Smiles
December 13th, 2006, 07:25
There is a thread down the page aways which discusses the new jumbo jet Airbus A-380. It is a huge 4-engined aircraft, but it's flying rules are still covered by the international ETOPS standards which say that aircraft ~ depending on specific criteria, including whether it is 2,3, or 4 engine plane.
Simply put, the ETOPS regulation specify maximum distance away from the nearest land-able airport (in flying time) each different kind of plane can be at any given time.
In all my flights to Thailand I've flown: B-747's (4 engines), B-767's (2 engines), but most often, the B-777 (2 engines). I enjoy flying the 777 somewhat more than the others for various reasons, but I've always silently marveled ~ and worried at times ~ that this gigantic machine is able to fly these amazing distances on just 2 engines . . . (mind you these puppies are huge).
The discussion below comes in the form of an Q&A between a questioner and an airline "expert". I thought you might be especially interested in the answer part, where the "expert" lets out some interesting information on one B-777 flight. Needless to say, I had not heard about this until now ... obviously not highly publicized.
4. Would Boeing 777 be able to serve Sydney, Auckland and Honolulu from Anchorage?
QUESTION:
Dear Sir, I am hoping you can help me out (and respond within a couple days' time). I am currently in my last semester of my college career (yippee!), and have to give a persuasive business presentation next week. The topic that I will be doing is why the made-up airline charter company I invented, with Anchorage as a hub and serving cities all over the globe, should purchase B777's instead of A340's to serve on long range routes. Sydney, Auckland, and Honolulu are among some of the cities.
I am trying to make it as realistic as possible and am wondering: Would a B777 be able to serve any of the above three cities non-stop from Anchorage in light of ETOPS requirements? It's not a big deal, but am just curious and would like to give factual information in my presentation. Thanks for your help!
Sincerely, Lee Wilson, Anchorage, Alaska
ANSWER:
Hi Lee, Tough job selling your idea as a 'new CEO' of this new Airline Charter Company ?
Okay, if your hub is in Anchorage, it is a little problematic using the Boeing 777's. You may loose out a little to the Airbus 340's because they have 4 engines and ETOPS is not a problem to them. I don't have an updated chart of the Pacific Oceanic area to give you an accurate picture of the suitable airports between Anchorage and Auckland. The Boeing 777 has an ETOPS approval up to 207 minutes. The critical area is between the Anchorage and the Hawaii sector. If you can use the Midway Islands, then your ETOPS problems are solved. Do an exercise yourself! If all the suitable airports are within the 207 minutes circle or 1500 nautical miles radius, you have no problems flying non-stop to Sydney, Auckland and Hawaii as far as ETOPS requirements are concerned.
For your information, on the 17th of last month (March), a United Airlines' B777 carrying 255 passengers flew over the mid-Pacific Ocean against strong headwinds for 192 minutes under one engine power to land without incident at Hawaii.
Boeing confirmed that it was the longest one engine diversion during ETOPS segment since the advent of transoceanic twin-engine flights 20 years ago by a TWA B767-200. The B777 departed Auckland bound for Los Angeles. The planned 180 minutes from the ETOPS alternates was exceeded as they encountered stronger headwinds during the diversion.
Now, you got a choice to purchase the following Boeing 777 series with the ranges given below:-
(B777-200) 5,210 nm ( 9,650 km)
(B777-200ER) 7,730 nm (14,315 km)
(B777-200LR) 8,810 nm (16,315 km)
(B777-300) 5,950 nm (11,030 km)
(777-300ER) 7,175 nm (13,290 km)
Take your pick!
Read about the advantages and issues of the Boeing 777 versus Airbus 340 in my previous FAQs.
Good luck to your presentation!
Cheers ...
Simply put, the ETOPS regulation specify maximum distance away from the nearest land-able airport (in flying time) each different kind of plane can be at any given time.
In all my flights to Thailand I've flown: B-747's (4 engines), B-767's (2 engines), but most often, the B-777 (2 engines). I enjoy flying the 777 somewhat more than the others for various reasons, but I've always silently marveled ~ and worried at times ~ that this gigantic machine is able to fly these amazing distances on just 2 engines . . . (mind you these puppies are huge).
The discussion below comes in the form of an Q&A between a questioner and an airline "expert". I thought you might be especially interested in the answer part, where the "expert" lets out some interesting information on one B-777 flight. Needless to say, I had not heard about this until now ... obviously not highly publicized.
4. Would Boeing 777 be able to serve Sydney, Auckland and Honolulu from Anchorage?
QUESTION:
Dear Sir, I am hoping you can help me out (and respond within a couple days' time). I am currently in my last semester of my college career (yippee!), and have to give a persuasive business presentation next week. The topic that I will be doing is why the made-up airline charter company I invented, with Anchorage as a hub and serving cities all over the globe, should purchase B777's instead of A340's to serve on long range routes. Sydney, Auckland, and Honolulu are among some of the cities.
I am trying to make it as realistic as possible and am wondering: Would a B777 be able to serve any of the above three cities non-stop from Anchorage in light of ETOPS requirements? It's not a big deal, but am just curious and would like to give factual information in my presentation. Thanks for your help!
Sincerely, Lee Wilson, Anchorage, Alaska
ANSWER:
Hi Lee, Tough job selling your idea as a 'new CEO' of this new Airline Charter Company ?
Okay, if your hub is in Anchorage, it is a little problematic using the Boeing 777's. You may loose out a little to the Airbus 340's because they have 4 engines and ETOPS is not a problem to them. I don't have an updated chart of the Pacific Oceanic area to give you an accurate picture of the suitable airports between Anchorage and Auckland. The Boeing 777 has an ETOPS approval up to 207 minutes. The critical area is between the Anchorage and the Hawaii sector. If you can use the Midway Islands, then your ETOPS problems are solved. Do an exercise yourself! If all the suitable airports are within the 207 minutes circle or 1500 nautical miles radius, you have no problems flying non-stop to Sydney, Auckland and Hawaii as far as ETOPS requirements are concerned.
For your information, on the 17th of last month (March), a United Airlines' B777 carrying 255 passengers flew over the mid-Pacific Ocean against strong headwinds for 192 minutes under one engine power to land without incident at Hawaii.
Boeing confirmed that it was the longest one engine diversion during ETOPS segment since the advent of transoceanic twin-engine flights 20 years ago by a TWA B767-200. The B777 departed Auckland bound for Los Angeles. The planned 180 minutes from the ETOPS alternates was exceeded as they encountered stronger headwinds during the diversion.
Now, you got a choice to purchase the following Boeing 777 series with the ranges given below:-
(B777-200) 5,210 nm ( 9,650 km)
(B777-200ER) 7,730 nm (14,315 km)
(B777-200LR) 8,810 nm (16,315 km)
(B777-300) 5,950 nm (11,030 km)
(777-300ER) 7,175 nm (13,290 km)
Take your pick!
Read about the advantages and issues of the Boeing 777 versus Airbus 340 in my previous FAQs.
Good luck to your presentation!
Cheers ...