EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:58 am

First of all, I want to say that my knowledge of the technical aspects of airplanes is very limited, so please be gentle with your answers. My doubt has to do with the fact that some Latin American carriers use 767's to Europe and, specifically, with whether a 767-300ER can complete, non-stop, certain routes without running out of fuel.

Facts:

After doing a little research, I found that, currently, the routes between Latin America and Europe served with 767's are the following. I am also including the distance between each city pair quoted in the Great Circle Mapper website (I acknowledge the distance may not be 100% accurate):

AM MEx-CDG 5725 mi. 767-200ER*
AM MEx-MAD 5643 mi. 767-200ER*
PU GIG-MAD 5047 mi. 767-300ER
AV BOG-MAD 4992 mi. 767-300ER
I may have missed other routes but these are the only ones that I found.

*AM has on very few occasions used the 767-300ER in these routes and, in accordance with many a.net threads, AM uses the 767-200ER to Europe basically because of range issues.

Additionally, LB's website mentions a non-stop flight to MAD (I believe it is not a regularly scheduled flight, though) and I assume that they are planning to use their 767-300ER for that route. The website does not indicate if VVI is the departure city, but I assume that is the case and, according to the Great Circle Mapper, the distance between VVI and MAD is 5531 mi.

Finally, in accordance with a.net, the 767-300ER has a range of 5505 mi. when equipped with CF6 engines and of 5875 mi. when equipped with P&W engines. The 767-200ER has evidently a bigger range.

Questions:

The reason why AM does not operate its 767-300ER to Europe is that MEx is a high above the sea level and this results in extra fuel being burnt, which circumstance can seriously compromise the completion of the flight (especially if the load factor is high). Is this correct? I am assuming AM's 767-300ER is equipped with Pratt & Whitneys.

If the Great Circle Mapper's distances are accurate, PU and AV do not have a problem with getting from GIG and BOG, respectively, to MAD or viceversa using a 767-300ER because the distance in both cases is safely within the stated range (with any of the two available types of engines) and, in the case of PU, because GIG is hot but not high (0 meters above sea level). Correct?

Isn't it a risky business that LB is considering (or has started) flying to MAD from VVI (or elsewhere in Bolivia) using its 767-300ER (I take for granted that it is equipped with the P&W's)? I tend to think it is risky since the whole territory of Bolivia is high above the sea level (which is why, theoretically, AM does not fly its 767-300ER to Europe from MEx). What do you make of it? Could it happen that LB's 767-300ER run out of fuel before arriving to its destination?

Finally, MX just received an ex-SK 767-300ER which it is flying to EZE (only 4548 mi. so no range problems there). According to a.net members, MX will receive more 767-300ER's in the coming months and they will be used for new routes to European destinations. The routes that MX may start most commonly mentioned here are MEx-LHR (5541 mi.) and MEx-FRA (5944 mi). If this indeed happens, how on Earth is MX going to be able to complete these flights (especially the flight to FRA) when the distance of MEx-FRA is clearly beyond the stated range of the 767-300ER and when successfully completing MEx-LHR non-stop can be seriously impaired by the fact that MEx is high above the sea level? I am missing something? Are these potential flights going to stop at some place for refueling? Is it really more 767-300's that MX will be receiving, or is it actually 767-200ER's or other types of aircraft?

Thanks a lot for your help. I hope I was clear and not too confusing (or annoying) with all my questions.

[Edited 2004-03-11 03:08:54]
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
rockyracoon
Posts: 1010
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2003 3:58 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:01 am

I believe AM has 767-200ER, range is around 6050 nm.

