Hi guys,

 

For the 777 I know there's the integrated standby instruments and the non-integrated (airspeed indicator, altimeter, and artificial horizon are all separate). It seems the non-integrated system was the original (found in the 777-200, 777-200ER, 777-300). I can see that PMDG would implement both systems in case they decided to develop these older models, but I wonder why it was left in as a configurable option for the -200LR and -300ER. 

 

Has there ever been a case (or airline configuration) which used the non-integrated instruments on the -200LR or -300ER?

 

Anyhow, for my two cents worth: I would be happy to pay for the expansion packs for the older 777 models -- there's something about flying aging, broken-in airplanes that I enjoy (bring on the 747-400!! ).

 

Cheers,

Sam Kharey

Maybe. Look around airliners for a while

 

Aircraft: 777

Category: Flight Deck

Remarks: LR

Sort: Year (oldest to newest)

 

and...

 

I couldn't find any, lol: http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?aircraft_genericsearch=%22boeing+777%22&airlinesearch=&countrysearch=&specialsearch=cockpit&keywords=LR&sort_order=year&page_limit=120&daterange=&range=&thumbnails=&engine_version=6.0

 

But that doesn't mean there ain't any! Boeing offers the option, then the airlines decide whether they take it or not.

 

For instance, I believe the 777 has an option for folding the wingtips up at around the 80% wingspan but no airline has taken that option.

EDIT: We have a winner!

 

Boeing 777-346ER, tail number N5016R. Also N5017V. These seem to be originally Boeing test aircraft, but still, it shows it's possible!

 

 

[MOD: DO NOT - In ANY way, shape, or form, directly link to an A.net picture here, or copy an image to be hosted elsewhere.]

 

 

I can see that PMDG would implement both systems in case they decided to develop these older models, but I wonder why it was left in as a configurable option for the -200LR and -300ER.

What would you gain by not having this option?

Boeing 777-346ER, tail number N5016R.

What is that to the right and left of the PFD's? I only have the 777-200LRF.

What is that to the right and left of the PFD's? I only have the 777-200LRF.

 

Probably some test equipment. Like the "thing" on top of the MCP. I don't know what any of those are for to be honest.

Why can't you link to pictures on airliners.net?

I must be out of the loop, that seems like an odd thing to get a tongue lashing for.

Why can't you link to pictures on airliners.net?

 

I must be out of the loop, that seems like an odd thing to get a tongue lashing for.

 

I noticed that as well.

 

[MOD: Do not attempt to sideskirt copyright law]

 

 

I must be out of the loop, that seems like an odd thing to get a tongue lashing for.

 

A.net links have been specifically disabled to protect people from poaching bandwidth from A.net (embedding photos, essentially). In order to post an A.net photo, someone generally has to download the photo, and then host it on their own site, which goes against the copyright of said image.

 

Very simply stated, if you do not own the material, image, etc. OR you do not have specific permission to use that material, image, etc., do not post it.

 

Based on Tom Allensworth's rather emphatic enforcement of, and posts about, this in the past, I'm guessing A.net has been very aggressive about handling breaches of this. See one of Tom's posts here:

http://www.avsim.com/topic/393059-copyright-reminders-please-read/

Sorry for the Airliners rule infringement.

 

In any case: Just believe me. That was a picture of the flight deck of N5016R, a 777-300ER with "non-integraded" standby instruments. Go on and look for it on your own in Airliners.

Sorry for the Airliners rule infringement.

 

In any case: Just believe me. That was a picture of the flight deck of N5016R, a 777-300ER with "non-integraded" standby instruments. Go on and look for it on your own in Airliners.

 

Indeed N5016R was fitted with the three separate standby indicators. Why? By the time is exited the production line, the ISFD was not ready yet!

 

It flew in this configuration throughout most of the certification period and once it was reconfigured for delivery to JAL as JA731J, it was of course fitted with the ISFD as specified.

 

In summary, there has only ever been one temporarily non-ISFD fitted -300ER.

 

Furthermore, various operators such as EK, UA, CX, SQ have over the past few years been replacing the separate standby indicators with the ISFD on their older -200/-200ER and -300 aircraft.

 

 

 

 

Indeed N5016R was fitted with the three separate standby indicators. Why? By the time is exited the production line, the ISFD was not ready yet!

 

Leo, thanks a lot for that information!

 

Now the questions are:

1. Did Boeing even offer the option of non-ISFD vs. ISFD to its customers?
2. If it did, did any customer choose the non-ISFD?

Leo, thanks a lot for that information!

 

Now the questions are:

 

• Did Boeing even offer the option of non-ISFD vs. ISFD to its customers?
• If it did, did any customer choose the non-ISFD?

I have seen a Dec. 2014 dated B777 customer options list. Definitely was not listed there and I doubt it was ever a official option offered by Boeing. On the other hand, Boeing is known for "if you pay for it, we will do it for you" when it comes to customer options. I am sure there was a period of time where any operator who really thought it was necessary for crew commonality, could have optioned the separate standby indicators for a absurd price.

 

For example, later in the B747-400 production line, the taxi light became standard equipment. Two forward facing bulbs, placed on the nose gear, linked to the air/ground switch and actioned by a single switch on the overhead panel.

 

One specific operator did not want a single remaining -400F aircraft (delivered various years after their previous -400F batch) to have this standard equipment. They paid Boeing to build/deliver it without the taxi light.A notorious penny wise and pound foolish airline, who with a subsequent -400ERF order finally came to their senses and received aircraft with taxi lights (Crews wanting them all along).

 

Many chose the no taxi light option, (when it was the cheaper customer option), to maintain commonality with their 747 Classic fleet. Some eventually realized that Boeing had created this option for a reason (for the pilots). Using wing mounted inboard/outboard landing lights to taxi, does not make other pilots happy, specifically when facing 747's while on the ground at night.

Gents-

 

Airliners.net:  The only place on the internet where enforcement of the rules is done by moderators more prickly than the PMDG forum mods. 

 

(Don't you DARE laugh...  DON'T.... DO NOOOOOOT....)

 

 

I have seen a Dec. 2014 dated B777 customer options list. Definitely was not listed there and I doubt it was ever a official option offered by Boeing. On the other hand, Boeing is known for "if you pay for it, we will do it for you" when it comes to customer options. I am sure there was a period of time where any operator who really thought it was necessary for crew commonality, could have optioned the separate standby indicators for a absurd price.

 

Very interesting! I guess this really applies to any manufacturer of "big machinery" and "low volumes". If you pay, I'll do as you say!

 

 

 

They paid Boeing to build/deliver it without the taxi light

 

That's odd, paying for an enhancement NOT to be fitted...

 

I thought the whole point of the separated standby instrument was paying LESS than the ISFD. But I'm also guessing that once something becomes standard, if you want to obsolete option you'll have to pay extra for it.