Boeing 777 Mtow Options — Tech Ops Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Boeing 777 Mtow Options

SXI899 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2008, 178 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5335 times:

I was doing a little research for work, and was wondering what (if any) MTOW options there are for the different models of the 777 (ie. -200LR/-300ER etc.).

The Boeing ACAP documents provide some information in that respect for the original models, but I noticed that for the -200LR and -300ER, the design MTOW in the ACAP document differs from the MTOW in the EASA TCDS, while the FAA TCDS refers you to the AFM.

Does anyone have more detailed information that they are able to share, or perhaps can direct me to somewhere where I can find that information myself?

Cheers,
Yorden

[Edited 2008-08-15 01:45:53]

Any Type, Any Time, Anywhere

16 replies: All unread, jump to last

Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 5301 times:

The options for baseline/maximum MTOW for the 777's are as follows, in 1,000 lbs:

777-200: 506/545
777-200ER: 580/650
777-200ER w/ -300 landing gear: 632.5/656
777-200LR: 710/766
777-300: 580/660
777-300ER: 700/775

source: Boeing 777 Standard Selections catalog

SXI899 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2008, 178 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5284 times:

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 1):
The options for baseline/maximum MTOW for the 777's are as follows, in 1,000 lbs:

777-200LR: 710/766
777-300ER: 700/775

Thanks for the info.
Interestingly, the EASA TCDS gives the standard MTOW for the -300ER as 750,000 lbs, and optionally 760,700 lbs. The -200LR is listed as 750,000 lbs standard and 766,800 lbs optionally. Odd that EASA certifies the aircraft at different weights.

Cheers,
Yorden

Any Type, Any Time, Anywhere

Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5205 times:

That is interesting. I know that in the options catalog it lists all of the regulatory agencies that can certify the aircraft, but doesn't have differences on the stand weights page. Also note that the "baseline" MTOW is what is included in the price of the airframe, and each pound extra, up to the maximum MTOW, is a certain price. I'm sure there are certain "configurations" that are used most often and that's probably where EASA got its numbers from.

AA388 From Puerto Rico, joined Sep 2007, 304 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5176 times:

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 1):
777-200ER w/ -300 landing gear: 632.5/656

I didnt know that this was an option. Do you have pictures or names of the airlines and regs?

-max

Flown on A319, A320, A321, A330-200, A340-300, 737-3,5,7,8, 747-400, 757-2,3, 767-300, 777-200

Flynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5171 times:

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 1):

Though no one has opted for the option yet, the 777 with folding wings took a MTOW hit (at least on paper).

Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 15102 posts, RR: 69
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5158 times:

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 5):
Though no one has opted for the option yet, the 777 with folding wings took a MTOW hit (at least on paper).

AFAIK that option is no longer available. Also shouldn't it be a payload hit?

Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic

Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5105 times:

Quoting AA388 (Reply 4):
I didnt know that this was an option. Do you have pictures or names of the airlines and regs?

I personally have no idea if anyone actually ordered this. I can easily look it up on monday, but until then, if anyone else would care to shed some light...

Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 15616 posts, RR: 90
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4966 times:

Quoting AA388 (Reply 4):
I didnt know that this was an option. Do you have pictures or names of the airlines and regs?

Most new 777-200ERs are the 656k MTOW.

NA

A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4627 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4941 times:

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 1):
777-200: 506/545
777-200ER: 580/650

Somewhere I read that the 580k MTOW can be retrofitted to -200As, is that true?

Exceptions confirm the rule.

Transpac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3064 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4869 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 8):
Most new 777-200ERs are the 656k MTOW.

DL's 772ER's are 656k MGTOW. Don't quote me, but I believe AA's are 652k MGTOW.

Quoting A342 (Reply 9):
Somewhere I read that the 580k MTOW can be retrofitted to -200As, is that true?

I have no idea as to the answer, but a better question would be: why would you want to??

A340-500: 4 engines 4 long haul. 777-200LR: 2 engines 4 longer haul

Zeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 6800 posts, RR: 74
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4864 times:

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 1):
777-200: 506/545

Ours range from 485/545

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 1):
777-300: 580/660

Ours range from 562/580

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 1):
source:

Our W&B manuals for the aircraft.

Kung Hei Fat Choi!

Pianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4820 times:

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 10):
DL's 772ER's are 656k MGTOW.

They're actually for 648k.

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 10):
I believe AA's are 652k MGTOW.

AA's 2ER's are certified to 648k.

A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4627 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4797 times:

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 10):
but a better question would be: why would you want to??

In order to get a better payload-range performance out of the aircraft.

Exceptions confirm the rule.

Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 15616 posts, RR: 90
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 4687 times:

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 12):
They're actually for 648k.

No they aren't. They've been uprated to Trent 895s and have the 656k cert.

Otherwise, one would never have made it to BOM from JFK without hitting the ground.

NS

Qantas744ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 4657 times:

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 12):
They're actually for 648k.

Actually they were.

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 14):
No they aren't. They've been uprated to Trent 895s and have the 656k cert.

Otherwise, one would never have made it to BOM from JFK without hitting the ground.

NS

Leo

If you want to be a Millionaire, start with a billion dollars and launch a new airline.

Mercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 326 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4550 times:

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 15):

DL has been upgraded to 656k on the -200ER w/ the higher Trent power.
UAL has 545k for -200A and 640k for -200B (orig 200ER).
AA & CO has -200ERs w/ 648k
AUA has 294.8t*metric ton

For the new Delta -200LR has 766k

Top Of Page

Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Boeing 777 Mtow Options

Username:	No username? Sign up now!
Password:	Forgot Password? Be reminded. Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)

Tech/Ops related posts only!
Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
No hostile language or criticizing of others.
Do not post copyright protected material.
Use relevant and describing topics.
Check if your post already been discussed.
Check your spelling!
DETAILED RULES

Check Spelling

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics: