When thinking about 777X operators, I always find I'm thinking about competition from the 789 and A359, indirect competition to it, but competition nevertheless. I believe that we are already starting to see a sizeable trend of 77W flying replaced by the 789 and A359, perhaps more from the A359 as it's a little closer in size, but the 789 does still take up some former 77W flying.

What's I'd like to know from you is how much 77W flying do you see being replaced by the A359 and 789 going forward, and maybe if we can all chip in with routes we know to have been down-gauged we can get a picture of how much of a trend this is already.

Off the top of my head, some former 77W routes that are now A359/789 include:

TG: BKK-LHR/FRA/BRU/MEL

SQ: SIN-MAN-IAH, SIN-BCN

CX: HKG-MAN/EWR/

BA: Harder to tell as some flights just change seasonally, but I'm sure LHR-NRT has been a 789 before and I'm even more sure there are more.


If I'm wrong on any of the above, feel free to correct.

Regards,
Martin

Add HKG-AMS/JNB/YVR/LHR/MAD/Australia soon for CX, they seem to love their A359s for rightsizing lots of formerly 77W long-haul routes.

MrHMSH wrote:

When thinking about 777X operators, I always find I'm thinking about competition from the 789 and A359, indirect competition to it, but competition nevertheless. I believe that we are already starting to see a sizeable trend of 77W flying replaced by the 789 and A359, perhaps more from the A359 as it's a little closer in size, but the 789 does still take up some former 77W flying.

What's I'd like to know from you is how much 77W flying do you see being replaced by the A359 and 789 going forward, and maybe if we can all chip in with routes we know to have been down-gauged we can get a picture of how much of a trend this is already.

Off the top of my head, some former 77W routes that are now A359/789 include:

TG: BKK-LHR/FRA/BRU/MEL

SQ: SIN-MAN-IAH, SIN-BCN

CX: HKG-MAN/EWR/

BA: Harder to tell as some flights just change seasonally, but I'm sure LHR-NRT has been a 789 before and I'm even more sure there are more.


If I'm wrong on any of the above, feel free to correct.

Regards,
Martin

Excellent topic and one that has crossed my mind 9n numerous occasions.

The 77W was for the mid-2000s to mid-2010s what the 747 was for a lot (if not most) of its time in service: the only aircraft with the range and cost to operate a significant portion of sn airline's network efficiently.

The same way smaller aircraft with the same or better costs/range (767, A332, A340, 772) suuplanted the 747, these next-gen efficient twins (787, A359) will supplant the 77W to do the job it once did "just because..."

AA: LAX-SYD (77W -->789)

JustSomeDood wrote:

Add HKG-AMS/JNB/YVR/LHR/MAD/Australia soon for CX, they seem to love their A359s for rightsizing lots of formerly 77W long-haul routes.

I thought some of those were planned to be A35K routes? I'm not really thinking about the A35K in this topic, as it's the same size as the 77W and we should expect some 77W routes to go that way (especially for a 9ab 777 operator like CX), it's more to see how aircraft a fair bit smaller are replacing the incumbent 77W.

Yes, for CX the A350 seems to have done incredibly well so far, they've launched a reasonable number of new routes with it as well as these routes we're discussing now being more right-sized.

Not a deletion but a supplement to the 77W service.
CX: HKG-SFO

SQ does send their A359 to JNB daily. Also their SIN-DME-ARN is now a A359 too,

MrHMSH wrote:

JustSomeDood wrote:

Add HKG-AMS/JNB/YVR/LHR/MAD/Australia soon for CX, they seem to love their A359s for rightsizing lots of formerly 77W long-haul routes.

I thought some of those were planned to be A35K routes?

That was something I was hoping for (at least for HKG-AMS), but it looks like the A359 will be the workhorse for CX. They did convert some A35K orders back to A359 (even though a certain member is convinced the opposite will happen with the majority of A359 orders...).

MoKa777 wrote:

The 77W was for the mid-2000s to mid-2010s what the 747 was for a lot (if not most) of its time in service: the only aircraft with the range and cost to operate a significant portion of sn airline's network efficiently.

Careful, or you'll piss off the A340 fans on the board.
LH managed to run a global network without ever catching 777 fever.

On the other hand, it is quite interesting that LX is upsizing from the A343 to the 77W. LX thought they could use the extra seats of the 10-abreast in Y 77W in their most important long-haul routes instead of ordering the 789 or the A359 which would have given them similar capacity to their A343s.

AA also decided a few years ago to get a few 77Ws in order to have a plane larger than the 77E and 789 (and the upcoming A359). Prior to that, the largest plane in the AA fleet was the 77E. I assume AA is really happy with the 77W.

