Topic Author
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:45 pm

Long Range Vs Ultra-Long Range Aircraft

Wed Oct 19, 2011 12:21 am

On many of the aviation-related articles I've read lately, the phrase "Ultra-long range" keeps popping up... Where do people draw the line when declaring the capabilities of an airplane ultra-long range vs long-range? is there a real benefit to being called "Ultra"?

It almost seems to me like anything with a 6300+ NM range (777, 747, MD11, A380, A340-600, G-V/550, Global Express) is declared Ultra-long range.
User avatar
Posts: 23203
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Long Range Vs Ultra-Long Range Aircraft

Wed Oct 19, 2011 1:23 am

Well Boeing defines their widebody markets by three categories:

A market - 3,900 to 5,200 nautical miles (7,220 to 9,630 km)
B market - 5,800 to 7,700 nautical miles (10,740 to 14,260 km)
C market - 8,000 nautical miles (14,815 km) and greater

An A market plane would be one performing "regional" intercontinental missions (North & South America / North America & Western Europe / Asia & Australia)

A B market plane would be one performing what one could consider "traditional" intercontinental routes.

A C market plane would be an "ultra long range" plane connecting two quite disparate points - South Asia and Eastern North America, Australia and Western Europe, Southern Africa to Western North America, etc.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FGITD, soundmind and 14 guests