777 records record flight

[[email protected]]

Perhaps of interest to you, gentle reader:

<quote>
LONDON (AFP) - A Boeing 777 plane has broken the world record for the
longest flight by a commercial jet when it landed at London's Heathrow
airport on a flight from Hong Kong via the Pacific.
</quote>

More at
<http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051110/tc_afp/hongkongusairbritain_051110181726>
among other places.

For instance, the OC Register says in
<http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/money/abox/article_761915.php>:
<quote>
The 777-200LR Worldliner - one of Boeing's newest planes - touched
down shortly after 1 p.m. (5 a.m. PST) at London's Heathrow Airport
after a journey of more than 11,664 miles. The previous record was set
when a Boeing 747-400 flew 10,500 miles from London to Sydney,
Australia, in 1989.
</quote>

[BTB]

wrote:
> Perhaps of interest to you, gentle reader:
>
> <quote>
> LONDON (AFP) - A Boeing 777 plane has broken the world record for the
> longest flight by a commercial jet when it landed at London's Heathrow
> airport on a flight from Hong Kong via the Pacific.
> </quote>
>
> More at
> <http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051110/tc_afp/hongkongusairbritain_051110181726>
> among other places.
>
> For instance, the OC Register says in
> <http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/money/abox/article_761915.php>:
> <quote>
> The 777-200LR Worldliner - one of Boeing's newest planes - touched
> down shortly after 1 p.m. (5 a.m. PST) at London's Heathrow Airport
> after a journey of more than 11,664 miles. The previous record was set
> when a Boeing 747-400 flew 10,500 miles from London to Sydney,
> Australia, in 1989.
> </quote>
>


Boring

[[email protected]]

BTB wrote:

>
> Boring

Sorry your attention span is so short.

/dps

[BTB]

wrote:
> BTB wrote:
>
>
>>Boring
>
>
> Sorry your attention span is so short.
>
> /dps
>

Boring because...

1. It is nothing really new, unlike Space Ship One or the first balloon
flight around the global
2. Only 35 people on board, mostly Boeing employees. It would have been
more impressive if it were a 'true' commerial flight
3. Long distance records are old new... what about a new speed record

[Vern]

BTB > wrote in news:pPudf.13917$Qu4.5505
@fed1read03:

>
> Boring because...
>
> 1. It is nothing really new, unlike Space Ship One or the first balloon
> flight around the global
> 2. Only 35 people on board, mostly Boeing employees. It would have been
> more impressive if it were a 'true' commerial flight
> 3. Long distance records are old new... what about a new speed record
>

Funny how you needed to tell all of us how in your opinion this is a non-
event.

I was actually quite impressed that they flew almost 23 straight hours
unrefueled from Hong Kong to London...who the hell cares if it was full or
empty. It's stil quite an interesting feat of technology.

[Juan Jimenez]

"BTB" > wrote in message
news:pPudf.13917$Qu4.5505@fed1read03...
> wrote:
>
> Boring because...
>
> 1. It is nothing really new, unlike Space Ship One or the first balloon
> flight around the global

By that logic, we've been been flying at those altitudes since the 1940's
and balloons have been flying since the 1800's. Who cares?

> 2. Only 35 people on board, mostly Boeing employees. It would have been
> more impressive if it were a 'true' commerial flight

Commercial aircraft, commercial flight...

> 3. Long distance records are old new... what about a new speed record

Where's the Concorde these days, eh? Hmm.

[BTB]

Juan Jimenez wrote:
> "BTB" > wrote in message
> news:pPudf.13917$Qu4.5505@fed1read03...
>
wrote:
>>
>>Boring because...
>>
>>1. It is nothing really new, unlike Space Ship One or the first balloon
>>flight around the global
>
>
> By that logic, we've been been flying at those altitudes since the 1940's
> and balloons have been flying since the 1800's. Who cares?
>
>
>>2. Only 35 people on board, mostly Boeing employees. It would have been
>>more impressive if it were a 'true' commerial flight
>
>
> Commercial aircraft, commercial flight...
>
>
>>3. Long distance records are old new... what about a new speed record
>
>
> Where's the Concorde these days, eh? Hmm.
>
>

But at least there are a few countries working on the next generation SST.

[BTB]

Vern wrote:
> BTB > wrote in news:pPudf.13917$Qu4.5505
> @fed1read03:
>
>
>>Boring because...
>>
>>1. It is nothing really new, unlike Space Ship One or the first balloon
>>flight around the global
>>2. Only 35 people on board, mostly Boeing employees. It would have been
>>more impressive if it were a 'true' commerial flight
>>3. Long distance records are old new... what about a new speed record
>>
>
>
> Funny how you needed to tell all of us how in your opinion this is a non-
> event.
>
> I was actually quite impressed that they flew almost 23 straight hours
> unrefueled from Hong Kong to London...who the hell cares if it was full or
> empty. It's stil quite an interesting feat of technology.

Full or empty means a lot. It this stunt was to meant to sell to the
worlds airlines a long range aircraft that fly unrefueled from Hong Kong
to London then I think they failed. Bums on seats is what pays the
bills - if it could fly unrefueled from Hong Kong to London with a full
passenger load then it would be quite an interesting feat of technology.

[BTB]

B A R R Y wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 16:23:35 -0700, BTB >
> wrote:
>
>
>>3. Long distance records are old new...
>
>
> Not if they're longer than the old record. <G>
>
> Barry

I think it should have been like the X prize, perform the trip once and
then you have 30 days to repeat it using the same vehicle... now that
would have been more interesting

[Juan Jimenez]

"BTB" > wrote in message
news:89Odf.28$Gt6.11@fed1read03...
> Juan Jimenez wrote:
>
> But at least there are a few countries working on the next generation SST.

Whoopie.

[David Lesher]

> But at least there are a few countries working on the next generation SST.



I was not aware the US ever outlawed SST R&D or construction.

If you want a SST; front some money and buy one.

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433