Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
atlflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 716
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 11:13 am

Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:59 am

This is great news to close the gap for the 787-10x against the A350-900.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...range-to-7100nm-udvar-hazy-383294/
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6593
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 1:15 am

Just for some perspective on how far we've come... two facts:

The 787-10X is now considered a "medium-haul" or "regional" airliner.

The full-passenger range of the 747SP was 6650 nm.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:21 am

The MTOW of the present landing gear configuration has been speculated to be about 255t. If this is about right then a PIANO-X simulation suggests that 7100nm is realizable at max passenger load. The MTOW increase is all fuel and brings it up to about 92.5t fuel load.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27045
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:31 am

That is still about 1000nm short of the A350-900's nominal range, however the real key will be how much of the A350-900's planned missions will the 787-10 be able to perform and will it be able to perform them more economically.

The 240t A330-300 is said to be good for some 90% of the missions currently flown by 777-200ERs, even if it can actually only fly about 75% as far at nominal payload (5950nm vs. 7725nm).
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 3:30 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):

Yes. I fear all Boeing will really achieve by increasing range to 7100 nm is a couple extra sales and an increase in CASM.

The whole point of the 10X was supposed to be a simple stretch; even 6750 nm is already more than enough for 95% of conceivable missions in the medium haul segment.

I think this is a mistake. Stay with 6750 nm and keep the MTOW the same as the 789.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 3:41 am

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 4):
I think this is a mistake. Stay with 6750 nm and keep the MTOW the same as the 789.

Hear! Hear!

I, too, hope Boeing isn't chasing marginal sales and watering down the aircraft in the process.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 3:43 am

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 4):
I think this is a mistake. Stay with 6750 nm and keep the MTOW the same as the 789.

On the other hand, they may end up with a HGW -900.
What the...?
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:27 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 6):
On the other hand, they may end up with a HGW -900.

But how much can the HGW increase if they can not really raise the MTOW with any significance?
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:51 pm

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 4):
Yes. I fear all Boeing will really achieve by increasing range to 7100 nm is a couple extra sales and an increase in CASM.

You are missing the point I believe. As I said in reply 2 if they can stay close to the OEW then the increase in MTOW is pretty much all fuel to provide the additional range. S U-H is a pretty astute customer and is passing along to Boeing what his customers are saying to him. If the increase in MTOW is ~4t how much of this is needed by the structure? Probably very little. Boeing played around with tire sizes and truck overall width to achieve the ~ 23t MTOW increase from the 788 to the 789. To add an additional 4t may take very little, but, of course it is the last straw that breaks the camels back!   
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27045
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 4:03 pm

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 7):
But how much can the HGW increase if they can not really raise the MTOW with any significance?

Airbus gained an additional 135nm with the move from 238t to 240t on the A330-300 and the boost from 235t to 240t was 400nm.

Boeing had been saying between 6700nm to 7000nm and as the 787's engines are more efficient than the A330's, say less than 1t to get 100nm (7000 to 7100nm) and around 4t to get 400nm (6700 to 7100nm).

As to how Boeing gets that one to four tons, the 787-9 is reported to be lighter than originally planned, so that might stretch to the 787-10, as well, with the lower OEW allowing more fuel to be loaded. Boeing might also have found the 787-9's undercarriage is stronger than originally projected so they could up the TO, ZF and ML weights a bit with no increase in OEW.
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:47 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
Boeing might also have found the 787-9's undercarriage is stronger than originally projected so they could up the TO, ZF and ML weights a bit with no increase in OEW.

That would definitely help.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:07 pm

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 10):
That would definitely help.

It would.  .

@Stitch: thanks for your answer. As always it is very informative.
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:29 pm

Hello guys
What we don't know for now is :
787-10X previous iteration : 6700-7000 Nm with 323 and ??? pax (for 7000 Nm)
787-10X new iteration : 7100 NM @323 PAX or 6800-7100 Nm with 323 and ??? pax

The 787 has always given with a range of pax traduced by a range in the range of the plane (oups )

So is it a 400 nm increase or a 100 nm increase?
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:46 pm

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 12):

For all we know, Boeing is coming up with numbers by spinning a roulette wheel. Until they actually commit, the numbers will probably be a bit...fluid.
What the...?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27045
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:56 pm

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 12):
What we don't know for now is :
787-10X previous iteration : 6700-7000 Nm with 323 and ??? pax (for 7000 Nm)
787-10X new iteration : 7100 NM @323 PAX or 6800-7100 Nm with 323 and ??? pax

323 passengers is in a Boeing OEM three-class configuration with 9-abreast Economy seating. To my knowledge, this is the standard seating configuration Boeing has used for the 787-10.

