Ord-del-ord

[Stratoboozer]

Could someone at AA, particularly from Dispatch or a pilot, what exactly will be the route of flight the 777 will take to Delhi when they ramp up service in Nov? Is the ORD-DEL segment going eastbound through Greenland, Scandanavia, Russia, then the Stans? Or will they plan on the Polar routes? Is the return trip going the same way or requiring a fuel stop somewhere? I'm not familiar with AA's 777 range capabilities, but it seems these flights will be quite a stretch, especially if they'll have a full load. I'm sure they'll be some weight restrictions on certain days. I'd like to know your alternate selection and if AA will be utilizing 5% reserves, if anybody knows...

Many thx and cheers.

 

[FWAAA]

I'm not a pilot but I am certain that AA's 777-223 can easily fly ORD-DEL (and back) nonstop via a polar route.

 

[Oneflyer]

It is a Polar route, but flies just west of Russia.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Call me "old fashioned" , but my old AS* will Never be going over the North Pole on a "2" engine A/C, NEVER !!!!!!!!!!!!

Now if the route was to "glance" the "pole"(with a quick "drop in" if necessary, to ours friends in Thule), thats one thing, but "up and over", FUHGETTIBOUTIT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NH/BB's

 

[kirkpatrick]

Could someone at AA, particularly from Dispatch or a pilot, what exactly will be the route of flight the 777 will take to Delhi when they ramp up service in Nov?

[post="307446"][/post]​

See this link for a Great Circle route. Of course, the route actually flown will depend on winds, weather and other factors.

http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=ord-del...LOR=&MAP-STYLE=

MK

 

[azdryheat]

I don't think this route can be flown easily by AA's 777's. What is the TOGW of AA's aircraft? This route is 700 nm further than ORD-HKG, which is just about the limit of a full UA 747-400. ORD-DEL on a 777 may very well be load restricted.

 

[Mach85ER]

Don't know the DEL info, but for perspective, the most fuel I ever saw in a couple of years was slightly over 1/2 of max capacity.

One time we flew a transcon with less than 1/4 full departing the gate. :blink:

 

[FWAAA]

I don't think this route can be flown easily by AA's 777's. What is the TOGW of AA's aircraft? This route is 700 nm further than ORD-HKG, which is just about the limit of a full UA 747-400. ORD-DEL on a 777 may very well be load restricted.

[post="307723"][/post]​

You must have meant some other route, since ORD-DEL is 270 nm shorter than ORD-HKG, not 700 nm further. ORD-DEL is 500 nm shorter than CO's EWR-HKG route (and that flight is weight restricted). AA may very well have to restrict the load, but it won't be stopping for fuel.

ORD-DEL is 6503 nm, while ORD-HKG is 6773 nm. AA's 777IGWs (now called 777ERs) have a MTOW of 656,000 lb and Boeing says they have a max range of 7,730 nm. AA's 777s use RR Trent 892s, with 92k lb of thrust.

Previously, Former ModerAAtor posted a Great Circle Mapper routing that keeps the ORD-DEL flight eastbound both directions, which should minimize headwinds.

Some performance data:

http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/aircom...caps/777_23.pdf

 

[Stratoboozer]

You must have meant some other route, since ORD-DEL is 270 nm shorter than ORD-HKG, not 700 nm further. ORD-DEL is 500 nm shorter than CO's EWR-HKG route (and that flight is weight restricted). AA may very well have to restrict the load, but it won't be stopping for fuel.

ORD-DEL is 6503 nm, while ORD-HKG is 6773 nm. AA's 777IGWs (now called 777ERs) have a MTOW of 656,000 lb and Boeing says they have a max range of 7,730 nm. AA's 777s use RR Trent 892s, with 92k lb of thrust.

True, the Great Circle distance is shorter from ORD to DEL then to HKG, but in route planning, it doesn't mean a thing, unless you're taking long directs. When you fly over on the Polar routes, there are only 4 to choose from and there are little to no deviation on these routes, especially through Russia and China. They do a lot of zig-zagging and there are many restrictions such as route closures and altitude blocks.... all having major affects on burn. Plus, by FARs, you need to carry minimum fuel for ETOPs, alternates, and contingencies - planned or unplanned. Suitable airports that are ETOPS qualified are scarce in that part of the world so the route selection become even more limited.

