Dave05
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:42 am

Eva air ordered quite a number of 787-10(34). Not only tpac routes, but continental europe too is feasible.
 
RainerBoeing777
Topic Author
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Aug 04, 2019 7:38 pm

https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status/1158077102060711937

United is already starting to use the Boeing 787-10 in trans-Pacific missions! With this there are facilities that airlines such as EVA Air, Korean Airlines and All Nippon Airways start using this model on your routes to LAX, SFO, SEA and YVR
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18147
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:08 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
After a year, an airline must use real world data to plan.

Is that just an industry standard-practice, or is it a formal regulation?

Sorry, I didn't see this. It is more the insurance companies. :spin: There are exceptions. It is also risk adversion.

One can plan to hold say 50 seats to be more agresive day 1 and unblock them as weather dictates.

But in general it takes six months of data to prove that initial estimates were conservative (or vice versa, say with the A346).

The main difference is passenger weights.

Boeing uses a heavier passenger than Airbus. It takes a year to find the seasonality differences.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 1961
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:25 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
downdata wrote:
Oh man, i’ve seen it all in this thread: 787-10, 78J, 78X, 781(?), 7810(??), 787-1000(???). What’s next? 787-ten-1thousand-XXX?


The full name is: Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner, or Boeing 787-10. IATA and ICAO abreviations are B78X and 781, respectively.


Who came up with 78J? I feel like half these codes come from A.net itself.
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:29 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
downdata wrote:
Oh man, i’ve seen it all in this thread: 787-10, 78J, 78X, 781(?), 7810(??), 787-1000(???). What’s next? 787-ten-1thousand-XXX?


The full name is: Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner, or Boeing 787-10. IATA and ICAO abreviations are B78X and 781, respectively.


Who came up with 78J? I feel like half these codes come from A.net itself.


I'm not sure how that happened. I thought it was going to be B78J at first, until I began tracking N14001, which showed up as B78X on Flightradar24, and that's what I have used since. What's really interesting is if the MAX 10 will be B3JM or B3XM.

As for the OP though...the B78X is too small for Japanese carriers while still maintaining first class, and not enough legs for anyone else TPAC without major restrictions, as they would come closer to the intended capacity. When a B78X (N14001 specifically) was flown on IAD-PEK, it was a sub for a B788 with basically the passengers booked on the B788 and all other seats blocked (with passengers redistributed as needed for balance). The other matter why it would not work (except for maybe SFO to Japan or Korea) is: not enough room for cargo. NH and JL rely on the B77W for both high premium F/J space and belly cargo.
 
rjmf22
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:45 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:

The full name is: Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner, or Boeing 787-10. IATA and ICAO abreviations are B78X and 781, respectively.


Who came up with 78J? I feel like half these codes come from A.net itself.


I'm not sure how that happened. I thought it was going to be B78J at first, until I began tracking N14001, which showed up as B78X on Flightradar24, and that's what I have used since. What's really interesting is if the MAX 10 will be B3JM or B3XM.

As for the OP though...the B78X is too small for Japanese carriers while still maintaining first class, and not enough legs for anyone else TPAC without major restrictions, as they would come closer to the intended capacity. When a B78X (N14001 specifically) was flown on IAD-PEK, it was a sub for a B788 with basically the passengers booked on the B788 and all other seats blocked (with passengers redistributed as needed for balance). The other matter why it would not work (except for maybe SFO to Japan or Korea) is: not enough room for cargo. NH and JL rely on the B77W for both high premium F/J space and belly cargo.


UA has flown the 78X on the IAD-PEK route several times now, one as recent as a few days ago, but I had a feeling several seats would be blocked.
United Airlines
 
jagraham
Posts: 927
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 12:11 am

6430 nm is for 330 pax and bags. And 254t MTOW.

There is a 260 t variant coming. More than an hour more flight time all other things being equal. About 7000 nm.

More of Asia will be reachable from the US. Much more if 330 pax aren’t necessary.
 
tealnz
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 12:29 am

We are still waiting for hard info on any additional range Boeing is offering on the -10. It started with a claim that the extra strength of the -10 wing-body join would allow a 1% increase on MTOW on the -9. Then Air NZ indicated that Boeing had been able to offer more range for their -10s. But the only specifics we have seen so far are a) that the GEnX offers better range than the Trents and b) a 260t claim I believe from Ostrower on The Air Current. Nothing so far from Boeing themselves or from other carriers. So nothing so far by way of verifiable information suggesting that Boeing have engineered a major MTOW/range increase into the -10.

