Not the 777-8
Originally Posted by tartare
(Post 10552106)
But epic flight this - I see Boeing have proposed a 777-8 variant to do it.
What mods might they make - less freight and additional belly tanks to boost the range? Leeham News is suggesting (https://leehamnews.com/2019/08/22/op...f-a-787-10er/, paywalled) that Boeing may now be shifting towards a 787-10ER as their answer. Since Air NZ recently selected the 787-10 for Auckland to New York, it seems they may have been offered an as-yet-unreleased Increased Gross Weight version. It may be much easier for Boeing to build a 787-10ER based on existing plans for a 787-10IGW rather than try to deliver a variant of the 777-8 when that base aircraft just might not be a goer. |
Leeham News is reporting that Boeing may now be shifting towards a 787-10ER as their answer. https://www.airlineratings.com/news/...oject-sunrise/ |
The test is useless. It’s Only 3 flights. That is not science. Prior Fatigue studies sampled hundreds of flights.With multitudes of different crews. The data is invalid with a meagre total of three. The aircraft is not operating over to JFK or LHR direct so it’s not even representative of the pattern. It’s only sampling one sector home and not even a consecutive number of flying the same pattern. It would be like doing one day of an early start in domestic and saying that early starts are easy. Except the reality is you’d do a 4 day trip of earlies and do rosters full of them. If CASA and or AIPA accept this rubbish then it just shows how corrupt the system is. Of course it’s all reverse engineered window dressing just like the embarrassing polyester cheap Indonesian shirt test group. At least the Polyester shirt test at least had a sample of 60! Maybe CASA allow us to operate just one sector home then? |
You would be AMAZED what you can do with data. Though long, there is an excellent blog post THE CONTROL GROUP IS OUT OF CONTROL. In it, the author describes a prestigious psychologist ,Daryl Bern, who tried his hand at "proving" parapsychology, and surprisingly, using the most rigorous methodology (Meta analysis of 90 randomised controlled trials) was able to demonstrate it existed. Bern's work is scrupulous.
Parapsychologists are constantly protesting that they are playing by all the standard scientific rules, and yet their results are being ignored – that they are unfairly being held to higher standards than everyone else. I’m willing to believe that. It just means that the standard statistical methods of science are so weak and flawed as to permit a field of study to sustain itself in the complete absence of any subject matter. I have no doubt whatsoever, the "science" behind Project Sunrise will assure the regulators to a highly rigorous scientific standard, that indeed the operation is safe, just as parapsychology has been "proven". |
Originally Posted by tartare
(Post 10551278)
I see Qantas are about to start research flights.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...22-p52jm3.html How would they route SYD to LHR? Take off and set heading 319 degrees and just keep going? The Great circle route takes you across the South China Sea - right through the middle of China, up the top of Kazakhstan and down, across Western Russia then down through Estonia and the Baltic to Britain... |
It's not a proving flight as in the "good old days when Pontius was a Pilate and iron men flew wooden aeroplanes"
It's a proving flight for the press and the lucky 40 to go on it. The embarrassing thing would be to drop in somewhere obscure when plans went awry. |
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher
(Post 10552991)
You would be AMAZED what you can do with data. Though long, there is an excellent blog post THE CONTROL GROUP IS OUT OF CONTROL. In it, the author describes a prestigious psychologist ,Daryl Bern, who tried his hand at "proving" parapsychology, and surprisingly, using the most rigorous methodology (Meta analysis of 90 randomised controlled trials) was able to demonstrate it existed. Bern's work is scrupulous.
The point is, he kept upping the scientific bar as more "proof" is demanded, and delivered everything that was asked of him. Personally I don't believe parapsychology exists, however, I cannot use a scientific data argument to refute his work. I have no doubt whatsoever, the "science" behind Project Sunrise will assure the regulators to a highly rigorous scientific standard, that indeed the operation is safe, just as parapsychology has been "proven". The Chairman's lounge acceptance rate for regulators and politicians alike has far greater statistically relevant success rates... |
Originally Posted by Rated De
(Post 10553652)
The Chairman's lounge acceptance rate for regulators and politicians alike has far greater statistically relevant success rates...
|
Whilst Alan is converting A321s to freighters, perhaps he could also send along these 787's to be fitted with drop tanks.
A secondary benefit could be had once the fuel is exhausted from these tanks they could then be filled with the passenger poo just before release - there must be some country we hate along the way on that long 19hr flight. He could also rename the project 'sunrise surprise'. |
So is the expert going to feature on these flights? |
Originally Posted by Blueskymine
(Post 10553748)
So is the expert going to feature on these flights? https://www.airlineratings.com/news/...oject-sunrise/ |
Originally Posted by Going Boeing
(Post 10556215)
The “expert” correspondent has generated this bit of verbal garbage to try and keep his self managed position as The Aviation Oracle going. https://www.airlineratings.com/news/...oject-sunrise/ |
Originally Posted by Arthur D
(Post 10556348)
And you would know better because.............? |
|
Originally Posted by kiwi grey
(Post 10552140)
...Since Air NZ recently selected the 787-10 for Auckland to New York, it seems they may have been offered an as-yet-unreleased Increased Gross Weight version. ...
Auckland - New York will be the job of the -9... IGW is mooted for both versions up to 260T apparently... |
Has the sun already set on Sunrise?
Thankfully young Patrick and the reliable SMH deliver the timely piece. After all that advertising spend is vital for SMH! Mr Joyce declined to say what it wanted from pilots and would offer in exchange. In the past the airline has generally highlighted that new aircraft and new routes creates opportunities for promotions and pay rises for pilots by opening up new positions on the flight deck. 1. Pilots 2. Regulators (if CASA actually demand science first) 3. Manufacturers 4. Insert excuse https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...01-p52ms5.html |
Why does anyone even think Boeing remotely care what Qantas wants? They certainly care what Southwest and Emirates wants but Qantas I dont think they give a c@ap about.
|
Originally Posted by pilotchute
(Post 10561991)
Why does anyone even think Boeing remotely care what Qantas wants? They certainly care what Southwest and Emirates wants but Qantas I dont think they give a c@ap about.
If an order were ever to materialise from Fort Fumble (other than for JQ) it might total 12 aircraft. Outside home market myopia, Qantas is a shell of itself. Its presence in Europe an oddity. Were an aircraft to be ordered, it will be off the shelf and already in service with many airlines worldwide. Observers will remember the spin surrounding the "first" Qantas 787, the game changing aircraft. LN of 615 was hardly revolutionary and the journalists on their junket were told to look away from the hardstand area where Jetstar 787-800 sat on static display. The reality is that it creates column inches in the daily rags, it gives the appearance of doing something and also provides a nice implied threat during contract season. |
“It’s presence it Europe is an oddity” Rated De, there are more Qantas planes in Europe than European planes in Aus. Last time I looked BA had one flight a day to Australia and nobody else any (except code share), Qantas at least doubles that. But I do agree both Boeing and Airbus probably don’t care about Qantas as it’s recent track record of converting orders is atrocious. |
Originally Posted by engine out
(Post 10562062)
“It’s presence it Europe is an oddity” Rated De, there are more Qantas planes in Europe than European planes in Aus. Last time I looked BA had one flight a day to Australia and nobody else any (except code share), Qantas at least doubles that. But I do agree both Boeing and Airbus probably don’t care about Qantas as it’s recent track record of converting orders is atrocious. Until the recent past, BA was run poorly by Little Napoleon's second cousin, Willie Walsh. Is there a pattern? /sarc. Although, Alez Cruz has managed to make it worse. Until "terminal decline" was the Fort Fumble buzz word, there were four daily Qantas flights to London and another to Frankfurt. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:59. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.