Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
777, Whats The Fuss About, Why Is It So Special?  
User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1881 posts, RR: 3
Posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6935 times:

hello all, i know all the stuff about the 777 thats so great but i want someone to set me straight on the technical specs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The engines for example, are do they have any special features unique to them sleves besides size and power?? What about wings and control surfaces? What makes them more special then any other wing? BTW DONT MENTION FLY BY WIRE!!!!!!!!!!! LoL!!!!!!!!!
Bri

47 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCMK10 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 513 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6912 times:

If you ask me, if your in coach on an airline with 2-5-2 seating (like AA) other then the less noise its no different then a DC-10.
DC-10's Forever



"Traveling light is the only way to fly" - Eric Clapton
User currently offlineUal777contrail From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6914 times:

in my opinion it is just like the DC-10 and i really like the 10's but it is new and the ptv's the space in first,business,and coach.
it is truly an awesome plane.at least the UNITED 777's.i have yet to fly on any other carriers 777's




ual 777 contrail


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6891 times:

It's Fly-by-wire!! Oh wait, you said don't mention fly-by-wire! LOL  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

It think it's because of a couple reasons. The wing is supercritical and one of the most advanced by Boeing. But one of the biggest is that Boeing had an about face on listening to the customer about a new product. Whatever input customers had, Boeing listened. Instead of thier old philosophy of, make it how we think it should be and the customer will like it whether they want to or not. The interior was somewhat "revolutionary" at the time. And it is just one awesome aircraft.

So, I don't think it's the airplane itself that is so attractive, it's the way it was developed. Just my two cents.


User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1866 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6899 times:

All newer wing designs have supercritical airfoil cross section. That's not a reason why the B777 is special.

To make a long story short, the B777 is an efficient design that offers lower operating cost than the competition. The B777 wing is a much cleaner design, because the competition has a wing that needs to accommodate both a twin and quad configuration.


User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1881 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6861 times:

alright well see EXPLAIN please! Like WHAT about the wing make sit cleaner?? and what keeps the cost lower???????????????? when you say lower are we talking 1% seat permile lower then say an MD11 (example only you can compare to whatever aircraft you like) or 50%??? thanks im being kind of tough on this one but you guys are doin good LoL!!!!!!!!!!!

User currently offlineDesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7811 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6857 times:

From my point-of-view, a lot of the 777 greatness (as a design) in its simplicity and a few details.

First of all the wing is pretty impressive. It both a high lift wing and a high speed wing, a combination of traits that really hasn't been possible till recently. It manages to offer impressive lift capabilities with simplier double-slotted flaps. As a comparison the older 747 uses tripple-slotted flaps. Plus the wing does not require winglets or a fancy wingtip to optimize performance. Plus looking at it from a side-view, the wing has a very elegant curve to it.

The engines. Prior to the development of the 777, nothing was putting out much more than 65,000 pounds of thrust. The size and the power of the engines are something that is unique to the 777. The technology that went into them has clearly trickled down to new engine designs that are flying on the newer Boeing and Airbus designs, like the JP 7000 engine that will be on the A380.

The cabin. Boeing spent a good deal of time designing a cabin that would maximize interior volume. Not only are the curvy overhead bins pretty, they are very space efficient.

Working together. This is probably the most impressive part about the 777's design. The customers had an unheard of level of input in the final design. It is a practice that has worked so well, that it would seem odd not to continue this practice.

Computer designed. The 777 was the first commercial aircraft to be completely designed in an electronic environment. Seems ho hum by 2002 standards... but think back to the early 90's and how all planes before it were designed.

Simplicity. Ever notice that the 777's cross section is a perfect circle. That creates for a more efficient design.


I hope this helps you understand.



Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 7, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6834 times:

How can you possibly say that inside it is like the DC-10?

The 777 interior is more spacious that pretty much any other plane due to is redesigned overheads, lighting...etc.

Fantastic plane

Jeremy


User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1881 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6756 times:

yeah but if you go inside the engines whats different about these engines, what makes these engines more fuel efficaint?????????????????