It seems that carriers now have a larger number of twin-engined alternatives on the larger side of the market. The 789, A359 (including its ULR version) and the upcoming 778 will serve very well those who do not need VLAs, but who need to fly longer routes. The A339NEO, the 787-10 and the A350-1000 will be formidable options for carriers that need a lot of capacity but not necessarily a lot of range (although my understanding is that the A350-1000 will also be very capable for long-haul and that Airbus might have a surprise up its sleeve in terms of future variants with added range). And finally the 779 is coming, and it will be probably the aircraft that puts the last nail in the coffin on the 748i (and probably the A380 unless the EK deal happens) thanks to its combination of cargo capability, large number of seats and long range abilities. While it is sad to see 4-holers go the way of the Dodo, it is really exciting to see what Boeing and Airbus are offering in terms of widebodies.

JustSomeDood wrote:

Add HKG-AMS/JNB/YVR/LHR/MAD/Australia soon for CX, they seem to love their A359s for rightsizing lots of formerly 77W long-haul routes.

The A359's CX is replacing in Australia are A333 routes

scotron11 wrote:

SQ does send their A359 to JNB daily. Also their SIN-DME-ARN is now a A359 too,

SQ previously operated the 772ER to JNB so not exactly a downgauge. I love seeing their A359 down here, though.

MoKa777 wrote:

scotron11 wrote:

SQ does send their A359 to JNB daily. Also their SIN-DME-ARN is now a A359 too,

SQ previously operated the 772ER to JNB so not exactly a downgauge. I love seeing their A359 down here, though.

It was briefly operate by 77W before it went A359

JJ8080 from GRU to JFK was a B77W and is now an A359. That may be seasonal, so we'll see in the future. It has also been an A332 and a B763 route over the last few years.

Revelation wrote:

MoKa777 wrote:

The 77W was for the mid-2000s to mid-2010s what the 747 was for a lot (if not most) of its time in service: the only aircraft with the range and cost to operate a significant portion of sn airline's network efficiently.

Careful, or you'll piss off the A340 fans on the board.
LH managed to run a global network without ever catching 777 fever.

Haha good catch and thanks for your concern over my wellbeing.

What I meant was '70s, '80s and '90s. Almost any airline one can think of operated a 747 at some point in these three decades. Once the 763, A332, A343 and 772ER came around? Not so much anymore. The A346 is not included in my consideration because it only showed up in 2002 when the other 4 aircraft types I mentioned above had 14, 4, 9 and 5 years of service, respectively, under their belts.

No offence meant.

The A346 did replace the 747 in some instances with the most notable in my mind being at SAA. Horgeous and capable bird...

UA replaces 777 for a 787 on its SFO - SYD Route.

ACYYZA345 wrote:

AA: LAX-SYD (77W -->789)

I have a recollection that that was partly in response to the QF-AA joint venture being disallowed - moving to the 789 was a capacity downgauge meant to keep the route going in "competition" with QF as the disallowance meant they had to ditch the metal-neutrality provisions, and QF serve that route with A380s alongside a mix of 744s and 388s from BNE and MEL. Indication at the time (again if I recall correctly) was that, if the JV was approved on the second application, the 77W would come back.

Delta's last few 744 routes, did they go A359? Do they count?

Further showing the value of smaller planes, where airlines need fewer junk fares / Y-class to fill them. Airlines are very keen to manage revenue and the smaller planes allow them to do this over long-haul distances where it did not use to be feasible.

Fastphilly wrote:

UA replaces 777 for a 787 on its SFO - SYD Route.

UA ran a 772 to SYD. This thread is about the 77W.

MoKa777 wrote:

The 77W was for the mid-2000s to mid-2010s what the 747 was for a lot (if not most) of its time in service: the only aircraft with the range and cost to operate a significant portion of sn airline's network efficiently.

The same way smaller aircraft with the same or better costs/range (767, A332, A340, 772) suuplanted the 747, these next-gen efficient twins (787, A359) will supplant the 77W to do the job it once did "just because..."

That sums it up. In ten years from now I expect roughly half of the 77Ws replaced by more modern twins, the other half will be replaced by 777X in the longer term.

CI replaced 77W on SFO with A359

qf789 wrote:

MoKa777 wrote:

scotron11 wrote:

SQ does send their A359 to JNB daily. Also their SIN-DME-ARN is now a A359 too,

SQ previously operated the 772ER to JNB so not exactly a downgauge. I love seeing their A359 down here, though.

It was briefly operate by 77W before it went A359

SQ SIN-AMS went from 77E -> 77W -> A359
SQ SIN-SFO went from SIN->ICN->SFO on 77W to SIN->SFO on A359
SQ SIN-MUC went from 77W to A359 but this was partially linked to it originally being SIN-MUC-MAN


QR changed a number of 77W routes to A359. For example DOH-SIN went from 3x daily 77W to 3x daily A359