Boeing fifth 787 test aircraft, ZA005, lifts off from Boeing Field. Image from Boeing.
The Boeing 787 Dreamliner has been grounded around the world since January 16th and many have put in countless hours to try and get the aircraft airborn once again.
Hope was raised when the FAA gave Boeing authorization to fly a 787 Dreamliner from Fortworth, TX back to Paine Field on Feburary 7th. That flight was only a one-time authorization. Today, the FAA had given Boeing authorization to take their fifth test aircraft, ZA005, on a flight over the state of Washington (and looks like a sliver into Oregon).
The aircarft lifted off from Boeing Field (BFI) at 12:32pm local time. ZA005 had no passengers and only 13 Boeing flight pilots and test personnel. After the 2 hour and 19 minute flight, ZA005 landed safetly back at BFI and the crew reported that the, “flight was uneventful.”
Map from FlightAware.com showing ZA005’s flight path over Washington State.
Over the durration of the flight, the crew were closely watching the main and APU batteries, which was in the center of the Dreamliner’s current woes. Boeing stated that the results are a part of an overarching investigation and at this time are not able to share any additional issues.
PHOTO: ZA005 landing back at Boeing Field
Boeing hopes to resume test flights next week to continue finding the issues plaguing their new 787.
ZA005 lifts off from BFI for a test flight. No passengers onboard. Image from Boeing.
On Thursday, All Nippon Airways (ANA) stated that the 787 grounding has affected more than 100,000 of their passengers and resulted in over 1200 cancelled flights.
San Jose Airport (SJC), which saw ANA Boeing 787 service for only a short period, before the fleet was grouned, announced via Twitter that the airline has cancelled service until at least March 30th.
According to the New York Times, Japan Airlines expects the grounding to cost them $7.5million through March and that they plan to seek compinsation from Boeing. Many other airlines have also made similar claims of expecting compisation from Boeing.
Sure, annoyed passengers, lost revenue and additional delays are one thing, but the airline that might be hit the hardest is LOT Polish Airlines where the new 787 Dreamliner means so much for their future. A great article from the Wall Street Journal talks about how the 787 continued issues could spell disaster for LOT.
 |
This story written by…David Parker Brown, Editor & Founder.
David started AirlineReporter.com in the summer of 2008, but has had a passion for aviation since he was a kid. Born and raised in the Seattle area (where he is currently based) has surely had an influence and he couldn’t imagine living anywhere else in the world.
@AirlineReporter | Flickr | YouTube |
Eastern Air Lines Lockheed L1011. Photo by Bob Garrard.
This post was written by Vinay Bhaskara with BangaloreAviation.com for AirlineReporter.com:
Eastern Air Lines was a pioneering carrier in the history of American commercial aviation. Its many historic achievements include launching the concept of a shuttle service between New York, Boston, and DC, as well as launching the Airbus A300 in the US market. However, thanks to gross mis-management by airline industry super-villain Frank Lorenzo, Eastern Air Lines sadly shut down on January 19th, 1991, making 1990 its last full year of operations.
In honor of the anniversary of Eastern’s passing, I’d like to share some interesting statistics from Eastern’s last full year of operations in 1990.
Part of a January 1991 Time table for Eastern Air Lines. The airline wouldn’t make it past the month. Image from Chris Sloan / Airchive.com.
Over the course of 1990, Eastern Airlines carried 22.09 million passengers on 279,793 scheduled flights, or an average of 60,536 passengers per day on 767 daily flights. On average, each flight carried around 79 passengers. Eastern offered a total of 38.25 million available seats. Thus Eastern’s system wide seat load factor was 57.8%. When compared to today’s bone-crunching reality of close to 90% load factors this may seem like a better option, but remember Eastern was losing tons of money at those loads. System wide, Eastern served 94 destinations, including 27 international ones (as well as San Juan and Ponce in Puerto Rico).
