Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4238 times:
CO's 767 and 777 fleets will be running on a very intensive schedule this summer - with double daily flights on EWR-LGW (2 X 777), EWR-CDG (777/762), EWR-CO / LIRF), Italy">FCO (764/762), EWR-TLV (2 X 777), extra operations on the IAH-AMS route (2 extra 767s per week), etc. ,etc. I do not think that, with the current fleet and schedules, CO could introduce a new destination with a 767 or 777, and the rumors continue that CO will announce another major new route that require a widebody (destinations from Moscow to Lagos have been suggested). Note that CO's 2 new european destinations (EDI and Oslo) will be served with 752s and EWR-BHX with have 2 752 flights per day (unusual move, one would expect EWR-BHX to be upgraded to a 764 instead of 2 752s per day).
Do you think that we will see an new order from CO for either the 762, 764 or 777?
Also, Delta has announced that it will sell or lease out the 777s that it has on order, do you think its possible that CO would be interested in these aircraft? I realize that CO has GE powered 777s and the DL birds have RR engines, but maybe CO could acquire the DL 777s on aggressive terms?
FraT From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 1101 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4126 times:
If you check with the search function you will find some threads from within the last couple of months. In one of these threads somebody with really good knowledge on this topic made a list with all the city pairings and the needed A/C's (772/764/762).
This list showed that CO is still using some widebodies on domestic routes and would be able to open one or two more widebody routes.
Cory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3974 times:
NWAFA, you're entirely right that CO would not pick up DL's 777s because of the engines. CO outsources their engine maintence to General Electric, and they would have to set up a whole new plan for the 777s from DL with the RR engines.
ContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 14 Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3862 times:
I doubt it very much. CO added two 777's in 2003 to its fleet (Ships 17 and 18) and has 16 767-400's and 10 767-200's. I could see them opting to exercise the last option on 1 more 767-200 but that is about it. CO has the biggest widebody fleet it has ever had (40 aircraft). The airline will continue to use 757's on developing routes that are long/thin, such as EWR to EDI and OSL. Eventually, I could see a few more domestic 757's being configured for intercontinental services (all 41 CO 757-200's are ETOPS certified and have the range to fly to Europe and deep into Latin America).
The 737-900 and the 757-300 give CO the flexibility to use the 757's elsewhere in the system.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16564 posts, RR: 52 Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3818 times:
They would excersise remaining 777 options before taking someone elses orders, especially if they are different engines.
From what I heard CO was looking at opening two perhaps as many as three new Pacific routes from EWR and IAH this year, they changed their mind and opted to go double daily EWR- Tel Aviv and on other routes such as Rome, Paris etc..
They have remaining options for 1 or 2 767-200s and a couple 777s, they might excersise these options but not untill their profitability is solidified.
There was the rumor that CO was looking at leasing 8 767-300s, that was from a realiable source but it's a year old now so it's still just speculation.
I think CO will sit tight with what they have now, maybe excerise a couple options if things pick up. However I think their next BIG widebody order will be for the 7E7, but that order is perhaps 2 years away with delivery perhaps 5 years away.
CALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3738 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3734 times:
Everyone always talks about us adding the other frequencies, but no one has said anything about hte extra GUM-HNL flight we will be doing this summer, although it is only an extra flight I think twice a week. Does UAL have any new 762's. I read last night that they were looking at possibly selling some of them.
okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5547 posts, RR: 11 Reply 10, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3621 times:
I bet they'll take some of the 767 service out of the domestic routes and put them on the pond-hoppers. That's the only idea I can come up with- as they get more 753s and 738s... they'll take the 757s and 767s and convert them to bizfirst (the 752's I mean) config and fly 'em across the pond.
What other option is there?
Ooh, wait... the 7E7!!!!!!
CALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3738 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3570 times:
I was looking at the summer schedule, and they have taken the widebodies out of the IAH-LAX route, and tehy will take the 777 out of SDQ for the summer as well, so that will open up a widebody, of course that could do a quick turn down to SDQ and possibly make it back for the TLV flight. THey also eliminated the 76H, on the IAH-MCO flight. SO there are plenty of subs going on with the widebodies and replacing them with 753's. And one RJ (IAH-MCO)!!
okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
Phatfarmlines From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1333 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3526 times:
Who needs the 767 or 777 or 7E7 when the ERJ-145XRQLRIGW will soon be offered for sale. Let CO use them to operate 6x daily CLE-LGW and 10x daily EWR-LGW and give those other treacherous widebody operators a run for their money.
On a serious note, what is the status on the parked CO heavies? Are they still parked, or are they being used for revenue flights?
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3485 times:
Yes, most of the widebodies used for domestic flying have been reassigned; the new delivery 753s will pick up some of the work plus some shuffling of the 757/739 fleet......Remember, even though CO will introduce 2 new transatlantic routes with the 752 this summer (and add a frequency on the EWR-BHX route), they just converted 4 757-200s from international to domestic configuration......thus, I do not think that many more long-haul destinations are planned for the 757 fleet. There are 2 EWR-LAX-EWR roundtrips per day with a 762, one EWR-SDQ-EWR with a 764, and one 762 and one 764 on the EWR-IAH-EWR route......but thats about it for non-overseas widebody flying.
If CO is serious about expanding international destinations and the rumors are correct, I do think that they will need additional aircraft. While I agree that the DL 777s may not be the best alternative, picking up some newer used 763s could be an answer.
AeroAussie From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 264 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3422 times:
In the short-term, my guess is that any further long haul routes that are announced will be within 757 range, hence the announcement of service to OSL. Also, as was mentioned earlier, they have reallocated aircraft on some routes to free-up long haul aircraft, such as with BHX being twice daily with a 757 instead of once with a 764. Perhaps they could do this in a few other markets? When they first started service to BRU it was with a 757. Maybe they could go back to a 757 on that route and use the 762 for something else? Another possibility might be the LAX-HNL flight, currently operated with a 762. If that was switched to a 757 as well, they would free up a second 762. (And, if they used a domestic configuration 757 from LAX to HNL, they'd actually gain (net) nine seats on each flight.)
Just some thoughts. I hope to see further expansion on CO's routemap soon. Bravo CO. Keep up the good work.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16564 posts, RR: 52 Reply 16, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3361 times:
BRU started out as a DC-10, then briefly was a 757 then went to it's present aircraft a Boeing 767-400.
"Another possibility might be the LAX-HNL flight, currently operated with a 762. If that was switched to a 757 as well, they would free up a second 762. "
The LAX-Honolulu flight as well as the Honolulu- Guam and Guam- Tokyo flights are operated by 767-400s, CO's Pacific 767-400s are configured in a high density confirguration.
If CO wanted they could bring their Pacific 767-400s operating out of Guam back to EWR or IAH, they could replace the double daily Guam-Tokyo flights with 757s. Honolulu-Guam requires a larger 767-400, heavily traveled route and much longer flight.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16564 posts, RR: 52 Reply 17, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3349 times:
"Remember, even though CO will introduce 2 new transatlantic routes with the 752 this summer (and add a frequency on the EWR-BHX route), they just converted 4 757-200s from international to domestic configuration......thus, I do not think that many more long-haul destinations are planned for the 757 fleet"
CO recently switched their EWR-Lima and EWR-Bogota flights from Business First configured 757s to their standard 757 configuration, I think those recent 4 757-200s were from those routes.
Ishky15 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 717 posts, RR: 13 Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3323 times:
I, too, agree that Continental will eventually need more widebodies, but am constantly reassured that they're fine for now with their current fleet capacity. This summer, although the 767s and 777s will be pushed far with the increased services in the markets aforementioned, there will not be a shortage of them in service. And until concrete profitability is reached, a widebody order would be a very risky move. If, however, the increased capacity of 2004 does in fact raise revenues and boosts Continental's finances, and continued growth in international markets is scheduled for next year, then they will have to either squeeze their widebody fleet even further or order some more.
The success of the capacity increase this summer, though, will be a good indicator of what can be expected for the upcoming future of Continental's international route network. Pending favorable results, I bet that we will see several of the cities mentioned on these boards for possible service as new destinations for 2005.