Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/3483546/

Topic: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: A330323X
Posted 2007-06-28 22:39:03 and read 11360 times.

Looks like one of their supporters jumped the gun in filing with the DOT, but see here, a support letter from the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority, in support of US Airways' proposed direct CLT-PHL-PEK service to begin in 2009.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: LIPZ
Posted 2007-06-28 22:51:01 and read 11337 times.

Great!
If they get the rights to fly the route, would this be the 1st ever direct (and nonstop) link to Asia from Philadelphia?

[Edited 2007-06-28 22:51:30]

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FLYGUY767
Posted 2007-06-28 22:56:46 and read 11314 times.

One-Stop Single Flight Number... hmmm..

Does that mean an A320 to PHL and then a A345 to PEK?

Interesting that no times, or equipment was mentioned as with American Airlines application..

Joking... Wouldnt a 744 be an intersting aircraft to add to the US network?


-JD

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-06-28 23:11:16 and read 11268 times.

That's because it's not the US DOT application. It's a NC political support document submitted to the DOT. Either the DOT application itself has not yet been formally filed or has not yet been entered into the public DOT data base. Good strategy though - similar to UA's previously awarded application.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Xiaotung
Posted 2007-06-28 23:13:54 and read 11261 times.

What happens to Shanghai?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Clipper136
Posted 2007-06-29 00:04:27 and read 11152 times.

Quoting Xiaotung (Reply 4):
What happens to Shanghai?

2 reasons....

1) Beijing is the Capitol.
2) Closer to PHL and can be operated by the A332s they are expecting in 2009.

PHL-PEK = 5977 NM
PHL-PVG = 6452 NM

Range of A332 = 6700NM


my  twocents 

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Xiaotung
Posted 2007-06-29 01:55:47 and read 11030 times.

Yes. I meant US previously was going to apply for Shanghai. Does it mean now they have given up on Shanghai and opted for Beijing?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-06-29 03:03:51 and read 10944 times.

Quoting Clipper136 (Reply 5):
Quoting Xiaotung (Reply 4):
What happens to Shanghai?

2 reasons....

1) Beijing is the Capitol.
2) Closer to PHL and can be operated by the A332s they are expecting in 2009.

If US flies to PEK from PHL it will likely acquire and use the optional 340s, not the 332s. The polar route would probably require weight restrictoins for the 332, plus the 343 will be more competitive with the 777/787s - the 332s are too small for a 14 hour ride. From an economy standpoint on such a long route, the 4 engine 343-500 should do OK, compared to the 332 and since cargo will likely be a major revenue source, the 340 is a better choice. US will also likely want to expand to other further Asia destinations if PEK is successful.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Skibum9
Posted 2007-06-29 03:27:42 and read 10908 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 7):
plus the 343 will be more competitive with the 777/787s

What are you talking about? How is the 343 more competitive with the 777/787? It is less fuel efficient, doesn't have the cargo capacity, and has a smaller width cabin.

Quoting Vega (Reply 7):
the 332s are too small for a 14 hour ride

What are you talking about again. It has the same cabin width as the 333, 342, 343, 345 and 346. Are you trying to say thay people now require a longer plane for longer trips.

Quoting Vega (Reply 7):
From an economy standpoint on such a long route, the 4 engine 343-500 should do OK

Why do you need 4 engines when a 2 engine bird can support the route more efficiently?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-06-29 03:47:02 and read 10873 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 7):
If US flies to PEK from PHL it will likely acquire and use the optional 340s, not the 332s. The polar route would probably require weight restrictoins for the 332, plus the 343 will be more competitive with the 777/787s - the 332s are too small for a 14 hour ride. From an economy standpoint on such a long route, the 4 engine 343-500 should do OK, compared to the 332 and since cargo will likely be a major revenue source, the 340 is a better choice. US will also likely want to expand to other further Asia destinations if PEK is successful.

If PHL-PEK is at all possible with the A332, that is the jet I would expect them to use. US does not like to over-equip.

But, it is an open question whether the A332 can really do the route. Weight restrictions are fine for a few years until the A350s arrive.

If that is their strategy, I admit it is very clever!

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-06-29 07:57:13 and read 10705 times.

Quoting Skibum9 (Reply 8):
Quoting Vega (Reply 7):
plus the 343 will be more competitive with the 777/787s

What are you talking about? How is the 343 more competitive with the 777/787? It is less fuel efficient, doesn't have the cargo capacity, and has a smaller width cabin.

You need to read the entire posting not just snippet's to create an erroneous assumption. My point is the 343-500 is better competition for the 777/787 than the 332 on a 14 Hour trip, both in cargo and passenger capacity.

Quoting Skibum9 (Reply 8):
Quoting Vega (Reply 7):
the 332s are too small for a 14 hour ride

What are you talking about again. It has the same cabin width as the 333, 342, 343, 345 and 346. Are you trying to say they people now require a longer plane for longer trips.

That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

Quoting Skibum9 (Reply 8):

Why do you need 4 engines when a 2 engine bird can support the route more efficiently?

Prove it for a 14 hour non-stop flight (332 versus 343-500). Also, Better support comes from more than just fuel burn rate. There is the added benefit of much more cargo and passenger revenue with the "LONGER" plane - check the 332 versus 343-500 stats.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-06-29 08:04:37 and read 10692 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 9):
If PHL-PEK is at all possible with the A332, that is the jet I would expect them to use. US does not like to over-equip.

They may not want to over-equip, but they do want to propose a reasonable and winning solution for the route which the DOT feels merits the award and I do not feel the marginal 332 is it.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Bobnwa
Posted 2007-06-29 13:37:22 and read 10588 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 10):
That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

What inflight passenger study if any verifies this? Or is this just your preference, if so why?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Airbazar
Posted 2007-06-29 14:11:48 and read 10559 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 10):
There is the added benefit of much more cargo and passenger revenue with the "LONGER" plane - check the 332 versus 343-500 stats.

What exactly is an 343-500? The A345 is a very expensive aircraft to operate especially as a very small sub-fleet. It is a niche aircraft. The A343 is cheaper but it's not that much more efficient than an A332. If the A332 can do the route without significant penalties, that will be the ideal aircraft for US to use. However, I doubt the A332 can be used on such a long route without penalties so maybe US will get a few A343's if they get the rights to fly the route. IIRC, the longest scheduled A332 non-stop route is/was TAM's CDG-GRU which has a planned fuel stop, and that's nearly 900nm shorter than PHL-PEK.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: ManchesterMAN
Posted 2007-06-29 14:35:12 and read 10525 times.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 13):
IIRC, the longest scheduled A332 non-stop route is/was TAM's CDG-GRU which has a planned fuel stop, and that's nearly 900nm shorter than PHL-PEK.

I think the concensus is that AF NRT-CDG is the longest A332 route. Its longer than GRU-CDG anyways.

I think PHL-PEK would be pushing it for a A332 though. I expect them to get A340s of some description if successful.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FUN2FLY
Posted 2007-06-29 15:13:36 and read 10483 times.