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 12):
So is it a 400 nm increase or a 100 nm increase?

Most reports for the past 12-18 months have given the 787-10's projected range with 323 passengers as between 6800-7000nm.
 
iceberg210
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 12:11 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 9:56 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 13):

For all we know, Boeing is coming up with numbers by spinning a roulette wheel. Until they actually commit, the numbers will probably be a bit...fluid.

If I were one of those execs I would totally have a roulette wheel or dart board in my office expressedly for that joke  

I know I do that with our business, if someone asks what the old dart board is for in the warehouse (that oddly enough was here when we bought the building), I just respond, "Want to know what the copper price is today?"

I'm actually convinced sometimes that it'd be a more sensible way to do it... And now that I come to think of it, maybe Boeing should use a dart board for the lead time on a 787, might be as accurate as anything....

[Edited 2013-03-12 14:57:44]
Erik Berg
“Little by little, we advance with each turn. That's how a drill works!”
 
hannahpa
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:33 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Tue Mar 12, 2013 11:40 pm

Does anyone know the Length of the 787-10? I know the 350-900 is 220 ft long (67.3 m). How much longer is the 787-10 than the -9??? THe 789 is 206 ft....

Thanks
 
User avatar
yellowtail
Posts: 3938
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:46 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:13 am

MIght EK be interested in a few hundred of these for medium haul routes to DXB...like FCO, MAD, NBO, LOS, HAM etc
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:34 am

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 17):
MIght EK be interested in a few hundred of these for medium haul routes

I don't see the point. For EK, going forward they will have a much simplified fleet:

A350-900
A350-1000
777-8LX
777-9X
A380-800

Each of those aircraft offers very specific capcities. The A359 already gives them the capacity of the 787-10. And EK has no issues with 'misusing' aircraft. Just look at how they fly their 77L.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27045
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:35 am

Quoting hannahpa (Reply 16):
Does anyone know the Length of the 787-10?

Boeing has been suggesting 68.5m.



Quoting hannahpa (Reply 16):
How much longer is the 787-10 than the -9?

5.5m (the 787-9 is 63m)

[Edited 2013-03-12 17:35:53]
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:40 am

It seems like a 4t MTOW increase will do the trick. PianoX gives this figure as does my model. The most plausible range for the 787-10 in it's initial definition is 6700nm with GEnx-1B with PIP2 and 6800nm with T1000-TEN. To get the -10 to 7100nm with the TEN engine you then need to fuel for 300nm additional endurance, this is including the increased drag as you drag those increased 4t all the way to 6800nm for to then burn it for the additional 40 minutes flight.

So Boeing need to calculate what those 4t additional fuel means in reinforcements to the frame. We can be sure they will not do that before they have flown the 787-9 and that they will be all over the place with trying to tweak further load alliviation out of the FBW and gust alleviation system. It is a good assumption that in the end it will amound to a very marginal OEW increase like Sunrisevalley writes.

What it will mean is a further challenge to the engine manufacturers, the 787-10 is already pretty stretched in start performance and the extra 4t will not help. We can assume that this means something like 78klbf TO thrust requirementer for the egnines, something RR will have a little easier job to provide. The T1000 was always a thad larger in it's diemnsioning and the tri spool is a bit better at max thrust, the GEnx-1 might need some additional tweaking to not have inferior hot and high performance.

[Edited 2013-03-12 21:42:26]
Non French in France
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:12 am

Hello Ferpe

So it seems that the 787-10X will no more be a simple stretch
It's striking to see that from day one the XWB family was marketed as : same range for all length
And that for the 787 family it(s not possible. To much margin eaten during design phase I think
And 78 000 lbf thrust is not far from one variant of the T-XWB for the A350-900
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:03 am

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 21):
So it seems that the 787-10X will no more be a simple stretch

I'm a fan of the 'simple stretch' -10x. A straight up trade of giving up range for passengers. Maximum commonality with the -9.

