Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airtran 737NG To Hawaii?  
User currently offlineLrgt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 710 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 7222 times:

Does anyone think Airtran will operate the 737NG on the expensive$$ and always booked LAX-HNL and LAS-HNL route since they now have a base at LAX and LAS and an A/C with ETOPS??? Would FL ever make LAX or LAS a HUB?

(B6/JetBlue can't do this because the A320 does not have the ETOPS 180 minute ETOPS like the 737NG)


Don't bring up the NW DC9's unless you have to!
52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMoneyShot From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 93 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 7040 times:

I'm sure everyone will throw a million reasons about why an LCC other than ATA can not survive flying to Hawaii. I will say I think it would be really cool if they did. The more LCCs flying to Hawaii the better cause I would assume that the fares would come down, thus making it more possible for me to bring my girlfriend there.

User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 984 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 7034 times:

(B6/JetBlue can't do this because the A320 does not have the ETOPS 180 minute ETOPS like the 737NG)

Yes it does-

http://www.eads.com/frame/lang/es/1024/xml/content/OF00000000400006/7/78/29801787.html


User currently offlineLrgt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 6971 times:

WOW! I stand corrected! This was recent and I remember checking on A320 ETOPS as part of a consulting project a year ago and it only had 90 or 120-minute. However, does anyone know of B6's are ETOPS automatically or will they have to jump through hoops with the FAA? I beleive the 737NG may be ETOPS out of the box (somebody correct me if I am wrong).

With this said, how about B6 from Long Beach...it is a focus city and LGB-HNL would fly under the radar of the majors from LAX as well as provide more demand on their east cost to LGB routes for the connection.



Don't bring up the NW DC9's unless you have to!
User currently offlineBluewave 707 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3152 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6931 times:

This talk of WN or B6 proposing service to/from HNL has been hashed out for the past couple of years. Now that FL has 73Gs, they have been thrown into the speculation pool.

WN's 73Gs are not ETOPS rated, and to do so, will cost them $$$. Whether they decide to invest $ on that project, depends on the potential ROI. They may have to re-work their Rapid Rewards program, to limit losses to those who redeem their rewards for free HNL flights.

I'm not sure if B6's A320s are ETOPS rated. If not, they will face the same dilema as WN.

If FL has had their 73Gs built ETOPS capable from the get-go, they have a distinct advantage. Question is, how much are they willing to invest in opening a base in HNL? Another LCC in HNL will open up more seats.

AQ has proved that ETOPS 73G service is viable, and profitable. Their 73Gs came from Boeing ETOPS rated factory fresh.




"The best use of your life will be to so live your life, that the use of your life will outlive your life" -- D Severn
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6855 times:

I find it so interesting that so many people think that service to Hawaii is a priority for a new or smaller airline. Its simply not true, its very difficult for an airline to make money on routes to the Hawaiian islands since there is a huge amount of competition, the yeilds are rather mediocre, and during many times of the year, flights to Hawaii are dominated by frequent flyers cashing in miles.
The mainland-Hawaii market has gotten even more complicated, first with the introduction of direct flights to the smaller islands and now, with aircraft like the 73G, with flights from "secondary" airports direct to Honolulu and the outer islands. It was much more simple 20 years ago when pax in the Los Angeles area wanted to travel to Hawaii - they booked a flight on UA or WA from LAX to HNL, and then Aloha or Hawaiian would take them on to Maui, simple and no choices. Now, there are a multitude of flights from every LA area airport to each of the 4 major Hawaiian island airports - lots and lots of choice and competition. Also, most airlines offer service to Honolulu and Maui from their primary hubs throughout the US; CO has a daily nonstop to HNL from EWR - UA tried this several times in the 1960s and 1970s without success.

Due to Aloha's innovation in offering new flights to the Hawaiian islands, and Hawaiian Airlines persistance in the markets, and ATA offering cheap flights to the islands, many legacy carriers have cut back or restricted capacity on their Hawaiian routes. The big news is that NCL cruises is developing the Hawaiian cruise market in a big way, with several ships based in Honolulu year round, which will increase the demand for seats to HNL (having 3 or 4 2500 pax ships departing evey week from HNL requires lots of airline seats) - UA re-started the ORD-HNL route primarily because of the new cruise services. NW, which cut back service from the west coast to Hawaii, is re-launching flights between LAX, SFO and PDX to HNL only because the economics of the 753 make these flights possible, trying to fly these routes with the DC10 or a brand new (expensive) A330 only costs money.