One of the factors for UA's award IAD>PEK was aircraft size. They had a 347 seat 744. A 200 (approx.) seat 332 will be up against 347 seat 744's from UA and 285 seat 777's from CO and AA's 777's (a fewer seats). So, if aircraft seating is a factor this time, the 340 will be needed. Of course, the govenment can change its past award strategy at anytime.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Captaink
Posted 2007-06-29 15:43:28 and read 10445 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 10):

That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

I may have been able to agree with you on the other points, but this one is silly. The comfort really has to do with the particular airlines configuration. A longer plane may just mean more people.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 13):

What exactly is an 343-500? The A345 is a very expensive aircraft to operate especially as a very small sub-fleet. It is a niche aircraft. The A343 is cheaper but it's not that much more efficient than an A332.

Is the A343 more efficient than the A332? I have much different stories in the past.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FLYGUY767
Posted 2007-06-29 15:44:45 and read 10443 times.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 13):
What exactly is an 343-500?

LOL... Maybe he meant an A340-300 with 500 seats, US Airways could call it Sardine Class..  crowded 

Seriously, what happened to the rumor of US Airways gaining the A340-500 ships?

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 13):
The A345 is a very expensive aircraft to operate especially as a very small sub-fleet. It is a niche aircraft.

 checkmark 

100% Agreed, it is a great plane for a niche market. The only way to have a decent profit margin on the A340-500 would be to have a larger fleet with an extended utilization of long-haul ops such as PHL-HKG, PHX-MNL, PHX-SYD, PHL-BOM. But it is very unlikely that any of those routes will ever happen within the next few years..

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 13):
If the A332 can do the route without significant penalties, that will be the ideal aircraft for US to use.

I would have to disagree it is to small of an aircraft and would be looked down upon due to the limited number of seats offered.

Quoting Vega (Reply 7):
If US flies to PEK from PHL it will likely acquire and use the optional 340s, not the 332s.

I have a very strong feeling that they may very well opt for the A340-600, in addition I would expect up to 9 frames.

The plan or so I have heard is for:

PHL-PEK (If unable to gain authority); PHL-HKG
PHX-AKL(*A hub)-(Final destination being Sydney or Melbourne)
PHX-ICN(*A hub)-(Final Destination rumored as DEL, BOM, or SIN(*A hub)).

That would suffice for daily service on all three routes. The question is how expensive would it be to operate a fleet of A340-600 ships? The other thing I would like to mention is that with the advent of the A340-600, if it were to happen could US Airways garner 5th freedom rights to fly from ICN to DEL, BOM, or SIN?

There of course are other grandiose rumors floating around US Airways including:

PHL-NRT or KIX nonstop
PHX-NRT or KIX, nonstop

(These I believe would be much better suited to the operation of an A330-200, or A340-300 however since NRT is slot controlled, and the cost of operating at Osaka is so expensive I could easily see an A340-600 being used for additional capacity, hence not needing a third of fourth flight to the Japanese market).

The US Airways fleet in any case should become very interesting in the next few years.

-JD

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-06-29 16:31:09 and read 10368 times.

Phoenix-Asia would be weak. The only Asia feeders at Phoenix are Tucson, San Diego, ABQ and Texas.

PHL's Asia feeders are much stronger. That will be their Asian hub.

The A340-600 would be quite shocking to see at US. We are talking the equivalent of a 773ER or 744. I do not think US has the physical power to support such a large jet.

The biggest US can handle is IMO the A343X. Big jets like the 744 could be very dangerous to US. They do not have the market power to fill it.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-06-29 16:37:18 and read 10351 times.

The main reason for pushing back the date is because we aren't able to get the aircraft to fly the route in time. They mentioned it to us, saying we would give up this round and wait until next year so we have more time to get a new plane. We have the options to get A340's under the new order, so that would be the aircraft of choice I imagine. They did not say which model though.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: BAGoldEx
Posted 2007-06-29 16:41:41 and read 10344 times.

I know there are not many of them out there, but would the acquisition of a few A340-200's be appropriate for the possible China route?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FLYGUY767
Posted 2007-06-29 16:58:48 and read 10316 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 18):
The only Asia feeders at Phoenix are Tucson, San Diego, ABQ and Texas

There are a lot more to add to the list namely:

DEN, COS, SLC, ONT, LGB, SNA, BUR, LAX, RDU, MCO, TPA, FLL, DCA, MEX,
GDL, SJO, STL, MCI, ORD, MKE, MSP, OMA, MSY, ATL, CLT, IND, CLE, CMH,
YYZ, OKC, ICT, DSM. MEM, PIT, DRO, YUM, FAT, SBA, CLD, PSP, BFL, SBP,
SBA, MOD, SMF, RNO

Yes, people do backtrack, it happens daily on every airline..

Quoting Flighty (Reply 18):
The A340-600 would be quite shocking to see at US.

The US Airways A330-300 currently holds - 256 Y 30 J

The Lufthansa A340-600 currently holds - 263 Y 72 J

The Cathay Pacific A340-600 currently holds - 220 Y 60 J 8 P

I think with the proper investment in a new long-haul premium product(which is rumored to be in the works to replace Envoy), it would not be that hard to fill a A340-600 on US Airways metal to Asia. Remember Asia demands higher yields year-round that Europe, and the demand for premium cabins to Asia is stronger than it is to Europe. Again it is workable only with the right investment and long-term commitment to such a program. I believe that we are all going to be seeing very big improvements over the next few years at US Airways, that is of course if they do not attempt another merger. Which is fodder for a whole other topic.

-JD

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Incitatus
Posted 2007-06-29 17:25:08 and read 10264 times.

Shouldn't USAirways start with PHL-NRT first?

It's amazing how quickly airlines line up to lose money when government agreements get in the way of market efficiencies.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FLYGUY767
Posted 2007-06-29 17:38:57 and read 10234 times.

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 22):
Shouldn't USAirways start with PHL-NRT first?

I have a strong feeling that US does not want to pay the going rate for a slot at Narita.. Nor do I feel they want to pay the cost for operations at Narita.. I could be very wrong however..

-JD

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-06-29 17:42:55 and read 10221 times.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 23):
I have a strong feeling that US does not want to pay the going rate for a slot at Narita.. Nor do I feel they want to pay the cost for operations at Narita.. I could be very wrong however..

That is one of our preferred markets...I believe it was Scott Kirby that stated it. If we can't get to China, they are going to try for Japan.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Evan767
Posted 2007-06-29 17:45:17 and read 10214 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 10):
That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

I think that depends on the seat.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: TK787
Posted 2007-06-29 18:09:38 and read 10178 times.

Quoting Captaink (Reply 16):
Quoting Airbazar (Reply 13):
What exactly is an 343-500? The A345 is a very expensive aircraft to operate especially as a very small sub-fleet. It is a niche aircraft. The A343 is cheaper but it's not that much more efficient than an A332.
Is the A343 more efficient than the A332? I have much different stories in the past.

Here is one of those stories, not taking any sides:
On the 8xweekly IST-JFK route (8072 km) TK uses 2x332s, and the rest with 343s.
Here are some facts on TKs 332s, and 343s:
Both have the same range at 12,000km.
Seats: 332 has 22J/228Y( total 250), 343 has 34J/237Y (total 271)
Cargo: 332 35,578kg, 343 44,836kg.

I am sure on slower days, and not much cargo, even with a west bound penalty on hot days, 332 s two engines save a bunch for TK. But on busier days 343s capacity comes in handy.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Usairways85
Posted 2007-06-29 18:46:51 and read 10127 times.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 17):
Seriously, what happened to the rumor of US Airways gaining the A340-500 ships?

