EVA Air And 777-300ER Breaks World Record

jimyvr · Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:52 am

http://news.sina.com/000-000-000-000/2007-02-09/10453598880.html

EVA Air received 5th 777-300ER on 09FEB07 in Everett while receiving "The Longest Equivalent Still Air Distance Commercial Service Record" award by Boeing.

The record once again demonstrates the superiority of 777-300ER, compared to other similar type of aircraft. It also prevents the required fuel stop during winter
　
On 14DEC06, EVA Air 777-300ER with all 316 pax plus 1 baby on board, flew 7216nm at 62knot head wind per hour for 14hrs 55mins, breaking the longest distance flown by 777-300ER.

The 5th 777-300ER will allow EVA to increase BR16/15's 77W flight to daily. 3 more will be delivered this year per schedule.

ATCGOD · Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:56 am

These planes are amazing. Kudos to Boeing for making such a fine product.

LTU932 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:59 am

Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter):
On 14DEC06, EVA Air 777-300ER with all 316 pax plus 1 baby on board, flew 7216nm at 62knot head wind per hour for 14hrs 55mins, breaking the longest distance flown by 777-300ER.

What was the routing?

jimyvr · Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:13 am

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 2):
What was the routing?

Los Angeles to Taipei, BR015

boeingfever777 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:32 am

Quoting Jimyvr (Reply 3):
Los Angeles to Taipei, BR015

That flight is only 5,908 NM... Not even close to 7,216.

cba · Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:34 am

The Great Circle Mapper lists LAX-TPE as 5908nm. What kind of routing did they fly that wound up adding an extra 1400nm to the flight?

Am I missing something?

LAXintl · Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:45 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 4):
Not even close to 7,216.

Quoting Cba (Reply 5):
Am I missing something?

The headwind component of 62kts.

On a over 14 hour flight such winds add the equivalent of quite a bit miles.

Btw- the article does not clearly define nautical or statue miles.

boeingfever777 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:01 am

Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter):
flew 7216nm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 6):
Btw- the article does not clearly define nautical or statue miles.

If he quoted the article then yes... Statue miles, LAX-TPE = 6,799.

wjcandee · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:09 am

How interesting that folks would actually do research to calculate the "great circle route" etc. for the airplane, without bothering to read the post carefully enough to notice that (1) the award is based upon "still air" distance (i.e. in-flight endurance); (2) the article mentioned the headwind component expressly; (3) the post mentioned nautical miles (although the article, interestingly, translates to "navigation", I'm not sure where there's an English version that would confirm that).

kaitak744 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:12 am

Where do EVA's 777-300ERs fly? and how many do they have?

zeke · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:18 am

Something missing here....

EK 413 (SYD-DXB) would come close to that as well, CX830/831, HKG-JFK nil wind is over 7500 nm, longer than that flight by about 1-2 hrs, so if the SQ direct to the west coast of the USA (SIN-EWR), about 3-4 hrs longer. What about the SQ flight from LAX-SIN that basically goes over TPE...surely that also has to be longer ?

TG, SA have some long flights as well.

Is the only thing I am missing is that they are all flights done in an Airbus A340 ?

[Edited 2007-02-12 22:19:23]

bongo · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:20 am

Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter):
with all 316 pax plus 1 baby on board

Poor baby and poor neighbour!!! 14hrs 55mins in a plane!!!

boeingfever777 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:32 am

Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 10):
Where do EVA's 777-300ERs fly? and how many do they have?

(5) in use... 8 on order.

No clue what the (2) 772LR orders are doing... Did they convert to them to 777F?

They fly LHR, LAX, & HKG I assume.

[Edited 2007-02-12 22:56:48]

zeke · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:34 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 13):
They fly LHR, LAX, & HKG I assume.

Sure I have seen one at the old BKK as well.

JMO-777 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:51 am

Hi!

Now they have 5 in service with another 8 on order and yes the order for two 77Ls was changed into an order for two 77Fs.

GreetZ,
Jan

boeingfever777 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:57 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 13):
Sure I have seen one at the old BKK as well.

You are right. BR067 routes TPE-BKK-LHR M-S, and BR211 is TPE-BKK... Does that continue on elsewhere?