Meantime airlines like SQ and KE are clear that they will use the -10s for regional routes while NZ has now clarified that it plans to use its -10s mostly on Asian routes, which are significantly shorter even than AKL-LAX/SFO.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 12:55 am

trex8 wrote:
Back when PanAm flew 7474SP NYC to TYO they would submit a flight plan which didnt actually go all the way to Japan, IIRC they filed for ANC or something, as west bound it was stretching the Sps range to the limit. When things on the flight were clearly favorable to continue all the way without problems they would refile a new flight plan to the real intended destination.
Do airlines still do this?

Qantas did this from US westcoast to Sydney as recently as a few years ago. Brisbane was put on the actual flight plan but 99% of the flights went to Sydney. This allowed more payload to go in the belly.

Back on topic of the 787-10 I also believe its range is understated. With reduced payload it can comfortably fly further than the brochure range.

For instance with the same 60,000lb of payload the Boeing ACAP document states the following ranges:
787-9 can fly 8000nm
787-8 can fly 7250nm
787-10 can fly 7000nm

The brochure ranges are calculated using heavier payloads as the aircraft get bigger.
787-8 = 60,000lb
787-9 = 70,000lb
787-10 = 80,000lb

The 787 has a flatter payload range curve than the A330CEO for example. One member said the 787-10 and A330-300 had similar range that is not reallybthe case. While brochure range is within a couple percent with a low density cabin the 787-10 advantage grow to over 10%
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1682
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 3:51 am

RJMAZ wrote:
trex8 wrote:
Back when PanAm flew 7474SP NYC to TYO they would submit a flight plan which didnt actually go all the way to Japan, IIRC they filed for ANC or something, as west bound it was stretching the Sps range to the limit. When things on the flight were clearly favorable to continue all the way without problems they would refile a new flight plan to the real intended destination.
Do airlines still do this?

Qantas did this from US westcoast to Sydney as recently as a few years ago. Brisbane was put on the actual flight plan but 99% of the flights went to Sydney. This allowed more payload to go in the belly.


To the best of my knowledge, and I might be wrong/out-of-date on this, QF still do send QF8 out every day as a DFW-BNE and refile enroute to the intended destination of SYD.

Again, back on the 787-10 specifically, UA has weighed in on this (very well timed!) topic, announcing that in NW19/20 it will operate both LAX-PVG and SFO-PVG using the 787-10. According to the article linked below, it's a seasonal change for LAX over December and January, and comes into effect in Feb for SFO - the article suggests but doesn't confirm the change is not permanent for SFO either. But the point is UA has chosen to use this aircraft for trans-Pacific flights.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... -dec-2019/
 
frank1991
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 2:04 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:42 am

I'm wondering how many seats UA has to block to make LAX-PVG works... or simply just don't take any belly cargo
 
marcelh
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 7:59 am

jagraham wrote:
There is a 260 t variant coming. More than an hour more flight time all other things being equal. About 7000 nm.

Is that already official announced, or A.net “official”?
 
Scotron12
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:26 am

marcelh wrote:
jagraham wrote:
There is a 260 t variant coming. More than an hour more flight time all other things being equal. About 7000 nm.

Is that already official announced, or A.net “official”?


AFAIK this is only A.net official. Based on a reference on the Air New Zealand order.
 
Max Q
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:50 am

Even if the -10 is weight restricted westbound if it can carry an equivalent payload to the -9 it can pay for itself on the eastbound leg where normal tailwinds may allow all seats to be filled
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
VSMUT
Posts: 3048
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:02 am

Regarding the Air New Zealand 787-10, are they really planning to fly them transpacific, or is that just A.net again? The CEOs statement about the order in the Kia Ora inflight magazine said it was for Asian routes, nothing about the US. To me it looks more more like the 787-10s will replace shorter regional and Asian 777-300ER and 787-9 routes, and in turn those types will take over the really long flights.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6976
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:07 am

VSMUT wrote:
Regarding the Air New Zealand 787-10, are they really planning to fly them transpacific, or is that just A.net again? The CEOs statement about the order in the Kia Ora inflight magazine said it was for Asian routes, nothing about the US. To me it looks more more like the 787-10s will replace shorter regional and Asian 777-300ER and 787-9 routes, and in turn those types will take over the really long flights.


They said they will fly missions similar to the 772, the only year round Asian route the 772 does currently is HKG, I’d expect the first batch mainly to do Asia, HKG, SIN, NRT, PVG however they may do the odd LAX/SFO, who knows.
 