They were from AC and went to another carrier, TAM i believe

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Malaysia
Posted 2007-06-29 18:54:35 and read 10110 times.

All I still want to see is LAS-BKK and PHX-BKK  Smile and LAS-HKG and PHX-HKG  Smile and LAS-SYD and PHX-SYD  Smile and LAS-SIN and PHX-SIN  Smile Ding ding, since US is a nobody in Asia for US airlines, maybe US should get in for SE Asia instead so its the largest US Airline in SE Asia. add BKK/KUL/CGK/MNL/SGN/SIN/ and HKG/SYD/MEL etc.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FLYGUY767
Posted 2007-06-29 18:55:36 and read 10110 times.

Quoting Usairways85 (Reply 27):
They were from AC and went to another carrier, TAM i believe

Thank You..

I thought this was the case but I was not sure.. Isnt SQ and EK getting rid of their A345 soon?

-JD

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Humberside
Posted 2007-06-29 19:25:33 and read 10080 times.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 17):
The plan or so I have heard is for:

PHL-PEK (If unable to gain authority); PHL-HKG
PHX-AKL(*A hub)-(Final destination being Sydney or Melbourne)
PHX-ICN(*A hub)-(Final Destination rumored as DEL, BOM, or SIN(*A hub)).

Would PHX-HKG be considered, expecially if US get PHL-PEK and dont do PHL-HKG?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: ConcordeBoy
Posted 2007-06-29 22:17:16 and read 9983 times.

Quoting Clipper136 (Reply 5):
1) Beijing is the Capitol.

Careful cher:
it's the location of the capitol... is the capital.

Quoting Clipper136 (Reply 5):
2) Closer to PHL and can be operated by the A332s they are expecting in 2009.
PHL-PEK = 5977 NM
PHL-PVG = 6452 NM
Range of A332 = 6700NM

...you make the mistake of assuming US' A332s will be capable of attaining the maximum range within that model's performance, which they wont-- thanks once again to PW.

Quoting Skibum9 (Reply 8):
when a 2 engine bird can support the route more efficiently?

...can it? Not in the case of US' aircraft.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Dutchjet
Posted 2007-06-29 22:53:29 and read 9948 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 10):
That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

This is news, please tell us more! Maybe this information is just what Airbus needs to get the slow selling A346 program back on track?

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 29):
I thought this was the case but I was not sure.. Isnt SQ and EK getting rid of their A345 soon?

EK - no, they need and want every airplane that they can get their hands on and have no plans to sell off their A345s.. EK's A343s are leased in (from Boeing, those are the ex-SQ airplanes that Boeing took in trade in connection with the SQ 777 deal) and those leases will begin to expire in a few years. Its not yet known whether EK will extend the leases.

SQ - while many on a.net are convinced that SQ is dumping their A345s, SQ continues to operate the type and never placed an order for the 772LR to replace their A345s. Thus SQ needs their A345s to operate the EWR and LAX routes for the foreseeable future.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 17):
I have a very strong feeling that they may very well opt for the A340-600, in addition I would expect up to 9 frames.

I would be surprised if US adds the A346 to its fleet, the A346 is a very big airplane.....A343s maybe, A345s a possibility, but A346s are a lot of capacity. But if US wants to enter the longhaul game, they will need something to fly the routes with until the A350s are delivered. The A332 is a good airplane, but it does have its limits....and the PW engines dont help.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 17):
PHX-AKL(*A hub)-(Final destination being Sydney or Melbourne)

Now that would be a shocking move.....

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-06-29 23:40:50 and read 9906 times.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 32):
Quoting Vega (Reply 10):
That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

This is news, please tell us more! Maybe this information is just what Airbus needs to get the slow selling A346 program back on track?

Simple, I would rather have 176 Feet of cabin to browse and walk around in on a 14 hour flight than 147 feet. Of course some don't mind Trans Atlantic on a 757 - I'm not one of them.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 32):
I would be surprised if US adds the A346 to its fleet, the A346 is a very big airplane.....A343s maybe, A345s a possibility, but A346s are a lot of capacity. But if US wants to enter the longhaul game, they will need something to fly the routes with until the A350s are delivered. The A332 is a good airplane, but it does have its limits....and the PW engines dont help.

With 10 332s on order, it would be foolish to go with 343s - US will order two 345s for China as the 332 contract options permit. Further, as I mentioned before, US will need the 345 to maximize cargo payload to make this route work year round. The 346 is obviously too big for what US could reasonably project as passenger revenue for PHL-PEK.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Dutchjet
Posted 2007-06-29 23:58:57 and read 9890 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
Simple, I would rather have 176 Feet of cabin to browse and walk around in on a 14 hour flight than 147 feet.

OK.......most dont stroll on their flights, but if the extra 29 feet makes you happy, fine with me. By comfort I thought that you were suggesting that longer airplanes provide a smoother ride or gives a pax more personal space.

Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
Of course some don't mind Trans Atlantic on a 757 - I'm not one of them.

And what does the 757 on transatlantic flights have to do with any of this?

Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
US will order two 345s for China as the 332 contract options permit.

Do you really think that US will opt for the A345......its an expensive airplane and its capabilities would only be necessary for the one route. While the A343 may be ""out of style"", its CFM engines make it an interesting choice (doesnt US fly A32Xs with CFMs) and it could efficiently operate flights from PHL/PHX to Asia and Europe.....in any case, US would need at least three A345s for the China route, to cover for delays, maintenance, etc. The ""spare"" could operate another service when not needed.......with only two airplanes, US would have to cancel the PEK flight every time one of its A345s would go tech, encounter a delay, or having scheduled maintenance.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Mah584jr
Posted 2007-06-30 02:28:32 and read 9802 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
Simple, I would rather have 176 Feet of cabin to browse and walk around in on a 14 hour flight than 147 feet.

Wow, I've never even thought about something like this. Judging only from your comments, you seem to be someone very into the size of aircraft versus practicality. I'm sure you would love it if US had a few 747s in their fleet, whether they were practical or not. As long as you have the floor space to walk around it would be fine with you.  boxedin 

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Captaink
Posted 2007-06-30 02:38:20 and read 9784 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
Simple, I would rather have 176 Feet of cabin to browse and walk around in on a 14 hour flight than 147 feet. Of course some don't mind Trans Atlantic on a 757 - I'm not one of them.

You are not being objective Vega. The majority of passengers, won't share you sentiments. Many times I notice that most passenger simply stay put, unless they need to go to the restroom. What are you talking about? Walking around the aircraft, this is not a cruise ship. Comfort on a long flight really has little to do with the length of the airplane.

We a.netters unlike other passengers have special needs according to our personal aircraft preference but we don't represent the average passenger.

US Airways decision is no doubt going to be based more on maximizing revenue, minimizing costs. I am certain that is how most airlines base their decisions. Maybethe 345/346 are going to be overkill for US. If the 343 is available I am sure US would choose them over the bigger 345/346s. If the A332 can do it for them, passenger wise, cargo wise, well I guess we can forget about the A340s entirely as the 332s are on order.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FCYTravis
Posted 2007-06-30 02:52:43 and read 9765 times.

Quoting FUN2FLY (Reply 15):
A 200 (approx.) seat 332 will be up against 347 seat 744's from UA and 285 seat 777's from CO and AA's 777's (a fewer seats).

