Emirates to use Boeing 777-300ER DXB-DUB

Comhrá

http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/emirates-to-roll-out-larger-aircraft-on-dublin-dubai-route-341038-Jan2012/

finners01

Good to see they expect higher demand....

BUT would not look forward to Emirates 10 across seating on the 777....10 across is cramped...aisles are very tight.

The a330 is much nicer to be a passenger on.

Tenger

finners01 wrote: »

Good to see they expect higher demand....

BUT would not look forward to Emirates 10 across seating on the 777....10 across is cramped...aisles are very tight.

BA tried that on their initial B777's but quite quickly refitted the Y cabin to 3-3-3.

The B787 that was in DUB had 3-3-3 seating and seemed very spacious. Talking to a Boeing staffer, he says JAL or ANA (wasn't sure) are planning on a 300+ seater version with 3-4-3 throughout for domestic flights.

BuffyBot

BA tried that on their initial B777's but quite quickly refitted the Y cabin to 3-3-3.

Rather than their initial 777's, that was was on a weird-join venture Gatwick sub-fleet, mostly used for the "bucket and spade" Carribean routes. While flown by BA pilots, the cabin crew were provided by one of the charter operators. They never had it on "mainline" routes and the whole operation was pretty soon disbanded and the planes converted to normal configuration.

TPMP

Do airlines not usually have a 3-4-3 cabin on 777's? I have only been on one once from London to LA and back on Air New Zealand and they had it like that. It was a little cramped in the aisles alright.

Coeus

TPMP wrote: »

Do airlines not usually have a 3-4-3 cabin on 777's? I have only been on one once from London to LA and back on Air New Zealand and they had it like that. It was a little cramped in the aisles alright.

Air France do 3-4-3 also and on their 777-200s aswell as I discovered when I flew with them a few years backs. The seats are tightly packed in alright with that config...

BuffyBot

TPMP wrote: »

Do airlines not usually have a 3-4-3 cabin on 777's? I have only been on one once from London to LA and back on Air New Zealand and they had it like that. It was a little cramped in the aisles alright.

3-3-3 was the general configuration (or 2-5-2 on some US airlines). 3-4-3 is becoming more common these days - Emirates, Air France, KLM and TAM and now Air NZ (on their 777-300's) have gone that way and probably a few others. Slimmer seats and slimmer aisles..can be a squeeze, but having done 13 hours in one (and not being tiny) it wasn't as bad as I initially feared.

EIDW

anyone know when its due out

lintdrummer

EIDW wrote: »

anyone know when its due out

July according to the article.

sharkman

Brought forward to 1st May ...

eatmyshorts

sharkman wrote: »

Brought forward to 1st May ...

Confirmed.

davepatr07

"BUT would not look forward to Emirates 10 across seating on the 777....10 across is cramped...aisles are very tight.

The a330 is much nicer to be a passenger on"


Much prefer the B773 over the A332. Flew from MEL to DUB rtn recently and found the A332 cramped, tatty and old in economy. Personal Entertainment was crap and didn't even work properly. Even my partner who is hobbit sized felt cramped in the seats. ICE on the triple 7 is the best thing since sliced bread.

True the 3-4-3 may sound cramped but there is lots more legroom compared to other carriers I have flown on including BA. Found the 777 quieter too and the last few rows handy if you are travelling with your partner 2-4-2.

Looking forward to A380 service soon (DXB-MEL). Flew on it from Auckland, most comfortable, quietest aircraft I have flown.

Mister Jingles

Very surprised not to see any photo's of this up yet :pac:

sharkman

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Very surprised not to see any photo's of this up yet :pac:

I was just about to post the same!!!:D

Kamjana

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Very surprised not to see any photo's of this up yet :pac:

http://instagr.am/p/KKjaSLOc15/

muppet01

nice shot , its a big bird but strangely wasnt full today,

Zonda999

Thats a lot of seats to fill. i see from wikipedia that Emirates have a numnber of capacity variations on their 70 777-300ER's. 354, 358, 364, 427 and 442 capacities. Anyone know which of those is used from DUB?

I had half guessed they weren't going to be filling the route with a 777-300ER on it. They've been doing quite a bit of advertising lately, in the papaers and on rte.ie, as well as on television

By the way, I wonder would anyone like to hazard a guess as to what percentage of the Emirates passengers are travelling onwards to Australia and New Zealand? I suspect it would be high..

Theres another picture of on this page by the way!

lord lucan

This was in yesterday. It's A6-EGJ,only in service since last Autumn and to the best of my knowledge it's a 3 class 777-31HER with 380 seats.

