ewt340 wrote:

But, the 7,200nm is calculated range with normal weather.

GuillaumePhilly wrote:

B777LRF wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

1. I'm sorry but it seems like you don't understand what discussion mean. But, you are welcome to leave this thread or the forums overall.
2. Instead of making useless judgements. I think you should start by providing us with "Factual Information" for any of your next comment. Otherwise you'll just ended up being a hypocrite now.

I understand perfectly well what a discussion is, namely exchanging points of view from a position of actual knowledge. Thus, this isn't a discussion but merely people with zero knowledge offering opinions based on nothing but assumptions. I appreciate we live in an ever fact-resistant world, but that doesn't mean we all just have to accept it. As for leaving these forums, I'd suggest that's hardly for you to decide on.

Might I suggest, ewt340, you leave the name-calling back in the sandbox. As to B777LRF’s comment, I have to say I see his point. The various reasons posed for this flight by the vast majority of people on this thread are nothing more than suppositions—opinions being offered with very little substance to back them up. His wry sarcasm was not only a comment on a.net, but our society as a whole. Our common discourse has been reduced to nothing more than people shouting unsubstantiated opinions at one another with little to zero factual information given on which such opinions are formulated. In teaching writing I ALWAYS insist that in order to have a rational and intelligent conversation, my students state the facts from which they are forming their opinions from. It is this supporting factual information that enables discussion and dialogue to take place. Arguing opinions with nothing to back them up is simply sanctimonious drivel; opinions are not facts and it’s pointless to argue simple opinions.

Now to the topic at hand. It sounds as if HALOGG has told us it is in fact a ferry flight for painting. Based on my back of the envelope calculations using today’s spot price for Jet-A of $2.109 and using, I’ll admit a flight sim planner, as a rough estimate a fuel load of 209,265 lbs of fuel = 31,234 gal. We get an approx fuel cost for the one-way ferry flight of ~$66,000.

Someone up-thread asked why they didn’t use VCV’s paint-shop. Using the same math as above a ferry to VCV looks to be ~$25,000.

Based on this one data point alone, depending on all the other costs associated with painting this aircraft—the work itself, crew pay, crew lodging and per firm, dead-heading cost, return flight to JFK to operate a revenue flight as it swaps out another aircraft going in for painting.... the cost of the one way ferry fuel cost difference of ~$41,000 would, in my estimation, be factored in to the overall business decision of wether having the work done in Rome makes both economic AND business sense.

Note also these aren’t even real numbers I’m using but quick and dirty calculations. I can easily believe that with all of the other variables involved that $41,000 difference in fuel cost wound up being made up for in myriad other ways and in the grand scheme of things it was decided the “extra” fuel cost vs having the work done elsewhere made sense.

If anyone else has some “quick and dirty” number— probably the main variable being the cost of painting a 332— we can probably see how this ferry absolutely makes sense.

That is how one backs up an opinion (in this case my opinion the ferry flight makes sense). Now I’ve given everyone some things they can argue with besides just my opinion. Discuss away.

pualani wrote:

This aircraft ferried FCO-SEA and arrived early Friday morning and my crew and I took the Seattle Seahawks and staff to Charlotte for their game against the Panthers

pualani wrote:

This aircraft ferried FCO-SEA and arrived early Friday morning and my crew and I took the Seattle Seahawks and staff to Charlotte for their game against the Panthers

nikeherc wrote:

Aircraft need regular repainting regardless of the livery. Striping the paint and identifying corrosion, minor damage, etc. is a very necessary process. Cost and availability go into the selection of the vendor. Dull, ratty looking planes do not inspire confidence.

joeycapps wrote:

pualani wrote:

This aircraft ferried FCO-SEA and arrived early Friday morning and my crew and I took the Seattle Seahawks and staff to Charlotte for their game against the Panthers

So random question, and it might be dumb once I sit back and think about it, but is there any particular reason they'd take a freshly painted plane to an HA destination, only to have it fly a charter back? I guess the way I think, it would make more sense (assuming the inbound SEA plane needs to be painted, per se) that the fresh 330 would go to SEA and work the flight back to HNL, while the unpainted A330 would charter until ultimately ferrying over to the paint shop? Forgive my ignorance on this one...

rbavfan wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

FA9295 wrote:

The distance for this flight is 8,713 mi. Airbus advertises the range as 13,450 km. (8,358 mi.). Granted, that range is with a full payload, but regardless, it's still pushing the plane to it's limits...

The direct distance for this flight should be around 7000nm, A330-200 is listed to fly at maximum range of 7,200nm with passengers and bags (both bags inside the overhead bins and passengers checked bags in the cargo compartments).

But, the 7,200nm is calculated range with normal weather.

Maybe tailwind or less passengers and bags.

HA has the 238 t model that has a 6950nm range.

910A wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

But, the 7,200nm is calculated range with normal weather.

The 7200nm figure is for the 242T 332/338 which HA doesn't have any. I believe their 332 are the 238T models with a 6500nm range with maximum payload..

B757capt wrote:

If it cost them more than $250,000 to paint the airplane I would be shocked.

pualani wrote:

This aircraft ferried FCO-SEA and arrived early Friday morning and my crew and I took the Seattle Seahawks and staff to Charlotte for their game against the Panthers

readytotaxi wrote:

Probably just me but given fuel costs and time could it not be done closer to home, cheaper?

Moose135 wrote:

pualani wrote:

This aircraft ferried FCO-SEA and arrived early Friday morning and my crew and I took the Seattle Seahawks and staff to Charlotte for their game against the Panthers

I caught you Sunday afternoon while the game was going on. I just wish they parked you in a better spot for photos through the fence!

Cush wrote:

I have a question about these flights. What sort of crew are on the aircraft for a flight of this duration (and also shorter). Is it just the pilots or are there flight attendants as well?

crownvic wrote:

I say eliminate the other 71 posts and go with HAL...thank you for answering everyone's comments, questions, speculations and dribble in one post...

spartanmjf wrote:

crownvic wrote:

I say eliminate the other 71 posts and go with HAL...thank you for answering everyone's comments, questions, speculations and dribble in one post...

Let's not forget Moose135's great shots of what is obviously a beautiful paint job!