Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Did Scoot De-rate SQ 772ER's To 772?  
User currently offlinejayeshrulz From India, joined Apr 2007, 1029 posts, RR: 2
Posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6288 times:

As wikipedia says, "On 25 May 2012 the first aircraft of the fleet, a former Singapore Airlines Boeing 777-200ER (operated as 777-200) was painted in the yellow-white FlyScoot.com livery.
Engines derated to non-ER standard.Two more being added.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoot#Fleet

Weren't there alot cheaper 772A's available in the market? Ex AI? CX? Why did they de-rate the 772-ERs? I know SQ has none, but cheaper alternatives were available!

And 407 pax in a 772! Oh my! Never shall i fly this airline!.


Keep flying, because the sky is no limit!
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinecol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2128 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6259 times:

They have always been derated, even in SQ days. They are the ex regional SQ versions. Only the SV registered units are not derated.

User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13430 posts, RR: 100
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6149 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting col (Reply 1):
They have always been derated, even in SQ days.

  

The question is, why not re-rate them for the Scoot 402 pax configuration. I suspect they still haul cargo, just more weight in people. Even on the relatively short routes, I could see a little more thrust being in order. But that depends if they will fly out further.

Quoting jayeshrulz (Thread starter):
And 407 pax in a 772!

I've read 402. I know, small difference. But that's an extra half row!

Quoting jayeshrulz (Thread starter):
Weren't there alot cheaper 772A's available in the market?

The facilities are for RR or GE engines. Most of the 772As are Pratt powered. I doubt SQ/Scoot was looking to buy those used.

Quoting jayeshrulz (Thread starter):
but cheaper alternatives were available!

After commissions? I expect the ex-SQ aircraft, once one removed the buying and selling commissions, were the lowest cost alternative.

But hey, there were replaced by leased A333s in SQ's fleet. Maybe airbus will make Scoot a deal when those leases expire.  

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12171 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6004 times:

Isn't Scoot part of SQ, their own LCC?

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 2):
But hey, there were replaced by leased A333s in SQ's fleet. Maybe airbus will make Scoot a deal when those leases expire.

I doubt it when Scoot can get the SQ B-773s, which are a little older than than the A-333s. The SQ B-773s have 332 seats, their A-333s only have 285 and some of their B-772 (derated ERs) seat 323.

The B-773 can be cattle-car configuered up to 550 seats, the A-333 "only" 440 seats.


User currently offlinetheginge From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5780 times:

If they are not using them on routes that require the ER then it may be cheaper to de rate them. Presuming they may well operate at a lower Max Take Off Weight which would then incur lower landing fees etc than operating them as ER's if they don't need that performance.

User currently offlinepoLOT From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2312 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5370 times:

Quoting jayeshrulz (Thread starter):
Weren't there alot cheaper 772A's available in the market? Ex AI? CX? Why did they de-rate the 772-ERs? I know SQ has none, but cheaper alternatives were available!

Did Scoot actually pay anything for the planes, or were they just shifted over from SQ? I don't know how independently it is being run from SQ, alternatives might not have been necessarily cheaper.


User currently offlineinitious From Singapore, joined Dec 2008, 1066 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5256 times:

The thrusts are derated but they can be electronically programmed to produce more trust akin to the SV* series. "777-200" is just a scheduling code in order not to mix them up with the higher capability SV* series back in SQ days as the SV* series flies the European and other long haul routes while SR* and SQ* series flies regional routes. They are all still officially known as Boeing 777-200ERs. SQ has never operated the Boeing 777-200 before.

Quoting jayeshrulz (Thread starter):
And 407 pax in a 772! Oh my! Never shall i fly this airline!.

Hey guess what, I have a flight with them tonight.  Wink (Or tomorrow morning at 2am.. Whatever you like)

[Edited 2012-06-24 20:01:24]


One way I will fly around the world!
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6952 posts, RR: 76
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5193 times:

It's a paper derate. Derating the engines affects the maximum capable MTOW... this gets translated to the aircraft's certified MTOW, makes the navigation, parking and landing charges easier.
The lower engine thrust rating required, makes for cheaper thrust licenses from RR.

Now, if you need to upscale it, just uprate them again.

