RainerBoeing777
Topic Author
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:58 am

The new Boeing 787-10 may be suitable for missions the transpacifico? An Example airline such as Eva Air (BR) can use it on routes such as TPE-YVR / SEA or All Nippon Airways on NRT-SEA / LAX and HND-YVR?
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
raylee67
Posts: 633
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:32 am

787-10's role in trans-Pacific will probably be limited. It has about the same range as A330-300. It would be limited to routes between West Coast and Japan/Korea. Even Taiwan would be a stretch for west-bound flights in case of full load or heavy head winds.

ANA only has 3 ordered, which is interesting. It doesn't seem that the 787-10 is ordered for domestic or regional routes. I would guess it will be used on Hawaiian routes, with A380 serving Tokyo-Hawaii and 787-10 serving other Japanese cities.

Eva Air will probably use the 787-10 on Asian routes.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 351 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
ronmk1986
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:56 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:35 am

For North Asian carriers like EVA or ANA, North America West Coast like YVR, SFO (and LAX for ANA, maybe tough for TPE-LAX for EVA unless they limit some cargo loads) may be suitable.

However, I suppose both ANA and EVA are going to use their Boing 787-10s predominantly for their intra-Asia and Oceania routes, meaning we may see their B787-10s flying to North American West Coast seasonally or (some one-time last-minute replacements for their B787-9s in those routes) at best.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1289
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:24 am

UA has flown the 78J on IAD-PEK before. We may see more of this on the TPAC market than anticipated at first.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD MEL DEN BLR MAA DEL KTM YYZ MEX
 
moyangmm
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:59 am

raylee67 wrote:
787-10's role in trans-Pacific will probably be limited. It has about the same range as A330-300.


787-10's range is greatly understated by Boeing; in real world 78J can comfortably fly with full passengers and bags from US east coast to Japan, Korea or PEK, or from US west coast to anywhere in the east Asia, such as PVG, HKG. There are multiple reports about its performance in this forum.

Boeing tends to be too conservative on the published range; Airbus tends to be too optimistic. In terms of the real world range under the same payload, 78J is about the same as 268t A350-900.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11948
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:18 am

Antarius wrote:
UA has flown the 78J on IAD-PEK before. We may see more of this on the TPAC market than anticipated at first.

With a significant load reduction. Similarly to how SQ would operate 772ERs on the eastbound SIN-LAX when A345s were down for mtx.

Neither is realistically a gauge for aircraft performance on such route types on a scheduled basis.



moyangmm wrote:
Airbus tends to be too optimistic.

Example?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Antarius
Posts: 1289
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:24 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Antarius wrote:
UA has flown the 78J on IAD-PEK before. We may see more of this on the TPAC market than anticipated at first.

With a significant load reduction. Similarly to how SQ would operate 772ERs on the eastbound SIN-LAX when A345s were down for mtx.

Neither is realistically a gauge for aircraft performance on such route types on a scheduled basis.


Of course, but the original topic was about the 78J on TPAC. While this route may not be ideally suited, the fact that it flew this at all (relative to the expected and a.net oft-repeated low range) shows that there might be several other TPAC routes that may be possible.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD MEL DEN BLR MAA DEL KTM YYZ MEX
 
theasianguy
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 10:31 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:36 am

Japan/Korea to West Coast North America should be comfortably within range of the 78J. Probably the furthest it can fly year round would be TPE-LAX.
 
moyangmm
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 7:22 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:23 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Antarius wrote:
UA has flown the 78J on IAD-PEK before. We may see more of this on the TPAC market than anticipated at first.

With a significant load reduction. Similarly to how SQ would operate 772ERs on the eastbound SIN-LAX when A345s were down for mtx.



The load reduction is not a limitation of the 78J; the flight is normally operated by 788, so UA only sells as many seats as 788 has.

The IAD-PEK 78J flights were way below MTOW. If UA wishes, it can fill the plane and 78J can fly that route without any problems.
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 587
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:12 am

The 787-10 can fly 6000 nm with full pax and bags. ORD-NRT would be very feasible as would any West coast city to Japan, Korea, or northern China.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
raylee67
Posts: 633
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:36 am

moyangmm wrote:
raylee67 wrote:
787-10's role in trans-Pacific will probably be limited. It has about the same range as A330-300.