FrancoBlanco · Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:12 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 10):
Something missing here

It never said the longest commercial flight or whatever, we all know that this would be SQ SIN-EWR. It said the longest flight for a 777-300ER if you read closely wink

And yes, the other flights you mentioned are flown by a A340; however, only HKG-JFK is a A340-600 the others are A340-500 which definately has a longer range than a 777-300ER (or not?). An interesting fact in this context is the CO flight from EWR to HKG with a 777-200ER.

If your post was pure sarcasm, then let me congratulate you. You fooled a lot of people, including me.

Sebastian

LAXspotter · Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:18 am

The 777-300ER has a range greater than that of the 200ER and the 200ER is flown by SQ on the same route. I was on the that SQ flight which took over 14.5 hrs. I wonder how the long the flight times are for CO flight from EWR to HKG. Now that would definetely be setting a record for the 200ER. I believe that would be close to 16.5 hrs. That is really taking it to the max. I have seen the 300ER of EVA Air and they are amazing, and a fuselage almost as long as the A346.

LAXspotter · Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:22 am

Quoting FrancoBlanco (Reply 16):
And yes, the other flights you mentioned are flown by a A340; however, only HKG-JFK is a A340-600 the others are A340-500 which definately has a longer range than a 777-300ER (or not?). An interesting fact in this context is the CO flight from EWR to HKG with a 777-200ER.

The A345 is comparable to the 777-200 LR and the A346 is comparable to the 773ER. However the 772ER, A346 and 773ER almost have identical range.

LAXspotter · Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:30 am

I know that ANA uses their 773ER on NRT-JFK and NRT-IAD routes. That must be close to the flight time of LAX-TPE on that 773ER.

N1120A · Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:31 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 10):
HKG-JFK nil wind is over 7500 nm

Nil wind 7500nm? I don't think so. HKG-JFK is 7014nm still air.

flylku · Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:34 am

Quoting Jimyvr (Thread starter):
The Longest Equivalent Still Air Distance Commercial Service Record

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 4):
That flight is only 5,908 NM... Not even close to 7,216.

Still Air Distance!!!

Ruscoe · Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:46 am

I think the salient point is that it did this flight with 316 + 1 pax. That pax load over that still air equivalent distance is impressive and may explain why they were able to convert the 77LR to F.

Ruscoe

boeingfever777 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:03 am

Quoting FlyLKU (Reply 21):

Still Air Distance!!!

That is like ESAD... Which is the feeling of due to head/tailwind.

I still do not understand it taking 1,300 extra Nautical Miles.

B707Stu · Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:17 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 10):
EK 413 (SYD-DXB) would come close to that as well, CX830/831, HKG-JFK nil wind is over 7500 nm, longer than that flight by about 1-2 hrs, so if the SQ direct to the west coast of the USA (SIN-EWR), about 3-4 hrs longer. What about the SQ flight from LAX-SIN that basically goes over TPE...surely that also has to be longer ?

I think it's the longest by a two engine aircraft.

raggi · Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:17 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 23):
I still do not understand it taking 1,300 extra Nautical Miles.

The flight lasted 14h55m
Ground Distance was about ~5900 NM
Air Distance flown was ~7200NM
Difference 1300 NM

1300NM divided by ~15h gives 86.67 NM/h --> avg. headwind was about 87 knots.

Capish?

raggi

jfk777 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:25 am

777-200ER's are operating all kinds of 14-15 hours flights. AA's ORD to New Dehli, Delta's Jfk-Mumbai and all those Asia to Europe flights by all kinds of airlines. The 772ER is a extraordinary airplane, its took Boeing ten years to top it. Continental's Newark to Hong Kong really was the first of these over the top ultra long 777-200ER flights.

sunrisevalley · Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:03 am

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 26):
Continental's Newark to Hong Kong really was the first of these over the top ultra long 777-200ER flights.

Just checking on FlightAware and FlightStats; CO98 that arrived today at EWR from HKG , flight time 15hr 43min, flight distance 6992nm. This afternoons outbound (dept.about 3.30PM EST) CO99 is scheduled for a flight time of 15hr 55 min, distance 7053nm. It is heading eastbound no doubt because the favourable westerly winds.

VEEREF · Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:15 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 23):
I still do not understand it taking 1,300 extra Nautical Miles.

Basically, if the aircraft had not encountered any wind at altitude, it would have covered an additional 1,300 nautical miles in that 14h 55m than it actually did because of the headwind.
.

jimyvr · Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:31 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 12):
They fly LHR, LAX, & HKG I assume.

