PDA

View Full Version : Boeing 767/777


Red Leader
4th October 2005, 19:58
I'm slowly venturing into the world of Civies after having been previously mainly a millitary fan.I'm getting th hang of recognising many types already, but I can't seem to tell the diff between 767's and 777's. Could someone please put me out of misery and help?? They look so similar!!!

plumstix
4th October 2005, 20:28
I'm slowly venturing into the world of Civies after having been previously mainly a millitary fan.I'm getting th hang of recognising many types already, but I can't seem to tell the diff between 767's and 777's. Could someone please put me out of misery and help?? They look so similar!!!

Red, the 777s main landing gear has three rows of wheels and the tailcone is pinched flat instead of rounded. That's the way I tell the difference between the two.

planejunky
4th October 2005, 21:26
Absolutley correct Plummy, also add the huge GE-90 engines as another ID feature, the largest on any civil airliner in service today. Even the Pratt & Whitney's and RR Trents are just as big, serious power too! :cool:

Red Leader
4th October 2005, 21:29
Thanks guys! Are we saying that the engines on the 777 are noticeably larger?
Would the rest of the plane ie fuselarge and wings then be identical?

plumstix
4th October 2005, 22:39
Thanks guys! Are we saying that the engines on the 777 are noticeably larger?
Would the rest of the plane ie fuselarge and wings then be identical?

Probably not identical but aren't too many other features to tell them apart. I'm sure the rivet counters could come up with some more.

Red Leader
4th October 2005, 22:48
I was wondering if perhaps the 777 may be a stretched version of the 767...ie identical in all other ways but just a longer fuselarge?

Agent X20
4th October 2005, 22:57
Wait til yer start on Airbuses... they confuse the life outta me.. :D

In my day it was 707 or DC8....!!

plumstix
4th October 2005, 23:07
I was wondering if perhaps the 777 may be a stretched version of the 767...ie identical in all other ways but just a longer fuselarge?

No, it is a separate aircraft. There may be some common components but I remember seeing a series some years ago about the development of the 777.

plumstix
4th October 2005, 23:09
Wait til yer start on Airbuses... they confuse the life outta me.. :D

In my day it was 707 or DC8....!!

Agent, Airbuses are easy. The 707 and DC-8 and your 4 engined convairs used to confuse me but I think I've sussed it now. By the way what's the difference between the 707 and 720?

Agent X20
4th October 2005, 23:17
Agent, Airbuses are easy. The 707 and DC-8 and your 4 engined convairs used to confuse me but I think I've sussed it now. By the way what's the difference between the 707 and 720?

About 13... :D

720 - Shorter bodied - memory...

.. from the book..

designed for medium-range operation from shorter runways. It was lighter and faster than the Boeing 707, and had a simplified wing design. This model had relatively few sales, but was still profitable due to the minimal R&D costs associated with modifying an existing type. At one point in the promotion stage to airlines it was known as the 717. It was used before the Boeing 727 replaced it in the market.

Airbuses are not easy - I get em all confoosed..

plumstix
4th October 2005, 23:19
About 13... :D

720 - Shorter bodied

Thanks Agent.

Agent X20
4th October 2005, 23:22
About 13... :D

720 - Shorter bodied - memory...

.. from the book..

designed for medium-range operation from shorter runways. It was lighter and faster than the Boeing 707, and had a simplified wing design. This model had relatively few sales, but was still profitable due to the minimal R&D costs associated with modifying an existing type. At one point in the promotion stage to airlines it was known as the 717. It was used before the Boeing 727 replaced it in the market.

Airbuses are not easy - I get em all confoosed..

and a bit more for you.... :D

plumstix
4th October 2005, 23:28
and a bit more for you.... :D

I see Boeing are no longer refering to their airliners by the name and variant e.g. 737-800 but now shortening it to 738 etc. etc. Apart from the 737-700 which is now a 73G to avoid confusion with the model number itself.

plumstix
4th October 2005, 23:31
Airbuses are not easy - I get em all confoosed..

Simple.
A300 - wide body with tiny winglets.
A310 - shorter
A320 - thin body
A321 - noticably stretched 320
A319 - Noticably stubby 320
A318 - laughably stubby 320
A330 - Wide body, twin with large winglets
A340 - as above with 4 engines.

There, can't make it any simpler than that :D

scramble
5th October 2005, 10:27
The Boeing 777 is way bigger than the 767, I believe only the 767-400 comes close, but its wider and longer. there are three version 777-200, 777-300 and the new one 777-300ER and just out and in test phase the 777-200LR. I also like the 777, it looks right and hope one day i get to fly in it.