So, to answer:

Quoting jayeshrulz (Thread starter):
Weren't there alot cheaper 772A's available in the market? Ex AI? CX? Why did they de-rate the 772-ERs? I know SQ has none, but cheaper alternatives were available!

The aircraft is still a 772ER.
Engineering is supported by SIAE.
Scoot relies on SQ for support.
SQ knows well their 777-212ERs... and the quirks of each aircraft.
So, it makes sense for Scoot to use 777-212s (apart from suspicions of "favorable rates" for the 777s coming from SQ...)

Now why did SQ ordered 777-200ERs and then derate them?
Simple, RESALE VALUE! The non-ERs are now dead ducks in the used market. So, the operator that got those ex-SQ derated ones, can always rerate them to full ER thrusts and MTOWs.

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineThai744 From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days ago) and read 5175 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sorry to sound stupid... but as a mere enthusiast, and not working in aviation or being mechanically minded, would someone mind explaining what "de-rated" means?

I assume the engines on the aircraft now as 777-200's are the same as when the aircraft was considered a 777-200ER?

How does it work?

Thanks in advance.


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10239 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5139 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Thai744 (Reply 8):
I assume the engines on the aircraft now as 777-200's are the same as when the aircraft was considered a 777-200ER?

How does it work?

I'm not an expert, but as far as I know, it basically electronically limits the maximum thrust the engine can generate, which in effect limits the MTOW of the aircraft.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 7):
It's a paper derate.

When you say that, does that mean there's nothing actually preventing the engines from being used to their max thrust?



How can I be an admiral without my cap??!
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6952 posts, RR: 76
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5081 times:

Quoting Thai744 (Reply 8):
I assume the engines on the aircraft now as 777-200's are the same as when the aircraft was considered a 777-200ER?

How does it work?

The engines are capable of I think 93.4klbs... these engines are controlled by the FADEC.
So, why use the excess thrust you don't need? Get a FADEC plug for the thrust you need... This then goes to other things such as MTOW, etc... (which gets reported when you pay your ATC bills... the lower the MTOW and MLW, the cheaper it is).

The case of Garuda's original A333, they were derated to 68klbs... this suits the low MTOW they wanted to use... BUT as the envelope requirements expand, they need to get higher MTOWs, to the extent that the A332s they got, I think are fitted with 72klbs engines.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 9):
When you say that, does that mean there's nothing actually preventing the engines from being used to their max thrust?

There is the FADEC plug. Sure you can use the max 93.4klbs on a paper MTOW limited to 506000lbs..
But that's a waste of money for thrust you're never going to use... you might aswell limit buying the 82k or less thrust plug license... (a heck of a lot cheaper)



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10239 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5072 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 10):

There is the FADEC plug. Sure you can use the max 93.4klbs on a paper MTOW limited to 506000lbs..
But that's a waste of money for thrust you're never going to use... you might aswell limit buying the 82k or less thrust plug license... (a heck of a lot cheaper)

Gotcha, that's basically what I thought. So there is a limiter in the logic, which could potentially be bypassed.

Thanks!



How can I be an admiral without my cap??!
User currently offlinechieft From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5005 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 2):
Quoting jayeshrulz (Thread starter):
And 407 pax in a 772!

I've read 402. I know, small difference. But that's an extra half row!

It is 402:

ScootBiz
32 ScootBiz seats in a 2-4-2 configuration, with a seat pitch of 38", 22" seat width, and 8" of seat recline, plus a footrest.

Economy
There are 370 Economy seats in a 3-4-3 configuration, with seat pitch ranging from 31" to 35

In single class, 440 pax would be possible...

[Edited 2012-06-25 05:04:44]


Aircraft are marginal costs with wings.
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1578 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5005 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 11):
So there is a limiter in the logic, which could potentially be bypassed.

Not really a limiter just a different commanded thrust so it can't really be bypassed, I don't think you can just use a jumper on it.

Fred


User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6952 posts, RR: 76
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 17 hours ago) and read 4613 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 11):
Gotcha, that's basically what I thought. So there is a limiter in the logic, which could potentially be bypassed.

It's a non-bypassable limiter.
To bypass it, you gotta get a new "plug" for it... that plug is at the FADEC.
Firewall the thrust levers, you're only going to get the maximum allowed by the plug.