LHR, BKK, selected HKG, sometimes SIN, Daily LAX from this week

YVR 2 weekly on the plan for summer only

worldtraveler · Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:59 am

DL 17/BOM-JFK is scheduled for 16 hrs 20 minutes this time of year and regularly is in the air 16 hrs or more. It has been in the air as long as 16 hrs and 45 minutes.

Given that DL is really pushing its fleet now, it is very likely that their 777LRs will be flying 18 hr or more flights and/or flying from hot airports w/ relatively short runways.

The 777 is indeed an incredible airplane.

CX Flyboy · Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:16 pm

I am quite surprised that LAX-TPE is the longest trip by a 77W!! So when CX starts flying JFK-HKG this year with them, they wll smash the EVA record!

jimyvr · Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:41 pm

Quoting CX flyboy (Reply 31):
So when CX starts flying JFK-HKG this year with them, they wll smash the EVA record!

Depends on the "Still Air distance" it will fly

cloudyapple · Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:02 pm

Quoting Cba (Reply 5):
The Great Circle Mapper lists LAX-TPE as 5908nm. What kind of routing did they fly that wound up adding an extra 1400nm to the flight?

Am I missing something?

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 4):
at flight is only 5,908 NM... Not even close to 7,216.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20):
Nil wind 7500nm? I don't think so. HKG-JFK is 7014nm still air.

How many times? Aircraft do not fly direct from airport A to airport B. You follow the roads when you drive. There are the roads equivalent in the sky called airways. There are also SIDs and STARs to follow.

Do you drive directly to your local supermarket in a stright line though your neighbours' sitting rooms and back gardens?

Great circle mapper is a great reference but don't quote their figures in the wrong context. In scientific terms GCM gives you the displacement while we are talking about the track distance.

And add to that the headwind component to give you the still air track distance.

celestar · Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:12 pm

I was on such flight from LAX to TPE. This plane was great.

celestar · Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:21 pm

I was on this flight from LAX two weeks ago. Due to my work nature, I had flown 4 returns flight on LAX to TPE and that was the only time, I purposely time myself to fly the B777. EVA 747 all looks like trash. They are sooooo old!
Anywya, I even upgraded myself to business (Laurel class). The seat was on par with modern business class seat on leading airlines. B777 was simply great for long distance. It was not as noisy as the B747 (I think moden airlines have better air-con system that circulate air in lesser noise) but the choice of seat cushin color was less desirable. For some strange reason, EVA new aircraft, like Airbus A330 and now the B777 are choose light color shade seat. I think they will get dirty easier. One last point I hope someone can help me. Two times in a row, I observe the 'strange' flying plan of EVA flight. 5 weeks ago, I was on a EVA flight from Taipei to LAX. Instead of flying to Tokyo and then on top over to the southern tip of Alaska and then coming down, this plane, literally turn East and fly parallel to the equator. The plane was a B747 and we overfly Midway island and flown past Hawail about 200 miles north! We hit LAX just like we came straight from Asia instead of the usual sliding down from Seattle path. On that time, when I went back to Taipei, the B747 did the same thing, flew the equator route. I have never flown on any flight plan that did this. Is there any benefit? I notice the fly time is about the same given the time of the year. But I notice tremendous amount of lesser turbulance on that flight, both way. Thought someone can explan why EVA choose to do this. Thanks

airlineaddict · Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:36 pm

Quoting Celestar (Reply 35):
weeks ago, I was on a EVA flight from Taipei to LAX. Instead of flying to Tokyo and then on top over to the southern tip of Alaska and then coming down, this plane, literally turn East and fly parallel to the equator. The plane was a B747 and we overfly Midway island and flown past Hawail about 200 miles north! We hit LAX just like we came straight from Asia instead of the usual sliding down from Seattle path. On that time, when I went back to Taipei, the B747 did the same thing, flew the equator route. I have never flown on any flight plan that did this. Is there any benefit? I notice the fly time is about the same given the time of the year. But I notice tremendous amount of lesser turbulance on that flight, both way. Thought someone can explan why EVA choose to do this. Thanks

Maybe turbulence was really bad over the north pacific.