Agent X20
5th October 2005, 10:35
I see Boeing are no longer refering to their airliners by the name and variant e.g. 737-800 but now shortening it to 738 etc. etc. Apart from the 737-700 which is now a 73G to avoid confusion with the model number itself. Thats for the new kids on the block... all this 744 stuff... always be a 747-400 here.. like all this MD-11 carp.. its a DC10..!!! -

Mind you its also a DH 121 Trident.. (as in DeHavilland) not HS or BAe... and certainly not a BAe Lightning...!!

david cotton
16th November 2005, 21:17
Hello all
I am a 747 lover and a 4 engined air bus lover. I like the idear of 4 engines. The 777 is real nice to fly in , but cant help thinking 4 engines is better than 2.

I onve flew to Angola on a big orange 747 and the card in the seat said it was a 747-200 big top combi. What the hell is a big top combi.... sound like some thing you get at Pizza hut.

I have spent many hours looking at the aircraft fleets in the inflight mags. I still can only id a 747 or 4 engine air bus from looking at em. I have to use the crash card to find out what i'm on for sure. I sometimes faint when i find I am on some thing like a YAK 42. :eek:

NeilD
16th November 2005, 22:40
Hello all
I am a 747 lover and a 4 engined air bus lover. I like the idear of 4 engines. The 777 is real nice to fly in , but cant help thinking 4 engines is better than 2.

I onve flew to Angola on a big orange 747 and the card in the seat said it was a 747-200 big top combi. What the hell is a big top combi.... sound like some thing you get at Pizza hut.

I have spent many hours looking at the aircraft fleets in the inflight mags. I still can only id a 747 or 4 engine air bus from looking at em. I have to use the crash card to find out what i'm on for sure. I sometimes faint when i find I am on some thing like a YAK 42. :eek:

big top = SUD = stretched upper deck... Combi.. normally has large side loading cargo door and front of pax cabin can be reconfig to carry cargo whilsr the self loading freight (pax) sit in the rest of the cabin.. Gooneybird will be along soon I expect to give us chapter and verse.. ;)
Neil.

plumstix
16th November 2005, 23:03
DC, you sure it was a 200? The 300 and 400 models have the extended upper deck but the 200's was shorter.

david cotton
17th November 2005, 09:09
DC, you sure it was a 200? The 300 and 400 models have the extended upper deck but the 200's was shorter.
Hello

This 747 was as old as the hills. It was TAGG (Angolan airlines) and I flew on it in 2002 from Lisbon to Luanda. I was in the upstairs business class, but it was very poor. The cockpit door was only a curtain, I went to the loo and almost ended up on the flight deck. Still....it got there.

The uper deck did seem very short ......and dark :eek: .

Craig
17th November 2005, 09:24
Aww come on guys, if you're talking 4 engined jet airliners there's only one worth talking about, and it's made by Vickers, none of this Airbus and Boeing rubbish! Now there is an aircraft with character! :cool: :D

david cotton
17th November 2005, 09:49
Aww come on guys, if you're talking 4 engined jet airliners there's only one worth talking about, and it's made by Vickers, none of this Airbus and Boeing rubbish! Now there is an aircraft with character! :cool: :D

Is that what they do during the week :eek: ? I always woundered what they did when the church was closed.

Can't say I would like to fly in an aircraft that is made by men who believe in life after death.

Regards
David

Agent X20
17th November 2005, 10:13
Thats at least 50 forum members that are now sticking little pins into David Cotton effigies... :D :D :D

Worst seat in the house.. last rear seat Virgin 747.. non reclineable and next to the toilets...

Best seat in the house.. Autair HP Herald to Scotland.. never flew above about 5000 feet... panoramic windows... same in the Viscount if you were not looking down onto wing.... Windows is to small these days...

david cotton
17th November 2005, 18:05
Hello
Worst flight had to be with Monarch Airways. It was boing with 3 seats either side of a single walk way.... is that the 757 ? It was a charter flight to India from Gatwick, with a 1 hour stop at Bahrain. It was pure hell..... your knees had to go either side of your head, there was so little leg room. Then, Just when you were about to fall asleep, the Bitch would come on the tanoy to tell you about duty free :mad: Never ever again will I fly with them.

But then again, Sudan Airways flight from Kartoom to Port Sudan. The sister aircraft to the one I was on had crashed the week before, after take off from Port Sudan. They could not service the planes properly because they could not get the spares. :eek: Needed to go to the loo more than once before that flight.

