 times:
Quoting aviateur (Reply 7): I wish that DL's website and magazine would remove the specs for the various regional jets. These are not Delta aircraft, and they are not operated by Delta employees.
Although they are not operated by Delta, a fair number of them are Delta-owned.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
Transpac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3139 posts, RR: 14 Reply 8, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 6411 times:
Currently it is operated by a 777 but the longest route, to date, operated by the 744 at DL is DTW-PVG at 7137mi versus ATL-NRT at only 6850mi.
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8589 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 6028 times:
futureatp From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4833 times:
Somewhere I have a manual to confirm but I believe DL (actually Northwest) deactivated the tail tanks of their 744s. That's around 20,000lbs of fuel capacity taken out.
I'm not completely sure if you were talking about the ATL-NRT route, but if you were, that route (at least for this week), is being operated by a 744 as per the DL flight schedule and FlightAware.
AA94 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 357 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2999 times:
Quoting jporterfi (Reply 18): I'm not completely sure if you were talking about the ATL-NRT route, but if you were, that route (at least for this week), is being operated by a 744 as per the DL flight schedule and FlightAware.
He isn't. The way I read his comment is that the longest route ever operated by a DL 744 was DTW-PVG at 7137mi. Currently, it's operated by a 777, but it is/was the longest route that DL flies 744s on.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 9): Currently it is operated by a 777 but the longest route, to date, operated by the 744 at DL is DTW-PVG at 7137mi versus ATL-NRT at only 6850mi.
Choose a challenge over competence / Eleanor Roosevelt
Some DL 744s did once operate LAX-SYD nonstop during the fairly brief period in the early 1990s when NW operated LAX-SYD and JFK-KIX-SYD. I think those routes started in 1991.
JFK-KIX-SYD was dropped after the Japanese government complained that NW was carrying too much 5th freedom traffic KIX-SYD. LAX-SYD lasted a little longer. If memory correct it was only 2 or 3 days a week.
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4277 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2586 times:
There was a rumor that LAX-SYD would shift to 744 once all the modifications were complete. I have my doubts that that's the best use of 744 capacity, but haven't heard anything about it recently.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
qf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2555 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2325 times:
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 16): I have my doubts that that's the best use of 744 capacity, but haven't heard anything about it recently.
I agree. I'd be very surprised if we saw 744's in SYD any time soon given the relationship with VA. They'd be better off adding 777 flights to BNE or MEL in partnership with VA.
Transpac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3139 posts, RR: 14 Reply 18, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2311 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 15): Some DL 744s did once operate LAX-SYD nonstop during the fairly brief period in the early 1990s when NW operated LAX-SYD and JFK-KIX-SYD. I think those routes started in 1991.
JFK-KIX-SYD was dropped after the Japanese government complained that NW was carrying too much 5th freedom traffic KIX-SYD. LAX-SYD lasted a little longer. If memory correct it was only 2 or 3 days a week.
It was JFK-OSA-SYD, KIX did not exist at the time. And it was the Australian gov't that had a problem with it, and is why the route wasn't run via NRT.
LAX-SYD ran 3 weekly, while LAX-HNL-SYD ran 4 weekly on the days the nonstop didn't operate.
gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 21, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2157 times:
Quoting CV880 (Reply 19): Oh, so CX could run LAX-HKG with 744's but DL can't??
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8589 posts, RR: 8 Reply 22, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2141 times:
CV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 991 posts, RR: 2 Reply 23, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1786 times:
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 22): Pretty much. Delta 744s could fly it....but only if Delta wanted to burn money. Any Asia growth from LAX will be with 767/777 and 330.
When You pull the 77L from SYD and replace it with the 744, please move the 77L to LAX-HKG. The 330's/767's won't make it. The seating density on the 777's is a bit slim (should be a 77W), but at least an American carrier would be in the market again.
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4277 posts, RR: 4 Reply 25, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1834 times:
Quoting CV880 (Reply 19): Oh, so CX could run LAX-HKG with 744's but DL can't??
The problem for DL with LAX-HKG is that it's a nice 767/A332 route for them in terms of volume but the 767 and 332 don't have the range. The 777 (either E or L) and 747 have the range but that is too much capacity.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
PHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4969 posts, RR: 14 Reply 26, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1775 times:
Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 4): The ATL-NAT flight is 6,850 miles. This is within the 744's range and is what they fly on that route. That number quoted by the OP isn't correct.
Do they actually run this route? On a previous DL744 thread I hadn't seen that one listed.
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 25): The problem for DL with LAX-HKG is that it's a nice 767/A332 route for them in terms of volume but the 767 and 332 don't have the range. The 777 (either E or L) and 747 have the range but that is too much capacity.
When DL finally takes the 787s could they run the route with them?
CV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 991 posts, RR: 2 Reply 27, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1799 times:
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 25): The 777 (either E or L) and 747 have the range but that is too much capacity.
The 777 is not too much capacity. If anything it's too little unless the front is full of paying pax. The fares in the market (low) require a dense capacity to make it worthwhile.
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4277 posts, RR: 4 Reply 28, posted (9 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1768 times:
Quoting CV880 (Reply 27): The 777 is not too much capacity. If anything it's too little unless the front is full of paying pax. The fares in the market (low) require a dense capacity to make it worthwhile.
Fair point... I should have said "too much airplane." If it had a dense enough config to make the route worthwhile, it would be too much capacity.
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 26): When DL finally takes the 787s could they run the route with them?
I wouldn't be one bit surprised. A 2020 787-8 should be able to handle that route quite nicely.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7411 posts, RR: 9 Reply 31, posted (9 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1557 times:
Quoting KDAYflyer (Reply 30): How about DTW-Nogoya? I flew that segment in June. One hell of a long flight......
It's about 6,552 miles.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 38 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2555 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21488 posts, 
From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4969 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