Thus, I really do not think that Southwest, JetBlue or AirTran are going to try to enter the Hawaiian market in the near future - its too risky, there is too much competition, and the services would tie up too many aircraft. Each roundtrip from the west coast to the islands requires the equivalent of one aircraft on a daily basis - each of these airlines are known for frequency - it just doesnt make sense. I could be wrong, but I think that the LCC carriers will leave Hawaii to the legacy airlines and Aloha and Hawaiian.


User currently offlineLrgt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6804 times:

It is an expensive route though and at the worst it would come down to the price of trans-con ($99 each way) which WN B6 and FL all charge $99 for; go to FL's website Airtran.com and book PHL/SFO x-ATL....EVERY date INCLUDING the day before Thanksgiving is $92 each-way...the same cannot be said about HNL which is a shorter route than PHL-ATL-SFO (even if it were direct). What about HNL-LAS? LAS is the #1 destination for Hawaiians and with LAS's growing resident population wanting to vacation, that may be better than LAX.

CO has a daily nonstop to HNL from EWR - UA tried this several times in the 1960s and 1970s without success.

Did UA try EWR too? If it failed they most likely did something wrong like they always do, may be too big of an a/c or 3-class or something. I have heard from CO that the EWR/HNL flight is a cash cow and has been ever since it started a year ago. I beleive they are even adding a daily EWR/OGG/HNL. CO's choice of a/c (767) was smart! I tried booking for off season and the flight was nearly full and the best price was $800 r/t.



Don't bring up the NW DC9's unless you have to!
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6780 times:

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, UA flew JFK-HNL nonstop, sometimes daily, sometimes, 3 or 4 times per week, sometimes only on a seasonal basis, with DC8-62s.

I flew this flight in 1974, I think, but it was dropped shortly thereafter.


User currently offlineLrgt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6719 times:

In the late-70's it cost more to operate a DC8 with fuel prices the way they were than people were willing to pay to fly, so it died.

CO capitalized on the popularity of EWR among now only the NYC market but the PHL market as well. With efficient 767-400's and lots of people willing to spend $800 r/t for EWR/HNL, the route is a winner. Now lets see US take a 767-200ER that they don't know what to do with since it was replaced by an A330 to on its former Europe route and use that to fly PHL/HNL....wait that would make too much sense...US...make sense...I can't use those words together.



Don't bring up the NW DC9's unless you have to!
User currently offlineGr8slvrflt From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 1608 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6698 times:

Right before the end came, Eastern was planning to run an L-1011 from LAX to HNL for frequent flyer and employee travel only. It might be a good idea to promote frequent flyer membership. I believe yields are pretty low anyway.

User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6604 times:

IMO, the Mainland/Hawaii markets are not ripe for a new entrant right now, particularly a LCC. UA has just resumed high capacity nonstops from ORD, and NW is in the process of adding significant additional capacity from major west coast cities. The LCCs other than TZ would be wise to defer getting into Hawaii.

User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6548 times:

Long Beach. Slot controlled hell. I imagine jetBlue, in this enviroment, is very cautious as to what routes they serve from their West coast focus city.

Las Vegas. Served on a onestop basis by Aloha, either through Oakland or Burbank. Hawaiian does it nonstop. I don't think a third carrier on the route makes sense.

There is still a lot of capacity going to Hawai'i, and as someone stated above, it's all crappy yields. The planes might be full, but they still ain't making a dime, just so the FFs have something to spend their miles on.
Hawai'i in the airline business is what I would call, "A Necessary Evil" or "Damned if you, Damned if you don't".

