Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Discussions pertaining to Airline operations,safety and training for Flight Deck Crew. Open to anyone who would like to learn all aspects of the Airline industry from a pilots perspective.

Moderator: Moderators

evanb
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2755
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:58 pm
Has thanked: 260 times
Been thanked: 792 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by evanb »

ACE MAN wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 11:51 am I operated that 773ER for quite a few years on that route and it performed really well, 340pax and 8T cargo at worst case at around 29deg C out of JNB ( only time we couldn’t get pax on was due to their low priority ticketing with high priority freight - worst case we stop Over in BKK for tech fuel stop- 1Hr30 longer on the travel time but at least all your bags arrive with you and no one gets left behind). No Airbus can do that to HKG. The -8 freighter is just a phenomenal machine when it comes to hauling freight. I have no experience to comment on the -8i, but it would be great, just came at a wrong time as long thin routes have no place for four engines.

Edit to say, when we did the A346’s , ours were of the first and heavy , they carried around 295-315 iirc and could only do the pax and their bags - no freight.
I've always appreciated your insights on the B77W and specifically sharing your experiences of operating it with CX and to JNB!

Given that CX have now received a substantial number of A350-1000, have their been any suggestions that it may replace the B77W when CX return to HKG-JNB? I've been hearing excellent things about the A350-1000s performance on longer sectors and suggestions that it may be a good hot and high performer (that bigger wing seems to make a real difference). Obviously, the B777-9 comes into play at some point, but it's off in the distant future now for CX.
These users thanked the author evanb for the post:
ACE MAN
User avatar
ACE MAN
Fower Tousand
Fower Tousand
Posts: 4730
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:53 am
Closest Airfield: FAKT+VHHH+FAPX
Location: iKhaya mina 22N114E
Has thanked: 1352 times
Been thanked: 526 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by ACE MAN »

evanb wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 1:03 pm
ACE MAN wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 11:51 am I operated that 773ER for quite a few years on that route and it performed really well, 340pax and 8T cargo at worst case at around 29deg C out of JNB ( only time we couldn’t get pax on was due to their low priority ticketing with high priority freight - worst case we stop Over in BKK for tech fuel stop- 1Hr30 longer on the travel time but at least all your bags arrive with you and no one gets left behind). No Airbus can do that to HKG. The -8 freighter is just a phenomenal machine when it comes to hauling freight. I have no experience to comment on the -8i, but it would be great, just came at a wrong time as long thin routes have no place for four engines.

Edit to say, when we did the A346’s , ours were of the first and heavy , they carried around 295-315 iirc and could only do the pax and their bags - no freight.
I've always appreciated your insights on the B77W and specifically sharing your experiences of operating it with CX and to JNB!

Given that CX have now received a substantial number of A350-1000, have their been any suggestions that it may replace the B77W when CX return to HKG-JNB? I've been hearing excellent things about the A350-1000s performance on longer sectors and suggestions that it may be a good hot and high performer (that bigger wing seems to make a real difference). Obviously, the B777-9 comes into play at some point, but it's off in the distant future now for CX.
I would think the A350-1000 would be the way to go but it won’t be carrying any freight, so not sure what the solution will be there. Right now the question is , will CX be returning at all? I believe the Rome office just closed down.
IITYWTMWYBMAD
Nomakhanjani
¯¯VAF¯¯
Tony van Vliet
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2433
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2004 9:43 pm
Closest Airfield: FAPX
Location: Paradise Beach
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 179 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by Tony van Vliet »

One evening at FAOR we were dispatching for HKG - along came my colleagues (400 crew US bound) and the friendly banter started.
744 vs 346
We had our flight plan for the flight, so.
, I asked our despacher to pull a SITA for our exact route but using a 744.
The pax load was similar but thats where it ended. The airbus flying time was 12 min LONGER on a 13 hour flight.
The A346 burnt 23 tonnes less than the 744 and we were able to carry 3 Tonnes more cargo AND we had an extra 45 min fuel for the forecast destination weather as we could expect holding.
Little chirping therafter!
Now it would be interesting to see the 777/330 numbers
User avatar
ACE MAN
Fower Tousand
Fower Tousand
Posts: 4730
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:53 am
Closest Airfield: FAKT+VHHH+FAPX
Location: iKhaya mina 22N114E
Has thanked: 1352 times
Been thanked: 526 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by ACE MAN »

