Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Last 777-200ER?  
User currently offlineWestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2134 posts, RR: 7
Posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 29214 times:

Per Puget Sound Test Flights, ANAs 777-281ER JA745A (L/N 1112) made her first flight on Thursday.

There is a very old 77E order for Asiana still on the books. Are Asiana still planning to take delivery of that order? If Asiana do not intend to take delivery of that 77E, then this ANA airframe may be the last 777-200ER ( # 421) built.


The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
69 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 29190 times:

Very interesting. It is very hard for me to believe that up to this month the 77E is the most produced variant of the 777. 77E =420 and 77W=406 as of the end of May.

I think the math works out that for any mission further than 1,500nm it is better to operate a 77L than a 77E which is similarly surprising to the statement above. An excellent aircraft for many customers in the late 90's early 2000's.

tortugamon


User currently offlineje89_w From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 2361 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 28915 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Interesting. On the Boeing Factory tour last month, I remember seeing this frame (L/N 1112) on its final assembly before it left the production hangar. I realized that this was one of the last B772ERs produced but now I wonder if it really is the last. Time will tell.

User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9643 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 28583 times:

Asiana took delivery of a 772ER last year so I assume they will take another one which was ordered in 2008.


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4525 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 28327 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1):

I think the math works out that for any mission further than 1,500nm it is better to operate a 77L than a 77E

That mileage seems too low, the 77L is a lot heavier than the -E



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31003 posts, RR: 86
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 28150 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1):
I think the math works out that for any mission further than 1,500nm it is better to operate a 77L than a 77E which is similarly surprising to the statement above.
Quoting Max Q (Reply 4):
That mileage seems too low, the 77L is a lot heavier than the -E

I believe it is closer to 2000nm. And while the 77L is heavier, it also incorporates a number of aerodynamic tweaks that help efficiency.


User currently offlinejoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3169 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 27992 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
And while the 77L is heavier, it also incorporates a number of aerodynamic tweaks that help efficiency.

A number of which can be (and have been on a great scale) retrofitted to the 772, 77E and 773: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aer...03_09/pdfs/AERO_Q309_article02.pdf


User currently offlineSASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 771 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 27599 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Max Q (Reply 4):
Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1):

I think the math works out that for any mission further than 1,500nm it is better to operate a 77L than a 77E

That mileage seems too low, the 77L is a lot heavier than the -E

I think that as long as it is used for the ultra long haul destinations, it can be done profitable but for missions up to 10,000 km, the A330-300 has better performances with the A350-900 on its way. Not strange that the 772ER does not sell anymore, and neither the 77L (expensive fuel). But on the other hand, it killed the A343 and MD11.

However the bird (772ER) has changed the way of longhaul flying. Great but noisy bird.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 27553 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
I believe it is closer to 2000nm. And while the 77L is heavier, it also incorporates a number of aerodynamic tweaks that help efficiency.

Don't the engines have improved SFC, too?


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3255 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 27250 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):

I believe it is closer to 2000nm. And while the 77L is heavier, it also incorporates a number of aerodynamic tweaks that help efficiency.

Seems low given the much heavier weights and the only tweak is sexed up wings, also seems low given the order book.


User currently offlinezkojq From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 1224 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 27122 times:

This topic has been discussed a few times. I think Boeing will continue to deliver the odd 777-200ER, though certainly not at the rate it previously did so.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1):
I think the math works out that for any mission further than 1,500nm it is better to operate a 77L than a 77E which is similarly surprising to the statement above.

Hardly justifies a subfleet. Particularly in the case of Asiana where they have no GE90 engines in their fleet and have no GE90 powered aircraft on order. I would certainly expect Asiana to take delivery.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 3):

  



Air New Zealand; first to fly the Boeing 787-9. ZK-NZE, NZ103 AKL-SYD, 2014/08/09. I was 83rd to board.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31003 posts, RR: 86
Reply 11, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 27091 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 9):
Seems low given the much heavier weights and the only tweak is sexed up wings, also seems low given the order book.

Most 777-200LR customers are new to the 777 family so that they chose that model over the 777-200ER reinforces the claims that the 777-200LR is more efficient even on shorter stage-lengths.

As to why more were not sold, most existing 777 customers already had their 777-200ER fleets in place and were not topping up. Though of those that did, some (like DL) chose the 77L instead of more 77Es. Also, Airbus had consistently improved the A330-300 to the point that it was capable of performing a significant portion of 777-200ER missions with better economics. As such, that shrunk the market for the 777-200LR to missions with high payloads and long ranges.


User currently offline817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 2388 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 26764 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Most 777-200LR customers are new to the 777 family so that they chose that model over the 777-200ER reinforces the claims that the 777-200LR is more efficient even on shorter stage-lengths.

As to why more were not sold, most existing 777 customers already had their 777-200ER fleets in place and were not topping up. Though of those that did, some (like DL) chose the 77L instead of more 77Es. Also, Airbus had consistently improved the A330-300 to the point that it was capable of performing a significant portion of 777-200ER missions with better economics. As such, that shrunk the market for the 777-200LR to missions with high payloads and long ranges.

   Don't think I could have said it any better. For this reason alone is why I think the 777-8LX will do well when launched. If more people knew this they would stop labeling the 77L as a "inefficient" aircraft



Reality be Rent. Synapse, break! Vanishment, This World!
User currently onlineraggi From Norway, joined Oct 2000, 1001 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 26601 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):

But then again, most 77L customers also bought the 77W, so more commonality as opposed to a 77E together with 77W which don't share the same powerplant.




raggi



Stick & Rudder
User currently offlinexdlx From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 658 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 23703 times:

Amazing that UA never ordered the LR or W versions.

User currently offlineSASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 771 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 22319 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting xdlx (Reply 14):

Amazing that UA never ordered the LR or W versions.

I can't imagine an airline can profitably operate a LR 777 unless you carry 50% premium passengers on top of a lot of economy plus passengers.......it is way too much plane with the current fuel prices (IMHO).

But, I agree with you that the 77W could be the easiest 747 replacement. You can operate them side by side with the 789/7810 and A359/A3510.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4229 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 21924 times:

I did not realize that the 772ER is still in production. I would assume that it would stop with the introduction of the new 777 variant.


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinePA515 From New Zealand, joined Nov 2007, 882 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 21143 times:

Quoting WestWing (Thread starter):
There is a very old 77E order for Asiana still on the books. Are Asiana still planning to take delivery of that order?

Looks like it. There was a Matt Cawby photo in the last week with a partly painted OZ tail in the Fuel Dock area next to the 6th 200LR for ET.

The last 200(ER) and the last 200(LR) on order.

Found the photo
http://paineairport.com/kpae6347.htm

PA515

[Edited 2013-06-15 12:33:30]

[Edited 2013-06-15 12:54:13]

[Edited 2013-06-15 12:58:01]

User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3264 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 20783 times:

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 15):
I can't imagine an airline can profitably operate a LR 777 unless you carry 50% premium passengers on top of a lot of economy plus passengers.......it is way too much plane with the current fuel prices (IMHO).

Did you remember to included the cargo hold?



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25346 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 20729 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
Though of those that did, some (like DL) chose the 77L instead of more 77Es.

77E couldn't handle LAX-SYD or ATL-JNB.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 20, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 20050 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 16):

I did not realize that the 772ER is still in production. I would assume that it would stop with the introduction of the new 777 variant.

Why not? All 772-series aircraft use most of the same parts (the engines being the biggest difference) and the same tooling for assembly. And as long as replacement parts exclusively for the 772 continue to be manufactured for existing operators, those parts can be used to build new aircraft.

What I wonder is why any airline that operates the 77W wouldn't just convert their remaining 772 orders to 77L.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25346 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 19966 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
What I wonder is why any airline that operates the 77W wouldn't just convert their remaining 772 orders to 77L.

After the 77E mentioned in the opening post is delivered to NH there is only one unfilled 77E order and that's part of an order placed over 5 years ago. I personally doubt that any more 77Es will be built.


User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 19802 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
What I wonder is why any airline that operates the 77W wouldn't just convert their remaining 772 orders to 77L.

Might have something to do with the extra 50M or so Boeing would expect from such a conversion, and if you're paying that much why not go full hog and spec a 77W? Not as if there's many 15+ hour missions out there.

Or that the 77L needs to fly a lot longer than 2000NM to beat a 77E in the DOC vs Revenue game.

Or because the A350 and 787-9 are just around the corner, having between them killed the 77E/L very dead indeed.

Perhaps even a combination of it all.



From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31003 posts, RR: 86
Reply 23, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 19648 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting xdlx (Reply 14):
Amazing that UA never ordered the LR or W versions.

They had the 747-400 so they didn't need the 777-300ER and until recently they operated their 777-200ERs below the maximum rated TOW and thrust (to save money on fees and maintenance) so they didn't need everything a 77E could give them, much less a 77L.  
Quoting brilondon (Reply 16):
I did not realize that the 772ER is still in production. I would assume that it would stop with the introduction of the new 777 variant.