If they increase MTOW much more, they will run into a wall where they have to start getting new gear, (maybe triple bogies), adding some area to the wing, bigger engines, waaaaaaayyyy bigger batteries, and a bunch of other expensive and time consuming stuff.

Boeing should definitely follow the KISS principle on this one.
What the...?
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:09 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 13):

For all we know, Boeing is coming up with numbers by spinning a roulette wheel. Until they actually commit, the numbers will probably be a bit...fluid.

I agree with this. There just is not enough information to make any educated guesses - let alone "calculations".I am not aware that we know the fuel consumption of some uprated engines (required) that do not exist.But more importantly - weight. Just what is the weight(s) of a 787? There are years old Boeing published figures that they were aiming for.Then the 787-8 came out miles overweigh with range reductions to match. Then there was a weight reduction programme (from what to what?) but little (it appears to me) is knows about it or indeed what has been or might be achieved.
Will the origonal published weights ever be achieved? Or is this now an imposiible goal (Much like - I suspect, the 388 weights).

To me it's all smoke and mirrors.They never tell you the key numbers unless -( like the 773 er for instance) they are better than expected - then suddenly they know them and publish them. The silence to me is deafening.I feel sure we will see the same thing on the A350 too.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2627
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:38 am

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 1):
Just for some perspective on how far we've come... two facts:

The 787-10X is now considered a "medium-haul" or "regional" airliner.

The full-passenger range of the 747SP was 6650 nm.

I think back to the truncated L1011-500 for the same reasons! And you're right, it is nothing short of breathtaking the strides that have been made here, but also in the single aisle markets too. 737s to HNL (from.. anywhere)? Try telling someone from 1984 that's the way it will be one day!

I remember reading a thread a while back about how 8000 would be the new "standard" for twin aisle (or at least for one in each family) when the 787 was in development, and thinking to myself if folks really knew the scale of what was being talked about there. It's an exciting time to be in this business.

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 4):

The whole point of the 10X was supposed to be a simple stretch; even 6750 nm is already more than enough for 95% of conceivable missions in the medium haul segment.

I think this is a mistake. Stay with 6750 nm and keep the MTOW the same as the 789.

And as neat as I think that kind of range would be for a 7810, I think I agree. At some point, this will have some repercussions on the validity of the 778x (if that is, Boeing is really serious about that one).

I just keep thinking here that an abundance of capability at the cost of efficiency really didn't do the 752 many favors toward the end.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 17):

MIght EK be interested in a few hundred of these for medium haul routes to DXB...like FCO, MAD, NBO, LOS, HAM etc

Since when would EK be interested in an RJ like that?   

Quoting aviaponcho (Reply 21):
So it seems that the 787-10X will no more be a simple stretch
It's striking to see that from day one the XWB family was marketed as : same range for all length
And that for the 787 family it(s not possible. To much margin eaten during design phase I think
And 78 000 lbf thrust is not far from one variant of the T-XWB for the A350-900

Perhaps so. But seeing these evolutions (for the 787 & A350) families is good in the sense that both A & B are showing that they are very much in tune with what their customers are interested in. I do like the idea that Mfrs are more in favor of building specialized aircraft these days, within reason of course.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14900
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:46 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
however the real key will be how much of the A350-900's planned missions will the 787-10 be able to perform and will it be able to perform them more economically.

I am sure Boeing will come up with some slides which show that all A350-900 missions can be done cheaper with the 787-10X. The real test will be if the market believes it, they obviously do not believe such comparisons when they show the 737 is more economic with an almost 50/50 market split.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4504
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:12 am

With this bump it would be possible for example to fly MEL-LAX with full load and LAX-MEL with close to full load.
That route was always an issue for the 744 which is why QF ordered the 744ER.
64 types. 45 countries. 24 airlines.
 
thegeek
Posts: 1334
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:19 pm

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 26):
With this bump it would be possible for example to fly MEL-LAX with full load and LAX-MEL with close to full load.
That route was always an issue for the 744 which is why QF ordered the 744ER.

