本網站使用cookie。您使用並繼續瀏覽本網站,即表示您接受這一點。
退出
您知道FlightAware航班跟蹤是由廣告支持嗎?
通過允許展示來自FlightAware.com的廣告,您可以幫助我們使FlightAware保持免費。我們努力使我們的廣告保持相關性,同時不顯突兀,以創造一流的體驗。在FlightAware上將廣告加入白名單快速而簡單,或者請您考慮選擇我們的高級帳戶.
退出
Back to Squawk list
  • 54

Boeing to Offer up to 330-Minute ETOPS on 777

提交時間:
 
EVERETT, Wash., Dec. 12, 2011 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Boeing BA -1.75% announced today it has received type-design approval from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for up to 330-minute extended operations (ETOPS) for its 777 fleet. The authorization allows 777 customers who purchase or already operate 777-300ER (extended range), 777-200LR (longer range), 777 Freighter and 777-200ER models equipped with General Electric engines to fly up to 330 minutes from an alternate airport.… (www.marketwatch.com) 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


FedExCargoPilot
I noticed that the 747 from CA to Auckland is munch faster than the 777s, this will help equalize it a bit more. This means that the a340, and 747-400 will soon be history for Air New Zealand and other carriers. Which isn't great, the 777 is not a nice plane to fly in long distance.
HunterTS4
Toby Sharp 0
Ive gone to DFW to Narita .....perfect bird for the job
alistairm
alistairm 0
why is it not nice on long distances? i have done fine with her from Toronto to Hong Kong.
FedExCargoPilot
I think its noisy and its very cramped.
Airway61
Is it noisier,than the 747-400 on long haul flights?
Dubslow
Dubslow 0
Are you referring to the 2-5-2 seating on certain airlines' economy sections?
FedExCargoPilot
Yes, the 3-3-3 is ok, but most airlines I believe are refitting with 3-4-3, I'm sure all 300s have 3-4-3. 2-5-2 is great when you re not in the middle.
canuck44
canuck44 0
Which is exactly why the 76 is still the most comfortable on the long haul @ 2-4-2.
dbaker
It really varies by airline. In coach, Continental operates the 777 as 3-3-3 and 767 as 2-3-2. In business, the 777 and 767 are 2-2-2 and 2-1-2, respectively. I find all four of the COA configurations to be perfectly comfortable.
Derg
Roland Dent 0
Yeah depends who is sitten next to yas don't it?
madtrader
madtrader 0
Last year, I took a Singapore Airlines 777 flight from Houston to Singapore (24 hours + the refueling time in Moscow). Economy was 3-3-3 and remarkably comfortable. To me it was much more comfortable than the 747 flights I've had to/from Asia. I'm watching for 777 flights the next time I've got to go so far (Memphis to Kota Kinabalu and back for that trip).
alistairm
alistairm 0
Holy smokes!!! I hope you were able to sleep well on that one!
madtrader
madtrader 0
If I remember correctly, it was about 38 hours door to door (close to 50 hours on the way back), where previously my longest trips were about 25 hours. The apprehension before the trip was much worse than the trip itself. I'm 5'10" 250lb, so I was really concerned my width would make it unbearable. The only tight parts were the flights between Memphis and Houston. The 777 made the long portion totally bearable. I watched 6 movies and slept the rest of the time (each way). On the way back we had a 13 hour layover in Singapore, so we toured the city. I've seen Singapore on several lists as the best place to have a layover and I totally agree.
alistairm
alistairm 0
Yes, i suppose if you are sitting next to an engine that can produce anywhere from 80 to over 100 thousand pounds of thrust; then yes, it may get a little noisy, lol. Cramped? for me, it is fine. I am 6 feet 4 inches tall, 260 pounds and i was fine. Good seat pitch with Air Canada:)
Airway61
Maybe,some people still like the redundancy of four engines.On,very long flights!
alistairm
alistairm 0
When GE tested the GE90-115b on their 747 test bed, they actually shut down all 3 JT9D engines and had the one (1) GE90 keep them airborne! That is why we have ETOPS. Four engines... bah!
FedExCargoPilot
was it 3-3-3? most of these new 300ers which are becoming really popular are being fitted with 3-4-3. AC I think operates 200LRs on most routes so it must be 3-3-3 for better endurance. Air NZ is getting refitted with 3-4-3, and its pretty cramped in there. Being anywhere in the 777 is noisy, I've flown it to Auckland from SF, you really need those noise canceling headsets. In my opinion, nothing will beat the 747-400, its quieter up front and on top, faster and more room. And it has 4 engines.
alistairm
alistairm 0
200LR, 3-3-3, flight 016. Took 300ER from Hong Kong to Manila with Cathay, 3-3-3 again.
chiphermes
Chip Hermes 0
Only 5h30min from landing? Sure sounds good.
FedExCargoPilot
Haven't flown the 74 for a while but if you are in the first half or on top its quieter the 777 seems louder I think. If you really want to get some rest fly airbus330/340
bayinstructor
Don Imus 0
NOBODY knows ETOPS regs like FlightAware's Dan Baker. Nobody. Good find Dan and keep up the fine work of your company. - Don
skyfly12
shawn white 0
I flew recently on AeroSvit and found that some people like middle or "bad" seats because when everyone else fights for the windows and alleys, they have a better chance to get extra seats on which they can rest. I personally am fine with any but like the 767's 2-3-2 seating best.
keithpeers
keith peers 0
Yes that is good ETOPS. THE B777.
FedExCargoPilot
Its too bad I can't take Air Canada when I travel from coast to coast. They should change that AC beats all! Would love to connect thru Toronto!
alistairm
alistairm 0
lol:) Come live in Canada!
civodul
I did fly SCL - YYZ yesterday on Air Canada (777-300) and seats are 3-3-3 in economy while 1-2-1 in front. I did travel in Business from YYZ to SCL and economy from SCL to YYZ. I can say economy seats are not bad at all! Air Canada really rocks!
alistairm
alistairm 0
Yep, at 6'4", i was able to stretch my feet out, had a few inches between my knees and the seat in front of me.
acsmckenzie1
Having flown both the 747-400 and the 777-300ER with Cathay Pacific, I can assure you that the 777-300ER is a generation above the older 747-400. Fuel economy, reliability, aircraft handling and passenger comfort are all superior on the 777-300ER.
Some might point out that the 747-400 flies faster, but that is because it is heavier and must do so to be efficient at higher weights. Hence, it has a greater wing sweep. However, this is done at compromise to its relative fuel efficiency and is the primary reason most 747-400s are being converted to cargo carriers. Remember, it was designed at a time when fuel was cheap - just like most of the gas guzzlers of its day - including the now infamous Concorde.
Derg
Roland Dent 0
Well said Andrew...in the UK we are paying $13 for gas.
sbord
scott bloom 0
i flew last Feb on AC 777 YVR TO SYD economy i think it was 3-4-3 nothing great nothing horrible. legroom yes. long flight.
KimballF
KimballF 0
Having flown from Melbourne to Auckland on the 773 recently, I can't complain - although that probably had something to do with being in the new premium economy Spaceseats - those are pretty neat seats!

登入

還沒有帳戶嗎? 現在就註冊(免費),設置諸多客制化功能、航班提醒等等!