But that's not really true. US will not be competing against those carriers, because US is applying for the available new-carrier selection in 2009. AA, UA and CO already have Chinese route authorities and so are not a factor in the applicable proceeding.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FCYTravis
Posted 2007-06-30 02:56:37 and read 9754 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
Simple, I would rather have 176 Feet of cabin to browse and walk around in on a 14 hour flight than 147 feet.

Neither of those figures is true - unless you're in the C cabin, you can't "browse and walk around" up front.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Tornado82
Posted 2007-06-30 03:02:53 and read 9747 times.

Is there really going to be this much demand for this route on US? US isn't known as a long-haul carrier by any means, and suddenly they're jumping into this feet first? People from anywhere not on the immediate east coast are not going to backtrack to PHL if there are any other more-direct options available (a la ORD, etc.) Not to mention PHL isn't a growing city any more (see the most recent census update/projections). This sounds like a debacle in the making, IMO.

Quoting Vega (Reply 10):

That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

Yeah those longer planes are always more comfortable than their shorter counterpart. Think of that the next time it takes forever and a day for boarding/deplaning on a 753 folks.  Yeah sure

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Usairways85
Posted 2007-06-30 03:09:29 and read 9741 times.

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 39):
Not to mention PHL isn't a growing city any more (see the most recent census update/projections). This sounds like a debacle in the making, IMO.

The city itself may be losing its population but the surrounding area is still large and the population is not declining

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Mah584jr
Posted 2007-06-30 04:48:32 and read 9671 times.

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 39):
Not to mention PHL isn't a growing city any more (see the most recent census update/projections). This sounds like a debacle in the making, IMO.

You're correct that Philly itself isn't growing but the Philadelphia metropolitan area has continued to grow. It grew by 4.6% from 90 to 00 and still ranks as the 4th largest metropolitan area in the US.

Quoting Captaink (Reply 36):
I guess we can forget about the A340s entirely as the 332s are on order.

i know we're all talking about the new asian routes but aren't the 332s supposed to replace the 767s?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Copaair737
Posted 2007-06-30 04:57:58 and read 9661 times.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 21):
MOD

How? US doesn't even fly to MOD at all. It would require a stop in SFO or LAX.

You got your wires crossed buddy.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Steeler83
Posted 2007-06-30 18:46:12 and read 9462 times.

Quoting Mah584jr (Reply 41):
You're correct that Philly itself isn't growing but the Philadelphia metropolitan area has continued to grow. It grew by 4.6% from 90 to 00 and still ranks as the 4th largest metropolitan area in the US.

True, downtown lost some 60,000 people since 2000, according to the state's estimated census data for 2006. Philadelphia is said to have an estimated 1.46 million people, while it also states that Uwchan Twp (I hope I spelled that right) is the fastest growing community in the state. Chester, Montgomery, and Bucks Counties are all developing quite rapidly...

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Tornado82
Posted 2007-06-30 18:55:31 and read 9446 times.

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 43):
while it also states that Uwchan Twp (I hope I spelled that right) is the fastest growing community in the state.

Then it just passed Lower Macungie Twp, up near Allentown, which was #1 when I lived there.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Steeler83
Posted 2007-06-30 20:00:16 and read 9394 times.

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 44):
Then it just passed Lower Macungie Twp, up near Allentown, which was #1 when I lived there.

That report also said that among the states largest cities, Allentown actually grew... by a few hundred...

Heck, it's still growth...  Silly  Smile

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-07-01 06:31:54 and read 9229 times.

We'll just have to wait until the application is filed by US and see who is correct regarding the aircraft type. If I am incorrect, I'll admit it - you naysayers should do the same.

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 43):
True, downtown lost some 60,000 people since 2000, according to the state's estimated census data for 2006

I have corrected this before and will again. If you mean "center city" which is typically the definition of downtown, Philadelphia Center City has increased in population over the past 20 years, by about 28% - not decreased. If you are referring to the city itself (the area within the city limits) then your numbers are presumably accurate.

Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 38):
Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
Simple, I would rather have 176 Feet of cabin to browse and walk around in on a 14 hour flight than 147 feet.
Neither of those figures is true - unless you're in the C cabin, you can't "browse and walk around" up front.

Sure they are - they are the Cabin length of the aircraft. The Economy section alone on the 332 has 263 seats and the 345 has 329 - I'd say without too much of a thought process, since the cabin widths are identical the 345 is longer - just on that basis. By the way, lots of people walk around in Economy on SFO-HKG and LAX-SYD - lots.

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 39):
Is there really going to be this much demand for this route on US? US isn't known as a long-haul carrier by any means, and suddenly they're jumping into this feet first? People from anywhere not on the immediate east coast are not going to backtrack to PHL if there are any other more-direct options available (a la ORD, etc.) Not to mention PHL isn't a growing city any more (see the most recent census update/projections). This sounds like a debacle in the making, IMO.

The number of available passengers for any airline is based on the airport Catchment Area, which is closely equivalent to the MSA - not a single city population, The Philadelphia MSA is close to 6M - a growth of 4.6% over the past 10 years. The actual Catchment area for PHL has been typically defined as closer to 7.4M by the airport. I explained the derivation of this catchment number in a much earlier post on this subject. CLT and it's connections/business interests will also feed this flight. Under your definition EWR (Newark) and Detroit (DTW) flights to Asia are also a "debacle in the making", which they have not been.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Tornado82
Posted 2007-07-01 06:49:00 and read 9217 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 46):
The actual Catchment area for PHL has been typically defined as closer to 7.4M by the airport

Yeah, and how much of that airport-defined catchment area is also claimed by ABE, ACY, etc? Let's take the up and coming Quakertown area for instance... ABE claims it in most of their propaganda, it is significantly closer to ABE, yet being in Bucks County will be in the PHL MSA. Airport-defined catchment areas are like fairy tales, they always end in a happy ending... for the airport defining it.


I will say though that I mistakenly trusted local media about Philly's population. Philadelphia (the city itself) has lost population, as have all the other Top-10 in PA sans Allentown. However the MSA is still growing (fueled mainly by growth in the northern ends). I was mistaken on that in prior postings, as the halfassed local paper's article on it wrote it as if the entire MSA had lost, using terms like "Philadelphia area."

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Steeler83
Posted 2007-07-01 07:00:10 and read 9204 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 46):
I have corrected this before and will again. If you mean "center city" which is typically the definition of downtown, Philadelphia Center City has increased in population over the past 20 years, by about 28% - not decreased. If you are referring to the city itself (the area within the city limits) then your numbers are presumably accurate.

Sorry mate, I was actually referring to the city/county as a whole... The downtowns of Philly and the Burgh are indeed growing very rapidly, with Pittsburgh's downtown population about to double over the next few years or so. The North Side, Oakland, and Southside neighborhoods are also booming, with growth creeping up the Southside slopes...

i don't know why I posted "downtown" Philly, when I meant the city as a whole...

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 47):
I was mistaken on that in prior postings, as the halfassed local paper's article on it wrote it as if the entire MSA had lost, using terms like "Philadelphia area."

Which paper was this, was it the Philly Enquirer?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Tornado82
Posted 2007-07-01 07:03:38 and read 9200 times.

