The 787-9 is advertised as a 7635 NM range by Boeing, we use it on SFO-SIN which is a 7340 NM route by Great Circle.

The 787-10 is advertised as a 6430 NM range by Boeing. To say it would be a stretch to go the 4450 NM great circle from SFO-NRT or even the 4950 from SFO-FRA grossly understates the aircraft's capabilities. Don't know that we will use it on those routes, but anything under 6000NM would be doable for the aircraft.

Looks like we will configure the -10s with 318 seats. So just between a 777-200 (280-290 seats in new configuration) and 777-300 (366 seats in the new configuration)

Knowing the way that aircraft routing seemed to have ADHD when it came to 777 vs 747 previously, I think it will definitely be interesting to watch how they handle 767-4,777-2,777-3, and 787-10 routing as we go forward. Probably won't be fun for us, but definitely interesting.

Chasing flying is going to become even more difficult!!

I asked Paul Carlson if the 767 fleet might be redistributed throughout the system because the 787-10 would have redundant route structure. He said there are no plans to do so. That was about two months ago.

Yes sir! That's going to be fun to watch. ;)

Here is the payload range chart Boeing has published for the 787-10. It is based on zero wind. At MZFW it looks to be about 4200nm. How often would a flight need to take off at max payload is the question.

http://www.boeing.com/resources/boei...787.pdf#page38
Attachment 3837

Actually the new new configuration of the 777-200’s will be 276 total.

50 Polaris
24 Premium Plus
46 Econ+
156 Econ

Chasing the 764?

Let's see... long term planning at United is about 12 hours, so that means "The Plan" could have changed about 120 times since then.

A friend of mine commented that some of the augmented 756 routes out of EWR to Europe could do a lot of those trips un-augmented due to the 787's speed advantage. Didn't cross my mind until then. Then took a look at the Europe trips and their associated block time on the 756. Subtract 15-30 minutes off of the westbound portion and some of those routes could possibly fall into un-augmented territory (AMS, LHR, CDG). Hopefully the 787 routes that are announced don't fall there. If they do then the bid might not cause much chaos as many will avoid 2 man Atlantic flying.

Wow...that thought had never crossed my mind. Carlson didnt seem to highlight that possibility in his update. Company wouldnt do something sneaky like that, now would they?

I've enjoyed flying the 777 LAX-HNL unaugmented. It's not that much shorter of a flight than what you're talking about. I don't see the 787 going junior due to less Bunkie positions.

There's a big difference between five and eight hours if you don't get a break, if the 787 is flown unaugmented- it will definitely push those trips lower on a seniority basis. The two man EWR-LHR goes much more junior than a three man EWR-LHR.