Scotron12
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:43 am

There has not been any official statement from Boeing that the 787-9 and 787-10 are getting a weight bump. Nor has GE said anything about any PIPs they are working on.

Not saying it's not going to happen. The question is when?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18147
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:02 am

Scotron12 wrote:
There has not been any official statement from Boeing that the 787-9 and 787-10 are getting a weight bump. Nor has GE said anything about any PIPs they are working on.

Not saying it's not going to happen. The question is when?

The first CMCs are the GE9x, so until production stabilizes on the 777x, GE won't be ready. So when is a few years off. Perhaps 2024.

The ANZ 787-10 first deliveries are in 2022 (through 2027). We can expect weight loss and MTOW PiPs by then:
https://onemileatatime.com/air-new-zeal ... ng-787-10/

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 3048
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:12 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
Regarding the Air New Zealand 787-10, are they really planning to fly them transpacific, or is that just A.net again? The CEOs statement about the order in the Kia Ora inflight magazine said it was for Asian routes, nothing about the US. To me it looks more more like the 787-10s will replace shorter regional and Asian 777-300ER and 787-9 routes, and in turn those types will take over the really long flights.


They said they will fly missions similar to the 772, the only year round Asian route the 772 does currently is HKG, I’d expect the first batch mainly to do Asia, HKG, SIN, NRT, PVG however they may do the odd LAX/SFO, who knows.


A quick look at flightradar24 shows that the 777-200ERs predominantly shuffle around between Australia/Asia/Rarotonga and Auckland.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6976
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 12:25 pm

VSMUT wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
Regarding the Air New Zealand 787-10, are they really planning to fly them transpacific, or is that just A.net again? The CEOs statement about the order in the Kia Ora inflight magazine said it was for Asian routes, nothing about the US. To me it looks more more like the 787-10s will replace shorter regional and Asian 777-300ER and 787-9 routes, and in turn those types will take over the really long flights.


They said they will fly missions similar to the 772, the only year round Asian route the 772 does currently is HKG, I’d expect the first batch mainly to do Asia, HKG, SIN, NRT, PVG however they may do the odd LAX/SFO, who knows.


A quick look at flightradar24 shows that the 777-200ERs predominantly shuffle around between Australia/Asia/Rarotonga and Auckland.


They mainly fly EZE until FEB, YVR until October, IAH and cover some LAX/SFO, the whole long haul fleet does short haul in between to SYDMEL/BNE/CNS/ADL/NAN/RAR/APW/TBU. Over NW they will do HNL and some NRT/KIX services.
 
jagraham
Posts: 927
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:15 pm

Scotron12 wrote:
marcelh wrote:
jagraham wrote:
There is a 260 t variant coming. More than an hour more flight time all other things being equal. About 7000 nm.

Is that already official announced, or A.net “official”?


AFAIK this is only A.net official. Based on a reference on the Air New Zealand order.


There is the Aircurrent report, but many a.netters don't consider Ostower "official". But so far, it's the ANZ order which indicates something better is coming in 787 land. Will it be 260t? I don't know. But whatever better change is coming decided it for ANZ.
 
marcelh
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:27 pm

jagraham wrote:
Scotron12 wrote:
marcelh wrote:
Is that already official announced, or A.net “official”?


AFAIK this is only A.net official. Based on a reference on the Air New Zealand order.


There is the Aircurrent report, but many a.netters don't consider Ostower "official". But so far, it's the ANZ order which indicates something better is coming in 787 land. Will it be 260t? I don't know. But whatever better change is coming decided it for ANZ.

1. Ostrower isn’t a Boeing spokesman, so he isn’t official.
2. I have read the statements of ANZ and I can’t find anything that says they ordered a more capable 787X than at this time.

You mau be right that there will be a more capable 787X, but IMHO some other statements might be fed by some “wishful thinking.”
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 604
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:33 pm

trex8 wrote:
george77300 wrote:
raylee67 wrote:

Let's say Boeing does understate the range. But that is the certified range, right? Authorities are not going to approve any flight plans that exceed that published/certified range, are they?


There is no “certified” range. There is a range stated that the plane can fly with a given load. Merely an indication. The plane has to dispatch with enough fuel to arrive at destination and with the reserve fuel for alternate and 45 mins holding. If it can do this by taking less pax or cargo then it can.

For example the Qantas LHR-PER Flight is above the “published” range of the 787-9 but it still can fly it and with no seats blocked either way most of the time.

There are also many delivery flights and charter flights that can fly really far due to fewer passengers on board. There have been a number of 737NG flights over 11 hours. Seattle-Prague direct springs to mind. That’s 5,200+ miles in a 737. Well above the “published” range.

