Flirting with disaster?
12-07-2006 | 08:03 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
From: B767A[ret.]
Flirting with disaster?
12-07-2006 | 08:12 PM
#2
Che Guevara
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
Likes: 0
I wonder what other restrictions they will have. Can a 777 fly fully loaded on one engine and maintain 35k feet?
That's the one i'm worried about.
For instance, Blakey said fuel saving technology, precise flight planning and routing make a requirement that aircraft carry large fuel reserves on long-haul flights outdated.
Last edited by ToiletDuck; 12-07-2006 at 08:18 PM.
12-08-2006 | 03:36 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
From: Any, usually behind the wing
Having flown to New Zealand on a United 777 (great flight by the way), I just couldn't get it out of my head that 2 more engines would have been better...I know that statistcally it doesn't add much, but still.
However, my seatmate, who made the trip regularly, commented that the Triple 7 was much more comfortable than the 744. I wouldn't know.
However, my seatmate, who made the trip regularly, commented that the Triple 7 was much more comfortable than the 744. I wouldn't know.
12-08-2006 | 09:23 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
From: Retired 767 Captain
[QUOTE=ToiletDuck;89700]I wonder what other restrictions they will have. Can a 777 fly fully loaded on one engine and maintain 35k feet?
Probably not. A 767ER, fully loaded had a drift down altitude of around 22,000feet. That is the altitude that can be maintained on one engine. A friend was flying one from ATL to CDG, and lost an engine at the E.T.P. The nearest runway was in Iceland, 2 1/2 hours away. He said that he had the good one cobbed for 2 hours and 10 minutes, with a fuel flow of 15,000 pph...With 2 good engines at 350 they burn 5,000pph each. Personally, I`d like 6 engines over the pond. BTW, the 767 was rejected as a contender to be Air Force One because it only had the two engines. 4 for the president, but 2 are good enough for the rest of us.
Probably not. A 767ER, fully loaded had a drift down altitude of around 22,000feet. That is the altitude that can be maintained on one engine. A friend was flying one from ATL to CDG, and lost an engine at the E.T.P. The nearest runway was in Iceland, 2 1/2 hours away. He said that he had the good one cobbed for 2 hours and 10 minutes, with a fuel flow of 15,000 pph...With 2 good engines at 350 they burn 5,000pph each. Personally, I`d like 6 engines over the pond. BTW, the 767 was rejected as a contender to be Air Force One because it only had the two engines. 4 for the president, but 2 are good enough for the rest of us.
12-08-2006 | 12:59 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,248
Likes: 0
From: 767A (Ret)
Driftdown into ice
A 767ER, fully loaded had a drift down altitude of around 22,000feet. That is the altitude that can be maintained on one engine. A friend was flying one from ATL to CDG, and lost an engine at the E.T.P. The nearest runway was in Iceland, 2 1/2 hours away. He said that he had the good one cobbed for 2 hours and 10 minutes, with a fuel flow of 15,000 pph...With 2 good engines at 350 they burn 5,000pph each.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
