Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How Come BA Or QF Are Not Using The B777-200LR?  
User currently offlinemitris From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 24 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 12258 times:

That way they could have direct flights from London to Sydney. The distance from LHR to SYD is 9,157.9 nm. The B777-200LR could handle 9,380 nm. I believe the aircraft has the legs for that route.

What's keeping away BA and QF of having non stop flights to those cities?

44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12466 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 12251 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yes, the 77L could do the route non-stop but not with any meaningful payload and almost certainly not profitably.

If it were a realistic money-making proposition, they'd be doing it.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 12088 times:

Let´s wait for an A380 with more range  


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineBen175 From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 689 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 12075 times:

Just out of pure curiosity, could a 3-class 77L make PER-LHR direct?

User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3057 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11947 times:

I've wondered if an all-C class service could work, almost like SQ SIN-EWR/LAX.

There would be less of a payload issue. Plus LHR-SYD has enough premium traffic to fill the plane. And I would bet a few would be willing to pay a premium for the non-stop flight. It could hurt yields on the one-stop flights, as some of those C/F class passengers would take the non-stop, but the service would also take some of the competition passengers.

But, for QF, a small fleet of 77L's for this service wouldn't be realistic. However, BA could possibly operate with the sub-fleet of 77L's, seeing their large fleet of 777's (with the 77W in particular).

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11638 posts, RR: 60
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11870 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 1):

Yes, the 77L could do the route non-stop but not with any meaningful payload and almost certainly not profitably.

  
Didn't a BA 777 fly BRU-SYD non stop on a charter for the UK PM a few years ago?

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 3):
Just out of pure curiosity, could a 3-class 77L make PER-LHR direct?

Easily.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30884 posts, RR: 86
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11859 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A 777-200LR configured just with Business Class should have the legs to do SYD-LHR non-stop in both directions most of the year, however putting a significant share of your premium cabin customers on one plane makes it that much harder for the rest of your flights on that route to make money as they'd end up with a higher percentage of Economy seats which would likely depress the yield per seat (and the yield per flight).

User currently onlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5566 posts, RR: 36
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11842 times:

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 3):
Just out of pure curiosity, could a 3-class 77L make PER-LHR direct?

But who wanted to fly 20 hours non-stop in a cramped economy class? I think such flight would work in an only business class aircraft.


User currently offlineRubberJungle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 11777 times:

Quoting mitris (Thread starter):
What's keeping away BA and QF of having non stop flights to those cities?

Just to add something which might be of interest, I talked to BA about non-stop LHR-SYD a few months ago, in light of the 777X development.

Essentially BA said it's not interested in such a service, because evolution of alliances means it's more beneficial to operate via southeast Asia, plus there's the penalty of tankering fuel. Both of these have reduced the attraction of a non-stop service and, even if an aircraft was capable of making the trip, BA told me it didn't see itself changing from being a "one-stop airline" to Australia.


User currently offlineTristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3999 posts, RR: 34
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 11686 times:

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 5):
Didn't a BA 777 fly BRU-SYD non stop on a charter for the UK PM a few years ago?

Yes. But it was BRU - MEL on a standard B777-200ER.
Tony Blair and about 40 staff flew non-stop.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7461 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 11605 times:

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 5):
Didn't a BA 777 fly BRU-SYD non stop on a charter for the UK PM a few years ago?

On 24 March 2006 BA 772ER G-YMMO flew PM Tony Blair, his wife and approximately 60 others the 8,953 miles from an EU Summit in Brussels (BRU) to the Closing Ceremony of the Commonwealth Games at Melbourne (MEL) operating as BA9118C in a sector time of 18 hrs 55 mins. At that time this set a new distance record for a commercial revenue-earning airliner flight.

Aftter this flight and the Closing Ceremony the aircraft took the Blairs on Official Visits to both New Zealand (AKL) and Indonesia (CGK) before returning to London (LHR) where it arrived on 31 March.