Best flight was an Airfrance flight from France to Argentina. I slept the whole way and woke when the wheels hit the tarmac..... lovely.

Regards
David

Agent X20
17th November 2005, 18:18
That would be a 757..... two rows of three abreast all the way down... unless of course you were first class uppa da front - which is 2 abreast.... Dont think Monarch do first class.... when I last flew with them the plane had fans.... :D

david cotton
17th November 2005, 18:31
That would be a 757..... two rows of three abreast all the way down... unless of course you were first class uppa da front - which is 2 abreast.... Dont think Monarch do first class.... when I last flew with them the plane had fans.... :D

757 should not be used for long haul.... :mad:

767, 747 and 777 are the only Boeing's that cut the long haul mustard.

The 777 is the newest Boeing (I think) is it as cheap to run as say the 4 Engine airbus ? I get the impression that the airbus might be cheaper to run, but is more complicated to look after.

Regards
David

Agent X20
17th November 2005, 18:38
Wait til the 380's about.. thats cheaper than all of them... they reckon its a 25% on freight... which is a massive reduction... now one of those fully of hot sweaty yobbos... yick....

Think today the nicest flying machine about is the DeHavilland 146.... OK.. BAe 146..

Craig
17th November 2005, 18:53
Maybe, I had the pleasure of a flight on a DC-10 though (an Airtours one a couple of years ago) and that was a thoroughly enjoyable experience, fairly roomy, loads of seats, not as claustrophobic as some of its smaller relatives and with proper "cinema style" TV screens, rather than those ****** LCDs that unless you're not sat looking directly at them all you can see is a green or purple outline! Grrr... :mad:

david cotton
17th November 2005, 18:54
Wait til the 380's about.. thats cheaper than all of them... they reckon its a 25% on freight... which is a massive reduction... now one of those fully of hot sweaty yobbos... yick....

Think today the nicest flying machine about is the DeHavilland 146.... OK.. BAe 146..

Hello Agent
I don't want to fly in one of those 380's until they have been around for a bit longer. I want to be sure they don't fall apart in mid air after a few take off and landings. Be a hell of a queue at the pearly gates if one of them went down. Poor old St Peter would do his nut. But don't worry agent...you would be in the other queue :D

Can you imagine flying into some where like Bangladesh on one of these things. You would be an old man before you got clear of imigration and got your bags. :eek:

Regards
David

NeilD
17th November 2005, 19:11
Hello
Worst flight had to be with Monarch Airways. It was boing with 3 seats either side of a single walk way.... is that the 757 ? It was a charter flight to India from Gatwick, with a 1 hour stop at Bahrain. It was pure hell..... your knees had to go either side of your head, there was so little leg room. Then, Just when you were about to fall asleep, the Bitch would come on the tanoy to tell you about duty free :mad: Never ever again will I fly with them.

David

yeah I did that trip year before last.. its no better on their 767 - 'cattle class' just about sums it up...it would've been more comfortable if they'd had straps hanging from the roof like an underground train and you could've stood up all the way..!
Neil

goonybird
17th November 2005, 19:56
Hello

This 747 was as old as the hills. It was TAGG (Angolan airlines) and I flew on it in 2002 from Lisbon to Luanda. I was in the upstairs business class, but it was very poor. The cockpit door was only a curtain, I went to the loo and almost ended up on the flight deck. Still....it got there.

The uper deck did seem very short ......and dark :eek: .