787-10's range is greatly understated by Boeing; in real world 78J can comfortably fly with full passengers and bags from US east coast to Japan, Korea or PEK, or from US west coast to anywhere in the east Asia, such as PVG, HKG. There are multiple reports about its performance in this forum.

Boeing tends to be too conservative on the published range; Airbus tends to be too optimistic. In terms of the real world range under the same payload, 78J is about the same as 268t A350-900.


Let's say Boeing does understate the range. But that is the certified range, right? Authorities are not going to approve any flight plans that exceed that published/certified range, are they?
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 351 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
george77300
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:44 am

raylee67 wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
raylee67 wrote:
787-10's role in trans-Pacific will probably be limited. It has about the same range as A330-300.


787-10's range is greatly understated by Boeing; in real world 78J can comfortably fly with full passengers and bags from US east coast to Japan, Korea or PEK, or from US west coast to anywhere in the east Asia, such as PVG, HKG. There are multiple reports about its performance in this forum.

Boeing tends to be too conservative on the published range; Airbus tends to be too optimistic. In terms of the real world range under the same payload, 78J is about the same as 268t A350-900.


Let's say Boeing does understate the range. But that is the certified range, right? Authorities are not going to approve any flight plans that exceed that published/certified range, are they?


There is no “certified” range. There is a range stated that the plane can fly with a given load. Merely an indication. The plane has to dispatch with enough fuel to arrive at destination and with the reserve fuel for alternate and 45 mins holding. If it can do this by taking less pax or cargo then it can.

For example the Qantas LHR-PER Flight is above the “published” range of the 787-9 but it still can fly it and with no seats blocked either way most of the time.

There are also many delivery flights and charter flights that can fly really far due to fewer passengers on board. There have been a number of 737NG flights over 11 hours. Seattle-Prague direct springs to mind. That’s 5,200+ miles in a 737. Well above the “published” range.

It’s quite incredible how the range varies so hugely by taking out lots of passengers and/or cargo.
A306 A313 A318 A319 A320 A321 A20N A21N A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388
B712 B733 B734 B735 B737 B738 B739 B38M B742 B744 B752 B753 B763 B772 B77E B773 B77W B788 B789
AT75 AT76 B190 BCS3 C208 CRJX DH3T E175 E190 P46T RJ85 SF34 SR20 SR22 TBM8
 
george77300
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:57 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Antarius wrote:
UA has flown the 78J on IAD-PEK before. We may see more of this on the TPAC market than anticipated at first.

With a significant load reduction. Similarly to how SQ would operate 772ERs on the eastbound SIN-LAX when A345s were down for mtx.

Neither is realistically a gauge for aircraft performance on such route types on a scheduled basis.


Can’t comment on the SQ flights but the UA IAD-PEK had NO restrictions at all as far as the range goes. It was a substitute for a 787-8 yes. So didn’t have full pax but as another person mentioned it was way under MTOW. No where near payload restricted. I don’t know where you got the load restriction from? Definitely not the case.

LAX772LR wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
Airbus tends to be too optimistic.

Example?


I don’t know specifically for all. I’m sure you can look. But for definite the Boeing 787 ranges are with full pax and bags (and some cargo). i.e. A normal flight load.

The Airbus A320 family, A321neo in particular is definitely not this. The 4000nm range of the LR is not full pax with bags. It definitely couldn’t do this with 240 people onboard. Not sure what the penalty is but it is there. I don’t have the charts to hand.

What the two manufacturers do on other aircraft I haven’t looked but you can look it up. But in general as it was mentioned Airbus tend to publish the maximum useable range but with a payload hit. Boeing publish maximum with full pax and bags. So Airbus being more “optimistic” may not be the correct word but they certainly publish the ranges with a more beneficial configuration. They don’t hide this by the way other than marketing. You can see this on their websites.
A306 A313 A318 A319 A320 A321 A20N A21N A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388
B712 B733 B734 B735 B737 B738 B739 B38M B742 B744 B752 B753 B763 B772 B77E B773 B77W B788 B789
AT75 AT76 B190 BCS3 C208 CRJX DH3T E175 E190 P46T RJ85 SF34 SR20 SR22 TBM8
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 843
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:01 am

raylee67 wrote:
ANA only has 3 ordered, which is interesting. It doesn't seem that the 787-10 is ordered for domestic or regional routes. I would guess it will be used on Hawaiian routes, with A380 serving Tokyo-Hawaii and 787-10 serving other Japanese cities.