Zonda999

So between that and the Etihad flight to Abu Dhabi, thats well over 600 seats goinf out that direction every single day. Thats a lot to fill even in a potential market of about 5 million, about (ROI and NI, that is). The competition between them can only be a good thing though

And btw, seeing that next to the EI A320's behind it, and even the A330-200 further on, makes you appreciate how much of a beast that plane is

Madpaddy79

8/42/310

jackal

They are going to struggle to fill it unless they fly into Dublin at more sociable hours. Most people I know on long hauls just want to get it over with as soon as possible. Their flight into Dublin, departing 7AM means an overnight stay in Dubai for most travellers coming from the far east or Australia. No thanks.

davepatr07

"They are going to struggle to fill it unless they fly into Dublin at more sociable hours. Most people I know on long hauls just want to get it over with as soon as possible. Their flight into Dublin, departing 7AM means an overnight stay in Dubai for most travellers coming from the far east or Australia. No thanks."

It actually isn't bad heading to Ireland from here which I thought it would be. It's worse on the way back heading East which is ideal for a stop over. Landing around midnight in Dubai for a 1 day/2 day stop over before resuming your journey is a good plan. Mind you the Jetlag is still there when you reach Oz. The A332 both ways were packed. If the B773 doesn't continue to fill it they could always use a spare B772.

Even though over 22hrs of flying is tiring I lost a lot of sleep coming back here then going to Dublin via Dubai.

sharkman

jackal wrote: »

They are going to struggle to fill it unless they fly into Dublin at more sociable hours. Most people I know on long hauls just want to get it over with as soon as possible. Their flight into Dublin, departing 7AM means an overnight stay in Dubai for most travellers coming from the far east or Australia. No thanks.

I cant see them struggle at all , I'm sure Emirates have done their homework on this route. I can only see them expanding their Dublin service.

jackal

sharkman wrote: »

I cant see them struggle at all , I'm sure Emirates have done their homework on this route. I can only see them expanding their Dublin service.

They probably have done their homework, and they do price their flights well, and a lot of travellers will look at that and little else. The overnight stop over does not appeal to me personally. Just get home as soon as possible and recover in your own place!

stopthepanic

They freight loads are very high on this flight ( I believe this was a reason for bringing the 777 start date forward) and remember the 777 was not supposed to start until July so the current loads are based on reservations made for a 330-200's capacity.

veetwin

I got a quick tour of the cabin the other day by a lovely English stewardess. 1st class is quite spectacular with reasonably large spacious suite which includes a large personal tv and minibar. Business is quite ordinary by comparision. Economy does have the 10 rows across but it didn't look to cramped in fairness. Massive selection in the AVOD and she was telling me that Emirates pay extra to show the latest movies even before they are released in some countries.

One of the Etihad staff told me recently that the cargo is a huge part of their operation also. He said the cargo and business passengers cover the costs of the flight and all the economy fares are profit!

ohigg84

Zonda999 wrote: »

So between that and the Etihad flight to Abu Dhabi, thats well over 600 seats goinf out that direction every single day. Thats a lot to fill even in a potential market of about 5 million, about (ROI and NI, that is). The competition between them can only be a good thing though

And btw, seeing that next to the EI A320's behind it, and even the A330-200 further on, makes you appreciate how much of a beast that plane is

Was about to say that.. That EI A320 is a dwarf beside it, and the A332 looks tiny too..
77W is a beautiful aircraft

brandon_flowers

veetwin wrote: »

One of the Etihad staff told me recently that the cargo is a huge part of their operation also. He said the cargo and business passengers cover the costs of the flight and all the economy fares are profit!

This is the case on most flights. If business is full/nearly full the costs are covered. Problem is not all routes have business class passengers all the time, especially something like DUB-DXB so they need to make sure they are filling economy at all times too.

Mister Jingles

If Emirates are doing well here in Ireland what are the chances that they will do stop overs from UAE to the USA in a year or so ?

Stinicker

Zonda999 wrote: »

By the way, I wonder would anyone like to hazard a guess as to what percentage of the Emirates passengers are travelling onwards to Australia and New Zealand? I suspect it would be high..

I travelled the route two weeks ago and there was loads of Irish people returning from Australia on the flight, was talking to the two lads next to me and they were both coming back from Australia. Alot of older retired types up in business class also. It also had quite alot of Indians and Africans travelling to Ireland plus your asian student types. The amount of actual tourists it was carrying was not great I imagine.

Tenger

Mister Jingles wrote: »

If Emirates are doing well here in Ireland what are the chances that they will do stop overs from UAE to the USA in a year or so ?

