I just read the Flight Global article about SIA re-entering the Singapore-Newark route, the longest flown route in the world (8,285nm) with the A350-900ULR .
The article makes mentions of the QATAR Doha-Auckland route (7,848nm) flown with the 7772LR as it is currently the longest airline route.
In comparing the SIA A350-900ULR with the QATAR 772LR, the 772LR has 259 seats compared with 161 for the Airbus product.
This begs the question of which aircraft is more economical to fly on longer routes considering the 772LR can carry more passengers. As such, does the extra capacity of the 777-200LR offset the said 25% fuel efficiency of the A350-900ULR on these longer routes.
Your thoughts.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... eb-452592/
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
I think you're comparing apples and pears.
Quatar has a lot of Y-class seats.
Quatar has a lot of Y-class seats.
Last edited by CPHFF on Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
My understanding is that 159 pax is just SQ's configuration of their A359ULRs. They could have had a more 'normal' configuration, but SQ was wanting to maximize premium yields. If people are ever going to pay more to fly Business or Premium Economy, it's on a ULH route.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
The LR will carry significantly more payload over ranges above about 6000 nm (although the gap shrinks again at the very outer extreme of the range envelope where no one is currently flying).
The 359 (ULR or not) has significantly lower trip cost.
Pick which one is more important to a given ULH mission. For example, obviously for SQ's ultra-premium ULH the extra payload isn't really relevant.
For Qantas's Project Sunrise, it appears Airbus is trying to engineer a variant of the A350-1000 that will eliminate or shrink the payload gap while maintaining a trip cost advantage compared to the 777-8. To what extent Airbus succeeds will determine who wins the contest.
The 359 (ULR or not) has significantly lower trip cost.
Pick which one is more important to a given ULH mission. For example, obviously for SQ's ultra-premium ULH the extra payload isn't really relevant.
For Qantas's Project Sunrise, it appears Airbus is trying to engineer a variant of the A350-1000 that will eliminate or shrink the payload gap while maintaining a trip cost advantage compared to the 777-8. To what extent Airbus succeeds will determine who wins the contest.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
viewtopic.php?t=766921
In this thread Sunrisevalley states:
"From a flight plan ORD-AKL for a 77L with a TOW of about 318t the fuel burn at cruise was 100.171t for 15-hours".
This works out at 6.65 tonne per hour compared to the 5.8 tonne per hour for the A350-900ULR reported at wiki. A fuel burn disadvantage of 13%.
In this thread Sunrisevalley states:
"From a flight plan ORD-AKL for a 77L with a TOW of about 318t the fuel burn at cruise was 100.171t for 15-hours".
This works out at 6.65 tonne per hour compared to the 5.8 tonne per hour for the A350-900ULR reported at wiki. A fuel burn disadvantage of 13%.
-
- FlightLevel360
- Posts: 406
- Joined:
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
The problem is, PE fares on EWR-SIN are routinely $1000-$1300 roundtrip, and there are also many $3000 roundtrip fares for business, too. It's cheaper than flying legacy economy to Europe, Japan, and many other similar markets.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
zkojq wrote:My understanding is that 159 pax is just SQ's configuration of their A359ULRs. They could have had a more 'normal' configuration, but SQ was wanting to maximize premium yields.
161 seats.
And while that could be true to an extent, it's worth noting that unlike the 77L vs 77E, the A359ULR does not have an MTOW increase over the currently produced A359... they're both 280T.
If an airline wishes to use a -ULR for its higher fuel tankage beyond what a typical A359 can offer, then they're going to have to cut payload.
And before anyone cries foul, of course the 77L has to cut payload to use its maximum potential auxiliary fuel use as well (despite how few airlines actually took that option).... just that the point where that must occur is exceedingly higher than just the capability of other 772s.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
LAX772LR wrote:And while that could be true to an extent, it's worth noting that unlike the 77L vs 77E, the A359ULR does not have an MTOW increase over the currently produced A359... they're both 280T.
SQ22 was neither at MTOW or maximum fuel volume going SIN to EWR.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
zeke wrote:LAX772LR wrote:And while that could be true to an extent, it's worth noting that unlike the 77L vs 77E, the A359ULR does not have an MTOW increase over the currently produced A359... they're both 280T.
SQ22 was neither at MTOW or maximum fuel volume going SIN to EWR.