Well, you had to ask:- (plummy correct that 300 was Big top)
TAAG - Angola Airlines -2002
2x Boeing 747's
would have been D2-TEA Boeing 747-312SCD c/n 23410 (ex Singapore 9V-SKN) (the other 747 wasn't SCD). Singapore used to paint the words Big Top on their 300's and have Mega top on their 400's
Don't ask for the HEX code. Only just getting into that side of spotting. ;)
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=944707&WxsIERv=Obrvat%20747-312Z&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=GNNT%20Natbyn%20Nveyvarf&QtODMg=Yvfoba%20%28-%20Cbegryn%20qr%20Fnpnirz%29%20%28YVF%20%2F%20YCCG %29&ERDLTkt=Cbeghtny&ktODMp=Bpgbore%2013%2C%202005&BP=1&WNEb25u=Zvthry%20Py%E1hqvb&xsIERvdWdsY=Q2-GRN&MgTUQtODMgKE=Vf%20ba%20gur%20fubeg%20svany%20nsgre %20n%20fubeg%20syvtug%20sebz%20Cnevf%20ba%20n%20or nhgvshy%20zbeavat.%20N%20pbyq%20sebag%20unq%20whfg %20cnffrq%20tvivat%20hf%20fbzr%20cerpvbhf%20enva%2 C%20pyrnavat%20hc%20nyy%20gur%20pvgl%20unmr%20naq% 20cbyyhgvba.%20Va%20snpg%20gur%20ivfvovyvgl%20jnf% 20fb%20tbbq%20gung%20gur%20Cnynpr%20lbh%20pna%20fr r%20vf%20va%20fgenvtug%20yvar%20vf%20nyzbfg%208%20 Xz%20sebz%20jurer%20V%20jnf.%20Gur%20Cran%20Cnynpr %20naq%20gubfr%20uvyyf%20ner%20Fvagen%2C%20n%20snz bhf%20phygheny%20qrfgvangvba.%20Nyfb%20vagrerfgvat %20gb%20frr%20gung%20cnyz%20gerr%20va%20gur%20yrsg .%20V%20ybfg%20pbhag%20bs%20ubj%20znal%20nsgreabba f%20V%20fcrag%20gurer%20cubgbtencuvat.&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=1185&NEb25uZWxs=2005-10-22%2018%3A22%3A44&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=23410%2F653&static=yes&width=1024&height=693&sok=JURER%20%20%28nveyvar%20%3D%20%27GNNT%20Natbyn %20Nveyvarf%27%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubgb_vq%20QRF P&photo_nr=3&prev_id=946497&next_id=943155&size=L

david cotton
17th November 2005, 20:22
Thank Gooybird
Thats the one... you can see me waving in the window :)

How old was this death trap then ?.... I bet it didn;t have the mods to prevent fuel tank explosions :eek:

Regards
David

parsley
17th November 2005, 20:54
big top = SUD = stretched upper deck... Combi.. normally has large side loading cargo door and front of pax cabin can be reconfig to carry cargo whilsr the self loading freight (pax) sit in the rest of the cabin.. Gooneybird will be along soon I expect to give us chapter and verse.. ;)
Neil.

on the combi it's the rear part of the cabin rather than the front that the freight is loaded in

P

david cotton
17th November 2005, 21:15
on the combi it's the rear part of the cabin rather than the front that the freight is loaded in

P
Does KLM use combies to fly to soal (South Korea). or has the combie been dropped on later cargo / passenger 747's

Regards
David

Agent X20
17th November 2005, 22:56
Hello Agent
I don't want to fly in one of those 380's until they have been around for a bit longer. Well its a case of get into the 21st C or get out**.. we have it down here, everyone is getting all uptight about Luton, cos its gotta be redesigned... of course it has... thats cos yer have to get all those people off two decks and through customs etc....and the taxiways have gotta be dug up cos at present two of these sods cant pass each other without taking off 50 foot of wing... but if they are 25% cheaper the airlines have to fly them or go under... the running costs are why the likes of Easyjet dont run 737-100's.. but the latest (ish) kit....

What is worring is if the likes of Easyjet feel that they can do a Jappo 747 and cram as many in as possible and go from London - Paris - London all day long... its an 8 minute turnaround for a 737 at present.. a 380 be a bit smelly by the end of the day...

** apologies that aint personal.....

david cotton
18th November 2005, 17:17
Hello Agent
Do not worry, I am well into the 21st Centuary, but the fact remains that all new things have teething problems. I just want to be sure they are ironed out without my participation. I am not sure how big a step the 380 is to be honest. From the little I know, I don't think it is a big a step as say the comet. I think it is about the same size step as the 747 introduction.

I do not think their will be too many problems handeling the 380 in 1st word coutries. You dont always dock these days and they have those new elevating coaches that actually dock to the plane, and then take you to the airport.

I think the worst part will be landing in the 3ed world airports with high volumes of locals on board. Its grim landing in Lagos on a packed 747, could only get worse landing on a packed 380.

Regards
David

Agent X20
18th November 2005, 21:54
No its all change, the ergonomics have to be right to get that many people off and on board through customs etc and to their cars etc etc..and some of the airports that dont take Jumbos are having to look to the 380 as the operating costs are that reduced.. rather than ten airlines flying to CDG for the 7 am monday morning , if one airline runs 1 380..could be very profitable.. If you aint gonna fly it dont worry, it seems that as many are coming out a freighters.. same with the 748.. but credit to them I say, if you had stated that a European consortium would be the biggest threat to Boeing/Douglas, they would have locked you up and thrown away the key..