Check out the Aircraft Data section of this site, lots of good info: http://www.airliners.net/info/

peace

[Edited 2004-03-11 03:06:05]
 
EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:06 am

Okay, an oversight. All my references to 767-200's and 767-300's in the very first post are indeed references to ER versions, obviously. Sorry if by forgetting to include that I sounded stupid.
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
MarcoPolo747
Posts: 446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 7:37 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:10 am

Amigo Eddie,

Just before entering in a codeshare agreement with RG and stop flying its own planes on the route, SK had a daily nonstop GRU-CPH flight which was among the longest nonstop routes to Europe using a 763 ER. I don't think range is a big issue for the 767 at least for crossing the south Atlantic because so many alternate airports are available and the oversea flight is just 1871 miles on its narrowest point (Natal-Dakar). Other long routes operated by 767s in this sector were : GRU-LHR and GRU-VIE (TransBrasil)and GIG-FRA (Varig).
 
EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:17 am

Hey MarcoPolo, how are you? Thanks for the info, although now I am more confused because, as I mentioned, the a.net database of aircraft's technical details states that the maximum range of the 763ER is 5,875 miles and GRU-CPH's distance is very likely more than 6,000 miles (GRU-FRA is, according to the Great Circle Mapper, 6,073 miles). Are you sure those flights you are mentioning were not operated with 762ER's?
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
MarcoPolo747
Posts: 446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 7:37 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:47 am

Amigo Eddie,

Thanks, how are you ? Both airlines published their flights as 767 not specifying which type, I have flown to CPH with SK and I am almost sure it was a 763 ER, RG operated both types , the 762 and 763 in the ER version.

Sorry if I didn't bring much light to this.

Best
 
Lan_Fanatic
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 11:41 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:31 pm

I don't know very much about technical stuff, but I remember some years ago, when Pinochet was released from his arrest in London, Mr.Sebastian Piñera, one of the major shareholders of LanChile offered a 767-300ER of this company to pick him up in London and bringing him back to Chile non-stop.

Can a 763ER fly non-stop from London to Santiago?
 
soamsky
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 3:41 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:38 pm

"AV BOG-MAD 4992 mi. 767-300ER"

I think AV uses its 767-200 for the BOG-MAD run. The 767-300 is mostly used for flights within America, such as BOG-EZE and BOG-NYC. Reason being, BOG high altitude.
Soar the blue of the South American Sky
 
fly727
Posts: 1752
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:27 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:42 pm

Dude:

To begin with; your questions are very interesting and have all a technical, if not logic answer.

The airport elevation is a major factor to consider when calculating an aircraft performance. Generally, the higher the airport is the lesser the thrust output will be due to air density. This is also true when analyzing the effect of temperature over performance. The hotter it gets the poorer the performance will be.

The first argument that might answer some of your questions is that the distance calculations of your source are in Statute Miles instead of Nautical Miles -used in aviation-. Thus the 5,643 Statute Miles of the MEx-MAD equals to roughly 4,900 Nautical Miles.

The reason why AM does not operate its 767-300ER to Europe is that MEx is a high above the sea level and this results in extra fuel being burnt

It is not something directly related to fuel endurance. Remember that the performance out of high & hot airports is greatly affected -reduced- and as a consequence the aircraft must be either MORE POWERFUL or LIGHTER in order to be able to achieve the performance specs of a safe operation. Can we make it more powerful? Well, maybe if we install JATO units, but this is not the case. We MUST make it lighter. How do we do that? Well... less fuel load, which will directly affect range. This is why AM uses the 762 instead of the 763 most of the times on its Europe flights. They both can provide relatively the same output of energy from its engines with the difference that the 763 carries much more weight than its shorter brother.

Just to make it crystal clear as I see you have confused the relation between altitude and fuel to burn; the higher you depart from, the lesser the altitude you will have to climb to reach your flight level (duh!) and thus the amount of fuel needed for that stage of the flight will be generally less (penalized of course by the slight extra fuel applied in order to get out of the demanding high-elevation airport).

which circumstance can seriously compromise the completion of the flight (especially if the load factor is high). Is this correct? I am assuming AM's 767-300ER is equipped with Pratt & Whitneys.