Well Emirates already fly to the USA direct from DXB so they currently 'do stop overs from the UAE to the USA'

I assume you mean flight from DXB-DUB-USA? They cannot do this as they currently do not have the travel rights to operate from another country into the USA. (I think this is referred to as 5th Freedom Rights) Emirates/Ethiad are bound by the UAE/USA agreement which limits their access to the States, while EU carriers enjoy and Open Skies agreement with the USA.

Part of the speculation about the Ethiad interest in Aer Lingus is that they could deliver pax to DUB who then travel to the USA on an Aer Lingus aircraft, thus taking advantage of the US CBP pre clearance facility in DUB.

castie

Tenger wrote: »

Well Emirates already fly to the USA direct from DXB so they currently 'do stop overs from the UAE to the USA'

I assume you mean flight from DXB-DUB-USA? They cannot do this as they currently do not have the travel rights to operate from another country into the USA. (I think this is referred to as 5th Freedom Rights) Emirates/Ethiad are bound by the UAE/USA agreement which limits their access to the States, while EU carriers enjoy and Open Skies agreement with the USA.

Part of the speculation about the Ethiad interest in Aer Lingus is that they could deliver pax to DUB who then travel to the USA on an Aer Lingus aircraft, thus taking advantage of the US CBP pre clearance facility in DUB.

Singapore Airlines fly to NY from Frankfurt no?
How did they manage that?
They also use Virgin Atlantic when they land in London to carry passengers to the states.

troposphere

Probably to do with this

Multilateral Agreement on the Liberalization of International Air Transportation.

With the purpose of promoting open skies air services arrangements, the Multilateral Agreement was negotiated on 31 October - 2 November 2000 at Kona, Hawaii, and signed at Washington D.C. on 1 May 2001 by Brunei Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand, Singapore and the United States of America.

[link]

Tenger

castie wrote: »

Singapore Airlines fly to NY from Frankfurt no?
How did they manage that?

As shown above.....Singapore has a bilateral agreement with the USA and EU. UAE does not and it looks like they will not get it as many airlines/countries are worried about the behemoth that is Emirates pushing their home airlines aside.

Edit for Zonda999: True. Emirates are the big shark looking to pounce with their rampant growth and their B773/A380 fleet means huge seat capacity. However EY and QR are less aggressive but are definitely ambitious in their growth plans.

Am not sure about EK and QR but EY announced that 2011 was their first year to make a profit. The Middle East Big 3 are not operating under the same self contained financial restrictions that other global carriers are. They are being funded from UAE oil money. Easy to order 90 A380 when you don't have shareholders to answer to. So until the Sheik's decide they have to stand alone other airlines are going to be at a disadvantage to the ME3.

Zonda999

Is hardly just emirates in fairness, what about Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways? It just goes to show what you can do when you have airlines that are probably not run as profitable businesses coming into the market..

Mister Jingles

Going back to the 773 itself, could one take off from Dublin fully loaded ?

cuterob

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Going back to the 773 itself, could one take off from Dublin fully loaded ?

I don't think fully loaded with full fuel but doesnt need full fuel for it's trip from dub

Zonda999

Remember the 77W is capable of flights about twice the distance from DUB to DXB, probably further..

eatmyshorts

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Going back to the 773 itself, could one take off from Dublin fully loaded ?

To kill a few minutes in the cruise on recent flight, I ran the figures through the performance calculator.

I input a standard day, i.e 15 degrees C, QNH 1013hPa, zero wind.
I didn't write the results down, but the Regulated Take Off Weight came back in the region of 320,000kgs to 334,000kgs, depending on whether using runway 28, 10, 16 or 34. Runway 10 gave the largest RTOW, and 16 I think the least.
I didn't take into account the options of APU-to-Pack, Packs Off or Thrust Bump, all of which would increase those figures.
Max Structural Take Off Weight is between 340,000kgs and 352,000kgs depending on the model of 77W.

Basically a 77W could make DUB-DXB with a full load from any runway in Dublin on most days, even 16 or 34.

Dacian

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Going back to the 773 itself, could one take off from Dublin fully loaded ?

As above, yes it can.
Having read elsewhere a few discussions about the runways at DUB the consensus seems to be that the B773ER cannot take off fully loaded with a full tank of gas.
So out of DUB you can use the full capacity of the aircraft but NOT the full range potential of the B773ER. It is an either/or decision. And for DUB-DXB you do not need the range so you use the full capacity.

veetwin

Dacian wrote: »

As above, yes it can.
Having read elsewhere a few discussions about the runways at DUB the consensus seems to be that the B773ER cannot take off fully loaded with a full tank of gas.
So out of DUB you can use the full capacity of the aircraft but NOT the full range potential of the B773ER. It is an either/or decision. And for DUB-DXB you do not need the range so you use the full capacity.