During 1990, Eastern operated 5 aircraft types including the Boeing 757-200, the McDonnell-Douglas DC 9-30, the McDonnell-Douglas DC 9-50, the Airbus A300 B4, the Boeing 727-200, the Douglas DC 10-30, and the Lockheed L1011-1 Tristar. The DC 10-30s were solely operated on the Miami-Rio de Janeiro flights, while the Lockheed L1011s were operated throughout the system on high volume flights between the Northeast, Miami, Atlanta, California, and San Juan, as well as between Miami and Bogota, Lima, and Guayaquil in South America. The 757-200s operated around 89 flights per day, while the DC 9 fleet operated more than half of the total number of flights with around 390 per day. The A300s operated around 38 flights per day, while the 727s operated close to 230 flights per day.
note: all figures approximate and are from the Dept of Transportation.
By far the largest operational base was Atlanta, which had 104,927 departures scheduled, around 288 daily departures. While this may seem small today given Delta’s 1000-plus flights per day hub in Atlanta, at the time, it was one of the largest airline hubs in the whole world.
For the year, Eastern carried 16.50 million passengers through its Atlanta hub, representing 74.7% of their total passenger base. Capacity-wise, Atlanta represented around 72.3% of Eastern’s total available seats, and Atlanta’s seat load factor was slightly higher than that of the overall network at 59.7%. From Atlanta, Eastern served 68 destinations, 4 of them international (plus San Juan, Puerto Rico). Perhaps the weirdest destination that they served was Gainesville, Florida with Douglas DC 9-30s and DC 9-50s, which today lacks mainline service. Below is a route map of Eastern Airlines’ service from the Atlanta hub:
Eastern also had a large Latin American gateway in Miami. After it shut down (along with Pan Am ’“ the other big Miami operator), both American Airlines and United (to a limited degree) moved in to fill the void in Miami and serve the strong ethnic demand between Miami and Latin America/the Caribbean.
By 1990, Eastern Air Lines once robust hub in Miami had shrunk to serve as primarily an origin and destination (O&D) base for service to Latin America. They operated just 40 daily departures and served only 11 domestic destinations: Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York La Guardia, Newark, Orlando, Philadelphia, Palm Beach, San Francisco, and Tampa (as well as San Juan, Puerto Rico and Toronto, Canada). But it was still a powerhouse gateway to Latin America, serving 23 destinations. The route map for the Miami Latin American gateway is shown below:
Over the course of its long history, Eastern also had hubs in Charlotte, New York JFK, Kansas City, New York La Guardia, and San Juan, as well as large focus operations in Chicago, Orlando, and Tampa. But by 1990, these had all been reduced to mere ’œspokes’ in Eastern’s network.
An airline that had been the world’s largest in the mid 90s had shrunk to a shell of its former glory. But despite the financial troubles driven by a decade of mismanagement, Eastern’s network was actually very well designed. Much of its network out of Atlanta was later replicated by low cost carrier AirTran Airways in the shadow of the Delta behemoth. And its vacated routes out of Miami formed the basis for American’s new Latin American gateway that today is perhaps its strongest hub.
An American Airlines 757-200 at Los Angeles, a sight that can’t last forever – Photo: Mal Muir / AirlineReporter.com
If you fly long-haul in North America you have probably flown on a narrow bodied aircraft. Whether it be transcontinental flights between the coasts or flying transatlantic between the USA and Europe, the North American airlines just love to use these smaller, more efficient aircraft. For me, the daddy of these aircraft is the Boeing 757, which is no longer in production but still is the stalwart of the narrow bodies.
Flying with Delta, United, US Airways and American Airlines you will more than likely step onto a 757-200 or the super long 757-300 for a flight to Hawaii, New York or even London. But what happens when this aircraft goes out of service? What is there to replace it? As the 757s start to be retired from service due to age (US Airways is already doing this), the airlines are going to have to start replacing these aircraft with something… but what?
