Re: Boeing cancels 747-500X/600X?

Date:         09 Mar 97 12:39:32 
From:         don@rata.vuw.ac.nz (Don Stokes)
Organization: Victoria University of Wellington
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1997.611@ohare.chicago.com>,
Alan Wong  <Alan.Wong@anu.edu.au> wrote:
>At present, a 747-400 flying from Los Angeles to Sydney is severely payload
>limited (I believe no cargo and 100 empty seats). Also Singapore to London

Dunno about cargo, but last time I flew LAX-SYD non-stop the flight was
*packed*.  There wasn't a single empty seat, let alone 100.

>The 777-200X, although larger than any likely 767 derivative, seems to be
>the answer. With a longer range than the 747-400, it may even be used
>for marginal 747-400 routes such as Sydney - Los Angeles or Singapore -
>London. And with a better frequency too.

Smaller planes would mean better frequency, although I suspect that the
777 is sufficiently large that it wouldn't make much difference to
scheduling, but using a twin would improve the economics of the route.

--
Don Stokes, Network Manager, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
don@vuw.ac.nz(work) don@zl2tnm.gen.nz(home) +64 4 495-5052 Fax+64 4 471-5386