flyinghippo · Tue Feb 13, 2007 3:35 pm

Quoting Celestar (Reply 35):
I was on this flight from LAX two weeks ago. Due to my work nature, I had flown 4 returns flight on LAX to TPE and that was the only time, I purposely time myself to fly the B777. EVA 747 all looks like trash. They are sooooo old!
Anywya, I even upgraded myself to business (Laurel class). The seat was on par with modern business class seat on leading airlines. B777 was simply great for long distance. It was not as noisy as the B747 (I think moden airlines have better air-con system that circulate air in lesser noise) but the choice of seat cushin color was less desirable. For some strange reason, EVA new aircraft, like Airbus A330 and now the B777 are choose light color shade seat. I think they will get dirty easier. One last point I hope someone can help me. Two times in a row, I observe the 'strange' flying plan of EVA flight. 5 weeks ago, I was on a EVA flight from Taipei to LAX. Instead of flying to Tokyo and then on top over to the southern tip of Alaska and then coming down, this plane, literally turn East and fly parallel to the equator. The plane was a B747 and we overfly Midway island and flown past Hawail about 200 miles north! We hit LAX just like we came straight from Asia instead of the usual sliding down from Seattle path. On that time, when I went back to Taipei, the B747 did the same thing, flew the equator route. I have never flown on any flight plan that did this. Is there any benefit? I notice the fly time is about the same given the time of the year. But I notice tremendous amount of lesser turbulance on that flight, both way. Thought someone can explan why EVA choose to do this. Thanks

Jet Stream would play a factor, especially going from TPE to LAX. Have the jet stream pushing you along would save a lot of fuel even if traveling a longer distance closer to the equator.

[Edited 2007-02-13 07:35:35]

warren747sp · Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:15 pm

The old MD-11 could do even one better. I once flew from LAX-HKG on Delta and the flight in just about 15 hours!

XT6Wagon · Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:23 pm

I think people are missing that this record is NOT for the distance between two points.

rather it is the distance that the plane flew as far as the air passing over the plane itself. Think of it like you are on a huge treadmill that goes for miles. So the distance you cover as far as you and your feet are concerned depend on how fast and which direction that treadmill runs. Do it in the direction you are going, and you get a great people mover as seen in airports all over the world. Go against its direction and you have to move quick to make any headway at all.

Also the 777 does have the longest commercial passenger flight as far as point to point distance goes. The A345 "only" has the longest scheduled flight record.

vv701 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:50 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 39):
Also the 777 does have the longest commercial passenger flight as far as point to point distance goes.

I believe this is the 8,953nm flown by BA 772 G-YMMO on a charter flight in March 2006. It flew non-stop from BRU to MEL carrying 60 passengers including PM Tony Blair from an EU meeting in Brussels to the closing ceremony of the Commonwealth Games in Melbourne. The elapsed time was 18hrs 45min.

HBJZA · Tue Feb 13, 2007 10:04 pm

Quoting Raggi (Reply 25):
The flight lasted 14h55m
Ground Distance was about ~5900 NM
Air Distance flown was ~7200NM
Difference 1300 NM

1300NM divided by ~15h gives 86.67 NM/h --> avg. headwind was about 87 knots.

Capish?

I do understand your calculation but I must say that the wind cannot change any distance. The speed is affected, in other words, the time the frame takes to fly from one point to another but the distance between the points doesn't differ. One mile is one mile. The wind make a difference as it would take 10 hours to make with extra huge powerfull wind but the distance will still remain 1 mile

Capish ?

raggi · Tue Feb 13, 2007 10:34 pm

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 41):
do understand your calculation but I must say that the wind cannot change any distance. The speed is affected, in other words, the time the frame takes to fly from one point to another but the distance between the points doesn't differ. One mile is one mile. The wind make a difference as it would take 10 hours to make with extra huge powerfull wind but the distance will still remain 1 mile

Capish ?

I don't think you understand. If the 777 in question had flown for the same time (14h55m) in ZERO wind, it would have covered a ground distance of 7200 NM, since then there would have been no difference between GROUND distance covered and AIR distance covered.
If the 777 in question had a 86 knot tailwind throughout the flight the GROUND distance covered would have been greater than AIR distance covered.
In this particular instance the 777 flew with a headwind, which makes the GROUND distance covered less than AIR distance covered.

Think swimming up- or downstream a river.