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 48):

Which paper was this, was it the Philly Enquirer?

Hahahaha... no I'm on the west side now buddy. (Thank God!) I'm talking very local, Uniontown's finest daily rag.  Silly

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FCYTravis
Posted 2007-07-01 08:03:47 and read 9165 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 46):
Sure they are - they are the Cabin length of the aircraft. The Economy section alone on the 332 has 263 seats and the 345 has 329 - I'd say without too much of a thought process, since the cabin widths are identical the 345 is longer - just on that basis. By the way, lots of people walk around in Economy on SFO-HKG and LAX-SYD - lots.

You missed the point - you can't walk around the full length of the aircraft if you're in Economy because Y-cabin pax are not permitted in the C-cabin.  Smile

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Steeler83
Posted 2007-07-01 15:29:31 and read 9072 times.

What is the whole point of whether or not you're able to walk around the cabin? People like spacious aircraft so that they don't feel cramped in their coach seat while on long-haul flights. When I fly, granted that I was mostly on 737s, but I just sit in my seat and enjoy the flight, listening to my mp3 player. At least, if I were to fly, say PHL-LHR or JFK-NRT, a larger plane like the 777 would be spacious. I probably would not feel very cramped or confined as I would, say, in a narrow body.

Then again, there's the whole horror of the "middle seat..." primarily on some 777 layouts.  scared  crowded 

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 49):
Hahahaha... no I'm on the west side now buddy. (Thank God!) I'm talking very local, Uniontown's finest daily rag.

Uniontown??? Man, they're even better than most media in our larger cities!  Wink

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Anetter123
Posted 2007-07-02 03:44:36 and read 8902 times.

Quoting A330323X (Thread starter):
Looks like one of their supporters jumped the gun in filing with the DOT, but see here, a support letter from the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority, in support of US Airways' proposed direct CLT-PHL-PEK service to begin in 2009.

I'm sorry, but I'll believe it when I see it. This is one route I just can't see getting approved. They don't even fly to NRT (not that NRT doesn't have enough US frequencies, but still).

I don't know if UA has applied for LAX-PEK already but if they do, I would not be surprised if that route got approved. LAX only has CA operating the 1 nonstop. SFO and ORD are already good connecting hubs from PEK for UA. Although LAX is also a hub for UA and would offer good connecting flights too, the O/D traffic that will feed the flight will definitely be a selling point.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-02 04:12:24 and read 8873 times.

Quoting Mah584jr (Reply 41):

i know we're all talking about the new asian routes but aren't the 332s supposed to replace the 767s?

That has been said. However, they are talking long term. The 767 will be around for another 8 to 10 years. After all, they want to use the A332 for PHX-FRA, PHX-LHR probably, and PHL-ATH, maybe PHL-TLV.

With all that activity, they won't be able to replace 10 frames of 767 activity. That will only come when the A350 is delivered to US. Then, the 767 can finally be retired.

This whole thread is about what US wants to use to serve PHL-PEK/NRT. The answer is, the Airbus A350-800. So, what is the best to take that role for a few years in between? Used A340-300s. That's pretty much an easy question.

I believe US does not want to purchase new A340s. Instead, they are searching the globe for a second hand fleet to use 2008-2015. To buy new jets for that is not reasonable...

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-07-02 06:05:48 and read 8804 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 53):
With all that activity, they won't be able to replace 10 frames of 767 activity. That will only come when the A350 is delivered to US. Then, the 767 can finally be retired.

Actually we will start retiring the 767's when the first A332's are delivered in 2009. They said they would be replacement aircraft, not growth. I would say the 767's have maybe 3- 5 years left...at the most.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-02 06:20:29 and read 8789 times.

Quoting Flyboyaz (Reply 54):
Actually we will start retiring the 767's when the first A332's are delivered in 2009. They said they would be replacement aircraft, not growth. I would say the 767's have maybe 3- 5 years left...at the most.

Yeah, they are just saying that. It can be growth aircraft if US decides they need more widebodies in service.... which most people believe they do. So, the 767 stays on. That is my take, and I realize US corporate denies it.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Centrair
Posted 2007-07-02 07:42:08 and read 8739 times.

Though I think it is cool that US is trying for China. I think they should try Japan and Korea during the wait for approval.

Though NRT is high on the list...it is high on a lot of people's list. They could buy a slot now if they wanted and cost them a pretty penny but they are not. You know who else doesn't have NRT slots but could buy them NOW...EK and QF. Both fly into other airports and feed. EK has KIX and NGO while QF flies into KIX.

US could do NGO or KIX and get NH feed from corners of Japan including NRT.
Problem is that the A332 can't really make PHL-Japan without restrictions...HEAVY restrictions. AF flies one A332 CDG-NRT once a week (will disappear with A380 arrival) with heavy restrictions on payload and passengers. That flight is 12 hours or so. Not sure what engines AF uses.

US will need an interim plane tille the A350s arrive for any Asian ops done from their current hubs. The only other option is to build up another hub of international ops from the west coast at PDX, LAX, SFO, or SEA.

China might be a goldmine but I think it is only so if you can get your brand out there. DL started years ago with offices in PEK and Shanghai (there was I think one in CAN too) without even having a flight. They were working the companies in all these cities and in the US to make sure that when they do apply they can be in a good position.

US just seems to have its fingers crossed that they can get it with no aircraft and no offices for promotion in Asia.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Panamair
Posted 2007-07-02 10:57:34 and read 8680 times.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 56):
You know who else doesn't have NRT slots but could buy them NOW...EK and QF. Both fly into other airports and feed. EK has KIX and NGO while QF flies into KIX.

QF flies into NRT from SYD, MEL, and PER with their own metal.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-07-17 00:11:42 and read 8337 times.

Here is a comprehensive view of the application submitted today. They even included a detailed schedule with Flight Numbers for PHL-PEK, starting on March 25th 2009 from PHL - a nice touch. Unfortunately, US will use the A340-300, instead of my incorrectly predicted longer range 340-500 for the service. The plan is to use a 767-200 from CLT to direct connect with this flight - an ambitious forecast.

http://www.usairways.com/awa/content...us/pressroom/newservice/index.aspx

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Philadelphia1
Posted 2007-07-17 01:50:00 and read 8216 times.

Here is the tentative Schedule I guess. notice the 8's in the flight numbers? i wonder if its a luck thing being that a lucky chinese number is 8. And only a 2 hour layover in China, then she's back up in the air.

SUMMER
March 25, 2009 - November 1, 2009
March 14, 2010 - November 7, 2010

US889 Depart Charlotte 06:45
Arrive Philadelphia 08:21
Boeing 767

Depart Philadelphia 10:10
Arrive Beijing 12:00+1
Airbus A340-300

US888 Depart Beijing 14:00
Arrive Philadelphia 16:00
Airbus A340-300

Depart Philadelphia 17:55
Arrive Charlotte 19:43
Boeing 767

WINTER
November 2, 2009 - March 13, 2010
November 8, 2010 - March 12, 2010


US889 Depart Charlotte 06:45
Arrive Philadelphia 08:21
Boeing 767

Depart Philadelphia 10:10
Arrive Beijing 13:05+1
Airbus A340-300

US888 Depart Beijing 15:05
Arrive Philadelphia 16:00
Airbus A340-300

Depart Philadelphia 17:55
Arrive Charlotte 19:43
Boeing 767


Source. USAIRWAYS.COM/CHINA
http://www.usairways.com/awa/content...room/newservice/about/service.aspx

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Centrair
Posted 2007-07-17 02:12:07 and read 8181 times.

