Hey there fellow Avgeek family,

This question is closely related to my own homebase LKO (Lucknow) where we happen to have a 8,996 - 9000 FT RWY and even though we have daily multiple A330-343 Flights ( Operated by Saudia) I always wondered why don't we get a 777-300[ER] given the deamand is high and Saudia does have its 773ER deployed on multiple India sectors.

Now a few months from now we had 4 weekly Air India 788 Dreamliners operating from my homebase as well and in 2017 even an Air India 747-400 had made a landing too but never has a 773ER touched the runway though a while back a Turkish Cargo 777F did make a diverted landing when it wasn't able to land at Delhi and last year Indian Government 7773ER VIP aircraft did make a final approach but it was just a fly by as it tookoff before touching down and that was the closest I ever saw a 773ER at my homebase.

I wonder if its our Runway thats short for a 773(ER) or could it be something else because we do have enough parking space which could accomodate two A333s at the same time and the usual load on A333s out and into LKO is 298 - 300 Pax..Saudia also uses its A330 (REGIONAL) fleet which has 300 Plus seats and it goes almost full both ways.

Given the runway extension may take another year or so I wonder if our runway is just not long enough for a 7773(ER) but then looking at many other airports like Dublin which have even shorter Runway than ours and yet having 773(ERs) is what bewilders me and conflicts my assesment.

Thanks in Advance !

You're comparing with Dublin. But....the average temperature in Lucknow is a tad higher than in Dublin, by about 15 degrees. This has quite an impact on performance.

Starlionblue wrote:

You're comparing with Dublin. But....the average temperature in Lucknow is a tad higher than in Dublin, by about 15 degrees. This has quite an impact on performance.

Hey Mr Starlion hope you're doing good..Thanks for the reaponse. The temperatures in summers here are torrid like today its 43°C so I guess may be it is a determining factor on what aircraft type could or couldnt be used.

FligtReporter wrote:

I guess may be it is a determining factor on what aircraft type could or couldnt be used.

It probably is.

For a quick overview on how the temperature restricts performance, check ACAPS document:
https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... 2lr3er.pdf
What you're looking for, is the difference for a given conditions for ISA, and ISA+15. Say, pages 52 and 53.
These are not the Lucknow data, just a reference to show a difference between standard and increased temperature (15 degrees Celcius difference).

ISA is standardized atmosphere conditions (29.92 in Hg, 1013.25 hPa; +14deg C, 57deg F at sea level).

If you want to calculate Lucknow required distance, you need to adjust for pressure, and temperature. There are more factors to put in for accurate calculations, but for a "more or less accurate" you should be fine with airport data and ACAPS.

Cheers,
Adam

gloom wrote:

FligtReporter wrote:

I guess may be it is a determining factor on what aircraft type could or couldnt be used.

It probably is.

For a quick overview on how the temperature restricts performance, check ACAPS document:
https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... 2lr3er.pdf
What you're looking for, is the difference for a given conditions for ISA, and ISA+15. Say, pages 52 and 53.
These are not the Lucknow data, just a reference to show a difference between standard and increased temperature (15 degrees Celcius difference).

ISA is standardized atmosphere conditions (29.92 in Hg, 1013.25 hPa; +14deg C, 57deg F at sea level).

If you want to calculate Lucknow required distance, you need to adjust for pressure, and temperature. There are more factors to put in for accurate calculations, but for a "more or less accurate" you should be fine with airport data and ACAPS.

Cheers,
Adam

Thank you very much for your elaborate response Mr Adam I truly appreciate your efforts in asissting me.Its truly helpful.

Regards
Anks

At the temperatures you are getting this week, the 77W could take off with somewhere around 670000 pounds. That's probably doable on such a relatively short flight to JED, but why would Saudia do that? Lucknow is likely a rather low yielding destination, perfect for the regional configuration their A330s have. They don't need the 77W's added range, so they're better off using that those where it makes more sense to use the extra capacity (on the regional configured ones) and/or range. I'd imagine the need to carry cargo also figures into where they send the 77W, which essentially functions as a combi aircraft, given how much cargo it holds.