On 10 March the same aircraft had carried Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip to Australia (LHR-SIN-CBR) and then CBR-MEL for the Opening Ceremony of the Commonwealth Games before returning them to LON (MEL-SIN-LHR) arriving there on 18 March. When it carried the Blairs and their party it was therefore still fitted with the Royal Suite in what is normally the First Class Cabin. Thus the Blairs became the only passengers apart from the Queen and Prince Philiup to ever use the suite. It includes two proper beds and can be fitted into either of the two BA 772ERs that have the specially adapted First Class Cabin floor to fit the beds and other furniture that make up the suite.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11638 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 11338 times:

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 9):
Yes. But it was BRU - MEL on a standard B777-200ER.
Tony Blair and about 40 staff flew non-stop.
Quoting VV701 (Reply 10):
On 24 March 2006 BA 772ER G-YMMO flew PM Tony Blair, his wife and approximately 60 others the 8,953 miles from an EU Summit in Brussels (BRU) to the Closing Ceremony of the Commonwealth Games at Melbourne (MEL) operating as BA9118C in a sector time of 18 hrs 55 mins. At that time this set a new distance record for a commercial revenue-earning airliner flight.

Aftter this flight and the Closing Ceremony the aircraft took the Blairs on Official Visits to both New Zealand (AKL) and Indonesia (CGK) before returning to London (LHR) where it arrived on 31 March.

On 10 March the same aircraft had carried Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip to Australia (LHR-SIN-CBR) and then CBR-MEL for the Opening Ceremony of the Commonwealth Games before returning them to LON (MEL-SIN-LHR) arriving there on 18 March. When it carried the Blairs and their party it was therefore still fitted with the Royal Suite in what is normally the First Class Cabin. Thus the Blairs became the only passengers apart from the Queen and Prince Philiup to ever use the suite. It includes two proper beds and can be fitted into either of the two BA 772ERs that have the specially adapted First Class Cabin floor to fit the beds and other furniture that make up the suite.

Thank you for that, excellent information.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineordwaw From United States of America, joined May 2006, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11077 times:

I am not trying to be difficult ... rather a curious individual trying to match math with economics and a real world practicality. Please shoot holes ...

Quoting RubberJungle (Reply 8):
Essentially BA said it's not interested in such a service, because evolution of alliances means it's more beneficial to operate via southeast Asia

Can someone expand on the premise that evolution of alliances makes it more beneficial to operate with a stop-over?

Quoting RubberJungle (Reply 8):
plus there's the penalty of tankering fuel.

What is the penalty of tankering the fuel here? Wouldn't following that logic suggest that any 16 hour flight should be split into 2 x 8 hour flights.

Quoting RubberJungle (Reply 8):
even if an aircraft was capable of making the trip

I thought we all agreed that an all J class 77L can do the job both ways, with a reasonable payload and passengers.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
however putting a significant share of your premium cabin customers on one plane makes it that much harder for the rest of your flights on that route to make money as they'd end up with a higher percentage of Economy seats

If we had a 77L with say 120 J seats flying non-stop, and a 77W with a SIN stop-over with 400 Y-only seats. And then if we had 2 x 77W with 60 J seats each, and 200Y seats each. We would still be selling 120 J seats and 400 Y seats. in addition, the 77L with J only could be at a premium ... I assume that spreading the J capacity across multiple flights might be a challenge ...


My thought process is ... if it makes sense to have 16 hour non-stop flights without splitting them into 2 x 8 hour flights, then why it does not make sense to have a 20 hour non-stop flight and having to split it into 14hr + 6 hr flights + 2 hr stopover when there is a capable airplane/configuration of doing non-stop?

Unless my logic is flawed, which is possible, the only reason I would see is too big a strain on a passenger to be confined to an airplane cabin for 20 hours non-stop, even in J - there is only so much sleep you can have, so much booze you can drink, and so many movies you can watch at FL360+ ...