It’s quite incredible how the range varies so hugely by taking out lots of passengers and/or cargo.

Back when PanAm flew 7474SP NYC to TYO they would submit a flight plan which didnt actually go all the way to Japan, IIRC they filed for ANC or something, as west bound it was stretching the Sps range to the limit. When things on the flight were clearly favorable to continue all the way without problems they would refile a new flight plan to the real intended destination.
Do airlines still do this?


It’s called a redispatch and yes it is still used. I’m not 100% sure what drives dispatch to this but I’m sure it is cost based, just like everything else. If fuel is tight and weather is poor we will get one for sure.
 
jagraham
Posts: 927
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 5:07 pm

marcelh wrote:
jagraham wrote:
Scotron12 wrote:

AFAIK this is only A.net official. Based on a reference on the Air New Zealand order.


There is the Aircurrent report, but many a.netters don't consider Ostower "official". But so far, it's the ANZ order which indicates something better is coming in 787 land. Will it be 260t? I don't know. But whatever better change is coming decided it for ANZ.

1. Ostrower isn’t a Boeing spokesman, so he isn’t official.
2. I have read the statements of ANZ and I can’t find anything that says they ordered a more capable 787X than at this time.

You mau be right that there will be a more capable 787X, but IMHO some other statements might be fed by some “wishful thinking.”



This is an ANZ quote from the article Lightsaber cited (post # 68)

“The 787-10 is longer and even more fuel efficient. However, the game changer for us has been that by working closely with Boeing, we’ve ensured the 787-10 will meet our network needs, including the ability to fly missions similar to our current 777-200 fleet.”

ANZ's 77Es have Trent 892s, similar to Delta's 77Es. Delta rates their 77Es at 8700 sm, or about 7500 nm. A bit over 1000 nm more than the 78J is rated for.
The above quote clearly says their 78Js will have performance similar to their 77Es.
ANZ 77Es have 306 seats including 28 lie flat seats and 40 large recliners; so one would expect that for a direct comparison, the 78J would have 25 less seats than brochure specs; 2.5t less in pax and bags and about 0.4t less in cabin furnishings. Half hour or so gain in flight time, or about 250 nm.
I would presume that ANZ thinks they are getting a 78J that is at least 500 nm better than brochure spec.
 
marcelh
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 5:26 pm

jagraham wrote:
marcelh wrote:
jagraham wrote:

There is the Aircurrent report, but many a.netters don't consider Ostower "official". But so far, it's the ANZ order which indicates something better is coming in 787 land. Will it be 260t? I don't know. But whatever better change is coming decided it for ANZ.

1. Ostrower isn’t a Boeing spokesman, so he isn’t official.
2. I have read the statements of ANZ and I can’t find anything that says they ordered a more capable 787X than at this time.

You mau be right that there will be a more capable 787X, but IMHO some other statements might be fed by some “wishful thinking.”



This is an ANZ quote from the article Lightsaber cited (post # 68)

“The 787-10 is longer and even more fuel efficient. However, the game changer for us has been that by working closely with Boeing, we’ve ensured the 787-10 will meet our network needs, including the ability to fly missions similar to our current 777-200 fleet.”

ANZ's 77Es have Trent 892s, similar to Delta's 77Es. Delta rates their 77Es at 8700 sm, or about 7500 nm. A bit over 1000 nm more than the 78J is rated for.
The above quote clearly says their 78Js will have performance similar to their 77Es.
ANZ 77Es have 306 seats including 28 lie flat seats and 40 large recliners; so one would expect that for a direct comparison, the 78J would have 25 less seats than brochure specs; 2.5t less in pax and bags and about 0.4t less in cabin furnishings. Half hour or so gain in flight time, or about 250 nm.
I would presume that ANZ thinks they are getting a 78J that is at least 500 nm better than brochure spec.

Does ANZ currently have missions they can fly with their 77E, but not with the 2019 spec 787X?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6512
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 5:38 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
Who came up with 78J? I feel like half these codes come from A.net itself.


IATA = 78J
ICAO = B78X

It would be far less confusing if the two organizations had chosen the same last character. The same thing happened to the A350-1000; its IATA code is 351, and its ICAO code is A35K.
 
hereandthere41
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:31 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:57 pm

seabosdca wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
Who came up with 78J? I feel like half these codes come from A.net itself.