Quoting Panamair (Reply 57):
QF flies into NRT from SYD, MEL, and PER with their own metal.

My bad...meant QR ...one key miss.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: TUNisia
Posted 2007-07-17 02:12:50 and read 8181 times.

Lools like they are planning to use a 767 from CLT-PHL and then a A340-300 on PHL-PEK.

http://www.usairways.com/awa/content...room/newservice/about/service.aspx

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Acey
Posted 2007-07-17 02:24:37 and read 8156 times.

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 31):
US' A332s will be capable of attaining the maximum range within that model's performance, which they wont-- thanks once again to PW.

 checkmark 

Quoting Usairways85 (Reply 27):
They were from AC and went to another carrier, TAM i believe

 checkmark  Once replaced by the 77L on YYZ-HKG, the two of them will eventually fly YYZ-PEK for AC for a few months before heading off to Brazil in October.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 53):
Used A340-300s.

I wonder if they can aquire any from AC? I know a few are leased and will be returned, but AC is phasing them out as triple 7's arrive and I wonder if keeping them within Star Alliance would benefit US, somehow, in terms of cost?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: CO787EWR
Posted 2007-07-17 02:50:10 and read 8114 times.

Hmmmm does anyone know where the A343 is coming from. Will the CLT-PHL-PEK work because didnt AA try DFW-ORD-China IIRC. Does anyone have data on A343 vs A332 vs A345.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Acey
Posted 2007-07-17 02:52:54 and read 8112 times.

Quoting CO787EWR (Reply 63):
Hmmmm does anyone know where the A343 is coming from.

I just tried to address it, but it's all just speculation at this point. Only time will tell.

Quoting CO787EWR (Reply 63):
Does anyone have data on A343 vs A332 vs A345.

http://www.airbus.com/en/

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: PHLwok
Posted 2007-07-17 03:17:04 and read 8075 times.

Quoting Philadelphia1 (Reply 59):
notice the 8's in the flight numbers? i wonder if its a luck thing being that a lucky chinese number is 8.

Yup. Check which route UA 888 flies  Smile

Quoting Philadelphia1 (Reply 59):
And only a 2 hour layover in China, then she's back up in the air.


That leaves very little margin for error, or to absorb PHL (or other) induced delays, which are common in the transatlantic ops this summer.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Acey
Posted 2007-07-17 03:24:35 and read 8056 times.

Quoting Philadelphia1 (Reply 59):
8's in the flight numbers?

Kind of like how WN 711, NW 711, DL 711, and HP 711 (last year) all fly to/from LAS?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: PHLwok
Posted 2007-07-17 03:24:54 and read 8056 times.

Quoting CO787EWR (Reply 63):
Hmmmm does anyone know where the A343 is coming from.

We're making the assumption it'd be a used bird, and 343's should certainly be easier to come by compared to 345's, but on http://www.usairways.com/awa/content...om/newservice/about/usairways.aspx they state:

"We’ve also ordered ten A330/A340 aircraft for deliveries starting in 2009."

I don't recall the terms of the purchase agreement, but this sounds like they could convert one or more of the 332 orders into an A340 series.

I still think it's far more likely they'd lease a used aircraft, but let's not preclude the possibility of a new build, even if it's not a 343, in spite of what the app says.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-07-17 03:38:59 and read 8030 times.

It's very likely, in fact almost certain, they will acquire and use at least 2 aircraft for this route - one as a spare or backup and RON or use it elsewhere until needed, otherwise I doubt they'd even get the job. US has NO backup for that range.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-17 04:00:13 and read 7968 times.

Vega, they will need at least 2 aircraft just to run the route. It is over 12 hours, certainly including the 2+ hours needed on the ground on both sides. 3 aircraft is the real minimum to run that flight daily.

PHL at 10am usually isn't slammed with delays, so at least that is good. The timings look pretty attractive.

CLT service would be with true (redone) business class service to CLT. So they are hoping to get CLT businesses and banks behind this effort. Of course, if this were Delta, they would run the China flight from their Southern hub. But US isn't quite that nuts.  Smile

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Philadelphia1
Posted 2007-07-17 06:58:21 and read 7849 times.

According to Wikipedia, and therefore facts may be debatable, the range on a fully loaded A340-300 is 75,500 kg (166,500 lb) and with a range of 7,400 nautical miles.

Circle mapper shows 7,400 nautical miles from PHL is well in range of a fully loaded 343 bus

Big version: Width: 481 Height: 241 File size: 7kb


Of course the wflight west and polar weather play a role, so the range will be trimmed back. But I think with a few restrictions, it can be done with a A340-300.

Another issue that concerns me is PHL's runway length. Its longest (9L, 27L) is 3,202 meters long.
A max loaded A340-300 is 3,000 meters. Cutting it short I think. But with the plane having weight restrictions it could be a better number.

Either way, I wish US Airways the best in luck, and all other airlines on getting past the government's great wall and into China's airports.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-17 07:12:40 and read 7829 times.

Quoting Philadelphia1 (Reply 70):
Circle mapper shows 7,400 nautical miles from PHL is well in range of a fully loaded 343 bus

Longest 343 route? Will it require the newest type of A340-300E? Or will an older one do it?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-07-17 08:32:49 and read 7785 times.

Quoting Philadelphia1 (Reply 70):
...A max loaded A340-300 is 3,000 meters. Cutting it short I think.

Where did you get that number (3000 meters) for an MTOW (608K) 343 ?

In any event, AF, LH, BA and others have been flying 343s and 747s in and out of PHL and EWR for years. VS even flies 346s out of EWR.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 71):
Longest 343 route? Will it require the newest type of A340-300E? Or will an older one do it?

If they lease them from a 2nd source, unlikely it would be an "E", since neither LH, AC or any of the usual suspects have any. If they exercise their Airbus option for several 343s (instead of 332s) from Airbus and also previously negotiated early delivery of these (late 2008 or Jan 2009), they may indeed be getting the "E" series. I lean toward the 340-300E because a 42 seat Business Class configuration was stated in the Release. I'd be shocked if they finally got a widebody acquisition right though.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Centrair
Posted 2007-07-17 09:34:48 and read 7753 times.

Quoting PHLwok (Reply 67):
"We’ve also ordered ten A330/A340 aircraft for deliveries starting in 2009."

Why A340-300s. WHY? Why not new build A345s? How about 8 or so, then they could go for Japan, Korea and HKG.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-07-17 14:10:58 and read 7682 times.

Quoting FLYGUY767 (Reply 2):
Does that mean an A320 to PHL and then a A345 to PEK?

The announcement we got at work said a 767 from CLT to PHL and an A340 from PHL-PEK holding 269 pax....would that be a 340-200? or -300?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: DiscoverCSG
Posted 2007-07-17 15:24:07 and read 7645 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 10):
That is exactly what I'm saying - a longer plane is more comfortable for a 14 hour flight.

Unless one flies in the front (J, C, F), NO plane is comfortable for a 14-hour flight!

