|
Here's a starting point: PianoX B787 vs 767-300ERW & Boeing 787 update and CO2 emissions perspective.
Originally Posted by PianoX
For a typical mission carrying 22 metric tonnes over 5000 nm (roughly HND-FRA), the block fuel burn of the B787-8 is calculated to be 50.1 tonnes. This compares to 50.7 tonnes for the B767-300ERW based on nominal performance (no in-service deterioration) and common reserve-rule assumptions that can be accessed via the models. Plots of fuel burn as a function of distance and payload are given below at the same transparent conditions.
|
Aeropelican - the B787 is kitted with new recaro slim-line seats. Allows for more seating density without compromising on pitch.
Further, there is only 21 business class, so additional economy class space, and one will assume a reduction in galley size etc? |
Vasis,
You are almost right. The LCC concept compromised the seat pitch. The slim line seats just help them do it. The Don |
Did I see Andrew Strauss in a Jetstar TV ad for the B787 last night ?
Who is the CP for Jetstar now ? |
yes.
still MR |
Any truth in the rumour that J* have crammed so many seats into the 787-8s that they cannot do OOL-NRT due to weight problems?
|
Come on Kremin, of course they could do OOL-NRT in those new machines, perhaps just not with a breakeven payload...
|
yes kremin, apparently. less to do with seats i'm told, more to do with the engine thrust rating they paid for. first 4? like that, others subsequent are to be chipped up. so the rumour goes anyway
|
Define "breakeven payload" :suspect:
|
Originally Posted by waren9
(Post 8063050)
yes kremin, apparently. less to do with seats i'm told, more to do with the engine thrust rating they paid for. first 4 like that? others subsequent are to be chipped up. so the rumour goes anyway
|
Interesting... this from an aircraft that was originally billed as a Trans-Pacific puddle jumper.
I am still not convinced about the 787. |
210-250 pax from boeing website for the -800
jetstar 335 pax config apparently anyone offering odds on how long before they are reconfigured on pax feedback? 335/250=1.34 |
Originally Posted by waren9
(Post 8063173)
210-250 pax from boeing website for the -800
jetstar 335 pax config apparently anyone offering odds on how long before they are reconfigured on pax feedback? |
true don, but reg's masterstroke of no seat recline did get reversed
|
Waren9.
I heard it was not only the engine thrust rating they paid for, but the engine pylon assembly associated with that thrust. Supposedly, when the lower thrust engines were ordered. Boeing build the pylon specifically for that thrust output. You can't just tweak the thrust without modifying the engine pylon. MC |
ah yes, mc that rings bells too.
|
Originally Posted by Mstr Caution
(Post 8063193)
Waren9.
I heard it was not only the engine thrust rating they paid for, but the engine pylon assembly associated with that thrust. Supposedly, when the lower thrust engines were ordered. Boeing build the pylon specifically for that thrust output. You can't just tweak the thrust without modifying the engine pylon. MC |
Is this a lemon for JQ in that it can't carry max pax over some of its existing sectors? I wonder how long it will take to 'return' the aircraft to Mainline?
|
I wonder how long it will take to 'return' the aircraft to Mainline? |
Originally Posted by Going Boeing
(Post 8063392)
I wonder how long it will take to 'return' the aircraft to Mainline? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:10. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.