3green
Topic Author
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 4:20 pm

777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 4:12 am

Hello, can i ask if anybody here has flown on the Boeing 777, and, if so, do they feel very powerful when takeoff power is applied? I see the size of the engines, especially the GEs, and think, wow, how much do they push you back in your seat? 
 
modesto2
Posts: 2669
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 3:44 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 5:54 am

I've been on two United 777's. And yes, they are powerful. However, I wouldn't say that there is a sizable difference between this aircraft and any other jetliner.
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 6:40 am

Try taking off in a 777 with no high loads, ie fuel/pax. I did this not too long ago on the AA777 flight ORD-DFW, man, that thing rotated so fast, I was amazed. The aircraft really has a TON of power. So I would have to disagree with Modesto2 that it feels just like any other aircraft. I have also taken off for long international flights on the 777, ie DFW-NRT, and you still feel the power and ease of which it has getting up into the air. Truly, an incredible aircraft.
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
Guest

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 7:53 am

I have to admit that I was not too impressed with its takeoff power on a Washington-Paris AF flight. It was barely better than an A340. For real acceleration you will have to fly smaller jets, but the 777 is still a beautiful aircraft with bloody impressive engines!
 
GE
Posts: 312
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2000 5:01 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 8:37 am

The 777's acceleration is extremely powerful, especially on flights with low loads. I love it's gigantic engines, more so if their GEs.  
 
Red Panda
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 9:31 am

I think the feeling of being pushed back to the seat is not just determined by the power of the engines. The load is also an important factor. If the passengers or cargo loads are light, then it would be very very powerful during takeoff. 757 and A320 are planes that you can really feel the power. (w/ light load of course)
 
Skyteam
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:50 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 9:33 am

Yes, It is very powerful. It really puts your back into the seat. It is one of the best feelings in flying!!!!!

SKYTEAM
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6418
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 10:55 am

All airliners have the power they need to have and no more. Twins need more power than quads because all airliners must be able to cope with one engine failure at the most critical time during take off.
The pretty standard runway lengths around the world dictate the power to weight ratio, which is the only thing which means anything to the accelleration.
A twin usually has a power to maximum take-off weight (MTOW) ratio around 3.1 - 3.3 while a quad has a ratio around 3.8 - 4.1. You can check every single airliner type out on the manufacturers' web sites. The 777 is completely in line with other twins, no more, no less.
A large and more efficient wing allows a slightly slower take-off speed and more economic power, and visa versa, therefore the decimals vary a little.
On a long range plane - like for instance a 777 - the max. fuel load is several times heavier than the max payload. When such a bird is used on sectors of only a few thousand miles, and consequently carry a light fuel load, then they have a very favourable power to weight ratio - just like a heavy truck which is missing its trailer.
It would be hard to imagine a more stupid thing than to put too powerful (and too heavy and fuel guzzling) engines on an otherwise good airliner. No airliner manufacturer ever did that.
The only planes which differ are those which were designed for unusually short runways and must accellerate more than other planes. That's planes like the DHC Dash-7 and DC-9-21 (or DC-9 Sport). The latter was only built in ten examples and they are disappearing now.
I have been on a DC-9-21 a few times, but never on short runways. There was no excessive accellaration, obviously because on a standard runway the flight crew cleverly chose to take off at reduced power to minimise external noise, engine wear and fuel burn.
At some airports it may be favourable for noise reduction to make full power take off even with a lightly loaded plane. That's when the airport surroundings are not noise sensitive, but you want to be as high as possible when passing the first populated and noise sensitive area.
All such things may make take-off rolls feel differently, but that has nothing special with the 777 to do. Anyway a 777 (or any other long range plane) may take off in a very lightweight condition even if the cabin is full, while that of course never happens on a fully loaded short or medium range plane which was not designed to carry 100+ tonnes of fuel.
Best regards, Preben Norholm
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
Guest

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 2:46 pm

I'm surprised that you can tell the difference, airlines vary the amount of engine thrust used depending on the aircrafts weight.
It is possible to reduce the B777's engine thrust by up to 45%. This greatly increases the engine life and reduces costs.
The only time that the B777's acceleration has impressed me was during an empty training sector, light aircraft, crew and 3 pax's, max power was used.... that was fun.
 
Guest

RE: Climbing?

Thu Nov 09, 2000 3:39 pm


Hello,

since I'm still looking forward to my first 777 flight in December, I was glad to hear some of your impressions.
Is a full 777 comparable to a 747 druing climb ?? I mean, does it also climb pretty slow or is it way different from the 747 ?

Thanks a lot,

B737-700
 
airnewzealand
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 6:00 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 4:34 pm

I recently flew on the 777-200 and 300 and found it to be exactly the same as flying on a normal 767-300. I thought the -300 was more pwerful though
cheers
mikey. 
 