The completion of the flight is not compromised unless some serious, strong and unexpected weather condition develops. Before the plane even leave the ground hundreds of calculations are done by the dispatchers, weather men and pilots to prevent those situations to occur. When the amount of fuel is limited a "redispatch" is done in the air, that is, another set of calculations that will lead to a decision to continue or divert to any of the pre-planned alternates.

If the Great Circle Mapper's distances are accurate, PU and AV do not have a problem with getting from GIG and BOG, respectively, to MAD or viceversa using a 767-300ER because the distance in both cases is safely within the stated range (with any of the two available types of engines) and, in the case of PU, because GIG is hot but not high (0 meters above sea level). Correct?

Yes, these scenarios do not represent a problem because it is well within the range of the aircraft (more now that we've seen the distances shown are in Statute rather than Nautical). Also, we should consider that not all the aircraft have equal specs. ER's might not be all the same (I ignore the particular specs), but trust me that every airplane has its own corrected performance tables.

Finally, MX just received an ex-SK 767-300ER which it is flying to EZE (only 4548 mi. so no range problems there). According to a.net members, MX will receive more 767-300ER's in the coming months and they will be used for new routes to European destinations. The routes that MX may start most commonly mentioned here are MEx-LHR (5541 mi.) and MEx-FRA (5944 mi). If this indeed happens, how on Earth is MX going to be able to complete these flights (especially the flight to FRA) when the distance of MEx-FRA is clearly beyond the stated range of the 767-300ER and when successfully completing MEx-LHR non-stop can be seriously impaired by the fact that MEx is high above the sea level? I am missing something? Are these potential flights going to stop at some place for refueling? Is it really more 767-300's that MX will be receiving, or is it actually 767-200ER's or other types of aircraft?

Nautical vs Statute fact. Redispatch can happen. Particular specs of the aircraft to be considered. Limiting the passenger/cargo load in favor of fuel. Also, consider this; what is the current configuration of MX 763s? Yeap, a lot of Business seats (40). Do not expect the airplane to do that in an all-coach arrangement.

Hope it helps, it took me quiet some time to write this (I'm having dinner, watching TV and downloading stuff) so, I'm sorry if in the mean time someone came with an answer to your questions.

RM  Smile
There are no stupid questions... just stupid people!
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24522
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:43 pm

LAB already flies between Santa Cruz and Madrid. To Madrid is non-stop, but the return flight stops in Brazil, I believe Fortaleza.
a.
 
EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 1:50 pm

Wow, very interesting stuff. I really appreciate all this information. I guess the biggest lesson I got from this is the confirmation of how little I know of the technicalities of aviation. Thanks to everybody and, mainly Tassio and Fly727 (especially Fly727) for your time. So maybe the bottom line is that a 763ER can make the hop from most Latin American cities to Western European airports subject to (i) particular engine specifications, (ii) the specific cabin layout of the plane in question (no. of First, Biz and Econ. seats) and the average load factors, and (iii) temperature and altitude of the airports.

MAH4546 mentions that LB's 763ER to MAD only makes a stop on its way back. Under a combination of factors (full flight, extremely hot weather, maybe certain wind patterns, etc.), could it happen that the outbound leg (the VVI-MAD non-stop leg) may need to be diverted for refueling like Fly727 mentioned?

Finally I have a new round of questions (please moderators, don't close the thread saying this is off-topic). If AM is being pressured by SkyTeam to upgrade its aircraft used to MAD and CDG, this most likely will result in AM getting 772's sooner or later, NOT more 763ER's, right? My assumption is that AM has good load factors to MAD and CDG and, for the reasons outlined by Fly727, getting more 763ER's is not the way to go for AM. Second, we can then expect MX's new 763ER's to be configured with a relatively large number of business seats and a relatively low number of coach seats (like the "Buenos Aires" 763ER) so that flying them across the Atlantic to any new destinations they may start will not be a problem, correct?
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
AM772
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 2:34 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 2:56 pm

AM, uses 767-200, with a config of 180-181 pas in MEX-CDG, MEX-MAD, MEX-GRU routes and the lone 767-300, in the route MEX-SCL and sometimes MEX-MAD, theres a rumor AM, will make in april an order for 3 772, and start new routes,,, good luck AM!!
 