But so what? That route will still be flown with an A380 and few other successful routes have ever needed such range. Unless it would be used to DFW, perhaps from AKL?

Or is that your point?
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:52 pm

Quoting parapente (Reply 23):
Then there was a weight reduction programme (from what to what?) but little (it appears to me) is knows about it or indeed what has been or might be achieved.

The latest ACAP sheets on the 787 dated October 2012 give an OEW of 117.7t for the 788. Ferpe has posted a number of posts on the 787 derivatives weights during recent months. These are very useful information.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5602
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:27 pm

I think that what is happening here is that as engines and structures (largely through CFRP) get more efficient range becomes less expensive. Therefore, if you are not sacrificing much short-range efficiency in order to get more range, then why not add it? As long as the base structure does not need to be heavier-leading to lower efficiency in short range operations-why not make the tanks a bit bigger? It is a win-win; with less fuel carried for short range missions you still have the efficiency, and you have the flexibility to do long range.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 1):
The full-passenger range of the 747SP was 6650 nm.

As others have mentioned, this shows how far we have come. The 747SP had to be considerably altered to get this range; with the 7810X all they are talking about is bumping up the MTOW a bit (I am assuming without adding significant extra weight to do it). There really is no reason not to if that is all that is involved.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 2:07 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 29):
As long as the base structure does not need to be heavier-leading to lower efficiency in short range operations-why not make the tanks a bit bigger?

As was pointed out in reply 2 to get the increased range requires a fuel load of ~92.5t . The tank capacity is 101.3t so there is still capacity available.
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:28 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 30):
As was pointed out in reply 2 to get the increased range requires a fuel load of ~92.5t . The tank capacity is 101.3t so there is still capacity available.

The tankage is good for some 8400nm even at the weights of the -10, it has an average fuel burn of some 5600kg/hr.
Non French in France
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 5:47 pm

Quoting ferpe (Reply 31):
The tankage is good for some 8400nm even at the weights of the -10, it has an average fuel burn of some 5600kg/hr.

I wonder if they'll be tempted to apply a similar increase in MTOW to the -9 so they can add range and/or payload.
What the...?
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 5:58 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 32):
I wonder if they'll be tempted to apply a similar increase in MTOW to the -9 so they can add range and/or payload.

It would improve the range to about 8200nm and it would become fuel limited at that point.
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 10:47 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 33):
It would improve the range to about 8200nm and it would become fuel limited at that point.

The reason the -9 is fuel limited shorter then my -10 is I use the T1000-TEN as my engine in the example, it is about 2% more efficient then the ones on the -9 when it goes into service.
Non French in France
 
hannahpa
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:33 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:57 pm

@ Stitch

Thank you so much; you are a WEALTH of information.

Now, I remember that the 787-9 was originally going to have a longer wingspan (208ft)? Is the 787-10 going to have the longer wing???

Also, what will the thrust rating be on the Engines? I know for the -9 the Trents/GE will have about 75,000 lbs so the -10 should have around 85-90,000?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27045
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:09 am

Quoting hannahpa (Reply 35):
Now, I remember that the 787-9 was originally going to have a longer wingspan (208ft)? Is the 787-10 going to have the longer wing?

Yes, the original wingspan for the 787-9 was to be 63m, but it now shares the same 60m wing as the 787-8.

Assuming that the 787-10 has a similar MTOW to the 787-9, it should be fine with the same 60m span, but pushing it to 63m would improve performance.



Quoting hannahpa (Reply 35):
Also, what will the thrust rating be on the Engines? I know for the -9 the Trents/GE will have about 75,000 lbs so the -10 should have around 85-90,000?

As I recall, both GE and RR were planning a 78,000 pound thrust rating for the 787-10's engines.
 
hannahpa
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:33 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:13 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 36):

Thanks again, Stitch. You are amazing!  

When will we know about the wing for the 787-10??
 
sv11
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 1999 6:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:56 am

Hi,
With the increase in range, can Lufthansa operate A340-300 routes also with this plane?

Regards,
sv11
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:22 am

Quoting sv11 (Reply 38):
With the increase in range, can Lufthansa operate A340-300 routes also with this plane?