A Rough Chart showing Etops 60 vs Etops 120 between New York and London
You need to look first at what makes these aircraft so popular: the passenger to range ratio. The 757 has that unique mix of enough passengers on-board with the range to get it over an ocean or across a large continent without a hassle, while still maintaining reasonable fuel burn costs. The narrow body set up (single aisle) allows the flight to serve routes, and especially cities, which would not be able to handle the wide body (generally double aisle) aircraft such as the Boeing 767, Boeing 777 or Airbus A330.
Historically if you were going to fly long-haul you needed four engines. Even as far back as the Boeing 707 or the Douglas DC 8, these aircraft were designed to fly those long haul routes with engines for backup, should one fail. Then along came aircraft like the Boeing 757, 767 and Airbus A300. They only had two engines, but were still able to cover long distances over water with only minor changes.
Although ETOPS (Extended Range Twin Engine Operations) has been around for quite some time it had always been restricted 60 minutes, then it was extended to 120 minutes. The 120 extension came in to help flights across the Atlantic to London.
A United 757-300, the Aircraft that never ends – Photo: Mal Muir / AirlineReporter.com
At a 60 minute rating they would have to fly from New York to London over Iceland to ensure that there was a landing site in range within 60 minutes. With new engine & navigation technology, came the introduction of 120 rating (though 180 minute etops is now the standard). It meant you could go direct over the ocean without a worry, as half way across you would still be within 2 hours of Iceland or New York or London. This revolutionized air travel.
As technology progressed more, the ETOPS ratings extended out, with Boeing currently holding a 330 minute rating for the 777 & 787 aircraft. Airbus is expecting a 350 minute rating for the new A350 XWB.
Today, narrow body aircraft serve plenty of ETOPS routes. Alaska Airlines operates the Boeing 737-800 & 900 from the west coast to Hawaii and there are quite a few rumors that Southwest might join them with their 737-800’s as well.
The A320 family though does some interesting ETOPS flights as well. The Airbus A318, also known as the Baby Bus, flies across the Atlantic with British Airways and Air Canada Air Canada flies an A319; a long way to go on such a small aircraft. When you have long thin routes (long distance, small amount of passengers) you need to use an appropriate aircraft.
But which aircraft will most likely fill the gap that the 757 will leave? Boeing has the 737-900ER and variants of the new 737 Max as well. Airbus is offering the A321 and soon the A321neo.
The A320neo family should extend the range of this aircraft by a good 600 miles. This could be the difference of serving a route or not and combines the capacity of the original A321, with the range of an A319 (the aircraft in the Airbus narrow body family with the longest range).
American Airlines has selected the A321 to replace its aging 757-200s and 767-200s on its transcontinental routes. Hawaiian Airlines just ordered the A321neo to expand its ETOPS operations. Flights from Honolulu to Los Angeles for instance are in the range of an A321neo and by utilizing this aircraft, they can free up some of their A330s or 767s to serve other, longer routes or routes that need the higher capacity. The A321neo will allow them to expand to possible new markets that do not have the demand for the larger A330 or 767.
Other airlines, like Icelandair, which currently only operates a fleet of Boeing 757s, are planning to expand their operations by introducing 12 737 MAX 8 and 9 aircraft. United Airlines, which currently has over 150 757s has ordered 100 737 MAX aircraft, which many will be used to replace the aging 757s.
Mock up of what Hawaiian Airlines Airbus A321NEO will look like. Aircraft image from Airbus, edited by Brandon Farris.
The new Airbus A321neo and 737 9 MAX will change the narrow body long range family, as it takes over those routes the 757 currently serves. This will also put more 757s on the market and possibly low cost carriers like Allegiant Air, might be able to add more 757s to their fleet and expand their ETOPs flights.
These aircraft and other new ones like it should replace those venerable 757s flying the sky at the moment. It will be good for those flying on-board, as new aircraft means a better on-board experience, but for some like me, it will be a sad day to see fewer 757s take flight. Seeing that ungainly long body of the 757-300, which looks like it shouldn’t exist on such a thin aircraft, is an amazing sight. When you step on-board, the single aisle looks like it will never end. Hopefully these new aircraft can inspire similar thoughts amongst future generations of AvGeeks.
 |
This story written by…Malcolm Muir, Lead Correspondent. Mal is an Australian Avgeek now living and working in Seattle. With a passion for aircraft photography, traveling and the fun that combining the two can bring. Insights into the aviation world with a bit of a perspective thanks to working in the travel industry.@BigMalX | BigMal’s World | Photos |
China Southern Boeing 787 Dreamliner B-2727 lands at Paine Field earlier today. Photograph by Michael O’Leary.