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10239 posts, RR: 26
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 17 hours ago) and read 4607 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 14):
It's a non-bypassable limiter.
To bypass it, you gotta get a new "plug" for it... that plug is at the FADEC.
Firewall the thrust levers, you're only going to get the maximum allowed by the plug.

Ah ok, thanks for the clarification.



How can I be an admiral without my cap??!
User currently offlinejayeshrulz From India, joined Apr 2007, 1029 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4335 times:

Quoting col (Reply 1):
They have always been derated, even in SQ days. They are the ex regional SQ versions. Only the SV registered units are not derated.
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 7):
Simple, RESALE VALUE! The non-ERs are now dead ducks in the used market. So, the operator that got those ex-SQ derated ones, can always rerate them to full ER thrusts and MTOWs.

Ahh. thanks guys! Dint know this. They've been to Mumbai on Multiple occasions...

Quoting chieft (Reply 12):
It is 402:

ScootBiz
32 ScootBiz seats in a 2-4-2 configuration, with a seat pitch of 38", 22" seat width, and 8" of seat recline, plus a footrest.

Economy
There are 370 Economy seats in a 3-4-3 configuration, with seat pitch ranging from 31" to 35

In single class, 440 pax would be possible...

Thanks for posting this. It really sounds cramped!   

Quoting initious (Reply 6):
Hey guess what, I have a flight with them tonight. Wink (Or tomorrow morning at 2am.. Whatever you like)

Oh great, how was it?

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 14):
It's a non-bypassable limiter.
To bypass it, you gotta get a new "plug" for it... that plug is at the FADEC.
Firewall the thrust levers, you're only going to get the maximum allowed by the plug.

I suppose the 772ER is certified for higher MTOW.... will the MTOW decrease once the thrust is reduced?



Keep flying, because the sky is no limit!
User currently offlineimiakhtar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4309 times:

Quoting jayeshrulz (Reply 16):
I suppose the 772ER is certified for higher MTOW

Correct.

Quoting jayeshrulz (Reply 16):
will the MTOW decrease once the thrust is reduced

Not necessarily. AA 77Es for example have the 92klbs rated Trent 892 but operate at the highest MTOW available. Same with EK 773s.


User currently offlinejayeshrulz From India, joined Apr 2007, 1029 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4295 times:

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 17):
Not necessarily. AA 77Es for example have the 92klbs rated Trent 892 but operate at the highest MTOW available. Same with EK 773s.

Yeah but what if load is full? Will the runway be enough of taking off de rated?



Keep flying, because the sky is no limit!
User currently offlineimiakhtar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4278 times:

Quoting jayeshrulz (Reply 18):
Yeah but what if load is full? Will the runway be enough of taking off de rated?

I guess it's not too much of an issue. Afterall, AA uses the 77E on the ORD-DEL route which would be close to MTOW and EK uses the 773 on 7 hour + sectors in Europe and Asia-Australia.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Why Did Scoot De-rate SQ 772ER's To 772?
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
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

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


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Did ATC Have To Be Told About This SOS? posted Fri May 2 2008 05:09:20 by Lenbrazil
How To De-rate An Engine posted Sat Nov 8 2003 09:51:27 by Liamksa
When/Why Did TPA Change The RWY Headings? posted Sat Apr 9 2011 15:07:42 by goblin211
Why Did Spoilers REmain Deployed During Taxi posted Fri May 14 2010 13:45:04 by TranStar
Why Did The 727 Need 3 Engines? posted Mon Apr 5 2010 20:55:59 by VC10er
Why Did LiveTV Items Cost B6 $95 Mil In '09? posted Tue Feb 2 2010 12:46:56 by Luv2cattlecall
SQ1: Why Did We Avoid Chinese Airspace? posted Sun Apr 6 2008 23:43:07 by KELPkid
Question: Why Did We Take Off The Opposite Way? posted Tue Feb 26 2008 17:24:48 by Icareflies
Why Did This Pilot Not Go-around? (video) posted Sat Apr 7 2007 05:20:53 by Alberchico
Why Did The L-1011's Brakes Overheat So Easily? posted Sat Feb 17 2007 00:53:06 by Blackbird

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format