Sounds interesting Tony , I can’t see an A346 carrying 454 souls plus their bags (Ala 744) and from experience the 777 takes 340 pax and their bags and becomes RTOW limited with cargo carrying weights. An A333/2 is just no contest for that route. The bean counters would probably prefer the 787 or an A350 on it because it’s cheaper to operate but at a cost of less pax and virtually no cargo is my guess.
These users thanked the author ACE MAN for the post:
EDP
IITYWTMWYBMAD
Nomakhanjani
¯¯VAF¯¯
African Flyer
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:55 pm
Closest Airfield: FAGC
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by African Flyer »

This is a very interesting thread 🧠 . Thanks to everyone who has contributed👌
Last edited by African Flyer on Mon Jan 31, 2022 6:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Positive rate! :D
evanb
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2755
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:58 pm
Has thanked: 260 times
Been thanked: 792 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by evanb »

ACE MAN wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 3:52 am Sounds interesting Tony , I can’t see an A346 carrying 454 souls plus their bags (Ala 744) and from experience the 777 takes 340 pax and their bags and becomes RTOW limited with cargo carrying weights. An A333/2 is just no contest for that route. The bean counters would probably prefer the 787 or an A350 on it because it’s cheaper to operate but at a cost of less pax and virtually no cargo is my guess.
The SAA configurations for the B744 and A346 were pretty similar. B744 carried between 335 and 337, and the A346 317 pax.
Last edited by evanb on Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
These users thanked the author evanb for the post:
ACE MAN
User avatar
ACE MAN
Fower Tousand
Fower Tousand
Posts: 4730
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:53 am
Closest Airfield: FAKT+VHHH+FAPX
Location: iKhaya mina 22N114E
Has thanked: 1352 times
Been thanked: 526 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by ACE MAN »

evanb wrote: Sat Jan 29, 2022 12:00 am
ACE MAN wrote: Fri Jan 28, 2022 3:52 am Sounds interesting Tony , I can’t see an A346 carrying 454 souls plus their bags (Ala 744) and from experience the 777 takes 340 pax and their bags and becomes RTOW limited with cargo carrying weights. An A333/2 is just no contest for that route. The bean counters would probably prefer the 787 or an A350 on it because it’s cheaper to operate but at a cost of less pax and virtually no cargo is my guess.
The SAA configurations for the B744 and A345 were pretty similar. B744 carried between 335 and 337, and the A346 317 pax.
Exactly why a 773ER makes sense
These users thanked the author ACE MAN for the post (total 2):
evanbEDP
IITYWTMWYBMAD
Nomakhanjani
¯¯VAF¯¯
Trent772B
Flying to unmanned aerodrome
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 3:27 pm
Closest Airfield: Cape Town
Location: Cape Town
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 254 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by Trent772B »

The A346 wouldn’t have any restriction on a JNB-HKG sector as it’s only a 13hr flight and the A346 only became RTOW limited after 28deg C. There would be plenty of weights available for cargo. The JNB-JFK sector is a different story, as the flight time is anywhere between 15hrs and 16.5hrs (I’ve done 16:45). That’s requires lots of gas. I doubt either would take much cargo on that sector.
B722, B744, A320, A332, A333, A342, A343, A346, A359, Alo3, Oryx, King Air, Beech 1900, T6
evanb
Too Tousand
Too Tousand
Posts: 2755
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:58 pm
Has thanked: 260 times
Been thanked: 792 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by evanb »

Trent772B wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 4:47 am The A346 wouldn’t have any restriction on a JNB-HKG sector as it’s only a 13hr flight and the A346 only became RTOW limited after 28deg C. There would be plenty of weights available for cargo. The JNB-JFK sector is a different story, as the flight time is anywhere between 15hrs and 16.5hrs (I’ve done 16:45). That’s requires lots of gas. I doubt either would take much cargo on that sector.
I doubt there are any aircraft that would take a meaningful amount of cargo on a JNB-JFK sector without leaving pax behind.
These users thanked the author evanb for the post:
ACE MAN
Trent772B
Flying to unmanned aerodrome
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 3:27 pm
Closest Airfield: Cape Town
Location: Cape Town
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 254 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by Trent772B »

The A346 numbers on a JNB-HKG sector look something like this. I assumed a RTOW of 362 000kg (ZFW limited) take off at ISA +15deg.

