MidnightMike
Topic Author
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:17 pm

"This jet cannot fly Sydney to London non-stop,'" he said. "[It] is easy on paper. This jet can fly non-stop with a full load of up to 301 passengers and 11 tonnes of cargo for 17,446km (Sydney-London is 17,016km). But there is just something about this route (from Australia to London): It gets the most continuous head wind conditions of any. We can't overcome them with a commercially feasible payload, yet flying the other way with a continuous tail wind is no problem at all."

In fact it is considered an all but a done deal by insiders that Qantas is going to include some Worldliners among an order for 40 new Boeings that will be announced as soon as the arm-wrestling over the final price is agreed.

He has reminded them that Qantas really wants to fly right over the top of Singapore and Dubai in particular, on its flights to London, because they are the hub cities of Singapore Airlines and Emirates which he describes as the enemy because of their claimed unfair access to government subsidies

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/bizf...cus/archives/2005/07/24/2003264881
NO URLS in signature
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:36 pm

I really would love to see the 777 in QF colours but I just don't think the 77C is viable... The 77W gives them much more flexibility IMO! I know QF are probably considering a split but I doubt that LHR is where the 77C's would go a majority of the time... I heard mention of DFW which would be far more feasible for the jet!

We'll see in time I guess.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
drewfly
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:37 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:37 pm

40 new Boeings? Daaamn. If we were talking 737's it would still be considered a large order, but since it will probably be widebody......thats huge. Time will tell of course if these claims are backed up. But if proven true, good news for Boeing.
A-10 Thunderbolt II, ugly as hell, efficient as hell, would you like to meet my boomstick?
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1825
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:51 pm

What a source! A Taipei paper re-printing a London report about an Australian airline's interest in an American-made plane.  Wink
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:59 pm

Kind of irrelivant as this was a given based on range projections.
 
zamaria
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:41 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:02 pm

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 1):
I really would love to see the 777 in QF colours but I just don't think the 77C is viable... The 77W gives them much more flexibility IMO! I know QF are probably considering a split but I doubt that LHR is where the 77C's would go a majority of the time... I heard mention of DFW which would be far more feasible for the jet!

Sorry for the dumb question, but the 77C is the B777-200LR and the 77W is the B777-300ER? Is this correct?

-Z
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13808
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:07 pm

Those must be really strong winds, because you'd think a 255 seat with 5 ton payload would be able to do it normally, given those range figures for the 301/11 capacity.

But QF could stop ignoring Perth, and fly direct to more of the US and Canada, or 8000nm routes with heavy cargo loads.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
avpilot01
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:28 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:14 pm

Quoting Zamaria (Reply 5):
Sorry for the dumb question, but the 77C is the B777-200LR and the 77W is the B777-300ER? Is this correct?

-Z

Not a dumb question...I was wondering the same thing. He's writing it like everyone is familiar with 77C and 77W.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11022
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:16 pm

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 1):
I heard mention of DFW which would be far more feasible for the jet!

Non-stop Sydney to DFW? That would be great, and the longest route out of DFW.
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:17 pm

Quoting Zamaria (Reply 5):
Sorry for the dumb question, but the 77C is the B777-200LR and the 77W is the B777-300ER? Is this correct?

Yep!  bigthumbsup 

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
But QF could stop ignoring Perth, and fly direct to more of the US and Canada, or 8000nm routes with heavy cargo loads.

I agree, and I think DFW is perfect in terms of the loads which could be carried. Any thoughts?
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
nudelhirsch
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:20 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:34 pm

DFW is not just perfect, it makes perfect sense as AA is based there, the good ole OW fellow... (or mate as our friends from OZ would say...). How about cargo ops on AA out of DFW? Is there any chance that DFW could be pax AND cargo hub for QF and AA?
Putana da Seatbeltz!
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13808
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:45 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
But QF could stop ignoring Perth, and fly direct to more of the US and Canada, or 8000nm routes with heavy cargo loads.

Before anyone starts screaming in print, I did not mean Perth-DFW as it likely would be too payload limited.

I meant Perth to LHR, SYD/MEL-DFW, SYD/MEL-US/Canada, etc. Although I guess Perth-LAX would be doable as well. Maybe 3x weekly Perth-LAX, 3x weekly Perth-LHR with 2 planes?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:45 pm

Quoting Nudelhirsch (Reply 10):
How about cargo ops on AA out of DFW? Is there any chance that DFW could be pax AND cargo hub for QF and AA?

