Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Transaero To Send 773 (non ER) To LAX  
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2477 posts, RR: 11
Posted (1 year 7 months 3 days ago) and read 6935 times:

http://airlineroute.net/2013/02/13/un-dme-s13/

For 3 weeks beginning in April, UN will schedule the 773 (non ER) into LAX. To my knowledge, this will be the longest scheduled flight for a non ER 777-300. 9800km +

This will be right up there in terms of capabilities for a 773. Probably explaining why the 744 is back on the route as of 22 april. Could it be one of the 744's is due for heavy maintenance?

btw, for anyone who is interested, current record holder for the 773 distance wise is TG from BKK to OSL. 8600 km.

Thenoflyzone


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25321 posts, RR: 49
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 3 days ago) and read 6888 times:

Korean did non-ER 773 to LAX for a couple years before its 77W fleet - some 5900miles.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25288 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 3 days ago) and read 6868 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 1):
Korean did non-ER 773 to LAX for a couple years before its 77W fleet - some 5900miles.

DME-LAX is 110 nm further than ICN-LAX.

DME-LAX 5319 nm
ICN-LAX 5209 nm


User currently offlineMEL From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 1098 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6586 times:

FYI, Korean flew the non-ER 773 on ICN-NRT-LAX not ICN-LAX.


NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineThe777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6565 posts, RR: 55
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6373 times:

Hi !

UN has had the 773 at LAX several times since they started service so not too surprising.

Still, perhaps they take a weight restriction?

Always nice to see another 777 carrier here at LAX!

The777Man



Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....CI, MU, LX and LH 777s
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2477 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5814 times:

Quoting The777Man (Reply 4):
Still, perhaps they take a weight restriction?

Well let's see. UN has RR engines on its 773. Meaning on the link below

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7772sec3.pdf

We need to look at the payload vs range chart with 90K rated engines. (not much difference anyways ref. the 98K chart)

DME-LAX is 5319 nm great circle, but in reality you're looking at 5700-5800 nm....if not more.

At that distance, a 773 can carry 75,000 lbs of payload. With 371 seats, and a heavy 4 class cabin, you can bet top dollar that there are weight restrictions on this flight, as 75000 lbs doesnt even cover all the passengers and baggage.

The return leg should have no problems, with the tailwind and all.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2013-02-14 05:03:40]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlinePacific From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2000, 1051 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5764 times:

Pretty amazing - it's as believable as flying an A330-300 DME-LAX! While 75,000lbs would cover pax + luggage at 200lb standard weight (on the high, but realistic side), there's the crew, the seats and the catering to add, then factor the winter headwinds. As the OP speculated, perhaps just a stop-gap due to performance limitations.

User currently offlineFlying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 2390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5670 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There must some serious weight restrictions on the outbound leg.

Don't forget GCM always mentions a certain mileage considering you take a straight route, which isn't obviously the case in real life ops.



Life is great at 41.000 feet...
User currently offlinesan747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4943 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3798 times:

Quoting Pacific (Reply 6):
Pretty amazing - it's as believable as flying an A330-300 DME-LAX!

And SU has done SVO-LAX on the A330-300 actually. Always amazing to see it when it comes in.



Scotty doesn't know...
User currently offlinecaptainstefan From United States of America, joined May 2007, 429 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days ago) and read 2823 times:

Quoting san747 (Reply 8):
Always amazing to see it when it comes in.

If there's any time an airplane is figuratively gasping for breath, I assume it's that A330 on final to LAX.



Long Live the Tulip!
User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days ago) and read 2790 times:

A new A330-300 has a fair bit more reach than a standard 777-300.

NS


User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1355 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days ago) and read 2788 times:

Why wouldn't they use the 777-200ER like they have in the past? Have they already done advance bookings or committed the fleet elsewhere or something? I know they've subbed in a 777-300 once in a while before but it does seem on the long side for it.

User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 2 days ago) and read 2777 times:

Yeah TBH, a 777-200ER would be able to heft the same payload on the route.

NS


User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2477 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2679 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 10):

A new A330-300 has a fair bit more reach than a standard 777-300.

Not quite. At least not before 2015.

http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamili...engeraircraft/a330family/a330-300/

Current highest MTOW on offer for the A333 is 235 tonnes. max range being around 5500nm.

The 773 has a 6005 nm range full loaded.

The 240 ton and 242 ton A333's dont come online until mid-2015, only then will the range of the A333 exceed that of the 773, and by only 100nm, so no, not a fair bit more.....

http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pr...ability-to-extend-market-coverage/

Anyways, all of this is academic. The A333 and 773 do not compete directly. The A333's direct competitor is the 77E.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2013-02-14 19:59:47]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17066 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2607 times:

Quoting captainstefan (Reply 9):
Quoting san747 (Reply 8):Always amazing to see it when it comes in.
If there's any time an airplane is figuratively gasping for breath, I assume it's that A330 on final to LAX.

Is that the longest scheduled A330-300 flight?



Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlinecedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8114 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2403 times:

If it's such a stretch (pardon the pun) for the 777-300 non-ER, perhaps they do actually tech stop it somewhere? Would only add an hour to the journey and they could go with full cabins and lots of cargo. Then again some posters say they've done LAX with the 773 before so obviously it can do it somehow without bankrupting UN.

As an aside, man are there a lot of Russians in LA.



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2477 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2208 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 14):
Is that the longest scheduled A330-300 flight?

No, since the aircraft in the schedules is an A332 i believe. They sub an A333 on occasion.

Longest scheduled A333 is SS from RUN to ORY, 9337 km, 5042 nm.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2477 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2088 times:

correction: even SS has the A332 scheduled. They just got 2 brand new A333's a few months ago, and they sub them occasionally to RUN.

So the next longest A333 flight is TK from SIN to IST. 4682 nm.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25288 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1879 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 17):
So the next longest A333 flight is TK from SIN to IST. 4682 nm.

LH begins A333 seasonal service YVR-MUC in May, 4517 nm, not much shorter.


User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17066 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 22 hours ago) and read 1766 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 16):
No, since the aircraft in the schedules is an A332 i believe. They sub an A333 on occasion.

Didnt know that SU had the A332.



Work Hard, Fly Right
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...
Does AF Plan To Send The A380 To LAX? posted Tue Jul 27 2010 09:48:32 by LY777
Non-Reving From LAX To Asia/Australia posted Sat Jul 29 2006 06:27:21 by Nygfan84
UA Non Stop From LAX To FRA posted Mon Aug 11 2003 21:49:33 by 747400sp
Could Thomson Ever Send The 787 To SAN? posted Mon Dec 3 2012 05:59:33 by LGWflyer
Wasn't Air France Suppose To Discontinue LAX-PPT? posted Sun Nov 11 2012 08:34:29 by g500
SQ To End LAX/EWR-SIN Nonstop Flights posted Wed Oct 24 2012 07:08:59 by sfoa380
Thai Airways To Upgrade LAX To 747 posted Wed Aug 29 2012 00:33:20 by Superfly
AA To Upgrade LAX-LHR To 777-300 Jun 2013 posted Mon Jun 25 2012 08:08:16 by miaami
Emirates To Reduce LAX posted Mon May 28 2012 00:17:40 by HB-IWC
CX Reduces Service To JFK, LAX And YYZ posted Thu May 17 2012 06:55:08 by cx828