Alright, so I read an article in the Boston Globe back in September about how the 787 would be great for Boston because it will allow non-stop flights to Asia, etc which currently cannot happen because 747’s cannot take off from KBOS with a full load. They even said that Korean Air used to fly a 747 out of Boston to JFK and pick up more passengers before heading to Korea. On the contrary, Lufthansa has a daily arrival & departure from Frankfurt with a 744 and Air France has one from CDG daily (I think). Does this mean they are not taking a full load of passengers and/or cargo?
*"Because of weight restrictions and the fact Logan’s longest runway is just over 10,000 feet - 1,000 to 3,000 feet too short for a wide-body jet to take off fully loaded with people, cargo, and fuel - the Korean 747-400 had to leave Logan with empty seats. It made a stop at Dulles to pick up more passengers before returning to Seoul, which reduced the service’s appeal for many Boston-based travelers.
Even with Korea-bound traffic from two markets, the service was a chronic money-loser.
A smaller Boeing 777 - typically around 270 seats - would still have to leave about one-third empty to make it nonstop from Boston to East Asia, Massport officials said. But a 787 will be able to leave with all 210 to 250 seats full, generating at likely fare levels a 25 percent profit margin for the airline, Freni said. “It can be profitable in and out of here.”*
I found this…Is it because of the amount of fuel necessary to make it to Asia? How much runway is necessary for a full load of passengers, fuel & cargo?