IATA = 78J
ICAO = B78X

It would be far less confusing if the two organizations had chosen the same last character. The same thing happened to the A350-1000; its IATA code is 351, and its ICAO code is A35K.


To add yet more confusion, INTERNALLY at UA, the 777-300ER is coded on the trip pairings as a 77X. The 787-10 is coded as a 78J. You'd most likely hear these terms if the post is authored by a UA person.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2271
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:40 pm

frank1991 wrote:
I'm wondering how many seats UA has to block to make LAX-PVG works... or simply just don't take any belly cargo


Why would UA need to block seats or refuse belly cargo?
Looking at UA85 TLV-EWR flight time for this flight is normally around 11:45, the flight time climbs to around 12:35, during winter. UA can take a full passenger load on this leg with all their bags and 35,000 pounds of cargo without a weight restriction. In fact today's flight UA85 05 Aug had 10 passengers no show so we ended up with 308 passengers, 316 bags, and 35,246 pounds of cargo, with a cleared fuel of 153,000 we still had 9,165 pounds remaining.

UA198 LAX-PVG has a flight time around 13:20, in the winter flight time can climb as high as 14:20. Using our current longest nonstop flight and flight time for a UA 787-10 which was almost at capacity today as a reference point I don't see why UA's 787-10 with a total of 318 passengers could not fly LAX-PVG with a full passenger cabin and at least 25,000 - 30,000 pounds of cargo daily.
 
Eyad89
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:32 pm

jayunited wrote:

Why would UA need to block seats or refuse belly cargo?
Looking at UA85 TLV-EWR flight time for this flight is normally around 11:45, the flight time climbs to around 12:35, during winter. UA can take a full passenger load on this leg with all their bags and 35,000 pounds of cargo without a weight restriction. In fact today's flight UA85 05 Aug had 10 passengers no show so we ended up with 308 passengers, 316 bags, and 35,246 pounds of cargo, with a cleared fuel of 153,000 we still had 9,165 pounds remaining.

UA198 LAX-PVG has a flight time around 13:20, in the winter flight time can climb as high as 14:20. Using our current longest nonstop flight and flight time for a UA 787-10 which was almost at capacity today as a reference point I don't see why UA's 787-10 with a total of 318 passengers could not fly LAX-PVG with a full passenger cabin and at least 25,000 - 30,000 pounds of cargo daily.


Thanks for your usual input from real world UA flights. However, I am wondering why this UA85 data is conflicting with the UA85 flight you quoted a couple of months ago:


jayunited wrote:
That is not true at all. Take for example today's 5/29/2019 UA85 TLV-EWR flight the MTOG for the 78X is 560,000 today's TOG was 559,235. Now before you said I told you so lets take a look at what is on that aircraft. First and foremost the aircraft went out full with 318 passengers and 326 bags and 26,089 pounds of cargo. Lets break it all down the OEW is 300,563 the weight of all 318 passengers is 60,903, the weight of their 326 bags is 9780 pounds and there was 26,089 pounds of cargo add those number together we get a ZFW of 397,335 out of a MXFW of 425,000. The cleared fuel was 161,900 so when you add the cleared fuel to the ZFW you get a TOG of 559,235.

The block time for UA85 is 11 hours 9 minutes,


The UA85 flight from two months ago took off at MTOW even though it had less payload than the other UA85 that took off today.

One more thing, the fuel figures from both flights are substantially different. Both flights had a climb profile (altitude) and durations that are almost identical.

Thanks again for this info, but I am just trying to work out those differences. Something isn’t adding up. Data from those flights can’t both be right.
 
COEWR787
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:35 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:07 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
most if not all UA TPAC flights use a re-file flight plan with a fuel alternate in the event of bad weather or an unforeseen problem. For years SFO-SYD used Nadi as the re-file stop where if the airplane had no problems, the flight plan was re-filed on to SYD. I do not recall in my time at United where we ever had to Land at Nadi to take on more fuel. So? I'm sure there are fuel alternates for most any Other long range Pacific route flown by not only United, But any other Carrier.

I actually landed at least twice at Nadi to refuel on the way to SYD from SFO on UA 744. It was not frequent, but it did happen. And I guess I should have bought lottery tickets because in a sum total of 6 times I have flown that route in that direction, it happened twice! :)
 
jayunited
Posts: 2271
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:57 pm

Eyad89 wrote:

The UA85 flight from two months ago took off at MTOW even though it had less payload than the other UA85 that took off today.

One more thing, the fuel figures from both flights are substantially different. Both flights had a climb profile (altitude) and durations that are almost identical.

