Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

787...New World Record!!???

Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

787...New World Record!!???

Old 29th Mar 2021, 00:47
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern Shores of Lusitania
Age: 50
Posts: 664
787...New World Record!!???

Please if Admin thinks that this thread doesn't belong here feel free to move to spotters balcony or something else, but i really got amazed...Its seems that VIP Comlux 787 P4-787 has just broken another record...it has flown today a direct flight btw Seoul and Buenos Aires and according FR24 data it was 20 Hours plus 19 minutes flt time...Wow!!!
Even broke the recent record of A350 Luftwaffe flts btw Germany to Camberra and from Tahiti to Koln (both direct too).

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/p4-787

Last edited by JanetFlight; 29th Mar 2021 at 01:02.
JanetFlight is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2021, 09:22
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 2,134
That's pretty impressive and I'm sure with the VIP layout inside it wasn't a hardship for the passengers. No doubt a relief crew for that sector as well. I suppose that once the weight of passengers and first/business class seats and hold cargo are taken away from the equation, most new-generation aircraft's range would be vastly improved. Does this example have extra fuel tanks to cover the long sectors that it's been designed for ?
SpringHeeledJack is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2021, 10:48
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,796
I'm not aware of an extra tankage mod or STC for the 787, particularly as the aircraft concerned was flying for Aeromexico until January of this year.

A light aircraft with full tanks can just about manage 10,000 nm (still air), according to Boeing figures, so a bit of wind assistance probably contributed.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2021, 18:43
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 2,134
There have been a handful of dedicated 787's built for private usage though haven't there ? Would these have had extra tankage, especially as they would be designed for ULH operations ? I seem to remember one was delivered to Deerjet in China (?)
SpringHeeledJack is offline  
Old 29th Mar 2021, 21:10
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,796
I can't really add anything to my previous post.

There are 21 STCs for the 787, including two that relate to fitting a VIP interior. None of them feature increased tankage.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2021, 10:10
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 2,134
Fair enough! It just seems that they missed a trick by not having that extra capacity for range, or ability to operate into airfields that might not have the requisite fuelling facilities. Perhaps a VIP 787 was just like someone having a Chelsea Tractor to drive around a big city or a 200mph car with the speed limit of 70mph.

Interestingly there are only a few flying and they've changed hands a few times in the last handful of years, so perhaps the operating costs were too high even for very high net worth individuals, or attracted too much attention.
SpringHeeledJack is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2021, 12:57
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dorset UK
Age: 67
Posts: 1,257
What route would require greater range that Seoul to BA?
Creat Circle distance 10520NM.
dixi188 is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2021, 13:52
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 12,796
Originally Posted by dixi188 View Post
What route would require greater range that Seoul to BA?
Great Circle distance 10520NM.
This one comes up regularly.

It's generally accepted that the farthest apart airport pair is Tangier, Morocco to Whangarei, New Zealand at approximately 10,790 nm.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2021, 15:51
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dorset UK
Age: 67
Posts: 1,257
What I mean is, why would you want extra tanks in the 787 if it can do 10,000NM anyway?
dixi188 is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2021, 18:16
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 3,196
Originally Posted by dixi188 View Post
What I mean is, why would you want extra tanks in the 787 if it can do 10,000NM anyway?
Bingo!
Something like 99% of the worldwide city pairs require less than 10,000nm of range. Even for a billionaire, is it really worthwhile to spend a bunch of money to cover that last 1% - which you'll probably never fly anyway? And if you do, even a billionaire is limited in how much they'll pay just to avoid a 30 minute fuel stop somewhere.

The VIP 737BBJ came standard with extra range - but the basic 737 doesn't have particularly long legs, so the extra range was rather desirable. Not so much with the 10,000 mile capable 787.

I'm sure if someone like Elon Musk said he absolutely had to have another 1,000 miles range before he'd buy a 787 as his personal toy, someone would spend the millions to develop it. But I wouldn't hold my breath. People don't become that rich spending money foolishly.
tdracer is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.