User currently offlineTristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3999 posts, RR: 34
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11037 times:

Quoting ordwaw (Reply 12):
I am not trying to be difficult

While all your arguments may be good ones, the problem is that it is LON-SYD.
There is huge demand for seats on the route, at bargain basement prices.
There is very little demand for full price luxury seats.
If you started operating special B777 all J non stop, how much more can you charge than all the aircraft that do one stop? There are so many one-stop seats on Emirates and Malaysian and Singapore and Cathay etc etc that are there enough people willing to pay huge premium to leave SYD at 1830 instead of 1630.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30884 posts, RR: 86
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10939 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ordwaw (Reply 12):
Can someone expand on the premise that evolution of alliances makes it more beneficial to operate with a stop-over?

Connecting flights can have higher load factors than Origin & Destination flights. So by having a stop-over in a major hub for another alliance carrier (like DXB for QF/EK), you can appeal to more passengers than those who just want to fly direct to London from Sydney.



Quoting ordwaw (Reply 12):
What is the penalty of tankering the fuel here? Wouldn't following that logic suggest that any 16 hour flight should be split into 2 x 8 hour flights.

You need to burn fuel to haul fuel, so the longer the flight time, the more fuel you will burn and therefore the more fuel you will need to load, which eats into payload.

We'll use a cargo flight as an example. If you wanted to fly non-stop from Tokyo to Chicago with a 747-8 freighter, you'd need to tank around 123t of fuel, which would limit the amount of payload you could load to 114t. If, however, you flew Tokyo-Anchorage and then Anchorage-Tokyo, you need only tank 66t for the first leg and 54t for the second leg - a total of 120t. So you would burn 3t less fuel then the non-stop. But more importantly, you could carry 134t of payload on each of those segments. So not only do you burn less fuel, you make a great deal more money so the extra revenue more than covers whatever extra fuel cost there is.

So by having the stop-over on the passenger flight, you likely burn less fuel and you can carry more people and cargo with the stopover since you are not trading payload weight for fuel weight like you are with the non-stop.



Quoting ordwaw (Reply 12):
If we had a 77L with say 120 J seats flying non-stop, and a 77W with a SIN stop-over with 400 Y-only seats. And then if we had 2 x 77W with 60 J seats each, and 200Y seats each. We would still be selling 120 J seats and 400 Y seats. in addition, the 77L with J only could be at a premium ... I assume that spreading the J capacity across multiple flights might be a challenge ...

Depending on the route, you may find that your premium cabin travelers prefer having two options for Departure/Arrival than just one, so offering two flights might increase the number of seats sold. There is also the benefit of being able to sell some of the seats twice with a stopover if passengers disembark at the stopover point to connect to a different flight and new passengers board at the stopover point to finish the journey to the destination. And you may also burn less fuel making the stop then not.

[Edited 2012-12-15 10:21:07]

User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4941 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 10876 times:

Quoting Ben175 (Reply 3):
Just out of pure curiosity, could a 3-class 77L make PER-LHR direct?

Yes I could but whether it would be economically justified I don't know. The airways distance is around 8100nm . SX1899 did up a flight plan for a 77L and on the day it was something greater than 18hrs westbound or about 8500nm ESAD. The load/range table shows ~190t ZFW for a 8500nm sector . The 77L DOW is about 155t so that would allow ~ a 35t payload.
Eastbound is about 2hrs less so the payload would be quite a bit better.

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 4):
However, BA could possibly operate with the sub-fleet of 77L's,

BA have no where to use this aircraft. My guess is their longest sector is SIN-LHR at about 6650nm airways distance . If they chose they could use a 77W on the route hauling about 50t westbound.


User currently offlineordwaw From United States of America, joined May 2006, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 10593 times:

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 15):
My guess is their longest sector is SIN-LHR at about 6650nm airways distance

LHR - EZE at 6904 nm on a 772-ER


User currently offlinesomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3365 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10469 times:

The big issue is the cost, it's awful expensive to transport fuel at 40.000ft for 17hrs......