Quoting Vega (Reply 33):
Simple, I would rather have 176 Feet of cabin to browse and walk around in on a 14 hour flight than 147 feet. Of course some don't mind Trans Atlantic on a 757 - I'm not one of them.

In my experience, seat pitch, seat construction, seat width, temperature/humidity, and fullness of the flight are the factors that influence whether I consider a plane to be comfortable. If size of the plane is a factor, it's mainly in terms of the width of the plane, not the length. As somebody mentioned, a longer plane of the same width just makes boarding/deplaning take longer. And yes, I've flown in the back third of a packed 753.  Wink

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 51):
At least, if I were to fly, say PHL-LHR or JFK-NRT, a larger plane like the 777 would be spacious. I probably would not feel very cramped or confined as I would, say, in a narrow body.

Again, it all depends on the configuration, load factor, and cross-section of the plane. One of the most uncomfortable flights I've had was JFK-LHR in a BA744 a few Julys ago. On of the most comfortable I've had was on a VS343 LHR-EWR last year - all because, on the latter flight, the only thing between me and an aisle was an empty seat.

Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 31):
Careful cher:
it's the location of the capitol... is the capital.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Mu2
Posted 2007-07-17 15:27:02 and read 7647 times.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 73):
Why A340-300s. WHY? Why not new build A345s? How about 8 or so, then they could go for Japan, Korea and HKG.

LOL. US doesn't plan that far into the future. Kirby and Parker have tunnel vision and only look at one thing and not how it would effect future options. I think they will fill an A343 quite fast and then they'll wish they went for the A345. Oh well.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-07-17 22:06:26 and read 7527 times.

Quoting Flyboyaz (Reply 74):
The announcement we got at work said a 767 from CLT to PHL and an A340 from PHL-PEK holding 269 pax....would that be a 340-200? or -300?

Guess I answered my own question. It's going to be a 340-300 with 42C 227Y. They have the schedules and everything on the webpage http://www.usairways.com/china

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-07-17 22:06:53 and read 7527 times.

Here is the actual DOT Application - about the most comprehensive by any airline:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf101/476696_web.pdf

My only comment is that it would seem more credible if US had been specific with a 340 availability date and also stated that the aircraft would be utilized on some other route prior to China. I mean if I were the DOT, I'd want a guarantee that at least two aircraft would be operational well before March 2009. As it is, US is the only applicant with NO capable aircraft for the route. Others can simply downgrade from elsewhere.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 73):
Why A340-300s. WHY? Why not new build A345s? How about 8 or so, then they could go for Japan, Korea and HKG.

You know how I feel about that - it's too logical.
US indicates in the above filing that they will INITIALLY lease 340-300s and select the 340-300 purchase option (versus 332) from AIrbus for delivery in mid-year 2009. It will be very interesting to see how they can get a very short term lease (1 year at least I assume) on 2 of these and then turn around and buy several more. The 340 should be inefficient (fuel burn), compared to the 332 or 333 on any other than the longest routes. Consequently, I could see US in a situation of trying to utilize for some period of time, 4 or 5 340-300s on routes with ranges close to about 6500nm. Using the 340-300 for Eastern Europe, instead of the 333 or 767 would seem extremely inefficient. I guess Moscow and TLV would work, but not as well as the 332 would. SO, why didn't they get the -500 with it's ability to expand further into Eastern Asia - who knows. Maybe they have negotiated with a *A partner for 2 PHL-NRT slots - the 340-300 would work there.

[Edited 2007-07-17 22:22:01]

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Clipper136
Posted 2007-07-17 23:39:14 and read 7461 times.

All answers to the many question are contained within the Application submitted by US.

Depending on when the service will actually start, US will either us new A340s delivered from Airbus in May or Jun of 2009 or lease 2 aircraft to start service.

US has already met and confirmed with lessors aircraft are available in the time frame that US requires.

On a side note....the CLT/PHL will be operated with 762 with 18 envoy and 186 Econ seats......
I did not know that the reconfigure of the 767s was going to be that much (current 24 Envoy and 179 Econ)

Also on Page 25 there is a small pic of and A340 in US's new colors.....(but by the engines it appears to be an A435)

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-18 00:06:40 and read 7441 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 78):
SO, why didn't they get the -500 with it's ability to expand further into Eastern Asia - who knows.

They will be flying the A350-800 on the routes by about 2014. So whatever they do 2009-2014 doesn't really matter that much. It's just temporary lift until the A350 gets there. By that time, the A340 is a dinosaur, even the A345.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Mu2
Posted 2007-07-18 00:45:29 and read 7398 times.

I guess this answers our question of how US will get the A343

US Airways will have A340-300 aircraft available for service to Beijing on
March 25, 2009. As part of its recently announced aircraft order, US Airways
obtained an option for A340-300 aircraft—deliverable in May or July 2009. Initially,
however, these aircraft will be brought into the US Airways fleet via lease. US
Airways has surveyed the lease market, held discussions with potential lessors, and
confirmed it will be able to obtain A340-300 aircraft. US Airways has also
confirmed that the aircraft will be delivered to it with more than sufficient time to
complete any necessary reconfiguration of the aircraft to meet regulatory and US
Airways’ requirements in time for the March 25, 2009, commencement date. US
Airways is an experienced operator of similar A330 widebody aircraft in
international markets, and is confident it can inaugurate timely service. The A330
and A340 aircraft have a high degree of cockpit and operational commonality
ensuring a seamless introduction of the A340 into the US Airways fleet.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: CO787EWR
Posted 2007-07-18 01:47:38 and read 7366 times.

Read the bid so the A340-300 allows some cargo to be carried both ways so i guess the A345 would be over kill for some one like US

[Edited 2007-07-18 01:59:59]

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Vega
Posted 2007-07-18 02:11:17 and read 7335 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 80):
They will be flying the A350-800 on the routes by about 2014. So whatever they do 2009-2014 doesn't really matter that much. It's just temporary lift until the A350 gets there....

What does that have to do with whether they should have selected the -500, instead of the -300? Five years is an eternity in the airline industry and 5 years of operating with non-optimal long-haul equipment is NOT a "temporary lift" - it's potentially a competitive disaster.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Centrair
Posted 2007-07-18 03:57:45 and read 7261 times.

Cna someone explain the meaning of this part of the application? It was near the beginning.

Quote:
US Airways to engage in the scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail from any point or points in the United States, via Tokyo or another point in Japan, to any point or points in the People’s Republic of China
open to scheduled international service.

It is the "via Tokyo or another point in Japan" part that catches me. What does this mean?

I have another file that goes over all the routes that are operated or can be operated by US carriers to foreign soil. USAirways currently has no routes designated to Japan. But interestingly they do have a route to HKG and ICN (both eff. 2005) but don't utilise it. USAirways is not listed with Japan. http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/intav/country.pdf

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-18 04:11:05 and read 7250 times.

Quoting Vega (Reply 83):
What does that have to do with whether they should have selected the -500, instead of the -300? Five years is an eternity in the airline industry and 5 years of operating with non-optimal long-haul equipment is NOT a "temporary lift" - it's potentially a competitive disaster.

Well I guess the A340-500 is a more expensive jet... it burns more fuel... and US Airways decided it ain't worth bothering with the -500. That's probably what happened.

They're just going to lease them anyway, and the 500s are rare. I'll eat my hat if they take deliveries of new A340s in 2009. Talk about competitive disaster! Those A340s will all be in the desert before too long, including the 500s. Beautiful jets though.

