.............SO WHAT ? ? ?
stable approach, I commend you on both your razor-sharp memory and tenacity in digging up the old reference and posting it.
However, in your haste both now and back then, you seem to have made the incorrect assumption that I was "ridiculing the hapless journo imbeciles".
As you pointed out, what I said was "I think they mean the B777-300 EXTENDED RANGE" and I did think that. Your information corrected my misunderstanding (at least I assume it did, I haven't bothered to research it myself) and I was happy to leave it at that and not bother to correct your own misunderstanding. Where is the scorn, vitriol or ridicule in what I said?
Maybe you were looking for something else in the "tone" of my post but if you re-read it you might be able to tell it was objective. I agree the journos almost always blow aviation-related stories to some degree but don't see the point in getting worked up about it. They seem to focus on getting the story out and lose accuracy in their haste. I believe this happens with any field the reporter hasn't got particular expertise in.
While I'm at it, the inaccuracy I was referring to on THIS thread is more in the telling by people that don't know the correct details rather than the press since, as far as I know, there WAS no press report.