Moneyshot-So if I am reading your post correctly, at present you leave the girlfriend at home when you go to Hawai'i?
Well, then you're a wise young-man.
If you give in and take her to Maui this year, next year she'll want Bora Bora, then after that, shopping in Paris, it continues to spiral out of control to the point you're working 3 jobs and still driving a rusty old 82 Mazda, driving around on the gas you bought with the change you found between the cushions, eating 2 day-old PB&J sandwiches.....while she's out shopping for new 'vacation clothes'.

When in doubt, let'em pout!



Delete this User
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6528 times:

Did UA try EWR too? If it failed they most likely did something wrong like they always do, may be too big of an a/c or 3-class or something.

CO's service is their international product. Granted, not 3 actually classes, but not domestic service either.

They've offered it for a very, very long time too. They used to operate it with the DC-10. If its a cash cow, its because they connect people onwards to Guam and other Air Mike destinations.

It is an expensive route though and at the worst it would come down to the price of trans-con ($99 each way) which WN B6 and FL all charge $99 for

It wouldn't be that cheap. Operating a 2200nm route with ETOPS 180 and the associated costs is not the same as a jaunt across middle America. The costs of having a crew in Hawaii to bring the plane back would be huge, as well.

I challenge you to find a WN fare across the country for only $99 each way. WN's cheapest fares sell out very, very quickly. People are mistaken if they think Southwest is always the cheapest way to go.

N


User currently offlineLrgt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 6334 times:

I challenge you to find a WN fare across the country for only $99 each way. WN's cheapest fares sell out very, very quickly. People are mistaken if they think Southwest is always the cheapest way to go.

I agree; I fly nearly weekly all over the country and have never flown WN because they have NEVER given me the best deal; they never have that $89 transcon fare or $19 short hop fare available. FL or the legacies are always cheaper. Since LAX-HNL is the same distance as LAX-EWR/PHL/etc, the operating costs are only going to be a few extra dollars for the ETOPS preflight inspection, however the average fare on LAX-HNL is most likely double LAX-EWR/PHL/etc.

The reason all of the legacies are increasing capacity on the west coast is because the planes are running full. They put an end to the frequent flier thing; if you want to use your 40,000 miles to go to Hawaii than you absolutely must book between 12 months in advance when the seats go on sale and 11 1/2 months in advance when all the frequent flier seats are already taken! This is true during the fall slow travel season on that route.



Don't bring up the NW DC9's unless you have to!
User currently offlineHnl-Jack From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 820 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6266 times:

Mainland demand for seats to Hawaii is growing faster than seats are being added in the market. Thus far in 2004 arrivals are up by nine percent and load factors still hover in the mid-80's. If you think you can get a $99 fare o/w you better think again. Lowest west coast - Hawaii fares are currently averaging over $500 r/t except for Omni and ATA. And, quite often last minute bookings off the west coast for coach travel will be in excess of $1,000 round trip.

Despite the positive numbers, I think it is highly unlikely we'll see carriers like Southwest, AirTran or Frontier enter the market with the 737NG product. Aloha can make the economics work with that type of equipment because they already have an established operation in Honolulu. They're able to fly mulitple frequences to multiple markets and support them with their total network in Hawaii. The cost of flying one flight a day with only a 130 or so seats to a market like Hawaii just doesn't make economic sense for the carriers mentioned.

I think it's far more likely we'll see new, Hawaii based "wide body" LLC start ups if the demand continues at its present pace.



Grew up in the business and continued the family tradition.
User currently offlineLrgt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6231 times:

Aloha can make the economics work with that type of equipment because they already have an established operation in Honolulu.

Yes, but no base in California. Airtran has the base in CA but not HI. Either way they each need to open one new station.


If you think you can get a $99 fare o/w you better think again. Lowest west coast - Hawaii fares are currently averaging over $500 r/t

My point exactly! $99 o/w is the standard fare for transcon (and they still only fill 60%) now which is the SAME distance. These companies are taking this and abandoing a market with MORE demand AND fares THREE times as much for the same distance. Make sense? NO!



Don't bring up the NW DC9's unless you have to!
User currently offlineRedDragon From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 1135 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6171 times:

...does anyone know of B6's are ETOPS automatically or will they have to jump through hoops with the FAA? I beleive the 737NG may be ETOPS out of the box (somebody correct me if I am wrong).