Thanks again for this info, but I am just trying to work out those differences. Something isn’t adding up. Data from those flights can’t both be right.


My apologies I completely screwed up I added the weight of the bags in with the belly cargo payload then accounted for the bags by themselves. So in essence I counted the bag weight twice (once by themselves then included them with the cargo). The total weight of the cargo on today's 05 AUG UA85 was 25,346 not 35,346.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6976
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:35 pm

marcelh wrote:
jagraham wrote:
marcelh wrote:
1. Ostrower isn’t a Boeing spokesman, so he isn’t official.
2. I have read the statements of ANZ and I can’t find anything that says they ordered a more capable 787X than at this time.

You mau be right that there will be a more capable 787X, but IMHO some other statements might be fed by some “wishful thinking.”



This is an ANZ quote from the article Lightsaber cited (post # 68)

“The 787-10 is longer and even more fuel efficient. However, the game changer for us has been that by working closely with Boeing, we’ve ensured the 787-10 will meet our network needs, including the ability to fly missions similar to our current 777-200 fleet.”

ANZ's 77Es have Trent 892s, similar to Delta's 77Es. Delta rates their 77Es at 8700 sm, or about 7500 nm. A bit over 1000 nm more than the 78J is rated for.
The above quote clearly says their 78Js will have performance similar to their 77Es.
ANZ 77Es have 306 seats including 28 lie flat seats and 40 large recliners; so one would expect that for a direct comparison, the 78J would have 25 less seats than brochure specs; 2.5t less in pax and bags and about 0.4t less in cabin furnishings. Half hour or so gain in flight time, or about 250 nm.
I would presume that ANZ thinks they are getting a 78J that is at least 500 nm better than brochure spec.

Does ANZ currently have missions they can fly with their 77E, but not with the 2019 spec 787X?


78J could not do AKl-IAH while EZE/YVR are also long west bound 13.5/14hrs. Judging by the comments on here it could probably already do LAX/SFO-AKL 13hrs block.
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:00 am

seabosdca wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
Who came up with 78J? I feel like half these codes come from A.net itself.


IATA = 78J
ICAO = B78X

It would be far less confusing if the two organizations had chosen the same last character. The same thing happened to the A350-1000; its IATA code is 351, and its ICAO code is A35K.


I personally prefer the ICAO code, but is remembering 2 codes for each aircraft THAT HARD? Most of us have to meorize 2 sets of airport codes anyway (other than Americans).
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:37 am

Is anyone else impressed by the 787-10 numbers just posted?

I can see a large portion of 777-300ER replacement sales going to the 787-10. Mainly the airlines that already operate 787's such as Air New Zealand.

Airlines seem to be downgauging to smaller widebody aircraft on their long haul flights.

The way I believe the airline will think isbas follows: If the 787-10 can fly say 90% of the routes operated by airline using 777-300ER then they will purchase the 787-10. The airline can then operate the 787-9 on the 10% route routes that are too long and just accept a moderate downgauge. This will provide the greatest profit.
 
tealnz
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:42 am

NZ have just done a full analysis on what the the 78J can do. Luxon says the new fleet will mostly be used on Asian routes. And that they will be looking at the 35K/77X when they look at a 77W replacement. Sounds to me as if they have a pretty good idea what the 78J can and can't do. And that that they are left with a substantial requirement for something more capable. Maybe we're in agreement?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6512
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:15 am

NZ will need more capacity on LAX/SFO and more range on other North American routes. But a lot of people sell the 787-10 short. I think they use the regular-weight (233/230 t) A330-300 and the 777-300A as mental shortcuts for thinking about what it can do, and it is a good deal more capable than either. Give it a proper engine PIP and we'll be looking at an aircraft that can handle most of the transpacific missions out there.
 
Max Q
Posts: 7709
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:26 am

jayunited wrote:
frank1991 wrote:
I'm wondering how many seats UA has to block to make LAX-PVG works... or simply just don't take any belly cargo


Why would UA need to block seats or refuse belly cargo?
Looking at UA85 TLV-EWR flight time for this flight is normally around 11:45, the flight time climbs to around 12:35, during winter. UA can take a full passenger load on this leg with all their bags and 35,000 pounds of cargo without a weight restriction. In fact today's flight UA85 05 Aug had 10 passengers no show so we ended up with 308 passengers, 316 bags, and 35,246 pounds of cargo, with a cleared fuel of 153,000 we still had 9,165 pounds remaining.