But as with all new airliners, new cars etc some folks wont go near em entil they are proven... which in the case of the Titanic was well founded..!!

david cotton
18th November 2005, 22:47
Hello Agent

I was thinking more of the 2 Comet loses, due to pressurisation stress. I wonder if these new aircraft will find new problems not yet seen. Maybe the changes are not that great and no new inovations are being tried out.

Not sure if air france will ever use 380's to get to to CDG. They only use 737's (or simler size) at the moment, so they could of gone to bigger craft by already. Mind you, air france can't ever get the 7am 737 away on time. God knows what will happed if they ever tried to use one 380, instead of one an hour.

Regards
David

Agent X20
18th November 2005, 22:57
Yep I think there are just too many airlines running that route... The Japs though run 747's like buses between the islands, high density seating arrangements.. it could be done here... As to the 380.. well I hope they have it right cos there will be a blo*dy big hole if they get it wrong... could take out most of Luton... mmmm....

Funny I was just posting about the Comet on another site as the same time as you were writing that.. spooky...

NeilD
19th November 2005, 00:04
A380.. wont win any beauty contests... :D

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/961362/L/

Neil

david cotton
19th November 2005, 00:10
A380.. wont win any beauty contests... :D

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/961362/L/

Neil

Ain't you heard of BBW or BBD '..... all have the big is beutiful theam. :)
And the 380 is big if nothing else. :eek:

Agent X20
19th November 2005, 00:28
:D BBW... another CHC commission...???? :D

Red Leader
20th November 2005, 00:17
Hey guys!
I'm just back from a visit to States. Flew on a 777 10 hours 20min flight Gatwick to Houston. The 777 I'd say is a nice comfortable plane(and I was in standard econonmy class no extras!).
Iflew similar route eralier in the year on a 767 and that was fine too, but I know someone that crossed the atlantic in a 757 and they echoed the thoughts on here that it was indeed cramped!

Agent X20
20th November 2005, 16:53
It all seems really to depend on yer 'build'.. as a 6'4". even club class is cramped..

david cotton
20th November 2005, 17:49
It all seems really to depend on yer 'build'.. as a 6'4". even club class is cramped..

6 Foot 4, blow me down.... did you used to be the butler for the Adams family. :D

David

Agent X20
20th November 2005, 17:51
6 Foot 4, blow me ... You using the old Agent chat up lines there David..??

david cotton
20th November 2005, 17:58
You using the old Agent chat up lines there David..??

You would have to find a real sucker to fall for that line :eek:

parsley
21st November 2005, 09:18
Hello Agent
Do not worry, I am well into the 21st Centuary, but the fact remains that all new things have teething problems. I just want to be sure they are ironed out without my participation. I am not sure how big a step the 380 is to be honest. From the little I know, I don't think it is a big a step as say the comet. I think it is about the same size step as the 747 introduction.

I do not think their will be too many problems handeling the 380 in 1st word coutries. You dont always dock these days and they have those new elevating coaches that actually dock to the plane, and then take you to the airport.

I think the worst part will be landing in the 3ed world airports with high volumes of locals on board. Its grim landing in Lagos on a packed 747, could only get worse landing on a packed 380.

Regards
David

There are problems associated with the A380...at Heathrow for example it will be restricted to specific stands because the wingspan exceeds anything in service at the moment so can't park on any of the current stands...also faces taxyway restrictions at various airports because of the wingspan...currently would not be able to use the Heathrow taxiway from Terminal 4 to the end of runway 09R because the left wing would hit the cargo warehouses en route!!

parsley
21st November 2005, 09:29
Thank Gooybird
Thats the one... you can see me waving in the window :)

How old was this death trap then ?.... I bet it didn;t have the mods to prevent fuel tank explosions :eek:

Regards
David

I have first flight as 12 August 1986

parsley
21st November 2005, 09:31
Does KLM use combies to fly to soal (South Korea). or has the combie been dropped on later cargo / passenger 747's

Regards
David
Not sure what KL are using to Seoul but they have 13 B747-400's (the current model) which are combi's

goonybird
21st November 2005, 23:18
BTW .....
TAAG Angola have and are getting B777's. :)
But 'tis not the plane, if the pilot has no wish to live :D :eek:

david cotton
22nd November 2005, 22:08
BTW .....
TAAG Angola have and are getting B777's. :)
But 'tis not the plane, if the pilot has no wish to live :D :eek:

I hope they have some one out there who can fix em. The planes, not the pilots :)

When I got of the old 747 I got an an even older 727 to fly up to Huambo. I really hate flying domestic flights in Aftrica , Russia or China.

When in Nigeria I like to fly Bellview, because they are meant to be safe. And then one goes and crashes..... Im walking next time I go there :(

Regards
David