LVZXV
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 10:03 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 3:24 pm

I have a vague memory of seeing LAN Chile 767-300ERs in Madrid prior to the arrival of the A340-300X. I doubt I'm wrong because LAN always flew to Europe, and had nothing with greater range than the 763. Did they fly SCL-MAD direct or did they stop in EZE?

I know Southern Winds flies almost daily from EZE-MAD with a 763 and so does Air Europa, with whom it occasionally codeshares. Spanair also used to fly 763s on the route, which must be one of the greatest stretches of the 767's range.

Air Canada also does YYZ-SCL and YYZ-EZE with the 763. On the North/South axis, I forget how far that is, but I believe AA and UA don't send their 767s to EZE from further afield than MIA, IAD or DFW. JFK is usually a 777 service, I think.

In short, I have no idea how much range the 763 has to spare on these routes, but they are obviously certified!
How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
 
JOSEMEX
Posts: 1437
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 1999 11:44 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 3:29 pm

LVZXV,

LAN Chile's 767 service to Madrid was not nonstop, I'm sure, as the first MAD-SCL nonstops were flown by IB with their 340's. I can't remember if they stopped at EZE or maybe Brazil, though.
 
LVZXV
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 10:03 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 3:44 pm

You have to remember what the 767 was really replacing in the case of most South American carriers, before measuring the aircraft's performance: the 707. The 767 carries a good 100 passengers more, can in most cases hop the 'pond' non-stop, is a great deal more comfortable and more efficient, has more range, and is a great deal cheaper than the A340/B747/B777. The 4 vs. 2 engine argument doesn't really enter the equation given most South American airlines' budgets. The 767 is just fine. And, in the case of Avianca, LAB, LAN Chile, and PLUNA, it improved and modernised the airlines' image (all were flying 707s into the '90s!)

Avoiding an A. vs. B. discussion, I am surprised that TAM is South America's only customer for the A330, and neither the A300 nor the A310 caught on either... Also, note the only 2 A310s in the continent (LAB's CP-2232 & AR's LV-AIV) do NOT fly transatlantic services, despite their impressive range.
How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
 
ghost77
Posts: 4458
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 2:07 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 4:01 pm

Eddiedude,

Afaik AM was getting 2 more B763's and 1 more B762 this year. That was the only plans they had for their long haul fleet.

More over and I would say sadly... was told that N703AM is about to be returned to ILFC (current status / its stand at MEx, AM logos and titles have been removed) N801AM is the next one to leave the fleet. So 2 757 less out of the current 7 that will make 5 757s only! Meanwhile DL flies 4 757 to MEx! And 767s to CUN, AA flies 2 daily A300s from MIA to MEx and 767s all day long arriving at CUN... bla bla bla bla and more of what we all know. Also fly727 told me that soon some MD80s will leave AM fleet since lessor contracts are about to end. AM's fleet is dramaticlly decreasing. Perphaps, this has to be with the 14/15 average daily hours 737s are flying compared to the 8 hours Dc9s were flying. Maybe it has to do something with this! Same goes with MX... A319s are flying more hours average than what the 727s used to fly 1 one day for the airline.

About the T7s in AM, I knew that AM priority was to received the 15 B737W ordered and then they were due to start talks with either Boeing or AF for the lease of 3 aircraft. AM772 just show today saying AM will order 3 777s, dunno his sources but hope its true! AM as long as the other mexican carriers really need widebodies!!! Its frustrating to see MEx and CUN being dominated by a bunch of foreign carriers with widebodies.

More over on April 2nd LAN's network will enter the Mexican market.... Lan Peru.... will start a 4x service Lima-Mexico City. Meanwhile AM flies a daily 757 and no PTV's that I'm sure will be offered on Lan Peru's 767.