The Airspeed of the 777 was: V=D/T --> V=7200NM/15h --> V=480NM/h (knots)
The Ground speed 777 was: V=D/T--> V=5900NM/15h--> V=393NM/h (knots)

You have to understand that it's about relativity. The 777 flies through the air, it doesn't drive on the ground. From the equation above the formula for distance D is V times T.
D=V*T --> Distance (AIR)= 480kts*15h --> D=7200 AIR MILES
D=V*T --> Distance (GROUND)= 393kts*15h --> 5900 GROUND MILES

Yes, the GC distance from LAX-TPE is 5900NM, but this 777 flew a distance in the AIR (which is what matters) of 7200 NM.

comprende?

trex8 · Tue Feb 13, 2007 10:52 pm

sl OT but when you see these range charts showing "85% annual headwinds" or something, what exactly are they talking about?

HBJZA · Tue Feb 13, 2007 11:45 pm

Quoting Raggi (Reply 42):
I don't think you understand.

Yes I do

Quoting Raggi (Reply 42):
Yes, the GC distance from LAX-TPE is 5900NM, but this 777 flew a distance in the AIR (which is what matters) of 7200 NM.

Still the distance between LAX and TPE still remain the same

you said :

Quoting Raggi (Reply 42):
Yes, the GC distance from LAX-TPE is 5900NM, but this 777 flew a distance in the AIR (which is what matters) of 7200 NM.

I said :

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 41):
The wind make a difference as it would take 10 hours to make with extra huge powerfull wind but the distance will still remain 1 mile

Which is exactly the same but with more humour. The fabulous T7 flew from my home to my neighbour's the distance of 5000NM in only 10 hours which represent a ground distance of 1 mile but the headwind was amazing. With 0 wind, it could have flown all the way from LAX to TPE !!!! (don't quote on my numbers)

VERSTANDEN
COMPRIS
COMPRENDO
CAPISH
UNDERSTOOD

OldAeroGuy · Wed Feb 14, 2007 12:27 am

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 43):
sl OT but when you see these range charts showing "85% annual headwinds" or something, what exactly are they talking about?

It means that there is an 85% probability on any one day during a year that the wind level (or a more favorable level) used to calculate the mission performance will be encountered. There is a 15% probability that the winds on that day could be less favorable.

You will also see wind probabilities expressed on a seasonal (summer, fall, winter, spring) or monthly basis.

[Edited 2007-02-13 16:30:57]

raggi · Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:06 am

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 44):

I didn't realize you were trying to be funny.

Quoting HBJZA (Reply 44):
Quoting HBJZA (Reply 41):
The wind make a difference as it would take 10 hours to make with extra huge powerfull wind but the distance will still remain 1 mile

This sentence was particularly bewildering to me. I didn't understand what you were trying to say here.

But, I'll leave it at that.

SEHR GUT!

raggi

aeroman444 · Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:49 am

The A340-500 can't do it with a full load of passengers and cargo. Low and slow. Big grin

9VSIO · Wed Feb 14, 2007 3:04 am

Quoting Aeroman444 (Reply 47):
The A340-500 can't do it with a full load of passengers and cargo

Would that not depend on what a full load was? I mean, SQ only puts 180-ish POB...That's a full load for them!

zeke · Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:31 pm

Quoting FrancoBlanco (Reply 16):
It never said the longest commercial flight or whatever, we all know that this would be SQ SIN-EWR. It said the longest flight for a 777-300ER if you read closely

I looked at the linked article, it was in Chinese, the only bit I saw in english was "The Longest Equivalent Still Air Distance Commercial Service Record", I cannot see "world record" etc.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 20):
Nil wind 7500nm? I don't think so. HKG-JFK is 7014nm still air.

I actually fly that route, and the nil wind distance on the flight plan is over 7500 nm.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 39):
Also the 777 does have the longest commercial passenger flight as far as point to point distance goes. The A345 "only" has the longest scheduled flight record.

In the charter world, most people do not make public their flight paths, I would not be surprised that other VIP aircraft have done longer flights, the A345 Prestige has a design range of 10,000 nm. We know QF has done LHR-MEL direct ing a 744, and they also have flown a 330 direct from TLS to MEL.

Quoting 9VSIO (Reply 48):

Would that not depend on what a full load was? I mean, SQ only puts 180-ish POB...That's a full load for them!

And 280ish in the 773ER, climbing to FL300 only after takeoff.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net