WN's 73Gs are not ETOPS rated, and to do so, will cost them $$$ ... I'm not sure if B6's A320s are ETOPS rated ... If FL has had their 73Gs built ETOPS capable from the get-go, they have a distinct advantage.

Apologies for going slightly off-topic this far into the thread, but can anyone shed a little more light on ETOPS approval? Is this more of a regulatory thing to do with an individual carrier's procedures and so on (I'm imagining it as along the same lines as those "Investor In People" things you see companies proclaiming in the UK - satisfy the conditions and get the certificate), or is there a lot of work to be done on the aircraft as well? I was assuming that once a particular type was certified for ETOPS, that approval for an individual carrier to operate ETOPS routes would be more a case of the former, rather than the latter (ie. the aircraft would physically be capable, but the airline would have to satisfy the relevant authorities first).

Does this make sense? Do airlines typically have to specify particular equipment on their aircraft to allow for ETOPS work?

I'm beginning to confuse myself now  Big grin

Rich


User currently offlineBUFJets From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6139 times:

I think there are a lot of people without FF miles who can't justify the typical fares from the mainland US to HI. If a LCC could offer flights for around $300 RT from CA or $450 RT from the East Coast (with a connection) and still make money, I think it would tap a new market of passengers.

User currently offlineAv8rdal From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 462 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 5526 times:

According to previous posts, AirTran's 737NG's are ETOPS certified. Why would the carrier invest that money into this if they didn't anticipate using it?

AirTran had an ambitious year last summer with its invasion of the west coast and eradication the 4-digit walk-up fares from Atlanta that Delta had been enjoying for quite some time. I would bet on them considering expansion to Hawaii (or maybe Alaska) at least seasonally. Where else would ETOPS be useful? Trans-atlantic service from Boston to Ireland and code-share with RyanAir? That would be an entirely different topic, so I'll leave it at that.



Maintain thine airspeed, lest the Earth rise up and smite thee.
User currently offlineUAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2392 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 5 days ago) and read 5144 times:

I still think that F9 will be the first LCC into the Hawaii market and I think that we will see this happen within the next year. F9 is ETOPS cirt. and they have already talked about ordering larger aircraft to serve "tropical" destinations. We all know that F9 is planning on the Caribbean market but it would make a lot of since for them to start Hawaii also. Right now F9 serves Alaska from DEN with load restrictions and they are still making money on that flight and talking about adding frequency. You can look at their Mexico service which a lot of people said wouldn't make a lot of money and see how it has blown up. F9 is opening up service from every market that they can and all the flights are full in and out. As F9 starts receiving more aircraft I think that we will see them dominate the vacation market as far as LCC's are concerned.


/// UNITED AIRLINES
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (10 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5133 times:

F9 will need to upgrade the MTOW on some of their 319s if they're serious about consistently serving ANC and adding HNL.

They selected a relatively low MTOW.

Airtran is in the same boat... they selected an extremely low gross weight for their 73Gs.

N


User currently offlineLrgt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5125 times:

...Now I am curuous about F9 as well as FL and B6 (maybe WN too if their NGs are ETOPS). Can anyone claify the ETOPS thing more?

I think that myth about this route being only for ff's redeeming milage can be put to rest though, right? Try finding room on these flights using your ff miles even if you have them! If you are not 11 1/2 months in advance to 12 months FORGET ABOUT IT!

Wow this post turned around! It went from NEVER, no way and not profitable to the opposite:

Hnl-Jack: Mainland demand for seats to Hawaii is growing faster than seats are being added in the market. Thus far in 2004 arrivals are up by nine percent and load factors still hover in the mid-80's. If you think you can get a $99 fare o/w you better think again. Lowest west coast - Hawaii fares are currently averaging over $500 r/t except for Omni and ATA. And, quite often last minute bookings off the west coast for coach travel will be in excess of $1,000 round trip.

BUFJets:I think there are a lot of people without FF miles who can't justify the typical fares from the mainland US to HI. If a LCC could offer flights for around $300 RT from CA or $450 RT from the East Coast (with a connection) and still make money, I think it would tap a new market of passengers.

