Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Boeing 767 range question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ptbodale
    replied
    The early 200 series acft weren't built for overwater services. Air Canada has only two of the original order in the 200 series (fin 604 the Gimli Glider and 611). All AC 200's have PW JT9D-7R4D engines.

    604 has a t/o weight of 140,600k and is a domestic acft only (good for inner Caribbean too).
    611 has a t/o weight of 152,000k and can do Hawaii and the U.K. if necessary
    The other remaining domestic B762, fin 672 came to AC from Pacific Western.

    The 200 ER's have additional fuel tanks and are overwater acft.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by BY123A
    As well as the ability to carry extra fuel, engine type has a large effect on the range of an aircraft. Britannia Airways initial 767-200s were powered by General Electric CF6-80A engines. Often when faced with a transatlantic ETOPS flight, requiring the need for extra fuel reserves, flight planning could be a bit of a headache, frequently requiring a stop en-route for fuel. However, Britannia’s last two 767-200s, G-BYAA and AB were powered by the larger, more powerful, CF6-80C2 engines. As well as an enhanced take-off performance the fuel burn was around 5% less than the 80A equipped aircraft and flight planning was a breeze. They were definitely the no sweat jets!

    Oh, so the first 767s weren't perfect. They used ton of fuel and had to make pit stops.... hmm well as we're talking about 767, how long it will be in production ??

    Leave a comment:


  • BY123A
    replied
    As well as the ability to carry extra fuel, engine type has a large effect on the range of an aircraft. Britannia Airways initial 767-200s were powered by General Electric CF6-80A engines. Often when faced with a transatlantic ETOPS flight, requiring the need for extra fuel reserves, flight planning could be a bit of a headache, frequently requiring a stop en-route for fuel. However, Britannia’s last two 767-200s, G-BYAA and AB were powered by the larger, more powerful, CF6-80C2 engines. As well as an enhanced take-off performance the fuel burn was around 5% less than the 80A equipped aircraft and flight planning was a breeze. They were definitely the no sweat jets!

    Last edited by BY123A; 2006-04-16, 07:35.

    Leave a comment:


  • ptbodale
    replied
    First B777-300ER is due in March 2007.

    Scheduled to operate YYZ-LAX-SYD.

    First B787 is due Feb 2010.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cam
    replied
    Originally posted by pkonowrocki
    I don't know when but do you mean 777s or 787s ?
    Yup

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Cameron
    completely OT, but since we are chatting at Boeing and Air Canada, when will the first of the planes arrive from the new order?

    Sorry again for the OT.
    I don't know when but do you mean 777s or 787s ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cam
    replied
    completely OT, but since we are chatting at Boeing and Air Canada, when will the first of the planes arrive from the new order?

    Sorry again for the OT.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Kevin
    I guess the A340-500 and A340-600 is another example.
    And I bet there will be some on A380
    thx for the info everyone, especially AJ for very specific info

    Leave a comment:


  • Kevin
    replied
    I guess the A340-500 and A340-600 is another example.

    Leave a comment:


  • ACman
    replied
    Originally posted by ptbodale
    No it was a non-stop, however we had a max pax load of 170. The acft holds 212. Then depending on the winds and the day we could board more and sometimes less.
    We also do that with the non X A340-313. Cargo restirctions to.

    Leave a comment:


  • MaxPower
    replied
    Originally posted by ptbodale
    No it was a non-stop, however we had a max pax load of 170. The acft holds 212. Then depending on the winds and the day we could board more and sometimes less.
    Seems pretty logic and possible ! Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • ptbodale
    replied
    No it was a non-stop, however we had a max pax load of 170. The acft holds 212. Then depending on the winds and the day we could board more and sometimes less.

    Leave a comment:


  • MaxPower
    replied
    Originally posted by ptbodale
    Air Canada did operate a weight restricted B763 on YYZ-NRT for a short time. Flyng time on that route was 13H10, the return NRT-YYZ was 11H30. An A343 covers the route now.
    Wonder if they went to to refuel or something, or was this a non-stop?

    I flew on SK 763 on the HKG-CPH-HKG, flights was varied on 11H20 sector, back when SAS operated these 76's

    Leave a comment:


  • ptbodale
    replied
    Flying time YYZ-TLV on AC084-06Apr was 10:59, the return
    AC087-07Apr was 12:05.

    AC033 HNL-SYD has a flying time of 10H40 and AC034 SYD-HNL has a flying time of 9H50.

    Air Canada did operate a weight restricted B763 on YYZ-NRT for a short time. Flyng time on that route was 13H10, the return NRT-YYZ was 11H30. An A343 covers the route now.

    Leave a comment:


  • MaxPower
    replied
    Thanks AJ. That was great to hear ! I find these info's very useful.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X