AM should upgrade this route with 767 and they need to install IFE on all their 767s!! And instead of getting 777s they should first increase their 767 fleet. While Lan Chile is adding 5 more B767-300s in all this year (AM total number of 767s)., here everything is uncertan, we are just guessing and crossing all our fingers to see AM increasing the number 767. Shame on AM, MX and CINTRA!

Ricardo APM  Smile

Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
 
fly727
Posts: 1752
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:27 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 4:25 pm

So maybe the bottom line is that a 763ER can make the hop from most Latin American cities to Western European airports subject to (i) particular engine specifications, (ii) the specific cabin layout of the plane in question (no. of First, Biz and Econ. seats) and the average load factors, and (iii) temperature and altitude of the airports.

Stated that way, yes. It is technically doable and those factors that you mentioned are some of many that flight dispatchers and designers have to deal with everyday. Hallaste el hilo negro, pues.  Big grin

MAH4546 mentions that LB's 763ER to MAD only makes a stop on its way back. Under a combination of factors (full flight, extremely hot weather, maybe certain wind patterns, etc.), could it happen that the outbound leg (the VVI-MAD non-stop leg) may need to be diverted for refueling like Fly727 mentioned?

Again right assumption. As a matter of fact westbound flights take much more time than eastbound. In this case, the MAD-MX), Mexico">MEX can take up to 3 more hours, depending on winds and route of flight.

Finally I have a new round of questions (please moderators, don't close the thread saying this is off-topic). If AM is being pressured by SkyTeam to upgrade its aircraft used to MAD and CDG, this most likely will result in AM getting 772's sooner or later, NOT more 763ER's, right? My assumption is that AM has good load factors to MAD and CDG and, for the reasons outlined by Fly727, getting more 763ER's is not the way to go for AM.

We once discussed that and someone thought about the 767-400. It turned out to be that it had a very poor performance and that the way to go for AM needs was the 762 or step up on the 777. A matter of heavy passenger loads and personal pride  Big grin makes me think the latter will be chosen (more over that Ghost brings back again the so-much-heard gossip about the triple seven).

Second, we can then expect MX's new 763ER's to be configured with a relatively large number of business seats and a relatively low number of coach seats (like the "Buenos Aires" 763ER) so that flying them across the Atlantic to any new destinations they may start will not be a problem, correct?

I ignore the capabilities of MX's 763s but I know they are not fitted with the most powerful engines available. That penalizes with some weight restrictions. Anyway, AFAIK due to the contract signed with SK, MX can't modify the layout of the plane (doesn't make a hell lot of sense to me, I think MX kept the configuration due to weight restrictions rather than for contractual reasons).

Saludos,
RM  Smile
There are no stupid questions... just stupid people!
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24522
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:43 pm

Air Canada also does YYZ-SCL and YYZ-EZE with the 763. On the North/South axis, I forget how far that is, but I believe AA and UA don't send their 767s to EZE from further afield than MIA, IAD or DFW. JFK is usually a 777 service, I think.

JFK-EZE is a 767 on AA. Only MIA-EZE has 777s.
a.
 
EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:19 am

Whoa, if LanPerú is starting flights to MEx from LIM with a 767, then this is going to be a lot of pressure for AM and TACA Perú! It is a very, very aggressive move by LanPerú because MEx-LIM is less than 6 hours long and many airlines don't see the case for using widebodies in a route less than 6 hours long unless their passenger loads are really high. Hopefully AM will upgrade the 752 to a 762ER or a 763ER (if AM's 752 fleet is shrinking and it is supposedly getting more widebodies, then this seems very possible). What I unfortunately don't see happening is AM installing PTV's in its widebodies (something that should have been done a long time ago). Is there really a market for three carriers doing MEx-LIM? I know both AM and TACA Perú use narrowbodies and that they don't fly the route daily; if you add a third airline with a superior product, then someone is going to have to drop the route or offer lower fares, double mileage, etc. Do you think that AM could give the MEx-LIM route to MX in exchange for another route and MX start operating a 763ER once it receives more of those?