AFAIK, ANA's immediate plans for the B787-10 are to SIN and BKK.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11948
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:35 am

george77300 wrote:
I don’t know where you got the load restriction from?

I would ask the same of you, considering that I didn't say the load was restricted:
I said it was reduced (from what that aircraft would carry in typical ops) as they never went above the -8's capacity despite using the -10.

Wouldn't have had any way of knowing what the available TOW stats for that specific op was, and to be honest I doubt you would either; so if the earlier pilot's claim is accurate, then great to see the aircraft's true capability. Still maintain however that using that specific flight as a generalized gauge for performance is flawed.



george77300 wrote:
The 4000nm range of the LR is not full pax with bags. It definitely couldn’t do this with 240 people onboard.

Nor do they claim that.

The capacity is for up to 240. The TATL range, especially at the higher end that they advertise, is claimed with approx 160-170 pax.

That's also the weight used during their certification tests, when they achieved 4750nm and 11hr with the weight equivalent of 162pax + 16crew.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3531
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:55 pm

ElroyJetson wrote:
The 787-10 can fly 6000 nm with full pax and bags. ORD-NRT would be very feasible as would any West coast city to Japan, Korea, or northern China.


ORD-NRT would be feasible were it not for that confounded variable, weather. Prevailing winds and wind variability make a mockery of stated ranges. And the beauty of the 78J is its ample cargo hold. A shame to fly with this empty when you could just use an A359 and have cargo and pax at that range.
come visit the south pacific
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1034
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:05 pm

This plane probably can get most used from the West Coast to North Asia in much the way Delta uses 763s and A330s our of SEA. Might be useful for a couple carriers.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:22 pm

If JL had not ordered the A35K, the B78X would have been ideal for a route like HND/NRT to JFK, in JL's premium-heavy configuration, and still have first class. The range is 6430 nmi with 330 passengers. But no long-haul plane at JL has more than 244 seats, and in 2-4-2, this would likely have had only about 215-220 seats. If NH did a top-up order, not really caring about the load in Y (the B77Ws that serve JFK are the highest J B77Ws in the world at 68 J and almost as many non-Y seats as Y seats), those would likely have only about 200 seats maintaining the high J count. (Any reduction would come from Y.)
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17007
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:49 pm

raylee67 wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
raylee67 wrote:
787-10's role in trans-Pacific will probably be limited. It has about the same range as A330-300.


787-10's range is greatly understated by Boeing; in real world 78J can comfortably fly with full passengers and bags from US east coast to Japan, Korea or PEK, or from US west coast to anywhere in the east Asia, such as PVG, HKG. There are multiple reports about its performance in this forum.

Boeing tends to be too conservative on the published range; Airbus tends to be too optimistic. In terms of the real world range under the same payload, 78J is about the same as 268t A350-900.


Let's say Boeing does understate the range. But that is the certified range, right? Authorities are not going to approve any flight plans that exceed that published/certified range, are they?

Actually, it is mission planning that determines. After a year, an airline must use real world data to plan. Do aircraft can be dispatched further if the aircraft has proven itself.

Every aircraft has its own individual payload range chart as no two have exactly the same performance. Aircraft tend to loose weight in production as Boeing or Airbus PIP components to loose weight. It is common for two aircraft to have an empty weight one or two tons different depending on line number and weight of repairs.

Boeing guarantees range after some weight of doublers or just a heavy example.

That said, the 787-10 is, in my opinion, shirt on TPAC payload at range. It is a fine EU to US or EU to mid-Asia aircraft (a bit short of range for EU to Japan).

That said, GE is ahead on CMCs. I expect the GEnX to be the next engine PIP'd with turbine inlet guide vanes. A nice 150nm range boost or so.

Lightsaber
You know nothing John Snow.
 