User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2963 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 10042 times:

1. You would have to charge a massive premium for the nonstop flights in order to cover the massive fuel bills that it would incur over the stopping flights. I'm not sure that there are enough passengers willing to pay such a big premium for the sake of saving 2-3 hours, even in F/J.

2. It's a very high risk operation. Had they started this sort of flight 5-6 years ago, they'd have been hit with the rising price of fuel and the drop in international traffic and would almost definitely have dropped out by now.

3. The option to drop flights and proportionally drop capacity across premium/economy (as QF/BA did during the GFC/aftermath) no longer exists if you're separating your classes across different planes. They would likely have been forced to drop below daily on the nonstop which would just totally destroy the business model.

4. Dropping the stop means less opportunity to pick up cargo and local traffic. QF's services to SIN from outside SYD/MEL would have experienced massive oversupply, and virtually every international aircraft flying to Asia/Europe would have been forced into expensive reconfigurations to balance out the seat count.

At the end of the day, it's all about profitability. Do I think SYD-LHR would be cool? Yes. Do I think it would be as profitable as flying via Asia/ME? No.


User currently offlinetayser From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 1130 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 10022 times:

The day we get aircraft (and engines) that can fly 2-3x faster than current aircraft will be the day you have Western Europe & Eastern North America to East Coast of Australia non-stop flights.

User currently offlineordwaw From United States of America, joined May 2006, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 9965 times:

Quoting tayser (Reply 19):

IMO Supersonic flights would only multiply all the reasons listed in this thread against non-stop flights ... Especially the inability to be profitable ....

[Edited 2012-12-15 18:58:05]

User currently offlineSethor From Australia, joined Oct 2011, 31 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 6583 times:

Quoting ZRH (Reply 7):
But who wanted to fly 20 hours non-stop in a cramped economy class? I think such flight would work in an only business class aircraft.

PER-DXB-LHR is 18:30hrs westbound & 17:30hrs eastbound take out runway taxi time, one take off & landing & it will be 30-60mins shorter.


User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4681 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6429 times:

Quoting ordwaw (Reply 16):
LHR - EZE at 6904 nm on a 772-ER

It's 6904 STATUTE miles (mi), but 5999 nautical miles (nm). Big difference on that sector length!



Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4941 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6158 times:

Quoting A342 (Reply 22):
It's 6904 STATUTE miles (mi), but 5999 nautical miles (nm). Big difference on that sector length!

I double check the timetable times, they will reflect conservatively typical winds between a city pair. I note that LHR-EZE is about 30-min longer than SIN-LHR which is ~ 240nm on an ESAD basis.


User currently offlineKaiTak747 From Switzerland, joined Aug 2012, 157 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 6001 times:

Quoting mitris (Thread starter):
What's keeping away BA and QF of having non stop flights to those cities?

As the flight length increases, the fuel consumption exponentially increases. An executive for Air France I think described ultra long haul planes as "flying fuel tanks".

This is because as the flight length increases, you need more fuel, which makes the plane heavier. Because the plane is heavier for take off and the earlier stage of the flight, you need to burn more fuel to cruise. So in the earlier stages of ULH flights the plane is extremely heavy and burns an enormous amount of fuel. Because the costs are so high, ULH flights are very difficult to work. This is the reason why the A340-500 and 777-200LR have sold in such low numbers.

LHR-SIN-SYD would therefore burn far less fuel than LHR-SYD because the plane would be lighter and burning less fuel during most of the journey. Also, if I was flying Y, J or F, I would prefer to stop as 17/18 hours is an awfully long time to be on a plane.

Quoting CXfirst (Reply 4):
I've wondered if an all-C class service could work

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"  Long haul business class airlines have historically not worked. Apart from LCY-JFK BA service, and Privatair I can't think of any left. SQ can't make ULH all J routes work in this climate, so I doubt anyone else can. There is so much traffic between LON and SYD but also so much capacity.


