767 range

[Guest]

In the above post, I have already said, from the Boeing pages (who says the Boeing site doesn't have the info any more?)767-200ER 6,600 nm (12,220 km)767-300ER 6,105 nm (11,305 km)767-400ER 5,645 nm (10,450 km)767-300 Freighter 3,270 nm (6,056 km)767-200 and 767-300 do have much shorter ranges. I copied mine from POSKY for the 767-200 and 767-300. And yes the JAL 767-300 wouldn't cross the U.S., they had the first 767-300 and at that time 767-300ER wasn't out yet.Kitty MercuryCathay Pacific Virtual Pilot (CX252)

[Guest Scott Campbell]

Kitty,I didn't say ER. Those are the ranges for the STANDARD models, from the Boeing specs of 1999.The ranges I posted are for the 767-200, not 200ER, and 767-300, not 300ER.If the plane couldn't even fly across the US, then it vouldn't fly from Chicago to Europe, which it still does, with the -200 (not 200ER) model. It would be a pretty useless aircraft if its range is less than a 727.Thusly for the 767-200:

http://avsim.com/flightdeck/temp/profile.jpg[TABLE WIDTH="560" cellspacing=0 cellpadding=4][TR][TD BGCOLOR="#cccccc" colspan=2]Passengers- Typical 3-class configuration- Typical 2-class configuration- Typical 1-class configuration [/TD][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#99ccff" ALIGN="left" valign="bottom" width="364] [div align=left]181224up to 255[/div][/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc]Cargo[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left" COLSPAN="2" width="364][div align=left]2,875 cu ft (81.4 cu m)[/div][/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc" valign="top]Enginesmaximum thrust[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left"COLSPAN="2" width="364" valign="top][/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc]-Pratt & Whitney PW4062[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left"COLSPAN="2" width="364]63,300 lb (28,713 kg)[/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc]-General Electric CF6-80C2B7F[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left"COLSPAN="2" width="364]62,100 lb (28,169 kg)[/font][/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc]Maximum Fuel Capacity[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left"COLSPAN="2" width="364][div align=left]23,980 U.S. gal (90,770 l)[/div][/TD][/TR][TR][TD BGCOLOR=#cccccc" colspan="2]Maximum Takeoff Weight[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left"COLSPAN="2" width="364][div align=left]395,000 lb (179,170 kg)[/div][/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc]Maximum RangeTypical city pairs: New York-Beijing[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left"COLSPAN="2" width="364][div align=left]6,615 nautical miles (12,250 km)[/div][/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc]Typical Cruise Speed at 35,000 feet[/TD][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#99ccff" ALIGN="left" width="364]0.80 Mach 530 mph (850 km/h)[/TD][/TR][TR][TD COLSPAN=2" BGCOLOR="#cccccc]Basic Dimensions- Wing Span- Overall Length- Tail Height- Interior Cabin Width[/TD][TD BGCOLOR=#99ccff" ALIGN="left"COLSPAN="2" valign="bottom" width="364][div align=left]156 ft 1in (47.6 m) 159 ft 2 in (48.5 m) 52 ft (15.8 m) 15 ft 6 in (4.7 m)[/div][/TD][/TR][/TABLE]http://avsim.com/flightdeck/temp/interior.jpghttp://avsim.com/flightdeck/temp/3view.gifhttp://avsim.com/flightdeck/temp/range.gif

[Guest Scott Campbell]

Michael,With an empty aircraft, I wouldn't doubt it. Heck, even the 707 went from Seattle to London on it's first BA delivery.

[Wolfko 0]

Montreal - Cairo is "only" 5429 Statute ("normal") Miles. There exist longer 767-300ER routes.E. g. when Lauda Air has not enough passengers to fill up their B777, then they fly Vienna - Kuala Lumpur with the smaller B767-300ER.Vienna - Kuala Lumpur is 5841 Statute Miles.Lauda Air even used to fly Vienna - Singapore (6030 Statute Miles!) with their B767-300ER.Wolgang

[Guest]

No, the figures you're quoting are for the -ER model. The specifications clearly show that (MTOW of 395,000 LBS). The base 767-200 has a MTOW of 300,000 LBS, standard 112,000 LBS fuel capacity and a range of 3,100nm. The figures on the Boeing site have been 'dumbed' down for the general public. I can't recall the range of the -300 basic off the top of my head but it was not too different than the base -200.Andrew

[Guest]

All the ER 767 have same approximate range. I think Boeing's logic behind this was how many people do want to fly this distance instead of we'll make the same plane bigger so it can fly farther...

[Guest Scott Campbell]

Andrew,Whooops. And here I was trying to make sure I had the right sheet. Goes to show me for not referring to my Jane's first.I agree about the Boeing site dumbing down. But for who? I don't think Joe Public is going to park his VW and go pick up a 767. ;-)I used to prefer the Airbus site when ity had all the data (still does really).In any case, the numbers Kitty gave are waaaaaaay too short.

[Guest]

Hi Scott,I forgot Boeing has performance sheets available as Characteristics for Airport Planning. Referencing these tables, range should be:767-200:--------3,100nm (300,000 LBS MTOW, Base Aircraft)3,950nm (317,000 LBS MTOW, HGW Non-ER)5,300nm (351,000 LBS MTOW, Base ER Aircraft)6,750nm (387,000 LBS MTOW, HGW ER)767-300:--------3,600nm (345,000 LBS MTOW, Base Aircraft)3,900nm (350,000 LBS MTOW, HGW Non-ER)5,150nm (380,000 LBS MTOW, Base ER Aircraft)6,250nm (407,000 LBS MTOW, HGW ER)767-400ER:----------5,600nm (450,000 LBS MTOW)It's interesting to note the difference in range versus capacity on identical aircraft. For example, Continental has their 767-400's configured for 235 seats while Delta packs in 287. Assuming 210 LBS per person including baggage, that works out to 49,350 LBS and 60,270 LBS payload respectively. With an OEW of 227,400 LBS, we'll assume ZFW of 276,750 LBS and 287,670 LBS.5,750nm (Continental, 235-Seat Configuration, ZFW 276,760 LBS)5,500nm (Delta, 287-Seat Configuration, ZFW 287,670 LBS)Here's what I'm getting at: While the 767-400's specific range may not be as good as the -200ER/300ER, it's range is not greatly affected by large variations in payload. The 767-300ER example assumed approximately 248,000 LBS as ZFW, 261 passengers. The passenger load is a little on the high side for the average carrier but regardless, the curve yields the same results. If we added 10,000 LBS of cargo, range would drop from 6,250nm to 5,500nm. That's a 750nm drop versus 250nm for an 11,000 LBS increase on the -400. I think once Boeing begins installing the AUX tanks on the -400 we will see some very impressive payload vs range figures. The advanced blended wingtips do seem to have a positive effect!Andrew

[Guest Scott Campbell]

Andrew,Thanks for the info. I forgot about the Airport Planning section, although it makes no sense to not have this data on the specs page.I'm trying to keep all this straight for ACLoader and my air files. And I have to make sure I do this for almost everything ever made. :-erks I haven't even kept up with the 767-400 and 747-400LR development.The one thing I need to make sure I get is the actual fuel loads and actual MZFW for everything.Sometimes I wish I had been interested in drinking and wrestling instead of FS and programming. ;-)