Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boeing 777-200LR Worldliner Certified to Carry Passengers Around the World
Boeing.com ^ | Feb. 02, 2006 | Staff

Posted on 02/02/2006 1:38:12 PM PST by Paleo Conservative

SEATTLE, Feb. 02, 2006 -- The world's longest-range commercial jetliner, the Boeing [NYSE: BA] 777-200LR Worldliner, now is certified by U.S. and European authorities to enter into passenger service with airlines around the world. The 777-200LR (Longer Range) is the fifth and newest member of the market-leading 777 airplane family.

Certification approval by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) formally recognizes that the 777-200LR has successfully completed all testing and safety requirements during its six-month flight-test program.

"The 777-200LR will revolutionize the way people travel with the ability to connect just about any two cities around the world," said Lars Andersen, vice president and program manager, 777 Program, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "The 777-200LR is more fuel efficient, has more range, and carries more passengers and cargo than the competition."

The FAA and EASA certifications grant an amended type certificate for the 777 and a production certificate authorizing Boeing to build the 777-200LR and deliver it to airlines for passenger service. The first 777-200LR will be delivered to Pakistan International Airlines later this month.

"The 777-200LR performed very well throughout its comprehensive flight test program for certification," said Bob Buchholz, chief engineer, 777 Safety, Certification and Performance. "In addition, the certification work will benefit us as we continue to develop the 777 Freighter."

Two 777-200LR flight test airplanes completed 886 flight hours on 328 flights, and 318 ground test hours. On both test airplanes, 27.8 miles of wiring were installed for the instrumentation used to record flight test data. More than 73 terabits (73 followed by 12 zeros) of data were recorded and analyzed. Boeing kept an online journal of the 777-200LR flight test activity, which is available at http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/200LR/flight_test/.

To develop the 777-200LR, Boeing strengthened the airplane's primary structure to accommodate an increased gross weight for takeoff and a higher engine thrust. Also, provisions were added to allow the 777-200LR to carry up to three additional fuel tanks. This work enables the airplane to carry more fuel, which allows it to fly farther and to serve as the platform for the 777 Freighter.

The 777-200LR uses many of the same advances developed with the 777-300ER (Extended Range), such as raked wingtips and other drag reducing improvements, and tail-strike protection. The 777-200LR is powered exclusively by the GE90-110B1L, a re-rated version of the powerful GE90-115BL used on the 777-300ER.

The 777-200LR is capable of connecting virtually any two cities in the world nonstop. In service it can carry 301 passengers up to 9,420 nautical miles (17,445 kilometers).

In addition to Pakistan International Airlines, EVA Air, Emirates, Air Canada, and Air India have ordered the 777-200LR. To date, 44 airlines around the world have ordered 827 777s.


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: 777; 777200lr; boeing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: dead
There are planes on the drawing board that could take off from St. Louis and land back in St. Louis in less than 10 minutes.

Any Cessna can do that!

21 posted on 02/02/2006 1:55:59 PM PST by Onelifetogive (* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some FReepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dead
V1 cut!
22 posted on 02/02/2006 1:56:10 PM PST by Denver Ditdat (Leftist New Year's resolution: force Christians into the closets vacated by gays)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
Looking forward to a Dallas to Moscow link.... At least one can hope.

You're more likely to have a Houston to Moscow flight, but a 777-200ER could handle that route. I wouldn't be surprised if such a route were flown on a 787. A 777 may have too much capacity for the route.

IAH (29°59'04"N 95°20'29"W) SVO (55°58'22"N 37°24'53"E) 5894 mi

23 posted on 02/02/2006 1:56:18 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

Hey - I agree 2 engines - science wise are better than 4 and the 777 can fly on one. But man, I like to see 4 engines - its an instinct thing not a rational thing.


24 posted on 02/02/2006 1:59:12 PM PST by Godwinson ("The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dead
There are planes on the drawing board that could take off from St. Louis and land back in St. Louis in less than 10 minutes.

Of course,no human being could fly in such an aircraft because of the G-forces involved.

25 posted on 02/02/2006 2:00:19 PM PST by Gay State Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
C'mon!

"Around the world" is a figure of speech. If one says Hong Kong is "on the other side of the world" or "halfway around the world", does it REALLY matter if the flight went from Chicago due west to Hong Kong, or it flew over the North Pole to get to Hong Kong? In either case, the passengers still flew "around the world".

Second, if you want to buy stock in an airline that proposes to, e.g., take off from Orlando, FL and fly around the world and land back in Orlando, FL, be my guest. I don't think you will get many paying passengers to take that long, tiresome, boring trip, just to land smack back where they took off from. The airline food is not that good, and the movies suck also.