As for 763ER's doing the MAD-EZE route, that seems a little bit of a stretch to me. Maybe they do a stop in Brazil or something, or have a seating configuration similar to MX's 763ER.

In connection with the potential 777 orders by AM, April is less than a month away, so I hope we will hear very soon about the orders. There is a thread from 2 weeks ago or so discussing how DL had some outstanding orders for 772's and that it was very likely not going to exercise them, so maybe the plan is to assign said orders to AM. The same thread also discussed how DL might actually get rid of one or two 777's that they currently operate; perhaps they would sell/lease these aircraft to AM. Could that be?

As for MX's widebody plans, I recall reading that the 767's were supposedly an interim solution and that negotiations to lease or buy 777's, A330's or even A340's are currently underway. MX getting any of the three types would be incredible. I am sure JJ is happy with its A330's and I think the airplane is a good choice for the GRU-CDG flight.
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
123
Posts: 616
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:49 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 3:46 am

LB takes their 763 regularly VVI-MAD, on the return flight they stop in Recife.

Range is no problem because the aircraft takes of in VVI which is at 400 m above sealevel, which is 3600 m less than La Paz.... Not all of Bolivia is mountains and highland; 33% is! 33% are mountanous valleys and the rest is lowland.

According to LB, the 767's have even longer ranges than only VVI-MAD.

RISK. Which one? It depends on ETOPS certifications. LB flyies within the ETOPS instructions because otherwise nobody would let them leave the ground.
 
plaaneboy
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 5:45 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 4:34 am

MAH4546 is correct, AA operates a 767-300 JFKEZE. It operates with a permanent weight restriction of 18 passengers southbound, while northbound it doesn't.

Also, UA operates a 767-300 IADEZE. I'm not sure if it also takes a weight penalty southbound though.
 
Lan_Fanatic
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 11:41 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:03 am

I read above about LanChile's 767s flights to Europe.

In the early nineties, the routing was SCL-REC-MAD-FRA. Then, in 1996 I think, the stopover in REC was moved to GRU.
After that, Lan got the A340s and since then the SCL-MAD route is non-stop.
 
Unicorn
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 6:57 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:08 am

Pluna of Uruguay use a 767-300ER for flights to Europe (Madrid I believe)

Unicorn

 
EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 8:13 am

Yes, that's correct. They fly from GIG. I guess the route is MVD-GIG-MAD.
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
MarcoPolo747
Posts: 446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 7:37 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 1:02 pm

Amigo Eddie,
You are right, PU's MVD-MAD run stops at GIG. MVD-GIG is a codeshare with RG and PU has full 5th freedom rights to MAD.
 
LVZXV
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 10:03 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Fri Mar 12, 2004 2:16 pm

EddieDude:

You're right about the MAD-EZE route: Southern Winds' 763ERs have just 201 seats, with economy enjoying a 35-inch pitch (and an impressive baggage allowance!)! Not sure about Air Europa though.
How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
 
EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Sat Mar 13, 2004 4:15 am

That's interesting. Is it a one-class cabin? With that pitch, Southern Winds' economy cabin sounds almost like premium economy. MX's 763ER has 42 business seats and only 144 coach seats, for a total of 186 (only five more seats than AM's 762ER's), probably to compensate for the fact that the fitted engines are not the strongest ones available, but I don't think that the pitch of the economy seats is that generous.
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738
 
LVZXV
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 10:03 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Sat Mar 13, 2004 8:30 am

Southern Winds is notoriously comfortable! They have no 1st class. Instead they have Business, Surf (Premium, if you like) and Economy. I'm not sure if it's Economy or Surf where you have a 64kg baggage allowance, which is the same as Air France business! I think Surf has 1 metre (40 inch) pitch, and Business a good deal more. As they have only 1 763 at present, and never operated more then 2, you'll be hard pressed to find a travel agent who's heard of them (in MAD, few even know where their check-in counter is!). Therefore, best you go to their website:

www.sw.com.ar

As with most things in Argentina at the moment, you'll fly well for less, as they are relatively inexpensive too (I think a EZE-MAD single costs around 700 dollars in Surf class).
How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
 
navega
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 1999 10:58 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:55 pm

All this talk about AM getting new aircraft etc. has me puzzled. It seems as though no one here reads the press
from Mexico.