SydneyBoy
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2000 10:08 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 9:01 pm

I took off in Thai's 777-300 from Don Muang a couple of weeks ago, and WOW. Never been pushed back in my seat like that before, and never heard engines make that sound. More like a racing car than an airliner.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8005
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Thu Nov 09, 2000 10:55 pm

All I know is watching UA 777-200ER's take off from Runways 28L/28R at SFO for international flights show the plane has pretty impressive takeoff ability even on a fully-loaded flight.

I've seen UA 930 (SFO-NRT) with a 772ER take off in shorter runway distance than JL 001 using a 747-400. The 744's seem to lumber down the runway before rotating for takeoff.
 
Guest

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 12:17 am

I'm looking forward to ATA's new 757's (with winglets?) arriving at MDW. That will be the largest plane to fly from MDW's "short" runways, and I assume max power will be required.....
 
wannabe
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 1999 3:37 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 12:46 am

I did a AA 777 flight from DFW to ORD several months back, and it was quick, but not as quick as several 757 departures I've had. The hottest takeoffs I've ever been in were a nearly empty 757 out of BOS about 10 years ago, and a Midway 737-700 out of RDU this past spring. I doubt that a fully loaded 777 can beat a 757 on takeoff performance and rate of climb. Maybe a few pilots can enlighten us?
 
virgin744
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 1999 5:51 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 1:11 am

Just to translate the figures Prebennorholm quoted into English  

A 777 usually takes off using 'at least' 96% of its engines thrust capability....

And having sat on the same row as one in a window seat, I can testify that they are THE most powerful engines I've had the pleasure of sitting next to. (A bit loud though)!

 
wannabe
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 1999 3:37 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 1:13 am

Hey, if you passed that much air, you'd be loud too!!!
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6418
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 1:18 am

This thread has become really trivial reading.
Let me suggest that all following posts on this thread are based on a zerox of the captain's weight and balance sheet.
Full Plane! The weight and balance sheet will tell us if it is 30 tonnes of pax/baggage plus 30 tonnes of fuel, or it is 30 tonnes of pax/baggage plus 130 tonnes of fuel.
Without this data all this talk is pure crap.
Cheers, Preben Norholm
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
na
Posts: 9160
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 1:24 am

The most powerful take-off I´ve experienced was not the one on the B777 3 years ago, it was on a short hop with a B744 this year. The aircraft was about 2/3 full but with nearly no cargo at all because it was special flight. The power was incredible.
 
advancedkid
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 1:27 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff+ Fishtail

Fri Nov 10, 2000 1:49 am

Hi all,
the 777 doesnt feel any different on take off
from other airliners. Well, I would say the most
powerful feel you would get in the 757.
However if you floy a lot in the back of a 777
or someone told you to notice it, you will indeed
notice while seated in the back end that the tail
kinda pendles left and right very slighty during
cruise. F/A know about it but usually won't tell
about it. My sister worked on most widebody
jets and says when noticed it gets very irritating
and gives headaches at times.
The most stable planes are those with three or
ofcourse 4 engines especially in rough weather
and turbulences.
Regards,
Advancedkid
 
a340-600
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 1999 10:17 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 5:10 am

I agree, b777 is very powerful (CO 777).
It's not a airbus vs boeing war, even I prefer a340 (AF) for the design, I think that it's a good idea to repalce the engines because it climbs very slowly.

B777(CO)/B744(AF) or B742(AF):
I think there is no differences.

I think the most powerful I've ever taken is a319(AF) with low loads.

I've not been on concord(e).
 
Guest

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 6:20 am

Virgin744, you stated "A 777 usually takes off using 'at least' 96% of its engines thrust capability...."

You are wrong my friend, read my message above. We operate about 20 -200's, the majority of flights are operated using a thrust rating called Derate 1, this is 10% less than the Maximum installed thrust. Crews are then able to input an assumed takeoff temperature to further reduce the takeoff thrust by up to another 25% (Depending on weight.)
Derate 2 is also available and is approx 20% less than installed, once again another 25% can be taken off this by using an assumed temperature.
Legally we must use the full -90B thrust once a month.

By playing with the takeoff thrust we also increase the amount of runway used, so you wont even see a 777 taking off in a short distance. We would much prefer to use all the runway and save the engines.
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 9:50 am

I have actually seen this:
A UA777 dearting from BWI had a shorter take-off run than a 737-700...is this possible? I saw it with my own eyes. It was amazing!
-AA777
 
Chi-town
Posts: 893
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 1:29 am

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 10:59 am

Yes, ive flown on a triple seven (777) United Airlines from DEN to ORD. Amazingly powerful! Trust me, they push you back in your seat plenty! It was a very exciting trip. The seats are 2-5-2 formation. i sat on the right side in the back of the aircraft, me and my brother sat on the 2 seat row. Individual TVs included. I was very impressed with the triple seven. I would definaltey take a trip on one again.
 