25 Post contains links Viscount724 : And I'm not aware of any remaining all-business class Privatair services. The last two were for KLM (AMS-IAH) and for LX (ZRH-EWR) and those were bot
26 LHCVG : Going off of Stitch, the specific alliance benefit is that you presumably do heavy codesharing through that hub anyway, plus the related alliance ser
27 mitris : Your statements make sense, KaiTak747. However, why would Airbus and Boeing design such ultra long range aircrafts when they're not selling that well
28 DocLightning : Not only that, but it would only really work for LHR-PER O&D customers. If you are going anywhere other than PER from LHR, then you'd rather make
29 Stitch : They were already doing the design work on their larger sisters (A340-600 and 777-300ER).
30 SEPilot : Boeing was not going to bother with the 77L; that is why the 77W entered service substantially before the 77L. But some customers pestered them for i
31 Stitch : Boeing launched the 777-200LR and 777-300ER together, but the 77L only secured a single customer so Boeing put it on hold and continued forward with
32 DocLightning : Well, the design costs would have been minimal since the parts lists are 100% overlapping with other 777 models (AFAIK They already had the tooling.
33 KaiTak747 : Good point mitris, I would imagine that these flights are not long enough to have serious payload restrictions. They could not have cost a huge amoun
34 DocLightning : Yup. It's useful for maybe five routes worldwide and as a VIP aircraft. Not exactly the best market planning. The 77L is about as fuel-efficient as t
35 KaiTak747 : Thank you for your great explanation. It is very interesting to know! I guess that most airlines would rather take the 787 or 773ER at the moment as
36 Viscount724 : But it's much heavier and costs like landing fees (and sometimes ATC and overflight fees) in most of the world are based on MTOW (max. landing weight
37 Stitch : The 777-200LR seems to be employed more for it's ability to operate without payload restrictions on long-haul missions more than for it's range.
38 Zkpilot : LHR-SYD is a tricky one as to why BA and QF don't have 77L.... BA don't need them (except for a direct flight to Oz) QF has been foolish for a long ti
39 LHCVG : I've always found that to be the most intriguing aspect of the 77L. Despite how Boeing advertised it as a ULH plane to open new markets, it's mostly
40 nrt1011 : Air Canada flies a 777-200LR on YVR-SYD. It seems the 300ER is just a tad too small for that trip so perhaps the 200LR is perfect for that route altho
41 sweair : EU-PER would be a nice route, that is not non stop SYD though, but you would arrive on Oz soil, sleep a night and then go domestic. The giant leap I w
42 rutankrd : But they aren't getting them ! The 788 models will be doing Regional and South Asia under Jetstar brand and the 789 model deliveries are cancelled. T
43 qf002 : Where there is a market, ULH can be very successful. QF's SYD-DFW service (the longest in the world once SQ drops their ULH flights) was upped to dai
44 VV701 : Giant leap? Certainly its a long, long flight. But if taking time out to overnight at PER, why not take time out and overnight at SIN and avoid an 18
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...
Not Using The Full Portion Of A Ticket... posted Thu Jan 3 2008 13:08:48 by Gilesdavies
Pilots Who Are Not From The Country They Fly For! posted Mon Sep 11 2006 10:57:23 by Cumulus
Why Are US Using The 767 To GLA? posted Thu May 25 2006 15:38:06 by Ba757gla
BA Or QF To Perth posted Tue Jan 13 2004 13:09:16 by Megatop
BA Or QF? posted Sun Apr 28 2002 23:37:23 by Alitalia777
TG Or BA Or QF To BKK posted Fri May 18 2001 08:11:51 by Cathay Pacific
How This BA A319 Will Transport The Olympic Flame? posted Wed May 16 2012 17:02:07 by Gonzalo
How Many Lear 23-25s Are Still Flying In The US? posted Wed Oct 12 2011 15:06:34 by canoecarrier
How Is BA Doing On The Cancun Route? posted Fri Dec 31 2010 12:54:21 by abibus
The BA Executive Club - Not Making The Grade? posted Sun Nov 1 2009 12:34:43 by BAfan