Aeromexico is in the middle of a financial crisis. It has
stopped all orders and deliveries of new AC and will not
be able to continue it's fleet renovation until it gets out of
this mess.

Mexicana will continue to renovate it's fleet. It recieved 2 new A319 this past week and will get 10 A318's to replace
the Fokkers.

What I am getting too is that AM cannot and will not be
getting new Aircraft for a while to fly to Europe or to
South America.

The Mexicana B767's are the same ones that SAS flew with
no problems to the USA for years and at a higher density.

If they keep the seating with the 42 business class seats which they have decided to do, they can go far.

A fact is that SCL, GEG, MAD and FRA are starting by the
end of this year or the beggining of 2005. They were with
Boeing 3 weeks ago looking at the 777 but don't think they
would do this as they are more business minded and will not make moves just to get big new airplanes to look good.

They are also looking at used A330's and I believe this is
what they will fly if not the B767,s.

THey are in a better financial position to make a move than
AM at the moment and will probably take advantage but
with the rumors of a possible merger or with the movement
of Mexicana Directors over to AM to get them out their financial problems, who knows what will happen.

Very interesting stuff about to happen with these two great airlines.
 
s.p.a.s.
Posts: 916
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2001 2:04 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Mon Mar 15, 2004 2:00 am

Let's make some clarifications:

Marcopolo747:

SAS indeed flew CPH-GRU-CPH, but the flight was discontinued back in 1994 IIRC. It wasn't daily and it was operated by a 767-200ER, and this planes had only 150 seats. The only flight operated by the 767-300ER was the last scheduled one. I remember this very well because by this time I had lots of free time on my hands and living close to GRU was there on almost daily basis for spotting.

---

Regarding Lan Chile flights, they flew SCL-GRU-MAD, and it was a late night departure from GRU.

I have had the "pleasure" to make the flight dispatch of Spanair flights (as a contract flight dispatcher) routing GRU-MAD and even departing around the late afternoon (read "not so hot temperatures") I can tell you this flights were far from easy to take some cargo with a full load of pax. If memory serves me right, the maximum I managed to load was 4tons on a full flight, and using reclearence technique. Quite a difference from the average 16tons we loaded on a daily basis with my regular work at swissair (MD11s), this with a full house flight. I also had some contact with DL load control and it wasn't different on GRU-ATL flights.

From this work experience and input from a chap who is a 767 driver at RG, this plane is Ok for up to 8/9 hours flights (on a schedule operation pax and taking cargo downstairs) above that you start to stretch the capabilities and loose cargo weight available, which in other hands, means you stop earning some money. For a charter operation, where you hardly have anything else than bags downstairs it is a very good performer.

Varig had flights GRU-MXP with 767 and as available weight for cargo was almost none, the break-even of this flight was around 120%, yes, even with a full house they were loosing money. The same happened when they decided to make GRU-LAX non-stop.

