Qantas 767s

[QF411]

Is it true the 767s in the QF fleet are the most over-powered of all the QF fleet? How high do you usually get in a 767 on a flight from say CNS-SYD or SYD-PER? Which engine variants are the best to fly in terms of performance? The GEs or RRs? How light would a 767 have to be to fly at FL430? Are they flown at that height often? Anyone have any pics to post of the 767 up at FL430?

[Keg]

Is it true the 767s in the QF fleet are the most over-powered of all the QF fleet?

Probably. The A330 is supposed to be a bit of a dog in the climb and the 767 would have more thrust to weight than any of the four holers. Not sure about how it'd go against the 737s.

How high do you usually get in a 767 on a flight from say CNS-SYD or SYD-PER?

It depends on many things including aircraft weight and the winds you're dealing with and whether you're trying to make up time, etc. CNS- SYD would probably be normally high 30s, perhaps 40 if you were light. Today I flew SYD-MEL at FL 230 due turbulence at all other levels.

Which engine variants are the best to fly in terms of performance?

GE, without a doubt. Lighter, less fuel burn, less oil burn on domestic ops (but the Rollers a're much better on the oil burn on long flights)

How light would a 767 have to be to fly at FL430?

Pretty light. I haven't looked at the specific numbers for a while to give you a weight.

Are they flown at that height often?

No. I reckon I've only seen it a half dozen times in my nine years on the aeroplane.

Anyone have any pics to post of the 767 up at FL430?

I'll see what I can do tomorrow on the way back home from PER! :} :ok:

[alphawhiskeytango]

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/0/3/1/0667130.jpg

[Jabawocky]

Keg

Interested to know why the RR's are better on oil consumption over a long leg.

Is it a difference in oil usage during the climb or descent that makes this the case?

And is it true the old ex BA Roller powered units are the "most tired" in the fleet? Seems to be the case!

J:ok:

PS Nice pic there AWT.....FL430 it is, that will make the young fella happy no doubt. Must be a delivery or test flight.... the cockpit looks way to new to be anything in QF hands!

[waren9]

Atleast the cockpit looks like it gets a clean every now and then. Lucky boys.

Same cant said for all QF group aircraft :(

[Critical Reynolds No]

If you look closer it is VH-OGM

[Track5milefinal]

Yes Keg some photos would be great!;)

[Short_Circuit]

Could be a bit of baro correction fed in there?

[Bullethead]

The GE engined B767s are the hotter of the two types, as Keg says more grunt, burn less fuel and are a lighter engine than the RR donk.

Out of CHC a couple of nights ago doing night freight to SYD, can't seem to get away from it, AUW around 119t and using full bore, because of concerns re possible windshear, :} and the thing leapt off the runway. Rotated to around 25deg ANU and pinned the VSI on the stops (6000fpm) until about F250. Reached TOPC, F380 12 minutes after liftoff. The F/O, an ex RAF Tornado driver, said the performance was similar. Not bad for an airliner! :}

Regards,
BH.

[Jabawocky]

Can anyone tell me the engines in the:

ZW_'s

OZ_'s

EA_'s

Ta.


Well the ZX's = Rollers
The OG's = GE's
EA's seem to be mostly pistons....:uhoh:
Ta.= mostly pistons.....RV's Pipers etc...:E

Now ya cant go sticking one of them GE things in your Dash10 either!:eek:

J :ok:

[Tankengine]

The EAs were Pratt powered 200ERs.

[engine out]

Out of Manila the other night went straight to FL350 at just below MTOW, around 170T. Though wouldnt be able to do that in a 180T certified 767.

[Capn Bloggs]

Wot are all those round dials with needles in the middle of them?:}

Are they the timers for the ovens? :E

[Fratemate]

the cockpit looks way to new to be anything in QF hands!

Until you look at the centre hydraulic demand pump :}

Now, if they could make them look that clean and fresh down the back I'd be a happy bear. 1970s seats and a projector (even in Business) in this day and age makes the QF fleet a joke as far as pax are concerned. Love the aircraft, quite happy with the cabin crew etc, just QF need to spend some money on the bit that pays the bills......or put an A330 on my regular run with the decent IFE :)

[dmussen]

Bullit Driver,
Your Co-Jo clearly didn't get to play with the Lightning. This machhine could climb.
Make a Tornado look like a blunt instrument old chap.
Victor B1a

[Lookleft]

Why is there a replica Toyota badge in front of the pilot? Surely that blocks the view of the lower screen?:ok:

[Bullethead]

Victor B1a

"Your Co-Jo clearly didn't get to play with the Lightning. This machhine could climb."

Right you are on both counts, he did however tell me he knew a couple of Lightning drivers and their log books were full of entries of around ten minutes and that included a high, mid fifties, intercept and return.

Regards,
BH.

[Keg]

Higher residual thrust on the Pratt engines. In essence you were descending with 'more' thrust on than in the RR or GEs. It wasn't a slow descent either- at least not in the early part of the descent. We had 320 knot descents as standard on the 200s to try and come close to the 'normal' profile of the GEs. The Pratts were slippery though and perhaps this is what you meant by 'slow'. We used to slow up slightly earlier in the 200s than the 300s due to that higher thrust and whereas 250/5000'/20 miiles would work for a 300 you needed an extra couple of miles for the same weight in the 200.

That said. We could push the 200s a truck load harder back in those days than we can push the 300s now with our company requirements. :ugh: :(

I couldn't manage photos today....much too heavy which means we had a good load on which means we were making money which means we're still good for a job for a bit longer.

[BrazDriver]

Love to see the 757 put the 767 then the rest of the fleet to shame!