User avatar
TWA772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 6891
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 8:53 pm

Stupid question...

The little brother to the 77W is a freighter, so what's stopping Boeing from making a 77WF?

It's even longer than the rumored (or already proposed?) 778F, and has a huge supply of spare parts and an awesome support network. And it's still be less expensive to operate than a 747. Lastly, if Boeing wanted to get creative, they can incorporate a swing tail option for outsized cargo if any operators still desire that capability.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
bahadir
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 4:57 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 8:55 pm

I have a feeling like we will see 777XF before the 77WF.
Earthbound misfit I
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:00 pm

Right now the market for dedicated freighters is thin, there is no solid business case.

From a technical point of view, a 77WF would loose too much range capabilities. Hence the 77F and 778F are baselined off the ULR models (777-200LR / 777-8).
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8806
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:04 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
Stupid question...

The little brother to the 77W is a freighter, so what's stopping Boeing from making a 77WF?

It's even longer than the rumored (or already proposed?) 778F, and has a huge supply of spare parts and an awesome support network. And it's still be less expensive to operate than a 747. Lastly, if Boeing wanted to get creative, they can incorporate a swing tail option for outsized cargo if any operators still desire that capability.


And a 777-300ERF would lift less than the current 777F. You do not use the stretch as the freighter, freight is usually more dense than passengers.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:04 pm

Perhaps we will see a PF variant. There will be lots of 77W coming to the marked. Although I don't see a lot of 777-2ER PF variant, is anyone doing this one?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2475
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:16 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Stupid question...

The little brother to the 77W is a freighter, so what's stopping Boeing from making a 77WF?

It's even longer than the rumored (or already proposed?) 778F, and has a huge supply of spare parts and an awesome support network. And it's still be less expensive to operate than a 747. Lastly, if Boeing wanted to get creative, they can incorporate a swing tail option for outsized cargo if any operators still desire that capability.


And a 777-300ERF would lift less than the current 777F. You do not use the stretch as the freighter, freight is usually more dense than passengers.


The 777F can fly China to MEM routes non-stop with a full freight load for FX. It all depends on the range payload chart. Maybe some airlines maybe could use the volumetric capacity and take the hit on range.
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:21 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Perhaps we will see a PF variant. There will be lots of 77W coming to the marked. Although I don't see a lot of 777-2ER PF variant, is anyone doing this one?


No, not yet, and not in the forseeable future. Bedek has a plan, however the mantra from the beginning is that the 777 and its composite floor beams are too expensive to retrofit for a freighter floor. Like, for the conversion cost you might as well just buy a new build freighter.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
PIEAvantiP180
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 6:04 am

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:21 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Perhaps we will see a PF variant. There will be lots of 77W coming to the marked. Although I don't see a lot of 777-2ER PF variant, is anyone doing this one?


Due to a composite floor on pax 772 and 773 my understanding is that it's not posible to due p to f conversations. Or at least without it being overly expensive.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:24 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Perhaps we will see a PF variant. There will be lots of 77W coming to the marked. Although I don't see a lot of 777-2ER PF variant, is anyone doing this one?


There was another issue, something with the 77W floor not being strong enough for cargo and would require a lot of investment.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26448
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:36 pm

Spacepope wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Perhaps we will see a PF variant. There will be lots of 77W coming to the marked. Although I don't see a lot of 777-2ER PF variant, is anyone doing this one?


No, not yet, and not in the forseeable future. Bedek has a plan, however the mantra from the beginning is that the 777 and its composite floor beams are too expensive to retrofit for a freighter floor. Like, for the conversion cost you might as well just buy a new build freighter.


Boeing has also been floating 777-200 and 777-200ER Boeing Converted Freighter concepts but, as Spacepope noted, for general cargo use the consensus is that one would need to replace the floor beams at significant labor / time expense.
 
77H
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 9:39 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Right now the market for dedicated freighters is thin, there is no solid business case.

From a technical point of view, a 77WF would loose too much range capabilities. Hence the 77F and 778F are baselined off the ULR models (777-200LR / 777-8).


Why do freighter models tend to get less range than their passenger version counterparts? Added weight for floor reinforcement ?

77H
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 10:02 pm

Boeing currently produces the 767-300F, 777F and 747-8F.

I think it's perfectly possible to replace all three of those with the 787-9F and 777-8F. A lot of planes in that size bracket need to be replaced in the next 10 years. It remains to be seen if the 777-300ER makes it to the BCF program.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18305
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Mon May 29, 2017 10:16 pm

77H wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Right now the market for dedicated freighters is thin, there is no solid business case.

From a technical point of view, a 77WF would loose too much range capabilities. Hence the 77F and 778F are baselined off the ULR models (777-200LR / 777-8).


Why do freighter models tend to get less range than their passenger version counterparts? Added weight for floor reinforcement ?

77H

Higher payload at quoted ranges mostly. A 77L is taking off with much less weight before fueling (so it carries more fuel and is lighter for much of the flight).

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commer ... 2lr3er.pdf
Complare pages 3-2 and 3-4.
The 77L is at 461000 pounds at takeoff (OEW plus payload). The 777F is at 547,000 pounds. While there is a few tons of floor beams in there, most of the weight difference is the payload. (Downside, shorter certified service life for the freighter.)

The freighter range charts actually go to a lighter weight (no fitting weight of seats, overhead bins, lavatories, and galleys). So without auxiliary tanks, the empty 777F will fly further than the 77L. The difference is the 777F doesn't have provisions for auxiliary tanks as the assumption is that volume will be full of freight. As you load payload, the range drops as fuel weight at takeoff becomes fuel weight until the plane is taking off at a higher no fuel weight than the passenger version.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
voxkel
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 9:17 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Tue May 30, 2017 12:23 am

I believe that Boeing was considering a 777-200ERF for a while, but there is simply not much demand as the standard 777-200F is capable enough for 7-8 hour flights on full payload. Similary, I dont see Boeing produce a 777-300ERF or 777-200LRF anytime soon. There would have to be demand for ULH freight operations for -300ERF or -200LRF to be feasible, and until there is demand for cargo to be delivered in 16 hours v. 19 hours currently, there is no case for any extended-range 777 freighters besides the standard -200F.
 
skyhawkmatthew
Posts: 480
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:42 pm

Re: 777-300ERF?

Tue May 30, 2017 12:54 am

voxkel wrote:
I believe that Boeing was considering a 777-200ERF for a while, but there is simply not much demand as the standard 777-200F is capable enough for 7-8 hour flights on full payload. Similary, I dont see Boeing produce a 777-300ERF or 777-200LRF anytime soon. There would have to be demand for ULH freight operations for -300ERF or -200LRF to be feasible, and until there is demand for cargo to be delivered in 16 hours v. 19 hours currently, there is no case for any extended-range 777 freighters besides the standard -200F.


The current 777F is much more a -200LRF than a -200F. It has the raked wingtips, increased standard fuel capacity, and -115 engines.
Qantas - The Spirit of Australia.

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