Seatguru shows max seating for the LH A340-300 at about 244. The 789 would better suit that seat count. Which is LH's longest route time wise ? Perhaps FRA-EZE at 14 hrs . The 787-10 could haul ~ 31t on that sector.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27045
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:11 pm

Quoting sv11 (Reply 38):
With the increase in range, can Lufthansa operate A340-300 routes also with this plane?
According to LH they are no longer interested in the 787 because it is too small for them.

So the RFP will be between the A350-900 + A350-1000 and the 777-8 + 777-9.
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:26 pm

9 abreast in 787 and you end up (dream)liner
LH might not want it ?
8 abreast and yes it's smaller (250 PA 787-9, and
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:27 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
So the RFP will be between the A350-900 + A350-1000 and the 777-8 + 777-9.

Considering the fact that LH has just recently received a number brand-new B748i's, and that more of them are still to come, and considering the fact that LH flies their birds for a long time, my guess is that the A359 + B777-8 would be the most logical choice for LH. But then, that is just my opinion. Maybe they will sell the B748i's around 2020 and take delivery of the B777-9 as well. Who knows?  .

[Edited 2013-03-14 07:45:14]
 
TP313
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:37 pm

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 42):
my guess is that the A359 + B777-8 would be the most logical choice for LH

Sorry to disagree, but IMHO if LH is going to buy any of the two 777X variants it will be the -9X.
I don't realy see LH wanting to get stuck with such inflexible payload for range trade that you get with the -8X.
If they ever need the range they will fly the -9X with payload restrictions.
I think it will either be 359 + 779X, or 359 + 3510 + 779X
And I also think that in less than 10 years there will be no passenger 747s flying at LH.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 5:43 pm

Quoting TP313 (Reply 43):
And I also think that in less than 10 years there will be no passenger 747s flying at LH.

If that becomes reality then chances of selecting the B777-9 by LH would increase dramatically.  . Otherwise, if they intend to keep the B748i for a long time, and if they convert the 20 options, they in my opinion will not be selecting the B777-9 any time soon.

But since LH very recently has ruled out the B787 as too small for them this part of the discussion in this thread is academic. But there plenty of other possible customers out there.  Smile.

[Edited 2013-03-14 10:49:24]
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27045
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 7:29 pm

Quoting TP313 (Reply 43):
I don't realy see LH wanting to get stuck with such inflexible payload for range trade that you get with the -8X.

 

The 777-8X should have one of the best payload-range chart of any twin out there.



Quoting TP313 (Reply 43):
And I also think that in less than 10 years there will be no passenger 747s flying at LH.

There is no way LH is going to retire their 747-8 fleet after only 5-10 years of service. If they do, the CEO and Head of Fleet Planning should both be fired by the Board of Directors, who should then all promptly resign for gross financial mismanagement.

[Edited 2013-03-14 12:48:34]
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Thu Mar 14, 2013 7:31 pm

Retire the 748 after 10 years of service? Perhaps you should have a look at this thread: LH 744 Retired With Over 120.000 Hours (by na Feb 6 2013 in Civil Aviation)
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
TP313
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:21 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 45):
The 777-8X should have one of the best payload-range chart of any twin out there.

Of course it has. And that is in fact my point, because, in practical terms, it is the very same
payload-range chart of the 9-X.
Now between 2 planes with the same payload-range chart what would you buy? The "shorty" optimized only for the very edge of the range envelope, or the long one that can be adapted to many more mission profiles and, if you need the range, fly with payload restriction?
The -8X "stellar" payload-range characteristics are in fact its Achilee's heel, because of the competition it faces from its more versatile larger brother. It's the "shrink syndrome" that also affects the 358.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:28 am

Their will only be one -8X model and that is the -8LX (ultra longe range). Can the current 77W fly the 777LR range with payload restrictions?
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
TP313
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Boeing Bumps 787-10X Range To 7,100nm

Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:36 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 46):

Retire the 748 after 10 years of service? Perhaps you should have a look at this thread: LH 744 Retired With Over 120.000 Hours (by na Feb 6 2013 in Civil Aviation)

I see your point, but I think it depends on how good a deal would LH get from Boeing to be launch customer for the 77X.
If phasing out the 748 early turns out to be the best option from an economic standpoint then LH wil go that way.
If not, then they will use them for 30 years...

[Edited 2013-03-15 02:37:10]

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