UA198 LAX-PVG has a flight time around 13:20, in the winter flight time can climb as high as 14:20. Using our current longest nonstop flight and flight time for a UA 787-10 which was almost at capacity today as a reference point I don't see why UA's 787-10 with a total of 318 passengers could not fly LAX-PVG with a full passenger cabin and at least 25,000 - 30,000 pounds of cargo daily.



I’m very impressed at how little fuel is needed for that route, that less than a 764
fuel burn with 70 more people
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6976
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:36 am

tealnz wrote:
NZ have just done a full analysis on what the the 78J can do. Luxon says the new fleet will mostly be used on Asian routes. And that they will be looking at the 35K/77X when they look at a 77W replacement. Sounds to me as if they have a pretty good idea what the 78J can and can't do. And that that they are left with a substantial requirement for something more capable. Maybe we're in agreement?


I’m sure they have done a full analysis, Luxon did say the 78J can do missions similar to the 77E, he did also say something along the lines of the 78J is not code for 77W replacement, however we are 4-5 years away from a replacement order or there abouts. They may go for something more capable or the 78J will continue to improve as well. They can use UA as part of the JV to add capacity as well.
 
jagraham
Posts: 927
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:42 am

tealnz wrote:
NZ have just done a full analysis on what the the 78J can do. Luxon says the new fleet will mostly be used on Asian routes. And that they will be looking at the 35K/77X when they look at a 77W replacement. Sounds to me as if they have a pretty good idea what the 78J can and can't do. And that that they are left with a substantial requirement for something more capable. Maybe we're in agreement?


I agree - a 78J doing 7000nm+ with 330 pax, on less than 34000 gal, would be quite impressive. Only cost and delivery would be issues.

As for how ANZ uses them, will they reduce the pax count and take the range? Or stick with brochure pax count and be satisfied with between 250 and 500 nm less than their 77Es?

At least until RR delivers Ultrafan on the A350 . . but as was said elsewhere, none of the major engine manufacturers have been good at avoiding hiccups.

I think this will firm soon, and then we shall see.

BTW, Aussie press (which I have not tracked down) suggest that ANZ may use a 78J for AKL to NY. With reduced (from what?) pax count and some more fuel (ACT?)
But don't take my word for it, read the articles.

https://simpleflying.com/air-new-zealand-new-york/

https://www.executivetraveller.com/air- ... ng-787-10s

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=12234189
 
tealnz
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 3:07 am

This thread is turning barmy. If NZ want to carry fewer passengers over longer range they will use the 789. They will not and cannot use the 78J to NYC. Luxon is on the record: the 78J is mainly for Asian routes.

We have a reality distortion field problem here folks. :banghead:
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 3:28 am

jayunited wrote:
frank1991 wrote:
I'm wondering how many seats UA has to block to make LAX-PVG works... or simply just don't take any belly cargo


Why would UA need to block seats or refuse belly cargo?
Looking at UA85 TLV-EWR flight time for this flight is normally around 11:45, the flight time climbs to around 12:35, during winter. UA can take a full passenger load on this leg with all their bags and 35,000 pounds of cargo without a weight restriction. In fact today's flight UA85 05 Aug had 10 passengers no show so we ended up with 308 passengers, 316 bags, and 35,246 pounds of cargo, with a cleared fuel of 153,000 we still had 9,165 pounds remaining.

UA198 LAX-PVG has a flight time around 13:20, in the winter flight time can climb as high as 14:20. Using our current longest nonstop flight and flight time for a UA 787-10 which was almost at capacity today as a reference point I don't see why UA's 787-10 with a total of 318 passengers could not fly LAX-PVG with a full passenger cabin and at least 25,000 - 30,000 pounds of cargo daily.


On headwinds, I could see a small belly cargo penalty on the outbound only, but still a full passenger load. However, there is an advantage of not needing too much for an alternate as I presume SHA and HGH are possible alternates. What's the declared alternate for UA85---JFK or IAD?

Now, as for UA85, if UA had enough B77W frames, I could see that going to a B77W just on demand, freeing up two B78Xs to go elsewhere, especially with UA90/1 already on the B77W.

Would there be any plans on perhaps using a B78X out of ORD anytime soon? ORD to NRT is just slightly longer than SFO to PVG.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6512
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 3:32 am

I expect those reporters are conflating the 787 variants. It's entirely possible that NZ could use a 787-9 on JFK, especially if it orders a few new builds with higher MTOW. Not remotely possible that it could be a 787-10.
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1682
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 3:39 am

The only two even vaguely relevant comments I've read in any press/media about NZ's prospective uses for the 78J are (1) as others have already mentioned, it will be a primarily NZ-Asia aircraft and (2) they are confident it will be able to meet similar/the same (?) mission specs as their existing 777-200ER fleet. That rules NYC out, but does suggest LAX/SFO/YVR as a regular thing, and perhaps IAH and EZE now and then.
 