I'm not saying AA's 777s can't do it non-stop, but I'm sure there will be occasions on weight restrictions, route selection/availability, and/or winds that might incur and fuel stop here or there. The question is where and when along the route will it occur if it does happen.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Strato,

You make good points.

Despite my own personal concerns, I really think that, because nothing is foolproof, that flying over the pole on 2 engines, is TWO DAM* RISKY !!

To me, it's simply a "numbers game"
Sure , the reliability factor with Etops, is very good, but it still comes down to a "numbers game". Losing 1 engine going over the pole is "potential suicide", because the A/C is left with 1 "LONE" engine, to make it to a landing site.

I give Airbus a great amount of credit.
There is a "huge" reason, that they make 2 models of A/C with "4 engines"

Imho, LOGIC, and REASON go out the window, with Boeing "pushing the envelope" with the 777 + "787", going over the pole., and the same goes for Airbus, should they "push" the A330, to do so.(Though With the 330, I don't think that is the case)

Back to Airbus. I'm sure they would like the potential profits of flying a 2 engine A/C over the pole, BUT they DON"T.(think A-340/A-380..."4 ENGINES")

Like anything else, until there is a severe tragedy(like a "2" engine plane ditching up on the pole) the almighty $$$ Buck, will come first !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NH/BB's

 

[eolesen]

Don't agree with you, Bears. As an industry, twins have been flying trans-oceanic routes for almost 25 years without a single hull loss over water or unihabitable lands.

Fact: the A340 with four engines has less thrust than the 777 does with two...

Rolls Trent (777) has a max of 95K thrust

CFM56-C5 (A340) has 34K thrust

95*2 = 190K thrust
34*4 = 136K thrust

If you want to watch an underpowered aircraft take-off, come watch LH's A340 buzz Euless or Grapevine every time it takes off from DFW for FRA. Then watch AA's 777 take off for FRA or LGW. You'll see the difference....

The A340 with three engines has only 7K more thrust than the B777 does with one engine, so that percieved margin of safety is really just that -- perception.

UA had a 777 fly for three hours and twelve minutes on a single engine back in March 2003 (they were at the outer edge of 180 minutes ETOPS range when they had to perform an engine shutdown). The previous "record" for single engine flight on a 777 was one hour forty minutes (BA, January 2003).

 

[TWAnr]

Back to Airbus.  I'm sure they would like the potential profits of flying a 2 engine A/C over the pole, BUT they DON"T.(think A-340/A-380..."4 ENGINES")

[post="308118"][/post]​

Then why is Airbus playing copycat to Boeing with the A350, an obvious response to the success of the 787?

 

[azdryheat]

Does not matter how many engines you have on a polar route. Divert time is long and airports can be very marginal.

 

[whlinder]

When I am flying, I don't want anything to break. I don't want ANY engine to be shut down. Four engines means there is a greater chance of something breaking.

 

[AirLUVer]

Could someone at AA, particularly from Dispatch or a pilot, what exactly will be the route of flight the 777 will take to Delhi when they ramp up service in Nov? Is the ORD-DEL segment going eastbound through Greenland, Scandanavia, Russia, then the Stans? Or will they plan on the Polar routes? Is the return trip going the same way or requiring a fuel stop somewhere? I'm not familiar with AA's 777 range capabilities, but it seems these flights will be quite a stretch, especially if they'll have a full load. I'm sure they'll be some weight restrictions on certain days. I'd like to know your alternate selection and if AA will be utilizing 5% reserves, if anybody knows...

Many thx and cheers.

[post="307446"][/post]​

I was talking to a ORD chief pilot the other day, and he said that they will not do a polar routing, there are sufficient tailwinds either direction for non-polar routing. As well as considerably less expense for ATC for non-polar routing.