I would hope so... Perhaps especially considering the 6 LD3 spaces needed for the extra range fuel tanks would not be needed for a destination such as DFW. It would probably also allow for a generous baggage amount for pax flights which is given to current QF American flights.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
commavia
Posts: 10107
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:47 pm

Well, I guess I'll join the chorus of those singing the praises of QF at DFW. QF flying a SYD-DFW route with the 777LR would make absolutely perfect operational and commercial sense for all the reasons already stated -- the 777LR can make the route, nonstop, in both directions, and it would be linking two of the largest oneworld hubs, including the single largest, DFW.

The only question that remains, however, is whether LAX would be willing to erode SYD-LAX as their primary feeder route into the U.S. mainland. While LAX would still no doubt retain thousands of connecting passengers a month, DFW would of course provide conveniently-timed nonstop access to so many more onward connecting cities throughout the U.S. On the other hand, routing some passengers on thinner routes over DFW rather than LAX could free up seats on SYD-LAX that QF needs to meet demand and to dampen calls for them to "step up" transpac capacity. Should be interesting, but all I have to say is -- "QF, we here at DFW have a brand new, beautiful International Terminal with your name on it!" I, for one, would love to see a shiny QF bird at my home airport.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 24724
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:50 pm

Qantas announced Dallas-Auckland service a few years ago, but never started it. The reason being that they didn't want to erode their LAX operation. I think Qantas at Dallas could work really well, but until they stop being so LAX-centric, it is unlikely. Qantas could also exploit the Vancouver, San Francisco, and Chicago markets, but they don't, because they rather just sit pretty at LAX. Can't blame them for that.

Qantas is one of the world's largest long-haul airlines, yet they only fly to five cities outside of Asia and Oceania: Frankfurt, London, Los Angeles, Johannesburg, and New York City.

[Edited 2005-07-25 16:52:40]
a.
 
voodoo
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 12:14 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 12:54 am

If the winds are blowing so strong in the `wrong' direction......I take it the payload-range figures also can't add up to flying -east- to London i.e. overflying the US West Coast and then Trans-Atlantic?
` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
 
N60659
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:01 am

Quoting Avpilot01 (Reply 7):
Quoting Zamaria (Reply 5):
Sorry for the dumb question, but the 77C is the B777-200LR and the 77W is the B777-300ER? Is this correct?

-Z

Not a dumb question...I was wondering the same thing. He's writing it like everyone is familiar with 77C and 77W.

I collected this from another thread not too long ago. Just one problem, I can't remember who posted the list. My most sincere apologies in advance for not giving credit to whom it is due:

777/772/77A/772A = 777-200
777/772/77B/772ER = 777-200ER
77C/77L/772LR = 777-200LR
77F/777F/772LRF = 777-200F
773/773A = 777-300
773/77W/773ER = 777-300ER

-N60659
Nec Dextrorsum Nec Sinistrorsum
 
commavia
Posts: 10107
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:08 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 14):
Qantas could also exploit the Vancouver, San Francisco, and Chicago markets, but they don't, because they rather just sit pretty at LAX. Can't blame them for that.


Agree completely. QF has done quite nicely by LAX, and derives millions in annual revenue from their QF-AA interchange hub at LAX.

My modest proposal for a revised QF North American schedule:

SYD-LAX / 14x weekly 744 (continuing LAX-JFK / 3x weekly 744)
SYD-SFO-YVR / 7x weekly 744
SYD-DFW / 7x weekly 777LR
SYD-HNL / 5x weekly 763
AKL-LAX / 7x weekly 744
BNE-LAX / 3x weekly 744
MEL-LAX / 7x weekly 744

[Edited 2005-07-25 18:09:05]
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2110
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:20 am

Quote:
SYD-HNL / 5x weekly 763

Um, no. In the 40 airplane order, there will be a sufficient amount of 787 (firm or option) to replace all 767s and possibly all A330s. So those, sadly, will finally leave Qantas colors.
 
boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:56 am

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 18):
Um, no. In the 40 airplane order, there will be a sufficient amount of 787 (firm or option) to replace all 767s and possibly all A330s. So those, sadly, will finally leave Qantas colors.

Doubt they will be getting rid of there A330-200/300's although thats funny you would even say that. You do know they still have (2) A330-303's on order (VH-QPH & VH-QPI.) There A330's do very nice for them on there routes to the Far East and the Outback.

Quoting Commavia (Reply 17):
SYD-HNL / 5x weekly 763

Also how did you come up with QF changing there 747-338 to a 763ER on the SYD-HNL service? I guess this is very possible due to they only have (5) 743's active in the fleet.

Also this (40) a/c order is being talked about like it's a done deal which it's not!

DFW would be nice!  yes 
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 2:33 am

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 14):

Qantas is one of the world's largest long-haul airlines, yet they only fly to five cities outside of Asia and Oceania: Frankfurt, London, Los Angeles, Johannesburg, and New York City.

One could also argue HNL onto that list.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
cloudyapple
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:01 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 2:51 am

"The A340-500 is even fitted with a single occupancy "morgue" so that in the event of a passenger dying in their seat, they can be discretely removed for the remainder of the flight."

That's something new to me...
A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 3:03 am

Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 21):
That's something new to me

...but it's not new to the industry.

People die in flight, fact.

Bad business to just leave a corpse sitting there, even if other pax don't notice; so best to have a storage area in flight.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 3:21 am

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 22):
Bad business to just leave a corpse sitting there, even if other pax don't notice; so best to have a storage area in flight.

Don't they usually take the corpse to the galley to prepare the inflight meal?
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-20

Tue Jul 26, 2005 3:25 am

perhaps.

Maybe the so-called "Engine Buzz" is really just the galley girls hacking away at some poor sap with chainsaws?  Wink
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:22 am

Its disappointing that nonstop flights between LHR and SYD and return will not be possible with the 772LR - the connection between London and SYD is one of the few routes worldwide that could support nonstop service on a daily basis but remains out of range of the airliners available today.

Boeing got close with the better than expected performing 772LR, but not they are not there yet - Boeing has to be looking at any possible way to squeeze a bit more range out of the 772LR at this point. It will be interesting to see how QF handles this situation. I do expect to see the 772LR to be included in the large order that QF is expected to place with Boeing: the 772LR will be very uselful for long transpacific routes (ie, BNE-LAX daily with a 772LR is a possibility) and we might just see the long discussed SYD-DFW route opened up (I realize that QF has a good thing going at LAX, but all of those connection possibilities at DFW is something that has to be attractive to QF and AA), but will QF take an innovative approach and do the SYD-JFK-LAX routing, or launch oneway nonstop service between LHR-SYD? I am curious to see what QF comes up with.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:30 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 25):
Boeing got close with the better than expected performing 772LR, but not they are not there yet - Boeing has to be looking at any possible way to squeeze a bit more range out of the 772LR at this point. It will be interesting to see how QF handles this situation.

Why? The aircraft was never expected to perform at that range. If they can do it, it's only a bonus.
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:32 am

There seems to be much talk of an impending QF order for Boeings. Where is this coming from? Has there been real indications for QF activity lately? I'm not up on the latest stuff.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:50 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 25):
Its disappointing that nonstop flights between LHR and SYD and return will not be possible with the 772LR - the connection between London and SYD is one of the few routes worldwide that could support nonstop service on a daily basis but remains out of range of the airliners available today.

I still say wait until it's confirmed by Boeing's (in)actions, than a 3rd party.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 25):
BNE-LAX daily with a 772LR is a possibility

seems like a 773ER would be an even better fit
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:52 am

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 26):

Why? The aircraft was never expected to perform at that range. If they can do it, it's only a bonus.

Why? Because if the 772LR could do the LHR-SYD route in both directions nonstop with an economic payload, it would likely result in additonal sales of a good number of 772LRs to QF, maybe BA and other airlines.

I am aware that Boeing did not expect the 772LR to be able to operate LHR-SYD, but it seems as if they are very close because of the better than expected performance of the 772LR, and what better bonus would there be than selling a good number of additional airframes?
 
Ozair
Posts: 1397
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:47 am

Has anyone considered future competition as the reason for a 777LR purchase by QF. Surely it is only a matter of time before Singapore, Emirates or another airline (other than United who currently fly twice daily from SYD) starts east coast OZ services to LAX. I can see the Australian government granting rights to one of the above airlines within the next 5 years. I think the 777LR purchase is too forestall that and ensure that they continue to generate traffic on the most profitable route QF has, OZ to US, and limit the impact of another airline competing on the LAX route.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1609
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:03 am

This is a guess, but they'll probably order a bunch of 777-300ERs to compete with Singapore and a bunch of 787-3s for their domestic networks... Can't seem to imagine Qantas going for 777-200LR at this point, since they love 747s for the long-haul to the US and the Kangaroo Route...
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
onedude
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:28 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:32 am

Expect the 332's to be replaced in any deal for new wideboy Boeings - they can't upgrade the J cabin to the bed product due to floor weight issues. The 333's though are expected to stay.
 
aviasian
Posts: 1244
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2001 8:11 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:36 am

Quoting Glom (Reply 23):
Don't they usually take the corpse to the galley to prepare the inflight meal?