...feel free to copy/paste/quote where anyone said it did.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
I said it did on the SQ22 thread. One of the passengers posted the fuel burn, fuel load, the V speeds from the crew, from that I know exactly what the weight was.
Fuel burn was around 100 tonnes, fuel load around 110 tonnes, TOW 273 tonnes.
Quoting myself
“The numbers they have of 162/168/174 from 02C with the QNH at 1013 and temperature of 25 deg C means they took off at 273 tonnes. That also matches the altitude profile.”
Fuel burn was around 100 tonnes, fuel load around 110 tonnes, TOW 273 tonnes.
Quoting myself
“The numbers they have of 162/168/174 from 02C with the QNH at 1013 and temperature of 25 deg C means they took off at 273 tonnes. That also matches the altitude profile.”
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
Just putting it here.
"The captain told me the aircraft weighed 272 metric tons on takeoff, just eight shy of its 280 ton maximum take off weight.
We had 101 tons of fuel on board at take off. The captain expects to burn about seven tons an hour in the early part of the flight (we are carrying fuel just to carry the rest of the fuel)"
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/worlds-longest-flight-live-updates/index.html
(Might have to assume that the fuel on board of 101 tons is a transposition error in the editing. 110 is the right figure I believe.)
"The captain told me the aircraft weighed 272 metric tons on takeoff, just eight shy of its 280 ton maximum take off weight.
We had 101 tons of fuel on board at take off. The captain expects to burn about seven tons an hour in the early part of the flight (we are carrying fuel just to carry the rest of the fuel)"
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/worlds-longest-flight-live-updates/index.html
(Might have to assume that the fuel on board of 101 tons is a transposition error in the editing. 110 is the right figure I believe.)
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
Erebus wrote:Just putting it here.
"The captain told me the aircraft weighed 272 metric tons on takeoff, just eight shy of its 280 ton maximum take off weight.
We had 101 tons of fuel on board at take off. The captain expects to burn about seven tons an hour in the early part of the flight (we are carrying fuel just to carry the rest of the fuel)"
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/worlds-longest-flight-live-updates/index.html
(Might have to assume that the fuel on board of 101 tons is a transposition error in the editing. 110 is the right figure I believe.)
What a slob. I would expect that someone doing a report for a major network, would wear something besides a white underwear shirt.
-
- afterburner
- Posts: 1492
- Joined:
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
CPHFF wrote:I think you're comparing apples and pears.
Quatar has a lot of Y-class seats.
It's Qatar, not Quatar. It is also pronounced qatar, not like Qantas that is pronounced quantas.
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
910A wrote:Erebus wrote:Just putting it here.
"The captain told me the aircraft weighed 272 metric tons on takeoff, just eight shy of its 280 ton maximum take off weight.
We had 101 tons of fuel on board at take off. The captain expects to burn about seven tons an hour in the early part of the flight (we are carrying fuel just to carry the rest of the fuel)"
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/worlds-longest-flight-live-updates/index.html
(Might have to assume that the fuel on board of 101 tons is a transposition error in the editing. 110 is the right figure I believe.)
What a slob. I would expect that someone doing a report for a major network, would wear something besides a white underwear shirt.
I guess it's better than what he wore a few years back.... https://www.smh.com.au/world/cnn-reporter-in-sex-rope-and-drug-scandal-20080421-gdsagm.html
-
- SteelChair
- Posts: 2674
- Joined:
Re: Which aircraft has the advantage - A350-900ULR v 772LR.
Back the OP question...which has the advantage?
It's not even a fair question imho, other than at extreme range. The 777LR OEW is much greater than the A350, and the engines are 10+years older on the 777LR. The 350 has a huge advantage on 90%of likely city pairs.
It's not even a fair question imho, other than at extreme range. The 777LR OEW is much greater than the A350, and the engines are 10+years older on the 777LR. The 350 has a huge advantage on 90%of likely city pairs.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Aaron747, AKL321NX, AKLDELNonstop, Aliqiout, ben175, David_itl, EQplanes, flyoregon, guppyflyer, heavymetal, iflyabunch, Kiwiandrew, macc, NameOmitted, NMo900, Orcair, oskarclare, Pcoder, qf002, qf789, QF945, Rubani294, slick1017, Toinou and 250 guests