NokTang Posted December 25, 2002 Report Share Posted December 25, 2002 Just stumbled upon a reasonable fare on Korean Air, code share with Delta. The aircraft is the 777. I've flown that BKK to Manila, however, has anyone done a long flight on it? Did it run out of gas? What about the BUMPS? Comfort in Coach? Korean Air flight girls or Delta? (Atlanta to Seoul)(and willing to give BJ in the toliet?) the times on the return require 120AM BKK to Seoul, however, that offset by the price and travel time saved (SE USA). thanks and happy holidays nok the kook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UAL875 Posted December 25, 2002 Report Share Posted December 25, 2002 I do the NRT - JFK (Tokyo-NY) run often. The American carriers have been using 777s on this haul (~14 hours non-stop) for a while now. So I think I can give you some perspective. Running out of gas. Not an issue. I think you are asking this because the 777 has 2 engines vs. 4 on 747s (the usual long flight aircraft). From the fair amount I have read but fortunately never experienced, the 777 can fly quite capably on 1 engine. Granted there is a comfort level knowing there are a couple of extra engines on a 747. But the triple seven's engines are ridiculously powerful. Look closely at their size...a 737 fusalage can fit within a 777 engine. Not joking. Bumpy. I think 777s are the smoothest ride (for a "heavy") in the sky, bar none. Just my opinion but when living in Japan it seems you ride nothing but 777s or 747s so I have had a bit of experience. Comfort in coach. This is a stickler amongst some board members as evidenced by an earlier post regarding jumbos. 777s have a smaller Business Class section vs. a 747. Guess what that means? Less chance of an upgrade. For some board members that is a huge factor and one that seems to control their flying lives. However it does not make the plane's performance worse by any stretch of the imagination. Some feel though, as frequent fliers, there is entitlement and they should always receive an upgrade. I don't think like that so I have no issues. As far as comfort, well the seating configuration which I have encountered (except on domestic routes within Japan) is 2-5-2 in Economy. Everyone has their own strategy as to where to sit. Personally I try to get in a "2". I think the difference between the 777 vs. 747 is marginal either direction. Don't expect too much from Economy is my mantra. I am not going to get into any kind of debate about how the extra 5/12th inch of pitch of this aircraft makes a world of difference on a long flight blah, blah, blah. More importantly, you might want to look at the seating chart beforehand. There are some rows in these 777s that really are optimal. Up to you to figure out which ones. I hope this info helps. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingaporeSteve Posted December 25, 2002 Report Share Posted December 25, 2002 I agree with UAL's post. Excellent aircraft, most have inseat videos in all classes as well in my experience. Some airlines configure the seating as 3-3-3 in economy. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NokTang Posted December 25, 2002 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2002 Yes, exactly the info/experiences looking for. happy holidays and thanks Nok the Kook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USVirgin Posted December 26, 2002 Report Share Posted December 26, 2002 The crew will be all Korean. I don't know the specs, but the economy seats on KE 777s seem to be wider than on their other aircraft and more comfortable than most competitors. For coach, it's the best aircraft to fly on Korean Air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkped Posted December 26, 2002 Report Share Posted December 26, 2002 You can find a lot of information on http://www.koreanair.com, although not the most user friendly web site on the net. Their schedule says that flight is a Boeing 772--airline speak for 777/200, maybe, but I don't know. Flew Korean's 747/400 between Anchorage and Seoul Inchon and was very impressed. Noticeably better cabin service than any U.S. carrier including Northwests trans-Pacific flight which I always thought was quite good. Personal video screens in each seat. The wings of the headrests will turn up--unfortunately, didn't discover that until an hour out of Anchorage on the way back. Tolerable leg room in coach, and I'm 6'2". Cabin crew is all Korean which makes for nice scenery, but I don't think (although I could be mistaken) the service included extras in the lavatory. Did fly 777s with Cathay Pacific and Thai Air on shorter flights--very impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp1 Posted December 27, 2002 Report Share Posted December 27, 2002 NokTang, just came back this afternoon from a 3 days' shopping trip to Seoul. Was booked on a package tour with other Japanese tourists. Both ways flown on Korean Air, B747-400. Flew on KE first time since many years since I usually fly with UA or NH on buz trips to Seoul. They used both ways clean aircrafts with friendly interior (blue and red colored seats). Seats in Economy had more leg space than on most other carriers. Food was acceptable but air hostesses were gorgeous. Overall impression: not a bad airline to fly with. But of course these were only short trips of two and a half hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCK Posted December 27, 2002 Report Share Posted December 27, 2002 Apologies for boring reply - I worked at Malaysia Airlines (Boeing 777 operators) and also was also involved in aero engine development, but that was a few years ago! When flying, two engined aircraft must be within two (sometimes up to three) hours of a feasible airport. In the very unlikely event of one engine failing, the aircraft could still fly safely, but the pilot would head for that nearest airport. I think that two engined aircraft flying from UK to USA must fly a "dog leg" so that they fly nearer Greenland, Canada etc. A B747 would probably fly in a straighter line. A jumbo takes about an hour less than a B757 to fly from UK to USA, but maybe a 747 is a bit faster anyway....Certain maintenance practices are also stricter for two engined aircraft. So, two engined aircraft are, in theory, OK for long haul flights, but like I said I have been away from aviation for a few years now :: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp1 Posted December 27, 2002 Report Share Posted December 27, 2002 Two engined aircrafts must be able to reach the next airport within max. 150 min. as far as I know. On a flight from lets say LHR to NYC they have to fly via (or close to) Iceland, Southern Greenland and New Foundland in order to cope with the applicable regulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCK Posted December 27, 2002 Report Share Posted December 27, 2002 lol - here we go techy stuff. I remember something called ETOPS (extended twin engine operating) for twin engined aircraft, which is granted by the FAA for the aircraft type and by the local airworthiness authorities for the airlines. The MAS 777's where I was had 120 minutes ETOPS, they flew from KL to places such as New York or Manchester. Twin engines elsewhere may have more or less, depending on the aircraft and the reliability of the airline. A bad airline can lose ETOPS if it doesn't behave! The absolute maximum I heard about was 180 minutes, although a 207 minute limit was being discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.