The world-wide fleet of Boeing 787 might be grounded, but Boeing flew one Dreamliners from Dallas/Forth Worth, Texas to Everett. The ferry-flight only contained Boeing employees and was used to run a test on the lithium-ion batteries. During the flight, the battery had to be closely monitored and no issues were reported.
Some in the media are reporting the aircraft was in Texas for painting. Maybe it could been having touch up work, but the aircraft, B2727, has been painted since late 2012.
The FAA approved this ferry-flight, but has not approved future test flights. Hopefully we will be able to see more 787 test flights in the air soon. See video of the landing on KING5.
A China Southern Boeing 787 Dreamliner arrives a Paine Field in Everett Thursday. All other Dreamliners are grounded. Boeing was granted permission to fly this aircraft to Everett. Photography by Michael O’Leary.
It appears that Alaska Airlines has taken the next step to start possible commercial flight service at Paine Field, located at Everett, WA. “This is a required step if the carrier were to begin jet service out of the regional airport at some point in the future,” the airline stated in a press release. The key word is “were.”
“We continue to believe that our flights at Sea-Tac Airport and in Bellingham best serve the Puget Sound region’s needs for affordable air travel, particularly in light of the significant investments both airports have made recently to improve their facilities,” said Andrew Harrison, Alaska Airlines’ vice president of planning and revenue management. “That said, if one or more other airlines begin operations at Paine Field, we would commence service alongside these carriers. Submitting a schedule with the FAA along with a request for authorization to serve Paine is a necessary step in the process.”
In this case, it is pretty obvious that Alaska is referring to Allegiant. Is Alaska really only taking a defensive position here or are they testing the waters to gauge reaction from the public? Public flights at Paine Field is a political hot-topic; There are many wealthy folks who live in the surrounding area, who have a strong voice against additional air traffic.
PAINE FIELD COMMERCIAL FIGHTS BACKGROUND STORIES:
“Alaska Airlines’ proposed schedule in the first year of operations would include 14 weekly round-trip flights to Las Vegas, Honolulu and Maui, Hawaii, using Boeing 737-800 jet aircraft.,” Alaska’s press release stated. “Alaska would also fly 21 weekly round-trip flights to Portland, Ore., with Bombardier Q400 turboprop aircraft.”
Alaska would plan to expand operations stating they they would fly 49 weekly round-trip flights, including, “28 round-trips to Las Vegas, Honolulu, Maui, Los Angeles, Phoenix and San Diego with 737-800s, plus 21 weekly round-trips to Portland using Q400s.”
| Summary of proposed service for the first year 35 round-trip flights a week: |
| City pair |
Weekly Frequency |
Aircraft |
| Everett-Honolulu |
4 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Las Vegas |
7 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Maui |
3 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Portland |
21 |
Q400 |
| |
| Summary of proposed service by the fifth year 49 round-trip flights a week: |
| City pair |
Weekly Frequency |
Aircraft |
| Everett-Honolulu |
4 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Las Vegas |
7 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Los Angeles |
7 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Maui |
3 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Phoenix |
4 |
737-800 |
| Everett-Portland |
21 |
Q400 |
| Everett-San Diego |
3 |
737-800 |
Flight information from Alaska Airlines.
This seems like quite a bit of potential traffic to just be getting ready, but better off to be prepared right?
One of the biggest hurdles left is there is no terminal at Paine Field and the airport has stated they would not pay to build one. Could/would Alaska and Allegiant work together to build a terminal together? Highly doubtful.
As of now, Allegiant has no comment. Your move Allegiant.