Scotron12
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 5:00 am

NZ mentlons "premium" lay out for their 787-10s. Could be they plan AKL-NYC but they already have the 787-9 which can operate AKL-NYC now. Why they would use the 787-10 for that particular route doesn't make sense.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 6976
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:09 am

Scotron12 wrote:
NZ mentlons "premium" lay out for their 787-10s. Could be they plan AKL-NYC but they already have the 787-9 which can operate AKL-NYC now. Why they would use the 787-10 for that particular route doesn't make sense.


NZ haven’t ruled out more than 1 configuration on the 78J. The 78J cannot and will not do AKL- NYC, there was some misreporting going on.
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 1073
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Fri Aug 09, 2019 7:06 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
downdata wrote:
Oh man, i’ve seen it all in this thread: 787-10, 78J, 78X, 781(?), 7810(??), 787-1000(???). What’s next? 787-ten-1thousand-XXX?


The full name is: Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner, or Boeing 787-10. IATA and ICAO abreviations are B78X and 781, respectively.


Who came up with 78J? I feel like half these codes come from A.net itself.

J is the tenth letter in the alphabet. :yes:
A318/19/20/21, A300, A332/3, A343/6, A388, L1011, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11, MD-80, B722, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9, B743/4/4M, B752/3, B762/3/4, B772/E/W, B788/9, F-100, CRJ-200/700/900, ERJ-135/145/175/190, DH-8, ATR-72, DO-328, BAE-146
 
downdata
Posts: 557
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Aug 10, 2019 1:39 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
Scotron12 wrote:
NZ mentlons "premium" lay out for their 787-10s. Could be they plan AKL-NYC but they already have the 787-9 which can operate AKL-NYC now. Why they would use the 787-10 for that particular route doesn't make sense.


NZ haven’t ruled out more than 1 configuration on the 78J. The 78J cannot and will not do AKL- NYC, there was some misreporting going on.


Wait a min, can the 7810 even do AKL-LAX? They’d have to run with <220 pax right?
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1603
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Aug 10, 2019 2:08 am

downdata wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
Scotron12 wrote:
NZ mentlons "premium" lay out for their 787-10s. Could be they plan AKL-NYC but they already have the 787-9 which can operate AKL-NYC now. Why they would use the 787-10 for that particular route doesn't make sense.


NZ haven’t ruled out more than 1 configuration on the 78J. The 78J cannot and will not do AKL- NYC, there was some misreporting going on.


Wait a min, can the 7810 even do AKL-LAX? They’d have to run with <220 pax right?



Omg. Please read prior posts, especially from JayUnited. First, it’s 787-10/J/X.
Secondly, LAX-AKL would be no problem for it, even with full passenger load.

It’s flown occasionally from East Coast to Asia. Also, look what it can do from TLV-EWR.
Whatever
 
downdata
Posts: 557
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Aug 10, 2019 3:55 am

FriscoHeavy wrote:
downdata wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

NZ haven’t ruled out more than 1 configuration on the 78J. The 78J cannot and will not do AKL- NYC, there was some misreporting going on.


Wait a min, can the 7810 even do AKL-LAX? They’d have to run with <220 pax right?



Omg. Please read prior posts, especially from JayUnited. First, it’s 787-10/J/X.
Secondly, LAX-AKL would be no problem for it, even with full passenger load.

It’s flown occasionally from East Coast to Asia. Also, look what it can do from TLV-EWR.


Isn't TLV-EWR at 5000nm a 600 nm short of AKL-LAX?

I've stole this from keesje from another thread from 2018 but it seems to suggest 5000nm is the limit for a full 280px - did Boeing make any enhancement to the range of the 7810 since then?

Image
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Boeing 787-10 Missions in the transpacific market

Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:19 am

In regards to Air New Zealand. The 787-10 can fly all but the three longest routes with a full passenger load. Only Houston, Chicago and Vancouver would be too far.

The future New York route is even further. No upgraded 787-10 could make it to New York with passengers. This is the route that requires the rumoured MTOW bump to the existing 787-9. Even the current 787-9 would struggle.

Air New Zealand placed a large number of options for more 787-10's the correct number to replace their 777-300ER's. The 777-300ER will get replaced by the 787 with the 787-9's used on the longest routes or the ones with high belly freight.

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