What an enlightening comment! This discussion - which was progressing rather nicely - could surely do without it.

Back to the thread : The B777LR's ability to fly nonstop from LHR-SYD (and some might argue from SYD-LHR too) is one thing . . . and Boeing is going to prove later this year that it is able to stay aloft for about 24 hrs. But is the travelling public ready to fly that long nonstop? I do recall how many on this forum (and mind you, this is the somewhat more enlightened community when it comes to aviation) express horror at flying 16-18hrs nonstop on an A345 with only 184 seats. How many will fly anything between 20-24 hrs on a B772LR with anything between 250 and 301 seats?

I personally think that Ultra Longhaul operations will soon be limited not by an aircraft's range but by human's tolerance. Many passengers on the Kangaroo Route are fairly elderly and I could not see them surviving that long stretch without their feet bloating to the size of big shoebox.

KC Sim
 
zotan
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:42 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:55 am

What about a 747ADV, and 787 order? I know that their 744's are relatively new, but since both of the planes will have the same engine it would probably work out pretty nice for QF.
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:57 am

Quoting ZOTAN (Reply 34):
What about a 747ADV, and 787 order? I know that their 744's are relatively new, but since both of the planes will have the same engine it would probably work out pretty nice for QF.

Probably not since they are going the A380 route
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 10:36 am

Quoting Ozair (Reply 30):
I think the 777LR purchase is too forestall that and ensure that they continue to generate traffic on the most profitable route QF has, OZ to US, and limit the impact of another airline competing on the LAX route.

If the route is X-OZ-US then, nothing will stop those airlines from using ULH aircraft to service other destinatons via OZ.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
lazybones
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 7:32 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 12:00 pm

Quoting MidnightMike (Thread starter):
This jet cannot fly Sydney to London non-stop

Well, thats Boeing fault for NOT working closer with Qantas and ConcordeBoy. He did the maths on this months ago! (ConcordeBoy that is) Big grin
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:54 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
Those must be really strong winds, because you'd think a 255 seat with 5 ton payload would be able to do it normally, given those range figures for the 301/11 capacity.

In an ultra long-haul (similar to SQ's A340-500) configuration, a B777-200LR would have between 200 and 220 seats. 5 tonnes of additional payload (above and beyond passenger bags) is about right for the high yield urgent cargo such as airmail.

I think QF will offer LHR-SYD nonstop with a technical stop SYD-LHR. I don't think QF will fly eastbound only SYD-JFK-LHR-SYD because JFK-SYD works nonstop.
 
trent900
Posts: 499
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:06 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:04 pm

Quoting Glom (Reply 27):
There seems to be much talk of an impending QF order for Boeings. Where is this coming from? Has there been real indications for QF activity lately?

Quite rite Glom, I havn't heard anything either. If this is true though, seems to be another airline that can't make up their minds.

T.
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:20 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 38):
I think QF will offer LHR-SYD nonstop with a technical stop SYD-LHR.

I think QF won't.  Wink

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 38):
I don't think QF will fly eastbound only SYD-JFK-LHR-SYD because JFK-SYD works nonstop.

JFK-SYD is almost as payload restricted as SYD-LHR.  Sad
 
SFORunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:23 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:37 pm

"Currently Qantas is studying whether a one-way non-stop arrangement from London to Sydney but a refueling stop, perhaps even in Russia the other way, will be acceptable to its top corporate customers, who generate most of its premium fare revenues. Another option is to fly to London via New York City and then return non-stop to Sydney on the most direct and fastest tail-wind-assisted route across Siberia and China.

But the number crunchers at Qantas have yet to decide if that is worth it, or whether they should just stick to using the jet to better access America."

Interesting.....
 
milan320
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 2:25 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:57 pm

Quoting Aviasian (Reply 33):
What an enlightening comment! This discussion - which was progressing rather nicely - could surely do without it.

What's wrong with a little comic relief? He didn't mention any one in particular, so no disrespect there. Good one Glom!!!
/Milan320
I accept bribes ... :-)
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13808
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 6:50 pm

Quoting Aviasian (Reply 33):
Back to the thread : The B777LR's ability to fly nonstop from LHR-SYD (and some might argue from SYD-LHR too) is one thing . . . and Boeing is going to prove later this year that it is able to stay aloft for about 24 hrs. But is the travelling public ready to fly that long nonstop? I do recall how many on this forum (and mind you, this is the somewhat more enlightened community when it comes to aviation) express horror at flying 16-18hrs nonstop on an A345 with only 184 seats. How many will fly anything between 20-24 hrs on a B772LR with anything between 250 and 301 seats?