77H
Posts: 1333
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:06 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
george77300 wrote:
I don’t know where you got the load restriction from?

I would ask the same of you, considering that I didn't say the load was restricted:
I said it was reduced (from what that aircraft would carry in typical ops) as they never went above the -8's capacity despite using the -10.

Wouldn't have had any way of knowing what the available TOW stats for that specific op was, and to be honest I doubt you would either; so if the earlier pilot's claim is accurate, then great to see the aircraft's true capability. Still maintain however that using that specific flight as a generalized gauge for performance is flawed.



george77300 wrote:
The 4000nm range of the LR is not full pax with bags. It definitely couldn’t do this with 240 people onboard.

Nor do they claim that.

The capacity is for up to 240. The TATL range, especially at the higher end that they advertise, is claimed with approx 160-170 pax.

That's also the weight used during their certification tests, when they achieved 4750nm and 11hr with the weight equivalent of 162pax + 16crew.


Regard the 78X IAD-PEK flight. Anyone working for UA with knowledge of their Unimatic system could look up how much remaining available payload there was on the flight. There are a few other, more in-depth resources available easily accessible to employees, if one knows where to look and can interpret the information.

77H
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 11948
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:32 pm

lightsaber wrote:
After a year, an airline must use real world data to plan.

Is that just an industry standard-practice, or is it a formal regulation?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
RainerBoeing777
Topic Author
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:59 pm

raylee67 wrote:
787-10's role in trans-Pacific will probably be limited. It has about the same range as A330-300. It would be limited to routes between West Coast and Japan/Korea. Even Taiwan would be a stretch for west-bound flights in case of full load or heavy head winds.

ANA only has 3 ordered, which is interesting. It doesn't seem that the 787-10 is ordered for domestic or regional routes. I would guess it will be used on Hawaiian routes, with A380 serving Tokyo-Hawaii and 787-10 serving other Japanese cities.

Eva Air will probably use the 787-10 on Asian routes.


There are 3 orders plus 7 options, the first deliveries are being used in its routes of higher demand in Asia, I believe that NH will increase its fleet of 787-10 there are destinations that require this model
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
trex8
Posts: 5272
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 12:44 am

george77300 wrote:
raylee67 wrote:
moyangmm wrote:

787-10's range is greatly understated by Boeing; in real world 78J can comfortably fly with full passengers and bags from US east coast to Japan, Korea or PEK, or from US west coast to anywhere in the east Asia, such as PVG, HKG. There are multiple reports about its performance in this forum.

Boeing tends to be too conservative on the published range; Airbus tends to be too optimistic. In terms of the real world range under the same payload, 78J is about the same as 268t A350-900.


Let's say Boeing does understate the range. But that is the certified range, right? Authorities are not going to approve any flight plans that exceed that published/certified range, are they?


There is no “certified” range. There is a range stated that the plane can fly with a given load. Merely an indication. The plane has to dispatch with enough fuel to arrive at destination and with the reserve fuel for alternate and 45 mins holding. If it can do this by taking less pax or cargo then it can.

For example the Qantas LHR-PER Flight is above the “published” range of the 787-9 but it still can fly it and with no seats blocked either way most of the time.

There are also many delivery flights and charter flights that can fly really far due to fewer passengers on board. There have been a number of 737NG flights over 11 hours. Seattle-Prague direct springs to mind. That’s 5,200+ miles in a 737. Well above the “published” range.

It’s quite incredible how the range varies so hugely by taking out lots of passengers and/or cargo.

Back when PanAm flew 7474SP NYC to TYO they would submit a flight plan which didnt actually go all the way to Japan, IIRC they filed for ANC or something, as west bound it was stretching the Sps range to the limit. When things on the flight were clearly favorable to continue all the way without problems they would refile a new flight plan to the real intended destination.
Do airlines still do this?
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:24 am

That is, IIRC, still standard procedure for flights which have a higher probability of needing a technical stop.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:30 am

I'm sure the 78X is capable of flying many TPAC routes, but the only question is whether it'll make more money than a 789 or A359. Given how people have stressed that its range is good with passengers and bags (but no cargo) it's probably not better overall for airlines to use, as the 789/A359 would have better flexibility to operate the shorter routes AND the longer routes, it would seem strange to have a smallish fleet dedicated to TPAC when the 78X is better for shorter routes only. Weather won't be anywhere near as much of a factor for the others either.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6326
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:49 am

The 78J will have zero issues in flying from the North American west coast to East Asia and back with a full passenger load and some cargo. It would be an awfully nice shovel on high-volume routes like LAX-ICN.

