karan69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2788 posts, RR: 19 Posted (8 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2537 times:
Hi AI recently claimed the 77L was causing them a lot of money , that got me thinking what would be the cost comparison between the 787 77L and 77W in Air Indias configuration on most commonly used route possibilities for these aircrafts
ie. BOM-EWR , BOM-LHR, DEL-HKG
the 787 has 256 seats [18J and 238Y]
the 77L has 238 seats [8F 35J and 195Y]
the 77W has 342 seats [4F 35J and 303Y]
Now looking at the configuration hands down the 77W and 788 are superlative to the 77L, the question is what impact do configuration and the aircraft type make to the profitability of the route and eventually to the airline?
From what i have read on this forum the 788 should be the hands down winner on DEL-HKG and if AI were to operate profitabily in low season on BOM-EWR, DEL-YYZ, DEL-ORD,DEL-JFK , the 77W fills the void in terms of capacity and peak season demands at slot constrained airports.
Experts i need your help in comparing the 3 aircrafts on the routes like BOM-LHR/EWR and DEL-HKG, specifically on operating costs of Fuel,pax and cargo capacity and flexibility
sunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 3954 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2437 times:
Quoting karan69 (Thread starter): Experts i need your help in comparing the 3 aircrafts on the routes like BOM-LHR/EWR and DEL-HKG, specifically on operating costs of Fuel,pax and cargo capacity and flexibility
Firstly, I am not an expert , all I do is take the data that I have accumulated from various sources ( Load/range tables, actual ( hypothetical) flight plans (77L and 77W) and PIANO-X ( 788 ) and work with it. I can only help with fuel costs.
To start I calculate the max. volume limited payload for each aircraft based on the carriers seating plan. B and A use a standard weight per passenger incl. baggage and pieces per passenger to calculate the number of LD3 containers needed. This allows the space available for freight to be calculated and this is converted to weight based on typical belly cargo density. For AI this gives values of 54.6t ; 38.5t and 37t for the 77W,77L and 788 respectively. The max range in each case is ~14hr, 18hr, and 13hr respectively. The distance in nm depends on the winds. I use the city to city sector times from the timetable for the calculation . They tend to be conservative.
From the load/range tables, the 77W BOM-LHR , 9hr 30m. with 54.6t payload burns about 72t of fuel with a TOW of ~310t. Typically fuel burn is about 85% of the fuel load. Two examples from hypothetical flight plans ; 13hr 38min , 40t payload , burn 101.1t and 14hr 39min., 40t payload, burn 117.8t
From a hypothetical 77L flight plan BOM-EWR at 15hr 55min with a 48t payload , burn off 110.5t. Another hypothetical plan for 16hr 9min, 51.5t payload, burn 117t.
From PIANO-X , the 788 based on OEW and fuel burn at spec. with a 37t payload , BOM-LHR , 9hr 30min burn would be 47.5T and DEL-HKG , 5hr 35min burn would be 26t.
Last weeks IATA index price for fuel was $1056 M/t.
As usual E & OE
karan69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2788 posts, RR: 19 Reply 3, posted (8 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2170 times:
Thanks Sunrisevalley
So to sum up
The cargo space left after passenger weights and bags are accounted for assuming the flight is 100% full is
77W-54.6t
77L-38.5t
788-37t
So in a true sense the 77L becomes redundant if Air India chooses to fly it under 13 hours,
Also we are going for 100% pax load but in an ideal case the pax load would be 75% on a year round basis, which would proportionately increase the range of the 788 enabling far better operating economics on BOM/DEL-EWR/JFK/ORD over the 77L, however it only fails in terms of cargo capacity that too marginally as compared to the 77L
The 77W does not compare in this scenario with the 788 as its pax volume is considerably more even at 75% loads
hence i fail to see the reason behind AI ordering the 77L especially if they are not gonna launch non-stop US West coast services from India.
Also coming to India-LHR flights the 788 makes far better sense to start a 2x daily service in order to complement the 77W on the primary flights from BOM/DEL-LHR or a secondary city pair like AMD/BLR/CUU/MAA if the market allows and not to mention much better to send to cities like FRA and CDG from DEL when compared to the 77L
As far as the DEL-HKG flight goes the stats say it for themselves the 788 is far better only issue is it does not have the 300 seat plus capacity of the 77W , so a route like this or any other for that matter can be adjusted between the 77W and 788 owning to capacity requirements
I simply do not understand why AI is not taking delivery of its 5 787s when the benefits of deploying the aircrafts on the
routes like DEL-JFK, DEL-FRA/CDG/HKG, DEL-YYZ,DEL-NRT,DEL-PVG
sunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 3954 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (8 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2088 times:
Quoting karan69 (Reply 3): The cargo space left after passenger weights and bags are accounted for assuming the flight is 100% full is
77W-54.6t
77L-38.5t
788-37t
No these are total payload values.The max passenger weight component of each is 32.5t; 22.6t and 24.3 t respectively.
The 788 runs out of 37t max payload at about 13hrs. It is city pairs beyond that that the 77L performs. The 788 BOM-EWR at about 16hrs. is little better than max passenger load. It does not make it right now. As the weight reduction program kicks in it could get upto about 28 to 29t payload.
Sponsor Message: 
From India, joined Oct 2004, 2788 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 3954 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