I personally think that Ultra Longhaul operations will soon be limited not by an aircraft's range but by human's tolerance. Many passengers on the Kangaroo Route are fairly elderly and I could not see them surviving that long stretch without their feet bloating to the size of big shoebox

How many times do we have to read the same comments re: ultra long flights?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Avalon
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 6:36 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:14 pm

Melb/Syd to London or New York is a very long and arduous journey to make in economy class & I cannot imagine many (or any) people prepared to fly these sectors. It is just too long a period to be restricted to an economy seat. It would make the overnight Melbourne-Sydney train seem luxurious.

Even a technical stop would be no good if it meant you could not get out and walk around & maybe have a shower.

I do not think any ultra long range non-stop flight would attract a requisite number of economy passengers unless it was in an A380 style of plane with recreation areas. Hub busting needs more than just getting today's type of plane to fly further.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:04 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 43):
How many times do we have to read the same comments re: ultra long flights?

I agree - but, for the record, MEL-LAX is already over 14 hours. With say three hours lost at LAX, most of it spent queueing at immigration and security, total journey time to JFK is around 21 hours. Similar time required for MEL-LHR with a stop at Changi.

Personally I'd settle for 18 hours non-stop any time, if it ever becomes available. Especially on a smaller aeroplane, rather than putting up with the 'cattletruck' atmosphere of a jumbo.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
User avatar
ClassicLover
Posts: 3980
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:27 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:52 pm

It will be interesting to see from this point of view - SYD-LHR is a very busy route, and apparently the A380s are going to be deployed on it. It will be interesting to see if QF will allocate some of its precious Heathrow slots to a non-stop flight that carries far less passengers.

What's the bet they're trying to work out if they can charge extra for a non-stop flight compared to the one-stop flight?  Smile

Trent.
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:01 am

Quoting ClassicLover (Reply 46):
It will be interesting to see if QF will allocate some of its precious Heathrow slots to a non-stop flight that carries far less passengers.

Less passengers but more fuel, Trent. Two 772LRs would carry 600 passengers for the same amount of fuel as a single A380 carrying 500 - and incur no airport/handling charges at Singapore.....

I think the market very well could stand a premium fare. I would certainly pay one, especially since the Triple Seven seats have a precious inch or two added to seat width and seat pitch.

I wonder whether big strategy changes may be in the wind at Qantas. There are indications that, under pressure from Canberra, there is likely to be a clean sweep of top management - and this article suggests that the airline will order up to 60 new aircraft, almost certainly a mix of 787s and 777s, in November.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au.../0,5744,15856225%255E23349,00.html

Interesting to reflect on the fact that those A380s were ordered back in 2000, when hub-to-hub looked as if it was here to stay, and virtually no airliners had ranges of more than 7,500 miles or so. The market is definitely shifting towards point-to-point ('hub-busting'); it's only a question of how far and how fast it moves.

The A380 may soon find itself serving a market that's 'done gone'. And no doubt Qantas, like the other launch customers, enjoys the 'no-penalty cancellation up to twelve months before delivery' option that Leahy offered on the A380.

Qantas must be pigsick that they now won't get any A380s before first-quarter 2007, and that SIA will get them earlier - probably before Christmas 2006. It means the loss of a complete 2006/7 high season, while their main competitor makes hay. And Qantas never stops moaning about how they get ripped off at Changi. As things stand, Qantas will no doubt take delivery as ordered - but if there are yet further delays in A380 delivery, on top of the years of delay already suffered, I for one wouldn't take any bets on what Qantas, under new management, might do..........
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-20

Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:27 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 47):
and virtually no airliners had ranges of more than 7,500 miles

...you mean other than the A332, A342, A343, M11, 772ER, and 747; right?  Wink
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Headwinds Buffet Boeing's Plans For The 777-200LR

Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:44 am

Should have said 'nautical miles', ConcordeBoy - I imagined that everyone thought in those when discussing aviation matters. 744ER 7,670 nms, 773ER 7,250 nms. A342 7,450 nms........

And A380 (claimed) 8,000 nms, 772LR (claimed) 9,540 nms.........

[Edited 2005-07-26 17:55:08]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci

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