Farther than that and airlines will lose out on much or all of the cargo, although full passenger range without cargo in typical airline configurations is actually rather long. I think you may occasionally see it sub for another aircraft on these sorts of routes, like UA has done on IAD-PEK, but it won't be bought to fly them. (Although some airlines, like BA, may choose not to equip their 78Js with crew rest facilities sufficient for longer flights.)

In general, modern aircraft with new-generation engines have shallower payload-range curves. They can do quite impressive feats with a light payload, but if you load their huge holds with cargo the picture changes a lot. This pattern started with the A330-200 and has gotten more pronounced with the 787/A350/A330neo.
 
SeoulIncheon
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:52 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:53 am

78X would be for seat capacity and if UA did IAD-PEK with 78X then LAX/SFO to HND/NRT/ICN would be no problem, with some cargo weight to spare. Given JL/NH is very premium-heavy, it might even make to JFK. However I don't think 787 cabins are wide enough to accomodate a true first class seat and it will render 78K rather ill suited for long-haul trunk routes. JL will probably fly 35K to the US and use 78K for Southeast Asia or Hawaii routes.
 
sabby
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:11 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 7:40 am

george77300 wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
Airbus tends to be too optimistic.

Example?


I don’t know specifically for all. I’m sure you can look. But for definite the Boeing 787 ranges are with full pax and bags (and some cargo). i.e. A normal flight load.

The Airbus A320 family, A321neo in particular is definitely not this. The 4000nm range of the LR is not full pax with bags. It definitely couldn’t do this with 240 people onboard. Not sure what the penalty is but it is there. I don’t have the charts to hand.

What the two manufacturers do on other aircraft I haven’t looked but you can look it up. But in general as it was mentioned Airbus tend to publish the maximum useable range but with a payload hit. Boeing publish maximum with full pax and bags. So Airbus being more “optimistic” may not be the correct word but they certainly publish the ranges with a more beneficial configuration. They don’t hide this by the way other than marketing. You can see this on their websites.


Full pax and bags means a typical full service configuration. For A321LR it is 168 pax where as for 78J it is 330 pax. 78J max capacity is 440 just like A321 max capacity is 240 and neither of those two config can reach anywhere near the specified max ranges.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:48 am

UA has flown 78X for the SFO-ICN-SFO route as well.
3/30 UA893 SFO-ICN 258 pax & 11t.
3/31 UA892 SFO-ICN 244 pax & 13t.
 
george77300
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:39 am

trex8 wrote:
george77300 wrote:
raylee67 wrote:

Let's say Boeing does understate the range. But that is the certified range, right? Authorities are not going to approve any flight plans that exceed that published/certified range, are they?


There is no “certified” range. There is a range stated that the plane can fly with a given load. Merely an indication. The plane has to dispatch with enough fuel to arrive at destination and with the reserve fuel for alternate and 45 mins holding. If it can do this by taking less pax or cargo then it can.

For example the Qantas LHR-PER Flight is above the “published” range of the 787-9 but it still can fly it and with no seats blocked either way most of the time.

There are also many delivery flights and charter flights that can fly really far due to fewer passengers on board. There have been a number of 737NG flights over 11 hours. Seattle-Prague direct springs to mind. That’s 5,200+ miles in a 737. Well above the “published” range.

It’s quite incredible how the range varies so hugely by taking out lots of passengers and/or cargo.

Back when PanAm flew 7474SP NYC to TYO they would submit a flight plan which didnt actually go all the way to Japan, IIRC they filed for ANC or something, as west bound it was stretching the Sps range to the limit. When things on the flight were clearly favorable to continue all the way without problems they would refile a new flight plan to the real intended destination.
Do airlines still do this?


