|
   |
Home >> Forum >> The First Boeing 777 to be Broken Up Civil aviation forum
The First Boeing 777 to be Broken Up
Return to the forum index - Post a message for this thread
| |
Message of shuttle6m - Sent 16 Nov 8:38 |
|
| |
Boeing 777-236 which started life with British Airways as
G-ZZZE (C/N 27109) and last served for Varig as PP-VRD is to be broken up. The aircraft which took its first flight on 3/12/1995 and entered service with BA on 12/1/1996.
Memphis based company Universal Asset management have acquired the aircraft for disassembly.
Its a shame such a relatively young aircraft cannot find a new home
AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF
PHOTO SCREENER
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of M-BASS™ - Sent 16 Nov 18:47 |
|
| |
A 777 already being broken up? Wow, that's kinda weird since it's a very profitable plane, and there's older planes with less fuel efficiency that are still being sold to other airlines.
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of Werkur737 - Sent 16 Nov 20:26 |
|
| |
   It's a shame a very profitable plane for disassembly, the aircraft is young and cannot find a new airline!
You're right M-BASS there are older planes with less fuel efficiency in operation. I hope this practice ends.
AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF
PHOTO SCREENER
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of G-NIKO - Sent 17 Nov 18:59 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of jetman - Sent 12 May 2:08 |
|
| |
Could it be the VARIG jinx? Since VARIG shut down no one seems to want their remaining 777s. I understand condition is the issue, they need MUCH work and no buyer on the horizon.
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of EI-DUB - Sent 12 May 7:46 |
|
| |
I believe theses particular 777s are older ones of the series and are the non ER variant, so as 777s go they are quite old and inefficient and if they are being scrapped they must have passed their economic sell-by date.
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Message of FLX - Sent 16 May 11:34 |
|
| |
I believe this particular BA 777 is a 772, not 772ER. 2 reasons why this is happening:
1. Most 772 operators need their 772s to fly both 8-10hrs sectors(Long Range) and 10-13hrs(Extra Long Range)sectors @ full payload. 772ER has this flexibility but not the 772. Take a look @ Boeing's order book. Of the 2 variants, nearly all deliveries to airlines hv been 772ERs since this variant's 1st delivery to BA in 96. Also, 333 has nearly the same capabilities+performance as a 772 but cost less to acquire+operate. 772s are probably having a relatively hardtime in the used aircraft mkt.
2. Used 772s probably worth more as broken-up spare parts than a complete aircraft. 772 may not be as useful as a 772ER but the majority of their parts are exactly identical. Given such huge #s of 772ERs will continue to fly for a long time, it makes sense for bits & pieces of a 772 to be <reincarnated> in a 772ER(BA is probably doing exactly that).
In any case, I won't describe any 777 ever produced as old or inefficient. The 1st ever 777 delivered was a 772 for UA in 95. Lots of similar-sized 343s and 333s were delivered earlier in 93-94 and are still going strong @ the frontline of leading global carriers(LH,VS,TG,CX,etc.). Even today, U'll hv a hard time trying to find a production widebody twin design as efficient as the 333(Though the 343 may no longer be efficient due to its quad engines). Remember, 772 was born @ a time when many were still hesitant to fly on a twin to cross the Pacific or Siberia(i.e. ETOPS 180). Early 772 operators were just beginning to accumulate experience on flying such a brand new big twin before putting its longer-range brother 772ER into really long range mkts dominated by 744s @ that time. The 772 was a necessary learning step for both airlines and pax to grow comfortable with the idea of a big twin flying extra-long range routes(Upto 14-15hrs). For Boeing, 772 built mkt confidence on the 772ER and the subsequent bigger/longer range 777s. I recall I read about an interview with the 777 project team mgr back in 1993 who described their mkt expectation re 772 vs 772ER(Known as 777-200IGW<Increased Gross Weight> @ that time) as something like.....most 777 customers will select 772 and use it to grow capacity on existing routes already flown/proven by smaller twins such as 763s in Transatlantic routes. On the other hand, the 772IGW is for a few adventurous customers who will use it to cross the Pacific/Siberia and bet on its reliability in very long range ops.....15yrs later, it seems like those few adventurous hv turned out to be the majority.
|
|
User profil
|
Private message
|
Suggest deletion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post a message for this thread
|
|
Messages must be written in english. Messages written in an another language will be deleted.
Post only messages related to the civil aviation, and do not insert any ad. Your IP is logged.
You can custom your text by using the following codes
[B]Your text[/B] : Text in bold
[I]Your text[/I] : Text in italic
[U]Your text[/U] : Text underline
[S]Your text[/S] : Text striketough
To include an Airfleets.net photo, use the code [P]Photo number[/P] |
|