The future belongs to the 787 and A350. US just inserted some A340 options as a ploy, they won't use them. They really want those A332s. That's my take anyway.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Centrair
Posted 2007-07-18 04:25:57 and read 7234 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 85):
I'll eat my hat if they take deliveries of new A340s in 2009.

In the application they state that they will lease A340-300 aircraft for use on this route which would be available before March of 2009 but have rights convert A330 orders to A340s for delivery in May or June of 2009.

Quote:
This order includes an option giving US Airways the ability to convert its existing firm orders for A330 aircraft to
firm orders for A340-300 aircraft. If US Airways’ application is approved, US Airways will be in a position to exercise options for delivery of A340-300 aircraft in either May or July 2009, depending on the date of a final Department award.

But you still don't have to eat your hat...we will see in 2009.
(Warning: Consumption of hats has no nutritional value and not recommended by the FDA. Doing so might result in dental damage due to string entaglement in teeth or an upset stomach.)

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: LACA773
Posted 2007-07-18 14:15:11 and read 7106 times.

As it is now, US drastically needs to upgrade their inflight product offerings and catering internationally if they are going to compete effectively. After listening to some eastcoaster friends complain about how frugal and skimpy US is on their transatlantic product, I surely hope they wil re-think their inflight longhaul products and even their domestic longhaul F cabin as it is pretty bad as well.

LACA773

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Kappel
Posted 2007-07-18 14:31:52 and read 7102 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 85):
Well I guess the A340-500 is a more expensive jet... it burns more fuel... and US Airways decided it ain't worth bothering with the -500. That's probably what happened.

I thought the reason they are now looking at the a343 was because they were going after the AC a345's, but those are now going to JJ.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-07-18 16:12:57 and read 7067 times.

Quoting LACA773 (Reply 87):
As it is now, US drastically needs to upgrade their inflight product offerings and catering internationally if they are going to compete effectively. After listening to some eastcoaster friends complain about how frugal and skimpy US is on their transatlantic product, I surely hope they wil re-think their inflight longhaul products and even their domestic longhaul F cabin as it is pretty bad as well.

We announced service upgrades to the long haul fleet and inflight service back in April. Should be completed in the fall. There is a press release on the website if you wish to view it. Should help things a lot  Smile

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Bobnwa
Posted 2007-07-18 16:43:13 and read 7039 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 85):
They're just going to lease them anyway, and the 500s are rare. I'll eat my hat if they take deliveries of new A340s in 2009. Talk about competitive disaster! Those A340s will all be in the desert before too long, including the 500s. Beautiful jets though.

The future belongs to the 787 and A350. US just inserted some A340 options as a ploy, they won't use them. They really want those A332s. That's my take anyway.

It is amazing that you have all this knowledge that US Airways am forward your message to US Airways does not have access to. I am forwarding your message to US Airways HDQ, and hopefully that will not make the mistakes you pointed out.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-18 16:52:59 and read 7027 times.

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 90):

They haven't made any mistakes, it's Vega who thinks they should buy the A345. I just pointed out that they will lease the A343 (which they said in the release)

I find it funny that US mentions they have A340 options AS IF they will activate them, but they did not actually say they will. It's just innuendo about new jets to spice up their China bid, not a promise that they will buy new A340s. The A350 is coming to them in a few short years. According to Airbus the A350-800 seats 312 people in 2 classes and goes 8,300nm. That will be an excellent China airplane for them.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-07-18 18:20:02 and read 6975 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 91):
It's just innuendo about new jets to spice up their China bid, not a promise that they will buy new A340s. The A350 is coming to them in a few short years.

They did state however if we did not get the China route, they would consider buying A340's anyhow to do different routings, including NRT (which is on our wishlist) TLV or DEL.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Usairways85
Posted 2007-07-18 18:35:33 and read 6959 times.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 91):
That will be an excellent China airplane for them.

The A350 is years away. If US thinks that they can wait for the arrival of the 350 as a suitable aircraft for china or asia then they will likely have a hard time making transpacific flts work. By the time the the 350s arrive UA and NW will have likely already deepen their hold on asia with the likes of CO, DL, and AA gaining a much better foothold than US.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: LACA773
Posted 2007-07-18 18:58:54 and read 6929 times.

[quote=Flyboyaz,reply=89]
We announced service upgrades to the long haul fleet and inflight service back in April. Should be completed in the fall. There is a press release on the website if you wish to view it. Should help things a lot

Thanks for the information Flyboyaz. Do you have a link to that article? Do you know of the planned upgrades to your companie's inflight service products?

LACA773

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-07-18 21:28:07 and read 6881 times.

Quoting LACA773 (Reply 94):
Thanks for the information Flyboyaz. Do you have a link to that article? Do you know of the planned upgrades to your companie's inflight service products?

Sure thing...try this link:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix....l-newsArticle&ID=991218&highlight=

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Philadelphia1
Posted 2007-07-19 01:44:38 and read 6803 times.

Quoting Flyboyaz (Reply 92):
including NRT (which is on our wishlist) TLV or DEL.

When did US Airways express interest in Delhi? Cool idea, but very off the charts

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flyboyaz
Posted 2007-07-19 02:15:56 and read 6781 times.

Quoting Philadelphia1 (Reply 96):
When did US Airways express interest in Delhi? Cool idea, but very off the charts

Scott Kirby mentioned it as a place we'd like to fly to. They mentioned India in general....would be pretty cool I guess. An A340 would do the route ok I imagine?

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Ca2ohHP
Posted 2007-07-19 03:01:52 and read 6757 times.

Anyone else notice the 767 seatmap on page 57? They're currently configured at 24C/176Y. I wasn't aware there were plans to reduce the Envoy class on the 767 fleet.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: Flighty
Posted 2007-07-19 03:05:45 and read 6751 times.

Quoting Ca2ohHP (Reply 98):
Anyone else notice the 767 seatmap on page 57? They're currently configured at 24C/176Y. I wasn't aware there were plans to reduce the Envoy class on the 767 fleet.

Indeed, people say the 767 Enboy class is very very old. Since US is shining up their 767s in general, they are putting new Envoy seats in. What type will they be? Unknown, but they must know, since the new configuration is all set up.

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: DTWAGENT
Posted 2007-07-22 01:53:27 and read 6616 times.

I have a question....Where is USAirways going to come up with an A340 to fly this route? And are they planning on having more then 2 birds on this flight? And are they going to keep thme after they start getting the A350xwb aircraft?

Just thought i would ask

chuck

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: FLYGUY767
Posted 2007-07-22 02:00:23 and read 6610 times.

Doesnt the list of connecting cities seem less than impressive?

What is the use of showing CLT as an originating station, if their is both an equipment change and a elongated layover in Philadelphia?

-JD

Topic: RE: US Airways To Apply For PHL-PEK In 2009
Username: DTWAGENT
Posted 2007-07-22 02:07:33 and read 6605 times.

That is what I thought. My on concern is that PHL can't handle it international flights now on USAirways. How are they going to do this flight to PEK. And starting it from CLT does not make any since at all.

DL would stand a better change at getting approved on this route then USAirways, just based on conx. cities alone.

I just hope DL get it and not USAirways, NWA, or AA.

chuck


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/