Not frequently I’m sure but Qantas do this at least on the DFW-SYD flight (their longest on the A380). It is filed to BNE sometimes and then continues to SYD if they are doing OK on fuel. (Only 30-45mins flying time difference but matters overall I guess)

Can’t think of another example but I’m sure there are some, but not many.
A306 A313 A318 A319 A320 A321 A20N A21N A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388
B712 B733 B734 B735 B737 B738 B739 B38M B742 B744 B752 B753 B763 B772 B77E B773 B77W B788 B789
AT75 AT76 B190 BCS3 C208 CRJX DH3T E175 E190 P46T RJ85 SF34 SR20 SR22 TBM8
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 359
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:53 am

So the 787-10 can do shorter TPAC trips. That makes sense. I can see it do Seattle to HKG, SFO to PVG, LAX to Tokyo and Korea and perhaps Beijing.

That's still a reasonable market and a wide field of applicability. The 7810 will still be useful on many of the thickest TPAC routes.

That said, the A350-900 can do a wider number of TPAC routes whilst having roughly the same passenger capacity.
 
tealnz
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:15 pm

seabosdca wrote:
The 78J will have zero issues in flying from the North American west coast to East Asia and back with a full passenger load and some cargo. It would be an awfully nice shovel on high-volume routes like LAX-ICN.

Farther than that and airlines will lose out on much or all of the cargo, although full passenger range without cargo in typical airline configurations is actually rather long. I think you may occasionally see it sub for another aircraft on these sorts of routes, like UA has done on IAD-PEK, but it won't be bought to fly them. (Although some airlines, like BA, may choose not to equip their 78Js with crew rest facilities sufficient for longer flights.)

In general, modern aircraft with new-generation engines have shallower payload-range curves. They can do quite impressive feats with a light payload, but if you load their huge holds with cargo the picture changes a lot. This pattern started with the A330-200 and has gotten more pronounced with the 787/A350/A330neo.


Do we know which of the major carriers have specified crew rests for their 78Js? It would be a useful indicator of carriers' plans to use the aircraft on routes of more than eight hours or so. Do UA have them, for example?
 
celestar
Posts: 535
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 11:37 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:56 pm

My understanding for EVA AIR is to use 787-1000 to replace its A330 fleet which is already being replaced by -300 vs the previous -200.
I think the 787-900 may be candidate for thin long range route but I am not sure.
EVA has a large fleet of 777-300ER and maybe the size of that is too big for some new destinations that they are thinking.
 
behramjee
Posts: 4867
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 4:56 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:19 pm

The B781 was never meant to be a Trans-Pacific workhorse but rather for the trans-Atlantic market in particular.

It can fly 11:30 hours comfortably with a full payload but anything above 12:00 on baggage heavy market segments is pushing its capabilities.

Yes the Asian carriers that have ordered it will be primarily using it on intra Asia and Austral-Asia routes.

Currently the longest flights scheduled on the B781 in S19/20 are TLV-NYC and AMS-SFO.
 
User avatar
AC02
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:20 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:38 pm

ronmk1986 wrote:
For North Asian carriers like EVA or ANA, North America West Coast like YVR, SFO (and LAX for ANA, maybe tough for TPE-LAX for EVA unless they limit some cargo loads) may be suitable.

However, I suppose both ANA and EVA are going to use their Boing 787-10s predominantly for their intra-Asia and Oceania routes, meaning we may see their B787-10s flying to North American West Coast seasonally or (some one-time last-minute replacements for their B787-9s in those routes) at best.


According to BR's official statement, besides intra-Asia routes they will put 78J on their European routes as well.
 
Turnhouse1
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:59 pm

ITSTours wrote:
UA has flown 78X for the SFO-ICN-SFO route as well.
3/30 UA893 SFO-ICN 258 pax & 11t.
3/31 UA892 SFO-ICN 244 pax & 13t.


So that implies full passenger load +3t on a 5000nm route, maybe a bit more if it was under MTOW. And possibly a bit of a headwind?
 
WIederling
Posts: 8359
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:01 pm

seabosdca wrote:
In general, modern aircraft with new-generation engines have shallower payload-range curves. They can do quite impressive feats with a light payload, but if you load their huge holds with cargo the picture changes a lot. This pattern started with the A330-200 and has gotten more pronounced with the 787/A350/A330neo.