While ye have your copy books out how much longer would the runway need to be for a full load at maximum range!

As an aside I was watching it being refuelled the other day they had one truck lined up behind the other. I was wondering why the second truck didn't fuel the other wing?

eatmyshorts

Dacian wrote: »

As above, yes it can.
Having read elsewhere a few discussions about the runways at DUB the consensus seems to be that the B773ER cannot take off fully loaded with a full tank of gas.
So out of DUB you can use the full capacity of the aircraft but NOT the full range potential of the B773ER. It is an either/or decision. And for DUB-DXB you do not need the range so you use the full capacity.

veetwin wrote: »

While ye have your copy books out how much longer would the runway need to be for a full load at maximum range!

As an aside I was watching it being refuelled the other day they had one truck lined up behind the other. I was wondering why the second truck didn't fuel the other wing?

With a decent headwind, or using Bump, or APU-to-Packs and not too high a temp, a 77W can lift Max Structural off runway 28 or 10.

I'm not flying again for a few days, but on my next trip I'll run the permutations again and print out the results for reference.

Tenger

veetwin wrote: »

As an aside I was watching it being refuelled the other day they had one truck lined up behind the other. I was wondering why the second truck didn't fuel the other wing?

AFAIK normal procedures is to only fuel on the RIGHT hand side.
Or maybe that is where the fuelling receptacle is located.....

stopthepanic

Tenger wrote: »

AFAIK normal procedures is to only fuel on the left hand side.
Or maybe that is where the fuelling receptacle is located.....

Re-fueling CAN occur on both sides but normally it is on the RIGHT (starboard) side of the a/c.

Veetwin, regards the 2 fuel trucks lined up, are you sure it wasn't a fuel truck with a trailer unit on it?

veetwin

stopthepanic wrote: »

Veetwin, regards the 2 fuel trucks lined up, are you sure it wasn't a fuel truck with a trailer unit on it?

No, two separate trucks. We were wondering how much it would cost to filler up!

Tenger

stopthepanic wrote: »

Re-fueling CAN occur on both sides but normally it is on the RIGHT (starboard) side of the a/c.

Oh the horror, school boy error in mixing my left and right up..........


I was under the impression that not all aircraft were fitted with receptacle on the port side.

mayotom

veetwin wrote: »

As an aside I was watching it being refuelled the other day they had one truck lined up behind the other. I was wondering why the second truck didn't fuel the other wing?

If they were refuelling from both sides and there was a fire, then evacuation would be virtually impossible

stopthepanic

[QUOTE=I was under the impression that not all aircraft were fitted with receptacle on the port side.[/QUOTE]

Tenger, I knew that at least some of the EI A330's could fuel either side so my comment was a presumption (I was once told 'never presume in aviation'). The doubts set in and I had to go find out for sure.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7772sec5.pdf

page number 79 states "Fuel: two underwing pressure connector on each wing"

but you are probably right that 'not all aircraft are fitted'

Foggy43

mayotom wrote: »

If they were refuelling from both sides and there was a fire, then evacuation would be virtually impossible

The B747-400 sometimes is fuelled from both sides until the wing tanks are full. There are pressure fuel points on each wing but only one (the left) has the fuel control panel. It takes about 90 minutes for one bowser to completley fill a B747-400. It will take about 170,000kgs which is approx 212,500 litres. The initial flow rate would be 3,000 litres per minute but will reduce as the tanks fill and shut off. If I remember correctly full wings is 120,000kgs.

Stinicker

Foggy43 wrote: »

The B747-400 sometimes is fuelled from both sides until the wing tanks are full. There are pressure fuel points on each wing but only one (the left) has the fuel control panel. It takes about 90 minutes for one bowser to completley fill a B747-400. It will take about 170,000kgs which is approx 212,500 litres. The initial flow rate would be 3,000 litres per minute but will reduce as the tanks fill and shut off. If I remember correctly full wings is 120,000kgs.

I'd hope they are paying less for their Kerosene than I am to fill the heating tank, otherwise you'd be looking at almost €200k to fill a jumbo jet!

stopthepanic

now do the math!!!


http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/economics/fuel_monitor/Pages/index.aspx

according to Boeing a 777-300 ER hold 47890 u.s. gallons

This equates to $147,980 ish!

obviously that is from empty.

Stinicker wrote: »

I'd hope they are paying less for their Kerosene than I am to fill the heating tank, otherwise you'd be looking at almost €200k to fill a jumbo jet!

you're right, nearly, a 747-400ER would cost $196848 to fuel from empty. No way would I hand over $200K and say keep the change!!