MTOW: 368 000kg
RTOW: 362 000kg
OEW: 178 000kg
MZFW: 245 000kg
Trip: 112 000kg
Total Fuel: 117 000kg

MZFW 245 000kg - OEW 178 000kg = 67 000 potential payload.
OEW 178 000kg + Fuel 117 000kg + total payload 67 000kg = 362 000kg (below MTOW).
317 pax at 80kg + 20 kg luggage = 31700kg.
Total payload 67 000kg - pax 31 700kg = 35 300kg
Ex-pax payload 31 700kg - catering 2000kg (?).
Sellable cargo weight 29 700kg with 43 LD3 stations.

It’s been a while since I’ve done these sums so I’m happy to be corrected.
These users thanked the author Trent772B for the post (total 2):
ACE MANevanb
B722, B744, A320, A332, A333, A342, A343, A346, A359, Alo3, Oryx, King Air, Beech 1900, T6
User avatar
ACE MAN
Fower Tousand
Fower Tousand
Posts: 4730
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:53 am
Closest Airfield: FAKT+VHHH+FAPX
Location: iKhaya mina 22N114E
Has thanked: 1352 times
Been thanked: 526 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by ACE MAN »

Trent772B wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 3:11 pm The A346 numbers on a JNB-HKG sector look something like this. I assumed a RTOW of 362 000kg (ZFW limited) take off at ISA +15deg.

MTOW: 368 000kg
RTOW: 362 000kg
OEW: 178 000kg
MZFW: 245 000kg
Trip: 112 000kg
Total Fuel: 117 000kg

MZFW 245 000kg - OEW 178 000kg = 67 000 potential payload.
OEW 178 000kg + Fuel 117 000kg + total payload 67 000kg = 362 000kg (below MTOW).
317 pax at 80kg + 20 kg luggage = 31700kg.
Total payload 67 000kg - pax 31 700kg = 35 300kg
Ex-pax payload 31 700kg - catering 2000kg (?).
Sellable cargo weight 29 700kg with 43 LD3 stations.

It’s been a while since I’ve done these sums so I’m happy to be corrected.
Good to see some figures again. The 777 won’t be far off at 15deg , but 15 is quite optimistic. I remember the BA747s out of JNB that delayed many nights waiting for the temp to go below 20deg just to meet planned RTOW.
IITYWTMWYBMAD
Nomakhanjani
¯¯VAF¯¯
User avatar
Richard Smit
Tree Tousand
Tree Tousand
Posts: 3587
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 5:02 pm
Closest Airfield: Stilbaai
Location: Stilbaai
Has thanked: 136 times
Been thanked: 796 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by Richard Smit »

ACE MAN wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 5:24 pm
Trent772B wrote: Sun Jan 30, 2022 3:11 pm The A346 numbers on a JNB-HKG sector look something like this. I assumed a RTOW of 362 000kg (ZFW limited) take off at ISA +15deg.

MTOW: 368 000kg
RTOW: 362 000kg
OEW: 178 000kg
MZFW: 245 000kg
Trip: 112 000kg
Total Fuel: 117 000kg

MZFW 245 000kg - OEW 178 000kg = 67 000 potential payload.
OEW 178 000kg + Fuel 117 000kg + total payload 67 000kg = 362 000kg (below MTOW).
317 pax at 80kg + 20 kg luggage = 31700kg.
Total payload 67 000kg - pax 31 700kg = 35 300kg
Ex-pax payload 31 700kg - catering 2000kg (?).
Sellable cargo weight 29 700kg with 43 LD3 stations.

It’s been a while since I’ve done these sums so I’m happy to be corrected.
Good to see some figures again. The 777 won’t be far off at 15deg , but 15 is quite optimistic. I remember the BA747s out of JNB that delayed many nights waiting for the temp to go below 20deg just to meet planned RTOW.
Howdi Ace,

The above are calculated at “ISA +15”.
So, that’s 19,5*C at FAOR.

Not unrealistic for a 21:00B departure, which used to be fairly normal for SAA.
These users thanked the author Richard Smit for the post:
ACE MAN
Plan, Lookout, Balance, Speed.
African Flyer
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:55 pm
Closest Airfield: FAGC
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by African Flyer »

Positive rate! :D
African Flyer
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:55 pm
Closest Airfield: FAGC
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by African Flyer »





Updates
Positive rate! :D
African Flyer
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1736
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:55 pm
Closest Airfield: FAGC
Has thanked: 194 times
Been thanked: 81 times

Re: Queen of the skies just keeps on flying!

Unread post by African Flyer »

End of an era 💔. Last one off the production line ✈

These users thanked the author African Flyer for the post (total 2):
richard Ckudu177
Positive rate! :D

Return to “Airline Chatter”