It is directly linked to engine efficiency.
Less fuel per same distance and the same payload increase will cost you ~efficiency delta more range.
Murphy is an optimist
 
tealnz
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:09 pm

Turnhouse1 wrote:
ITSTours wrote:
UA has flown 78X for the SFO-ICN-SFO route as well.
3/30 UA893 SFO-ICN 258 pax & 11t.
3/31 UA892 SFO-ICN 244 pax & 13t.


So that implies full passenger load +3t on a 5000nm route, maybe a bit more if it was under MTOW. And possibly a bit of a headwind?


NZ, who keep buying more 789s, last year mentioned the 78J as a possibility for their future fleet mix. They compared it to their previous 767-300ERs, and talked of the 78J as a candidate for Asian routes. AKL-NRT is 4750nm. NZ carry a lot of freight on Asian routes. Their assessment sounds in line with commentary above on where the sweet spot lies for the -10.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3574
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:25 pm

george77300 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Antarius wrote:
UA has flown the 78J on IAD-PEK before. We may see more of this on the TPAC market than anticipated at first.

With a significant load reduction. Similarly to how SQ would operate 772ERs on the eastbound SIN-LAX when A345s were down for mtx.

Neither is realistically a gauge for aircraft performance on such route types on a scheduled basis.


Can’t comment on the SQ flights but the UA IAD-PEK had NO restrictions at all as far as the range goes. It was a substitute for a 787-8 yes. So didn’t have full pax but as another person mentioned it was way under MTOW. No where near payload restricted. I don’t know where you got the load restriction from? Definitely not the case.

LAX772LR wrote:
moyangmm wrote:
Airbus tends to be too optimistic.

Example?


I don’t know specifically for all. I’m sure you can look. But for definite the Boeing 787 ranges are with full pax and bags (and some cargo). i.e. A normal flight load.

The Airbus A320 family, A321neo in particular is definitely not this. The 4000nm range of the LR is not full pax with bags. It definitely couldn’t do this with 240 people onboard. Not sure what the penalty is but it is there. I don’t have the charts to hand.

What the two manufacturers do on other aircraft I haven’t looked but you can look it up. But in general as it was mentioned Airbus tend to publish the maximum useable range but with a payload hit. Boeing publish maximum with full pax and bags. So Airbus being more “optimistic” may not be the correct word but they certainly publish the ranges with a more beneficial configuration. They don’t hide this by the way other than marketing. You can see this on their websites.

most if not all UA TPAC flights use a re-file flight plan with a fuel alternate in the event of bad weather or an unforeseen problem. For years SFO-SYD used Nadi as the re-file stop where if the airplane had no problems, the flight plan was re-filed on to SYD. I do not recall in my time at United where we ever had to Land at Nadi to take on more fuel. So? I'm sure there are fuel alternates for most any Other long range Pacific route flown by not only United, But any other Carrier.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:51 pm

Turnhouse1 wrote:
ITSTours wrote:
UA has flown 78X for the SFO-ICN-SFO route as well.
3/30 UA893 SFO-ICN 258 pax & 11t.
3/31 UA892 SFO-ICN 244 pax & 13t.


So that implies full passenger load +3t on a 5000nm route, maybe a bit more if it was under MTOW. And possibly a bit of a headwind?


OMG, the big typo. UA892 is ICN-SFO.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3574
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:44 pm

77H wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
george77300 wrote:
I don’t know where you got the load restriction from?

I would ask the same of you, considering that I didn't say the load was restricted:
I said it was reduced (from what that aircraft would carry in typical ops) as they never went above the -8's capacity despite using the -10.

Wouldn't have had any way of knowing what the available TOW stats for that specific op was, and to be honest I doubt you would either; so if the earlier pilot's claim is accurate, then great to see the aircraft's true capability. Still maintain however that using that specific flight as a generalized gauge for performance is flawed.



george77300 wrote:
The 4000nm range of the LR is not full pax with bags. It definitely couldn’t do this with 240 people onboard.

Nor do they claim that.

The capacity is for up to 240. The TATL range, especially at the higher end that they advertise, is claimed with approx 160-170 pax.