User currently offlineMr.BA From Singapore, joined Sep 2000, 3423 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6736 times:

Well I wouldn't say it's special but it's a wonderful twin-jet. It's 2 large and efficient engines allow it to fly as long as 16 hours (and it's a twin-jet) with a relatively high MTOW (656,000), it's got good fuel burn figures. It flies at Mach.84, quite a feat for a twin. It's got a great cabin for comfort, it's very much technologically advanced. You almost can't find any fault out of it.


Boeing747 万岁!
User currently offline737doctor From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1332 posts, RR: 38
Reply 10, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6715 times:

Try this post on the Tech/Ops forum and see what responses you get...


Patrick Bateman is my hero.
User currently offlineBrianhames From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 795 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6688 times:

The 777 is the first Boeing airplane to maintain a completly circular fuselage, therefore maximizing cabin space.

ANA 777s are awesome, recently flew to Tokyo and back from San Francisco in First Class, oh yeah.


User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1866 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6617 times:

I have already explained why the B777 wing is cleaner. It is designed for a twin, unlike its competition which is designed for both a twin and quad. Since it has an aerodynamically superior wing, an engine that's a few years more advanced than the ones used on the A330/340, and twins are generally cheaper to operate than quads, that's why the B777 generally has lower unit operating cost.

User currently offlineLeo From China, joined May 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 6576 times:

This is what all the fuss is about............................


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Walter Pietsch
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Watt
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Toby Willis



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Garry Lewis
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Craig Murray



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Colin K. Work
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Hiromichi Miyagaki
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Edward Lai



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Craig Murray
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Walter Pietsch



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Chandler
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jazon Alves



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jazon Alves



...it's clear is it not....


User currently offlineSailorOrion From Germany, joined Feb 2001, 2058 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 6578 times:

If the 777 would be cheaper to operate in gerneral, why would Airbus have sold ONE A330/A340? Neither of them has lower operating costs. It depends on so many factors that you simply cannot say this.

The 777 is a modern airliner, including the lastest wing, engine, design (full computerized) and control (full fly-by-wire) technology available, keeping both operational cost and maintenance workload down. She also offers a family of products, from mid-ranges to ultra-long hauls and different fuselage sizes. The fuselage has sufficient cargo capacity and offers a quiet and spacious cabin.

The 777 is a truly awesome aircraft. So are her competitors.

SailorOrion


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8046 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6522 times:

I think in a few years the 777-300ER could become a quite popular plane, mostly because it is a true successor to the 747 Classics.  Smile

User currently offlineRabenschlag From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 1022 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6509 times:

besides all the technical beauty, i think its also because its boeings first completely new design since 1982, when the B767 went into service.

but let me add a critical comment on the fuselage diametre. if you think of a fuselage being designed to pack pax and cargo in the most efficient way, the 777 fuse ist a bit too large. if you put in two ld3 containers, a lot of space is wasted. the a330 packs the containers most efficiently. however, the 330 has more headroom.

r.


User currently offlineRabenschlag From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 1022 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 6498 times:

of course, the 777 has more headroom.

im sorry, r.


User currently offlineAcidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1875 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6467 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Lower operating costs are a relative term, which can be applied between any airline operators. If an airline is an all Airbus shop, then that would be a factor that would perhaps influence the decision to buy A330/A340s. If an airline is already a 767 shop (not necessarily a like comparison), it could make more sense in that manner to go with the 777. Depends on the kinds of routes and services that an airline provides. And all these costs can offset somewhere else. A 777 could be cheaper to run than an A330, but 330s don't have the big long ETOPS certifications that a 777 can get, which is really important to trans-Pacific operators. If the airline is an already Airbus shop though, it could be more economical to stay with the 330/340 series in order to reap the benefits of a larger sales relationship with Airbus, common parts/tooling/maintenance procedures, common cockpits, etc. What makes an airplane profitable to a particular operator is a lot more than just how much gas it drinks...


Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1866 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6440 times:

The B742 is a lot more expensive to operate than the B744. Does it mean the B742 should disappear from airline operations the day the B744 entered into service? Of course not. When one has committed financially to an aircraft type, it is often too hard to change one's direction. Also, operation cost is not everything. For example, the A330/340 is cheaper to acquire. So airlines have to decide between low capital cost/high operational cost vs high capital cost/low operational cost. In addition, the B772 is larger than the A333/343. Larger capacity means more revenue opportunities, but it adds to one's cost base if one cannot fill the planes. In short, lower unit operating cost does not mean that the B777 will get the whole market. The B772A/ER is an econmically and technically superior aircraft. That's why Airbus has netted fewer than 250 A333/343s since the B777 launch. During the same period, the B772A/ER has logged about 500 sales.

User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6412 times:

Your statement is true. But it's largely skewed by fewer airlines buying a large amount of aircraft.

On an airline by airline competition...more have chosen the 330/340.

I'm a big fan of both birds.


User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1881 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6368 times:

ALRIGHT DOES ANYONE KNOW IF THE ENGINES HAVE ANYTHING SPECIAL IN THEM OR WORK IN ANY WAY DIFFERENTLY THEN OTHER ENGINES THAT MIGHT MAKE THEM SPECIAL? So does the three engine son the MD-11 cost more to operate then the two on the 777? I guess im anxios to get behind the engines i dont know much about them exept the basics i want to see what makes them more efficant in fuel burn or what makes them QUIETER?

User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1866 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 6335 times:

Greg:

The basis of your argument is not solid. Larger carriers are actually more sensitive to opearting cost. A couple of percent difference of a large fleet means a large amount of money saved or spent. Because of the overhead cost, impact of a lower operating cost aircraft would be relatively smaller for a small fleet. That's why more large carriers are shunning away from the A333/343. That's why Airbus has to concentrate on smaller carriers. If the A343 were a more cost effective solution, there would be a lot more airlines ordering large fleet of A333/343 instead of the B772A/ER. Mind you, we are talking about an industry that a tenth of a percent can means profit or loss. The cost advantage that the B777 has is not astounding, but it's enough to have swung many major decisions in their favor.

Flyboy80:

Yes, it's cheaper to maintain two engines on the B777 than three engines on the MD-11. The questions you asked cannot be answered in a few lines. You can post it in the Tech/Op forum. I'm sure someone will be glad to answer your questions.


User currently offlineDesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7811 posts, RR: 16
Reply 23, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 6294 times:

Flyboy80.... hold on a second.

Let me clarify my comments about the engines.

SIZE matters completely. Prior to the 777 large high-bypass engines were maxing out at around the 65,000 lb thrust range and had main fan diameters of around 90". In order to get the power the 777 needed, here were are talking about 77,000-100,000+ lbs of thrust the engines needed to be something special (don't take that literally). First of all they are all large... 120"+ fan diameter. These engines were significantly bigger than anything GE, PW or RR had built before. Requiring in large part major redesigns of older engines (in the case of RR and PW) or a cleanslate design, which the GE90 essentially was. Because everything is bigger that presents manufactering and engineering challenges. How do you make the main fan out of titanium or composites when it is so big. Likewise for the internal bits as well. Plus weight is an issue... how do you make something that is considerably bigger than anything else, and keep its weight down. Even though, say a GE90-92 produces 40% more power than a GE CF6-80 it doesn't burn 40% more fuel. Bear in mind this is not 100% factual, but it should serve as a basis of why the 777 is so impressive. And more importantly how the technologies that it pioneered have began to show up in other new designs.



Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1881 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6190 times:

THANK YOU DESERT JETS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
iM STILL INTERESTED IN EVERYONE ELSES POINT OF VIEW AND I WILL POST THIS SOON IN TECH/OPS THANKS!!!!