If you're willing to pay for it, Boeing is willing to build it (within reason).  
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 20):
What I wonder is why any airline that operates the 77W wouldn't just convert their remaining 772 orders to 77L.
Quoting B777LRF (Reply 22):
Might have something to do with the extra 50M or so Boeing would expect from such a conversion...

I've heard that the difference in Average Sales Price between a 777-200ER and 777-200LR was far, far, closer than the difference in Average List Price. I expect a significant part of that is GE's willingness to make deals on the engines (especially if it is to convert a customer who would order a 77E with RR or PW power).

NH's recent 777-200ERs are said to have been compensation for 787 delivery delays. As for OZ, I am guessing they need them for missions beyond the capabilities of their A330-300s and they could not wait for their A350-900s.


User currently offlinewaly777 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2012, 336 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 19198 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19):
77E couldn't handle LAX-SYD or ATL-JNB.

Hmm why do you think it couldn't handle either? I admit the JNB-ATL routing might be difficult on strong headwind days but LAX-SYD should be easy to accomplish considering it has a higher range than the 744 and 744ER


77E range =7725nm



The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
25 777STL : A 77E can do LAX-SYD, although not with the uplift of the 77L. In the early days of its LAX-SYD route, DL actually subbed in the 77E occasionally when
26 Viscount724 : Also have to consider the economics, cargo capacity etc.
27 WestWing : Thank you so much for pointing out that photograph. So it is the Asiana aircraft pictured there which may be the last 77E built. I assume we will kno
28 Post contains links zkojq : Aeroflot's website say they are expecting to take delivery of 777-200s this year. The order was placed two years ago and includes 777-300ERs also. htt
29 bmibaby737 : I believe they converted them all to 300ERs as the only orders on Boeings website are: Aeroflot - Russian Airlines Russian Federation Europe 777-300E
30 7BOEING7 : From Boeing's website: 422 ordered/420 delivered Remaining deliveries 1-ANA, 1-AAR
31 Cargolex : It hasn't been updated to include the past month yet. The ANA (JA745A) has already been delivered (saw the departure in person).
32 Stitch : That is correct
33 HeeseokKoo : Asiana is getting one 772ER in July, its 13th 772ER, and it will be used for upgrading product to JFK beginning July 22nd. I'm surprised to know that
34 ChicagoFlyer : I totally believe this! What basically happens is that Boeing themselves would come to an airline and show charts with 777-200LR inferior to 777-200E
35 WestWing : Thanks for the confirmation. By the way, the OZ 77E (ln 1117 or 1118 (?) ) has not made her first flight yet. Perhaps this one is being painted on-si
36 PA515 : The OZ 77E should be L/N 1117 and a JJ 77W L/N 1118. The JJ aircraft made an appearance a few days after the OZ. PA515
37 Pellegrine : Huh? This was closer to 3500+nm. Wow. I'm definitely no aeronautical engineer, but I can easily see how the new, smaller 737-style vortex generators
38 WestWing : It is now five weeks since l/n 1117 for OZ was first pictured out of the factory floor on Matt Cawby's website but this aircraft still has not flown.
39 Post contains images NWAROOSTER : Is Asina going to need to repiace the 777 they lost in San Francisco?
40 Tristan7977 : This means no more RR Trent 800, PW4098, and less powerful versions of the GE90.
41 ckfred : Doesn't AA have some 77Es still on order? I would assume that some of these will convert to 77W. Yet, I bet there are routes in which a 777-200 makes
42 Someone83 : These orders have already been converted to the 77W
43 DocLightning : It's interesting. The 777-200 frame is dead except for the freighter variant. Not surprising, given that Airbus replaced it with their newer HGW A333s
44 HeeseokKoo : OZ already delayed its deployment to July 29th. Between 22nd and 28th, already tight 772 rotation (due to the accident) becomes even more tight as OZ
45 NorthstarBoy : As to the first part of your post, UA 117 and UA 895 would like to disagree with you. Both are longer than Lax-Syd distance wise and both operate wit