Cheers

RS
"ad astra per aspera"
 
AM772
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 2:34 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Mon Mar 15, 2004 2:52 am

Whay I've read, MX is going to get 4 and an option to 5 ex-SAS B763, And 10 A318 at the end of this year,,, at first, MX asked for 10 A318 to replace F100's, but then they decided to get A318 in MX colours and repaint F100 to Aerocaribe,,, they're all rumors.
Also I've heard that AM will get their 15th B737, wait for a few months to get some money and place an order for 10 B738 to replace at the moment MD82's, they also are looking for a long-range, med/high-capacity aircraft like B772 or B764 even though they have serius finantial probs, this to compete with MX's plans, also that 6A is adding 4 more B732's,,, boring 732's and opening 1 or 2 US new routes.
As I said this are rumors and out of this forum I've never heard about a merger btw them,,, so good luck for the 3 main carriers in Mexico!!!
:D
 
Lan_Fanatic
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 11:41 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Mon Mar 15, 2004 3:05 am

I flew SCL-GRU-MAD in LanChile back in 1997. It was a hot evening in Sao Paulo when we took off. And I have never been in such a long run for taking off. Also I remember that the pilot accelerated but kept the brakes on, then he released them and then came...the longest take off I've ever had.

It was quite amusing.
 
s.p.a.s.
Posts: 916
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2001 2:04 pm

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Mon Mar 15, 2004 3:21 am

Indeed some long hauls eat a lot of asphalt before being airborne, GRU has a undesireble combination of elevated altitude (2540ft) and high temperatures on a 3700m runway.

I have experienced my share of long take-off runs, both jumseating (MD11s mostly) and spotting.


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Renato Salzinger



Gran Saludos

RS

"ad astra per aspera"
 
LVZXV
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 10:03 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Mon Mar 15, 2004 3:49 am

Lan Fanatic:

In response to an earlier post of yours', I think a 763 could only fly LHR/LGW-SCL with a VERY light passenger load. In fact, I remember that the aircraft that ended up flying Gral. Pinochet back to Chile in March 1999 was a FACh B707. I'm sure it had to stop somewhere, but I doubt MAD or anywhere in Spain were the preferred choices...
London to Santiago is something like 6,952 miles, and the route was only briefly served directly by a BA B747-400, but with One World etc. BA codeshares with LAN from Buenos Aires these days. If a LAN 763 tried to fly SCL-LHR/LGW non-stop, it would find itself landing in the drink, probably in the Bay of Biscay or some other calm waters...
How do you say "12 months" in Estonian?
 
fly727
Posts: 1752
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:27 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Mon Mar 15, 2004 5:34 am

Navega:

Finally CINTRA's move to place two directors in AM's board didn't happened and that is been around in the net for a few days now. Also, AM will continue to renew its fleet, specially the long-haul which is in disadvantage against other's competitors and pressure from Skyteam. In the mean time, two 757's will be returned to its lessors and substituted for two 767s (o the -200 series I think) to reinforce its presence in Europe with more frequencies to MD), Spain">MAD and CDG. The acquisition of more 73NG now is closer than ever as AM has options over more than 30 aircraft after the 15 confirmed and has already approached Boeing for them now that part of the MD fleet will soon be returned due to expiration of the leasing contracts.

The new director MRM just had a meeting with ASPA pilots and clearly stated that the so mentioned merger will not occur and that despite they will/are working so close and coordinated the companies will keep separate identities and structures.

It is certainly a wait and see situation here.

RM  Smile
There are no stupid questions... just stupid people!
 
EddieDude
Topic Author
Posts: 6177
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

RE: 767's LatAm To Europe: Range Issues

Mon Mar 15, 2004 6:07 am

Guys, perhaps you remember a thread on IB wet-leasing 744's from SQ a few days ago. I "dared" talk about how IB got the A346's from Airbus instead of the 772ER's from Boeing in direct response to another member's posting in connection with IB's long-haul aircraft types and I got a message from the moderators stating that my posting was irrelevant to the topic. I wouldn't like to see this topic closed for those reasons, so below is the URL to the thread on AM's future. I think it is more suitable to post these comments about AM's newer aircraft there rather than here.

Thanks,

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/1421767/
Next flights: MEX-LAX AM 738, LAX-PVG DL 77L, SHA-PEK CA 789, PEK-PVG CA A332, PVG-ORD MU 77W, ORD-MEX AM 738

Who is online