25 Mr.BA : It's got a maintenance panel in the cockpit making the job easier for everyone.
26 Greg : My argument holds. Fact: There are more customers for the A330/340 than there are for the 777. That is the only point I was making. Clearly if the 777
27 Travelin man : Well, here are some reasons there is a big fuss about the 777: Air China Air France Alitalia All Nippon Asiana American Airlines British Airways Catha
28 Prebennorholm : The B777 is very special because it is the only totally new US airliner which has been introduced into service during the last twenty years. And in te
29 Post contains images CF-CPI : A couple of things: Lufthansa and Air France are the flag carriers of the nations with the largest stake in Airbus. I'm not accusing anyone of sleazy
30 N79969 : NWA was a launch customer for the 330 and would have to pay penalties if they cancelled in favor of the 777. Airbus sweetened the deal for NWA as well
31 LMP737 : Flyboy80: Instead of me giving you a history and technical aspects of the 777 try going to your local Borders and Barnes&Noble. Try finding Boeing 777
32 Dynkrisolo : Greg: Lufthansa, Iberia, and Air France chose the A340 before the B777 was available. Air France, moreover, has purchased more B777s than A340s in rec
33 Keesje : It is the best (most efficient) long haul 320 seater just like A332 appears to be the best long haul 250 seater I guess ... Cabins very nice (space),
34 Greg : Dyn.... I concurr. More sales==more profit (hopefully). Airbus however, has a VERY strong tool in that all their products share a common cockpit quali
35 EGGD : Nothing. Its not special in any way, its just another ordinary generic airliner.
36 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : EGGD: Your statement by itself is not wrong. But knowing your preferece, would you say the same thing for the A340? I kinda doubt you would. Greg: The
37 Greg : If there is a market for a 400 pax twin...why isn't AI building one? Or does the A330 just not lend itself to a further stretch?
38 N79969 : I think a 400 pax twin would conflict with the Airbus philosophy. I don't what their threshold is but above some seating capacity, Airbus goes for qua
39 Dynkrisolo : Airbus definitely thinks there is a market for a 350+ pax aircraft. That's why Airbus has the A346. Why did they go with a quad instead of a twin? The
40 Prebennorholm : Dynkrisolo, I think you are right. It probably all boils down to ETOPS. When the 330/340 family was launched, then hardly anybody was dreaming about E
41 BWIA 772 : Simply put the 777 is like the 737ng it meets the airlines' need for that size aircraft perfectly. Will luv to see a 772 in BWIA colours have tolive w
42 N79969 : I have heard that ETOPS twin aircraft have lower diversion rates than trijets or quads. The simplest explanation is that with two engines you have few
43 Cx340 : Well, I don't know what makes the 777 so special, but all I can tell you is that my Uncle, who is a 777 captain for Singapore Airlines and who has flo
44 Flyboy80 : someone do me a favor and put this is Tech/Ops for me !!!!!!!!!!! thx
45 EGGD : The A340 is nothing special either, whats your point?
46 LMP737 : The 777 was the first widebody twin to have ETOPS certification "out of the box". Prior widebody twins had to prove their reliability in airline servi
47 Cloudy : And getting the 777 ETOPS out of the box raised standards - it didn't lower them. Boeing achieved this by pounding the test planes into the ground - t
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...
Why Is It So Expensive To Fly To YYZ? posted Sun Nov 9 2003 23:48:15 by ManchesterMAN
CWL Why Is It So Bad! posted Thu Sep 25 2003 18:03:04 by EGFFbmi
Why Is It So Expensive To Fly To Colorado? posted Fri Oct 12 2001 10:05:52 by Iwareboy
LHR, Why Is It So Crowded? posted Mon Mar 6 2000 01:18:11 by Twa747100
Why Is It That The SE Is So Neglected? posted Sat Jun 15 2002 07:00:36 by Gsoflyer
Why Is It Always The Same Answer? posted Sat Jun 10 2006 00:27:43 by JetBlueGuy2006
Why Is It The 747-8? posted Wed Jan 4 2006 22:56:22 by DTW757
Why Is Lufthansa So Keen On The 146/Avro RJs posted Tue Aug 30 2005 11:13:18 by Vfw614
Why Is Airbus So Popular In The Middle East? posted Fri Jan 28 2005 13:18:03 by Terre
Why Is It Called The Song Music Trivia Challenge? posted Mon Jan 24 2005 01:11:44 by ISLIPwn