Personally, I don't see a market where a jet takes off, circles the globe, then drops its passengers off in the same place they took off from. If you want to buy stock in that airline, ping me; I will then buy some offsetting put options.
26 posted on 02/02/2006 2:00:22 PM PST by Dont_Tread_On_Me_888 (Bush's #1 priority Africa. #2 priority appease Fox and Mexico . . . USA priority #64.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nakota; dead

Yea, didn't they accomplish 10-minute-or-less flight at Kitty Hawk?


27 posted on 02/02/2006 2:02:09 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dont_Tread_On_Me_888
For example, the shortest distance from Chicago to Japan would be to take that type of alternative route, not fly directly west to Japan.

I did JFK-NRT (and return) once...non-stop.We flew over Alaska both ways.And as a matter of fact,it was in a 777.

I don't know what part of the state,however (northern...southern).

28 posted on 02/02/2006 2:03:52 PM PST by Gay State Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative
But doesn't it only have the range to go a little less than half way around the world?

Maybe mid-air refuelling for those more-than-half-way-around-the-world trips. :-)

29 posted on 02/02/2006 2:04:01 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godwinson
I ain't going over any pond with only two engines. Period

It can fly on just one. And those engines will eat nearly anything without stopping.

Water? Birds? Ice? No problem! It's a very, very reliable power plant.

30 posted on 02/02/2006 2:04:39 PM PST by TChris ("Unless you act, you're going to lose your world." - Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

Ping me if you can find a "polar route" that takes passengers from Orlando to Miami. To say you are wrong is an understatement of Ted Kennedy ass size proportions.

I simply pointed out to this member that polar routes are used, since his question implied he was thinking a direct, non-polar route.


31 posted on 02/02/2006 2:04:55 PM PST by Dont_Tread_On_Me_888 (Bush's #1 priority Africa. #2 priority appease Fox and Mexico . . . USA priority #64.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Godwinson
its an instinct thing not a rational thing.

Must be ... I've hardly ever flown on anything other than a twin; ranging from a Twin Otter to a B777.

32 posted on 02/02/2006 2:07:07 PM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Godwinson
According to engineers - more engines means more probability something will go wrong with an engine.

That sounds like the statistician that, after learning the astronomical odds of having two bombs on board an aircraft, made sure to pack a bomb in his carry on luggage.

33 posted on 02/02/2006 2:10:57 PM PST by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Houston to Moscow would be just a good, but I think there are more russian expats living in Dallas than Houston.


34 posted on 02/02/2006 2:11:58 PM PST by Centurion2000 (SUPPORT THE DANES! BURN A KORAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dead
There are planes on the drawing board that could take off from St. Louis and land back in St. Louis in less than 10 minutes.

Let's assume an "around the world" between those two.

Distance 25,000 miles. Time 1/6 Hour. Average speed 150,000 mph. This means linear acceleration for 5 minutes from 0 to 300,000 mph, then the same decelleration. V = at. a = 3,600,000 m/h2. a = 1,466.67 ft/s2 = 45.8 g

Is this right?

35 posted on 02/02/2006 2:12:02 PM PST by Onelifetogive (* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some FReepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: HostileTerritory
The 777-200LR is capable of connecting virtually any two cities in the world nonstop. In service it can carry 301 passengers up to 9,420 nautical miles (17,445 kilometers).

I want to know if you have a site you like for mapping navigational distances between cities, because a Great Circle Mapper I found says SYD-NYC is 9,938 miles, or out of reach.


Click on the picture

The range is 9,320 nautical miles. The distance from Sydney to JFK in NYC is 9950 statute miles. A nautical mile is about 1.15 statute miles so the 777-200LR has the range to fly SYD-JFK, but it might have problems with headwinds during certain times of the year flying JFK-SYD.

36 posted on 02/02/2006 2:12:28 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
Houston to Moscow would be just a good, but I think there are more russian expats living in Dallas than Houston.

But IAH has much more international air service than DFW.

37 posted on 02/02/2006 2:14:07 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: TChris
hers one of a a 6 intruder eating one unlucky guy

http://www.fsdome.com/cgi-bin/download.pl?url=uploads04/feb/a6_1c.zip

38 posted on 02/02/2006 2:14:26 PM PST by al baby (Father of the Beeber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: al baby
hers one of a a 6 intruder eating one unlucky guy

Well, it tried to eat him. It gagged and spit him back out. ;-)

39 posted on 02/02/2006 2:17:50 PM PST by TChris ("Unless you act, you're going to lose your world." - Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive
Let's assume an "around the world" between those two.

Oh, no. I was leaving that part out. That would make it really too difficult.

40 posted on 02/02/2006 2:20:57 PM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson