New ETOPS record for 777
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New ETOPS record for 777
Given that it's delivery date to some airlines is getting closer and closer, I thought this may be of some interest to a few people.
I bet Mr Frank Santoni loves his job! 
I think Air France are first in line to receive this aircraft, somewhere around April 2004.
Soulman.
Fri, 17 Oct '03
777-300ER Flies a Lot of the Pacific on One Engine
The old ETOPS record was well under four hours; the new 777-300ER has just landed in Taiwan, after having left Seattle. During that 13-hour flight (over Tuesday and Wednesday), it was on one engine for five and a half hours.
The GE90-115B, the most-powerful engine in commercial service, was "perfect," according to Boeing spokesman Ed McGinn. Test pilot Frank Santoni confirmed that evaluation.
Aero-News Network.
777-300ER Flies a Lot of the Pacific on One Engine
The old ETOPS record was well under four hours; the new 777-300ER has just landed in Taiwan, after having left Seattle. During that 13-hour flight (over Tuesday and Wednesday), it was on one engine for five and a half hours.
The GE90-115B, the most-powerful engine in commercial service, was "perfect," according to Boeing spokesman Ed McGinn. Test pilot Frank Santoni confirmed that evaluation.
Aero-News Network.
I think Air France are first in line to receive this aircraft, somewhere around April 2004.
Soulman.
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all very well doing that when you've got a spare engine, fully servicable and available on the other wing. It's the pucker factor when you know that the engine keeping you going is all you have left that counts.
We all know how reliable the engines are most of the time, so what were they trying to prove with this flight? IFSD rates are all very well but if the shutdown was because of something more serious than just a precaustion, say a mechanical failure of a high speed component, then so what if you can fly for over five hours on the other donk if there could be damage not only inside the bad engine itself but in the event of an uncontained failure what about damage to other systems and aircraft structure?
We all know how reliable the engines are most of the time, so what were they trying to prove with this flight? IFSD rates are all very well but if the shutdown was because of something more serious than just a precaustion, say a mechanical failure of a high speed component, then so what if you can fly for over five hours on the other donk if there could be damage not only inside the bad engine itself but in the event of an uncontained failure what about damage to other systems and aircraft structure?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: LTN uk
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even with the best engine's (Rollers are my preferred choice) they do still fail or have to be shut down, but that doesn't scare me in the slightest. The thought of a cabin fire at 30w has me $h1ting for Britain.
Now that engine technology has been proven (as much as it feasibly can be) lets look at what we can do to enhance fire protection - in my view a far more likely situation
Now that engine technology has been proven (as much as it feasibly can be) lets look at what we can do to enhance fire protection - in my view a far more likely situation
Paxing All Over The World
BB1 - such as water mist systems in the cabin? They, of similar are long overdue. Astounding that they have not been mandated. They might be perfect but I would rather have the liquid in their tanks to see what they can do, than the extra liquid in bottles of duty free.
Maybe this test flight would have been a more realistic simulation if, on shutting down No 2, they had then cut the engine restart circuitry with the pliers!
Then they would really know how it felt to be dependent on just one engine operating flat out for more than half a working day, that if that faltered in the next 5.5 hours they were finished. And let's fit engines at the end of their overhaul life while we are at it, and instead of Boeing's top test pilots get a couple of crew from an agency.
Oh, and they should all have their wives and kids in the back too.
Then they would really know how it felt to be dependent on just one engine operating flat out for more than half a working day, that if that faltered in the next 5.5 hours they were finished. And let's fit engines at the end of their overhaul life while we are at it, and instead of Boeing's top test pilots get a couple of crew from an agency.
Oh, and they should all have their wives and kids in the back too.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"flat out"?
In the cruise?
WHBM, get a life. Alternatively read the previous posts regarding far more likely scenarios equally appropriate to 2, 3, 4, and even 8 engined aeroplanes!
ETOPS are here to stay, and so they should be!
In the cruise?
WHBM, get a life. Alternatively read the previous posts regarding far more likely scenarios equally appropriate to 2, 3, 4, and even 8 engined aeroplanes!
ETOPS are here to stay, and so they should be!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: FAR EAST
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe this test flight would have been a more realistic simulation if, on shutting down No 2, they had then cut the engine restart circuitry with the pliers!