I'd bet you see a 787-10 before a 77W.

N1120A wrote:

At the temperatures you are getting this week, the 77W could take off with somewhere around 670000 pounds. That's probably doable on such a relatively short flight to JED, but why would Saudia do that? Lucknow is likely a rather low yielding destination, perfect for the regional configuration their A330s have. They don't need the 77W's added range, so they're better off using that those where it makes more sense to use the extra capacity (on the regional configured ones) and/or range. I'd imagine the need to carry cargo also figures into where they send the 77W, which essentially functions as a combi aircraft, given how much cargo it holds.

I'd bet you see a 787-10 before a 77W.

I hope we do some other Widebody than the normal 333s..I guess a 789 would be good too though would our Runway be enough for a fully loaded 787-9 or 787-10 if not the ultra long 777ER ?

FligtReporter wrote:

N1120A wrote:

At the temperatures you are getting this week, the 77W could take off with somewhere around 670000 pounds. That's probably doable on such a relatively short flight to JED, but why would Saudia do that? Lucknow is likely a rather low yielding destination, perfect for the regional configuration their A330s have. They don't need the 77W's added range, so they're better off using that those where it makes more sense to use the extra capacity (on the regional configured ones) and/or range. I'd imagine the need to carry cargo also figures into where they send the 77W, which essentially functions as a combi aircraft, given how much cargo it holds.

I'd bet you see a 787-10 before a 77W.

I hope we do some other Widebody than the normal 333s..I guess a 789 would be good too though would our Runway be enough for a fully loaded 787-9 or 787-10 if not the ultra long 777ER ?

Here.

https://www.boeing.com/resources/boeing ... ps/787.pdf

FligtReporter wrote:

N1120A wrote:

At the temperatures you are getting this week, the 77W could take off with somewhere around 670000 pounds. That's probably doable on such a relatively short flight to JED, but why would Saudia do that? Lucknow is likely a rather low yielding destination, perfect for the regional configuration their A330s have. They don't need the 77W's added range, so they're better off using that those where it makes more sense to use the extra capacity (on the regional configured ones) and/or range. I'd imagine the need to carry cargo also figures into where they send the 77W, which essentially functions as a combi aircraft, given how much cargo it holds.

I'd bet you see a 787-10 before a 77W.

I hope we do some other Widebody than the normal 333s..I guess a 789 would be good too though would our Runway be enough for a fully loaded 787-9 or 787-10 if not the ultra long 777ER ?

Again, I don't think the 77W would necessarily have an issue departing, given the short flight distance. I think the primary issue would just be having 100 more seats in the regional configuration and being way too premium on the long haul configuration.

The 789 probably isn't dense enough, but would have absolutely no performance issues.

gloom wrote:

FligtReporter wrote:

ISA is standardized atmosphere conditions (29.92 in Hg, 1013.25 hPa; +14deg C, 57deg F at sea level).

If you want to calculate Lucknow required distance, you need to adjust for pressure, and temperature. There are more factors to put in for accurate calculations, but for a "more or less accurate" you should be fine with airport data and ACAPS.

Hi FlightReporter: I think you meant to say +15C/59F: ( https://www.universalweather.com/blog/i ... he-basics/ )
Lucknow can be found on SkyVector https://skyvector.com/airport/VILK/Chau ... gh-Airport

I can see no reason for a 777 not to fly into VILK/LKO unless PCN (Pavement Classification Number) is an issue. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACN-PCN_method ) LKO is only ~400' ASL. Temperarture would certainly be a factor as FlightReporter suggested. But many operators will operate in the wee hours of the morning when temperatures are at their coolest. One other constraint might be terrain but Google Earth Pro seems to indicate LKO is outside mountainous areas in the "near in obstacle" criteria.

Notwithstanding all of the above, the DGCA (Indian Aviation Authority) works in mysterious ways!

