Re: SP vs. 400

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



They flew here...I have a foto with both here at the same time.

Grant McKenzie wrote:

> I don't think they ever did this due to payload restrictions. With a
> reasonable pax load the 200s and 300s always needed a stop in HNL. It
> wasn't until the 400 was released that anybody could fly the Pacific non-stop.
>
> As an aside, I know the SP flew SYD-HNL-YVR but I don't recall them flying
> to LAX. Could be wrong, though.
>
> Grant
> SYD
> QF
>
> At 04:39 PM 05/08/03 -0400, you wrote:
> >In a message dated 8/5/2003 1:30:37 PM Pacific Daylight Time, RWM@xxxxxxxxxx
> >writes:
> >
> ><< Don't think so, but Qantas would now.  It made JFK-NRT, for sure,
> >  but that's over 1000 miles shorter. >>
> >
> >Over 1000 miles shorter, with nice winds coming back to JFK
> >
> >Well, Grant, since you are the main regular Aussie, did QF ever fly a 742B or
> >a 743 nonstop LAX-SYD or LAX-MEL?  Or did they only do it with the SPs until
> >the 744s came.  Also, did the SPs have weight restrictions, or could they be
> >loaded to the hilt?

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]