46 Post contains links 817Dreamliiner : Matt Cawby has a photo of HL8284 coming out of the paint hanger on the 13th: http://www.flickr.com/photos/microvolt/9282204692/
47 FWAERJ : If I remember correctly, AA converted all their 77Es on order to the 77W recently, at the same time they boosted their 77W orders.
48 Post contains links WestWing : HL8284 made her first ("B1") flights today, July 17 as BOE587 PAE to MWH and MWH to PAE.
49 Post contains links WestWing : Asiana HL8284 (ln 1117) PAE to ICN delivery flight was on Friday July 26 (link: AAR274D). If this is really the last 777-200ER, then there have been 4
50 NYCAAer : At AA, since we've taken delivery of the 77W, the pilots I've flown with have told me that the economics of the 77W vs. the 772 are much better. We've
51 tortugamon : I thought they already converted their 77E options into 77W orders? Glad to hear the investment is working out for AA. tortugamon
52 Stitch : That is correct. Boeing's O&D page shows 47 77Es ordered and 47 77Es delivered and 20 77Ws ordered and 8 delivered.
53 Longhornmaniac : The common denominator with those three routes is they're polar, which reduces the "effective length" westbound. A 77E would struggle to handle the w
54 avek00 : Not really. United was in no financial condition to order either plane for much of the 21st century, has no need for the 77L's performance specs, and
55 flight152 : EWR-HKG, EWR-BOM, ORD-HKG among others could easily benefit from the 77L.
56 AeroWesty : Before AF447, I never realized the havoc that the Intertropical Convergence Zones could have on aviation. Aren't SFO/LAX-AKL and LHR-EZE about the fa
57 jfk777 : Who needs a 777LR. JFK and ORD to Hong Kong are flown by Cathay using 777-300ER's. UA has flown Newark to both Hong Kong, Mumbai and Dehli using Cont
58 Viscount724 : NZ uses the 77E YVR-AKL which is further than the other routes you mention. YVR-AKL 6,121 nm LHR-EZE 5,999 nm SFO-AKL 5,663 nm LAX-AKL 5,652 nm
59 Pellegrine : Not really. As was said before LAX-SYD-LAX is not a problem for a passenger load, sure the 77L could uplift more cargo. ATL-JNB isn't a problem at al
60 Post contains links and images EK413 : HL8284 rolled out of the paint hangar on the 13th of July 2013. http://www.flickr.com/photos/microvolt/9282204692/ This is the final 777-200ER that r
61 HeeseokKoo : Arrived ICN on July 27th 12:30pm-ish and its first revenue flight is July 29th to JFK, at 10am. It looks to me a quick process, but I guess it's doab
62 Boeing717200 : Those are north south routes. Not the same as routes that encounter a significant amount of the jet stream.
63 Ejazz : The longest B777-200ER flight in my logbook was with SQ from Las Vegas - Hong Kong. Flight time 16 hours 8 minutes. Obviously load restricted. Althoug
64 HeeseokKoo : In fact, this fleet is used for a couple of flights on July 28th, too. 10am to NRT and 8:10pm to HKG. That's less than 24 hours after it arrives to I
65 avek00 : Not really. The GE90 77Es can handle all of those routes with relative ease. Payload restrictions are rather uncommon these days (ORD-HKG is currentl
66 flight152 : Oh ok. When I was left behind in HKG last summer due to payload restrictions it must have meant the 77E was perfect for that route. My bad.
67 nomorerjs : ORD/NYC to HKG on a 77W are routine, no need for a 77L.
68 flight152 : Who said there was a need for additional seats?
69 Pellegrine : Wow the winds on that were fierce for it to be that long. That should usually be a ~14.5-15 hr flight. Interesting though, forgot SQ even served LAS,
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...
The Future Of The Current SQ 777-200ER Routes posted Tue Oct 25 2011 12:54:23 by SASMD82
Can The 777-200ER Do BOM-EWR/JFK Non-stop? posted Sat Dec 5 2009 00:28:24 by Jayeshrulz
777-200ER - Is The End In Sight? posted Wed Oct 21 2009 09:18:07 by WINGS
The Last Of The 777-300s (non-ER)? posted Fri Jul 28 2006 00:43:19 by WestWing
Last 777 In PHX On To The 744 YES! posted Sun Mar 28 2004 05:53:53 by AV8AJET
First Photo Of The First KLM 777-200ER .. posted Tue Aug 12 2003 16:21:26 by Keesje
Will Qantas Eventually Get The B 777-200ER/300ER? posted Fri Mar 9 2001 04:11:37 by United Airline
CX Changing Its Tune To The 777-200ER? posted Sat Feb 3 2001 01:36:39 by CX747
There Is No Such Thing As The 777-200ER? posted Sat Nov 27 1999 17:16:36 by Lufthansa
SQ 777-200ER Retrofit posted Tue Jun 11 2013 05:49:34 by megatop