When will SYD - DFW be canned (if ever?)

[markis10]

Interesting, what is a "very long leg"? something like MEL/SYD-LAX?
What will MEL/SYD-DXB mean then? or LHR-SIN?

If you look at the linked thread there is an example of a very long leg:

Now lets look at DXB – JFK; 


A380 - 

Trip Fuel 172.9T (I Chit you not!!) Available Payload 67T, utilised 52T.
B777 - Trip Fuel 106.8T, Available Payload 57T, Utilised 45T.
So, 65 Tonnes of gas extra to potentially haul an extra 10 tonne.

Which flight do you think would be more profitable?

Rumors around of pulling the A380 off long routes, cancellation of orders, and EK being a launch customer of the 777-X.

6800 miles in that case, versus 7500 for LAX-SYD (9 miles longer than DXB-SYD)

 

[serfty]

Still need a reference to 744ER's in respect to 388 for 7500nm routings ... hmmm ....

Well, here's something from JB:

http://www.australianfrequentflyer....estions/ask-the-pilot-30478-9.html#post458282

But that's on a postulated 9000nm sector on a 388 compared with 2 x 4500nm segments.

(Love the last sentence.)

I may ask over there:idea:

 

[Dee Thom]

If they ordered some 747-800s they would be every bit as good and quiet at the A380.

Or purchased some A350-1000 equipment. Al-Baker from Qatar, who has had a lot of input into the 1000 series, has increased his orders for this aircraft, and cancelled some of the smaller 800 series.

Another option would be the "newl" evolving 777X extra,extra LR, albeit an old airframe dolled up which wouldn't have much better operating costs than the currant 777 LR

Cheers,
Dee.

 

[jb747]

Or purchased some A350-1000 equipment. Al-Baker from Qatar, who has had a lot of input into the 1000 series, has increased his orders for this aircraft, and cancelled some of the smaller 800 series.

Which is yet another 'pie in the sky' aircraft. It's bound to be late, and to burn more fuel than promised.

 

[straitman]

Which is yet another 'pie in the sky' aircraft. It's bound to be late, and to burn more fuel than promised.

jb747,

Good to see you have become as cynical as the rest of us :!:

 

[Must...Fly!]

Funny we mention A350, MSN-001 was just structurally completed.

First flyable A350 XWB "MSN1" structurally complete | Airbus News & Events

 

[Dee Thom]

Which is yet another 'pie in the sky' aircraft. It's bound to be late, and to burn more fuel than promised.

I recall the soothsayers of the late 60's saying the same about the B747-100 prior to launch; again in the 70's when the Airbus consortium decided to take on the American aircraft manufacturers; the A350 will give better running costs than say the new release "Dreamliner", technology now days just won't stand still.

Cheers,
Dee.

 

[jb747]

I recall the soothsayers of the late 60's saying the same about the B747-100 prior to launch; again in the 70's when the Airbus consortium decided to take on the American aircraft manufacturers; the A350 will give better running costs than say the new release "Dreamliner", technology now days just won't stand still.

I suspect they said it wouldn't work, which is rather different to "won't meet promises". Running costs are also a much different thing to fuel burn.

 

[pzworld]

DFW hasn't gotten that much international flights, and the arrive time for QF7 is perfect for go through customs, almost empty. I also found custom officers at DFW for more friendly than those at other US major airports. The transfer is not that bad either, you claim your luggage and go pass the quarantine desk, AA connecting flight bag dropoff area is right outside and there are AA staff to help anyway.