Guest

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 11:18 am

In May of this year I flew on a RR Trent powered Delta 777-200ER from MCO to ATL. With 92,000lbs thrust from each engine (184,000lbs total thrust), this plane was fast rolling down the runway and lifted off the runway climbing quickly and smoothly like a souped up 737. This plane has it over the underpowered 34,000lb thrust (136,000lbs total thrust), CFM56-5C4 powered A340-200/300.
 
Guest

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 11:36 am

two years ago i was able to take a flight from LHR to abu dhabi nad it was on a BA 777-200.....out of all the planes i've flown on that definately was the best...it showed the great power that those engines have....i was put back in the seat...by far the best plane there is....without question....


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © James Reppucci

 
n949wp
Posts: 1398
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2000 3:45 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 11:52 am

About 2 weeks ago, I flew SEA-NRT on an AA 777 (N784AN). From my window seat on the right-hand side, I figured we lifted off at about the same point on the runway as in the days when this flight was still using MD-11's. Acceleration on the runway is comparable to most other aircraft that I've been on.

I believe on long-haul flights like these, everything about the aircraft's operation is aimed at fuel economy. So, although we might have taken off sooner or climb faster, the flight crew made a deliberate decision not to. And boy, do we need the extra fuel!! Headwinds on that westbound Trans-Pacific flight was incredible. According to the flight information display on the PTV's, our speed relative to the ground never got above 500 mph. For several hours over the Aleutians, we hovered around the lower 400's, with the lowest speed I saw being 408 mph!!!!

'949
 
virgin744
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 1999 5:51 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 4:55 pm

Ambasaid,

I am more than happy to accept your technically sound opinion but I'm sure that each 777 takeoff is different from the next under the circumstances.

The one I flew on was a -300 and the captain was kind enough to explain the takeoff to me he said that he had input an assumed takeoff temperature to further 'increase' the takeoff thrust to 96% when I asked why so high, his reply was in case of an engine failure during takeoff.

Now I am not saying you're wrong, just saying that in this instance, it was different.

Hope this helps
 
sdate747
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2000 4:55 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 5:10 pm

I flew on a UA 777 in Jan 1999. Sad part is that a Dobbs International truck banged up the galley door, delaying takeoff for 75 minutes. But they fixed it, pressureized the cabin to make sure it was leakproof and took off. As for the engine thrust, I can say it was not so great in my case since the plane was over 1/2 empty and had little cargo on board. The best part was the Personal Entertainment system ... i got 2 screens to myself since the seat next to me was empty. I also listened to ATC. Very good flight. Good food and movies too. This was LAX-IAD by the way
 
krisworldB777
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2000 10:28 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Fri Nov 10, 2000 10:26 pm

I have to admit that I love flying aboard 777s - even watching them takeoff. I find them a truly amazing aircraft. From Perth, SQ and MH fly 772s so I fly on them pretty regularly. The flights ex. Perth are normally very full and it certainly takes a little while for the aircraft to start rolling but once they are - they go for it. I find watching an A340 frightening on takeoff because I worry that it will overshoot the runway because it looks so damn slow. The 777 leaves it for dead. SQ pilots are morew careful that MH when they are applying power - MH whack it into full thrust which is a feeling I love - SQ are a little more carefull and steadily push it to full which I find a little annoying. I don't find the 777 any more powerful than most but it is still a bloody brilliant plane. Well done Mr. Boeing!
 
Guest

RE: 777 Takeoff

Sat Nov 11, 2000 1:32 am

I just love some of these statements......

"MH whack it into full thrust which is a feeling I love - SQ are a little more carefull and steadily push it to full which I find a little annoying."..... How do you know this, have you seen them do it, or is it a feeling?

I would find it strange that anyone is whacking the power forward, the 777 is fitted with an autothrottle system, Boeing procedures call for the crews to stabilize the engines and select autothrottle. The throttles are then automatically advanced.

Virgin744, out of interest, are you sure that he said 96% of engine thrust or 96% N1?
 
advancedkid
Posts: 740
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 1:27 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff Krisworld

Sat Nov 11, 2000 8:22 am

Krisworld,
maybe what you felt was a different angle of attack between the two airlines.
Regards,
Advancedkid
 
virgin744
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 1999 5:51 pm

RE: 777 Takeoff

Sat Nov 11, 2000 9:26 am

Ambasaid,
Even I was amazed when he (CX Captain) explained this to me but I'm sure he said 96% engine thrust...

It makes me think to this day, but I'm sure that was what he said.
If you find any documentation on 777 takeoffs I'd be the first to be interested in reading it, mail me if you find out.

Thanks
Virgin744