That's also the weight used during their certification tests, when they achieved 4750nm and 11hr with the weight equivalent of 162pax + 16crew.


Regard the 78X IAD-PEK flight. Anyone working for UA with knowledge of their Unimatic system could look up how much remaining available payload there was on the flight. There are a few other, more in-depth resources available easily accessible to employees, if one knows where to look and can interpret the information.

77H

The PROBLEM with that? Nobody can divulge that information that it can't be traced back to the Dispatch sector that it came from, And? Probably the Dispatcher.
 
gregn21
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 10:27 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:02 pm

StudiodeKadent wrote:
That's still a reasonable market and a wide field of applicability. The 7810 will still be useful on many of the thickest TPAC routes.


Once some early A330s get phased out by Asian and Pacific carriers, the 78X will be a staple on E. Asia - Oceania, Hawaii, India, Middle East. Only other places they could be deployed by Asian carriers are some Eastern Europe routes (which are probably too thin to warrant the -10) and MAYBE SEA/PDX.
 
SEU
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:09 pm

celestar wrote:
My understanding for EVA AIR is to use 787-1000 to replace its A330 fleet which is already being replaced by -300 vs the previous -200.
I think the 787-900 may be candidate for thin long range route but I am not sure.
EVA has a large fleet of 777-300ER and maybe the size of that is too big for some new destinations that they are thinking.


I hate to be that guy....... (I dont) but its 787-10/9/8. Not 1000,900,800
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:18 am

MrHMSH wrote:
I'm sure the 78X is capable of flying many TPAC routes, but the only question is whether it'll make more money than a 789 or A359. Given how people have stressed that its range is good with passengers and bags (but no cargo) it's probably not better overall for airlines to use, as the 789/A359 would have better flexibility to operate the shorter routes AND the longer routes, it would seem strange to have a smallish fleet dedicated to TPAC when the 78X is better for shorter routes only. Weather won't be anywhere near as much of a factor for the others either.


What about a need for first class? That said, I don't see it getting much beyond Japan. Even in NH's ultra-premium configuration (100 of 212 seats on B77Ws flying to JFK are premium seats), one will take a hit on belly cargo (but likely not passengers) in the winter, as JFK-HND is about 5900 nmi. The B77W is a far superior belly cargo hauler than the B78X or even the B789 for TPAC. (The B77W can handle 44 LD3 containers while the B78X can handle 40, but can the B78X do the full 40 in the winter season?)

For routes with a lower J requirement, the B789 is far more adequate; a higher J makes the B77W ideal.
 
Dave05
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:52 am

Is Taiwan considered north Asia? Eva air can only fly the 787-10 across the pacific to YVR, and may be Seatle. The real north Asia is Narita, Incheon, Beijing and may be Shanghai.... 787-10 would have no problem flying Lax to Narita, incheon and beijing. If carriers are willing to block 50 seats from 330 odds seats on most 787-10 may be Lax to taipei and Hongkong....
 
snuggs28
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:29 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Wed Apr 24, 2019 11:22 am

UA Flt 32-24 APR LAX-NRT will be a 787-10 N12003 today. Return Flight will be Flt 33-25 APR NRT-LAX
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23446
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:03 am

The multiple UA LAXNRTLAX upgauges are tied to Golden Week traffic demand.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
downdata
Posts: 526
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:21 am

Oh man, i’ve seen it all in this thread: 787-10, 78J, 78X, 781(?), 7810(??), 787-1000(???). What’s next? 787-ten-1thousand-XXX?
 
Antarius
Posts: 1289
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Apr 29, 2019 6:03 am

downdata wrote:
Oh man, i’ve seen it all in this thread: 787-10, 78J, 78X, 781(?), 7810(??), 787-1000(???). What’s next? 787-ten-1thousand-XXX?


Image
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD MEL DEN BLR MAA DEL KTM YYZ MEX
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2576
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:57 pm

downdata wrote:
Oh man, i’ve seen it all in this thread: 787-10, 78J, 78X, 781(?), 7810(??), 787-1000(???). What’s next? 787-ten-1thousand-XXX?


The full name is: Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner, or Boeing 787-10. IATA and ICAO abreviations are B78X and 781, respectively.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos