PDA

View Full Version : Going the distance - A new world record.



mapguy
11-10-05, 02:36 PM
:thumbup: Boeing has broken the record for the longest flight by a commercial airliner. The 777-200LR Worldliner took off yesterday from Hong Kong and landed this morning at London's Heathrow Airport completing the 12,000 mile trip in a little over 23 hours. Read all about it here. (http://www.777.newairplane.com/)

http://avionsdeligne.info/images/772lrlbg.jpg

Way to go Boeing!

Cam
11-10-05, 02:50 PM
Yikes! Just going from HKG to LAX is a bastige of a trip! Flying over the top of LAX and New York to Heathrow would more than likely have me going stir crazy! WTH is up with going the wrong way anyway? :saywhat:

mapguy
11-10-05, 02:55 PM
Yikes! Just going from HKG to LAX is a bastige of a trip! Flying over the top of LAX and New York to Heathrow would more than likely have me going stir crazy! WTH is up with going the wrong way anyway? :saywhat:

It is longer that way. If they had enough fuel on board they should have buzzed the Airbus Facility in Toulose before landing in London...

Gnam
11-10-05, 03:01 PM
WTH is up with going the wrong way anyway?
Tailwind, would be my guess. Who could sit for 24 hours?

JoeBob
11-10-05, 03:51 PM
The point of the flight was to break the record, not to get there quickly.

TrueBrit
11-10-05, 04:00 PM
Tailwind, would be my guess. Who could sit for 24 hours?

Yup, that'd be my guess too, get the benefit of the jetstream....can you imagine how much fuel had to be on board when they took off to go that far?? :eek:

JoeBob
11-10-05, 04:14 PM
It wasn't about tailwind, it was about setting a new record with a new aircraft. The 777-200-LR hasn't even entered service yet. It wasn't exactly carrying a heavy load either. The plane had eight pilots and was carrying an additional 27 passengers and crew, including Boeing representatives, journalists and customers. (They did plan a route that took maximum advantage of the Jet Stream, and had three auxiliary fuel tanks on board. They also started in Asia because fuel there has lower density than in other parts of the world - they considered shipping the fuel in from California, but it cost too much to do.)

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/200LR/images/world_record_landing01_lg.jpg


Here's Boeing's Press Release:
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q4/nr_051110g.html


Boeing 777-200LR Sets New World Record for Distance
LONDON, Nov. 10, 2005 -- Boeing [NYSE: BA] established a new world record for distance traveled nonstop by a commercial airplane when a Boeing 777-200LR Worldliner landed at London Heathrow Airport today. The 777-200LR (Longer Range) flew 11,664 nautical miles (21,601 km) during its 22-hour 42-minute flight that left Hong Kong flying eastbound the evening of Nov. 9. The distance set by the 777-200LR is farther than any previous commercial jetliner has flown and exceeds a distance of more than halfway around the world.

"This record-setting distance flight exemplifies the pioneering aviation spirit that has made Boeing a leader in the aerospace industry," said Lars Andersen, vice president and program manager, 777 Program, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "The 777 has been a leader in its market ever since it first went into service. The 777-200LR Worldliner continues that market leadership by offering unmatched capability that allows airlines to offer passengers nonstop routes to their destinations."

The 777-200LR left Hong Kong International Airport at 10:30 p.m. local time Nov. 9 and landed at London Heathrow Airport at approximately 1:30 p.m. GMT Nov. 10. The airplane traveled eastbound towards London, flying over the North Pacific Ocean, across North America, and then over the mid-north Atlantic Ocean en route to London.

"The performance of the 777-200LR during the record flight was exceptional," said Suzanna Darcy-Hennemann, the project pilot leader for the 777-200LR record flight. "It took the support of a great team of people to make this historic flight a success. I'm proud to be a part of that team."

On its flight from Hong Kong to London , the 777-200LR flew farther than any previous commercial jetliner, surpassing two notable previous distance records. For an airplane its size and class, the 777-200LR replaces the distance record set by a 747-400 in 1989 that flew 9,200 nautical miles (17,039 km) nonstop from London to Sydney. Also, the 777-200LR exceeded the distance traveled by a 777-200ER (Extended Range) that flew 10,823 nautical miles (20,044 km) from Seattle to Kuala Lumpur in 1997, setting a speed and distance record. Although the 777-200LR flew farther, this record will continue to stand because the 777-200ER was classified in a lighter weight category for its record attempt.

The 777-200LR is the world's longest-range commercial jetliner and is capable of connecting virtually any two cities around the globe. It is the fifth 777 model. In service, the 777-200LR can carry 301 passengers and baggage up to 9,420 nautical miles (17,445 kilometers).

The first 777-200LR will be delivered to Pakistan International Airlines in early 2006. To date, 43 airlines around the world have ordered more than 700 777s.

And a story by one of the test pilots who flew it:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/200LR/flight_test/

Gnam
11-10-05, 04:59 PM
Is anyone currently working on mid-air refueling for commercial planes? Or is seen as unnecessary?

racermike
11-10-05, 05:11 PM
Is anyone currently working on mid-air refueling for commercial planes? Or is seen as unnecessary?

They just need to hire "sammich" to show them how to route extra fuel lines throughout the aircraft.

Gnam
11-10-05, 06:08 PM
I can see that hump draging garden hoses through the main cabin talkin' 'bout where he comed from. :D

JoeBob
11-10-05, 06:12 PM
Is anyone currently working on mid-air refueling for commercial planes? Or is seen as unnecessary?

Not to mention a wee bit on the dangerous side.

oddlycalm
11-10-05, 06:57 PM
Who could sit for 24 hours? There's the real crux of th issue, that and what doing so will do to your general health.

I do everything I can to break up long trips and encourace those that report to me to do the same. I've never once flown to Oz non-stop and generally scheduled thing to do in Japan both coming and going.

Aside from the well known danger from blood clots in the legs, spending long periods of time at low oxygen saturation levels puts a lot of stress on your heart. While doctors consider blood oxygen levels below 90% dangerous, the oxy sat levels for sitting passengers on commerical plances is 86%. For the flight attendants, as well as others moving around the cabin, that can drop into the 76%-78%. The fact is, nobody has ever done a formal study of the effects and what little info I have is a result of a PT I know taking a pulse oximeter on a recent trip and asking folks to allow her to slip the oximeter on their finger momentarily. The flight crew is on a separate oxygen/ventilation system.

I think it's great that Boeing has managed such a long flight, but I wish they would spend some time thinking about things that could be done to make long flights more healthy for the passengers.

oc

Ankf00
11-10-05, 07:08 PM
787, composite fuselage, higher cabin pressure, higher cabin humidity

:thumbup:

F Toulouse. :thumdown:

oddlycalm
11-10-05, 07:27 PM
787, composite fuselage, higher cabin pressure, higher cabin humidity Now that's what I'm talking about. :thumbup:

oc

coolhand
11-10-05, 08:14 PM
It took me a minute to think about this, because if they went East West that would not have been very special because BA has been flying from Singapor to London for years.

Then you guys mentioned going over the US :eek:

HK to the west coast is long, and the west coast to Europe is long.

Good stuff, Boeing rocks, but i would not want to work there.