Yikes! wrote:

I can see no reason for a 777 not to fly into VILK/LKO unless PCN (Pavement Classification Number) is an issue. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACN-PCN_method )

I was about to mention that, but he did say one did a fly-by, so I don't know that they would have attempted an approach if that was an issue.

N1120A wrote:

FligtReporter wrote:

N1120A wrote:

At the temperatures you are getting this week, the 77W could take off with somewhere around 670000 pounds. That's probably doable on such a relatively short flight to JED, but why would Saudia do that? Lucknow is likely a rather low yielding destination, perfect for the regional configuration their A330s have. They don't need the 77W's added range, so they're better off using that those where it makes more sense to use the extra capacity (on the regional configured ones) and/or range. I'd imagine the need to carry cargo also figures into where they send the 77W, which essentially functions as a combi aircraft, given how much cargo it holds.

I'd bet you see a 787-10 before a 77W.

I hope we do some other Widebody than the normal 333s..I guess a 789 would be good too though would our Runway be enough for a fully loaded 787-9 or 787-10 if not the ultra long 777ER ?

Again, I don't think the 77W would necessarily have an issue departing, given the short flight distance. I think the primary issue would just be having 100 more seats in the regional configuration and being way too premium on the long haul configuration.

The 789 probably isn't dense enough, but would have absolutely no performance issues.

thanks for your response Sir.

Yikes! wrote:

gloom wrote:

FligtReporter wrote:

ISA is standardized atmosphere conditions (29.92 in Hg, 1013.25 hPa; +14deg C, 57deg F at sea level).

If you want to calculate Lucknow required distance, you need to adjust for pressure, and temperature. There are more factors to put in for accurate calculations, but for a "more or less accurate" you should be fine with airport data and ACAPS.

Hi FlightReporter: I think you meant to say +15C/59F: ( https://www.universalweather.com/blog/i ... he-basics/ )
Lucknow can be found on SkyVector https://skyvector.com/airport/VILK/Chau ... gh-Airport

I can see no reason for a 777 not to fly into VILK/LKO unless PCN (Pavement Classification Number) is an issue. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACN-PCN_method ) LKO is only ~400' ASL. Temperarture would certainly be a factor as FlightReporter suggested. But many operators will operate in the wee hours of the morning when temperatures are at their coolest. One other constraint might be terrain but Google Earth Pro seems to indicate LKO is outside mountainous areas in the "near in obstacle" criteria.

Notwithstanding all of the above, the DGCA (Indian Aviation Authority) works in mysterious ways!

DGCA does work in weird ways..I feel may be the 777 Ops are not permited due to Terminal infrastructural constraints if not the runway ones..Given the current Intl terminal is too small to even comfortably accomidate 300 Pax let alone accomodating 377 or so to fill a 777-3[ER].I think once the new terminal gets ready and they shift Intl operations to what is curently the domestic terminal (T2) we may see a 777...But I can just hope and pray that someday I get to see the 777 at my homebase.

Thanks for youe reaponse Mr Yikes ..I truly appreciate your time and efforts

Yikes! wrote:

I think you meant to say +15C/59F

Right, I've had 14C stuck in my head, but it is 15, indeed.

Cheers,
Adam

AirKevin wrote:

Yikes! wrote:

I can see no reason for a 777 not to fly into VILK/LKO unless PCN (Pavement Classification Number) is an issue. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACN-PCN_method )

I was about to mention that, but he did say one did a fly-by, so I don't know that they would have attempted an approach if that was an issue.

Yeah I even have a video of that approach and fly by..I was emotional to see the 777-3(ER) APPROACHING I thought it would finally land but I was heart broken the moment it started flying up.I happen to be the first and only plane spotter of my city to have spotted this bird but dont know if we will ever a 777-3ER.

You know an Infamous table top airport like CCJ ( Kozhikode ) use to get SAUDIA 777-300ERs regularly even though its runway is more or less the same length as ours but for some reason we just dont get 777s at all..I hope once they shift Intl operations to new terminal we recieve the mighty 777s too...till then I could just pray

Thanks for your response Sir !