Av8rdal: According to previous posts, AirTran's 737NG's are ETOPS certified. Why would the carrier invest that money into this if they didn't anticipate using it?
AirTran had an ambitious year last summer with its invasion of the west coast and eradication the 4-digit walk-up fares from Atlanta that Delta had been enjoying for quite some time. I would bet on them considering expansion to Hawaii (or maybe Alaska) at least seasonally. Where else would ETOPS be useful?


UAL747DEN:I still think that F9 will be the first LCC into the Hawaii market and I think that we will see this happen within the next year. F9 is ETOPS cirt. and they have already talked about ordering larger aircraft to serve "tropical" destinations. We all know that F9 is planning on the Caribbean market but it would make a lot of since for them to start Hawaii also. Right now F9 serves Alaska from DEN with load restrictions and they are still making money on that flight and talking about adding frequency. You can look at their Mexico service which a lot of people said wouldn't make a lot of money and see how it has blown up. F9 is opening up service from every market that they can and all the flights are full in and out. As F9 starts receiving more aircraft I think that we will see them dominate the vacation market as far as LCC's are concerned.



Don't bring up the NW DC9's unless you have to!
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (10 years 3 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5115 times:

Can anyone claify the ETOPS thing more?

Its not just a stamp you get.

It involves very different maintenance practices, additional onboard systems, and a host of other things.

N


User currently offlineUAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2392 posts, RR: 11
Reply 23, posted (10 years 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5070 times:

Gigneil
I will post this in responce to your post. This information is posted on a F9 site for managers.

Rumor: Frontier is modifying a bunch of Airbus aircraft to increase their power.

Reality: Eight Airbus aircraft will undergo a change to increase the engines’ thrust; however, the modification is primarily in paperwork; not in the engines’ make-up.

As background, an engine’s power is rated by thrust, which is measured in pounds. Frontier’s A319s are powered by CFM 56-5B5/P engines, which have 22,000 lbs. of thrust per engine. Frontier can “buy” additional thrust through a change to the 319s’computer systems, because the engines have a range of power capabilities to accommodate an entire family of aircraft.

Through a change to the 319s’ computer systems, and by working with GE (the engine manufacturer) and Airbus, eight Frontier aircraft will soon operate at 23,500 lbs. per engine, and the engines will be classified as CFM 56-5B6/P. Two additional aircraft – scheduled for delivery later this year – will arrive at Frontier with the same authorization.

The additional engine power will allow Frontier a better performance in existing markets, such as LGA, where shorter runways can make full-load departures challenging. New, longer routes, such as DEN-ANC and LAX-MSP, MCI, and STL, will also be better served with the more powerful Airbus aircraft.




/// UNITED AIRLINES
User currently offlineLGB Photos From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (10 years 3 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5041 times:

That is just what we need......another carrier flying on an already oversaturated market.

25 N766UA : What about Maui? There are far fewer flights from there to the mainland and it's more of a vacation spot than HNL.
26 Bluewave 707 : One factor failed to mention ... HNL has only 28 gates for "overseas" traffic. These proposed flights will be coming and going during off-peak time an
27 Post contains images Gigneil : UAL747DEN- Right on. N
28 Lrgt : It sounds like F9 is the one we should be taking about, not FL. Can anyone confirm anything solid? They seem to just jump right in without talking abo
29 Gigneil : I'd like to emphasize that I don't believe F9 or FL will serve HNL However, if F9 does, they can't do it from Denver. Their 319s just wouldn't have th
30 UAL747DEN : I also do not think that F9 will serve Hawaii from DEN at least at this point. UA already has a nonstop DEN-HNL flight. I do think however that they w
31 Lrgt : While I DO expect LAX-HNL on F9 appear, I beleive B6 would do better with the route because they will not get into a price war with the other companie
32 Gigneil : I'm not 100% sure Airtran did order them with ETOPS. The only place I've heard that is here, and only as a maybe. I see no reason whatsoever why a B6
33 Lrgt : Gigneil: JFK-MIA is NOT ETOPS !!!!!!!!!!
34 Post contains images Lrgt : By the way JFK/SJU is not ETOPS either! ...ETOPS is for when you are flying in the middle of a big ocean all alone There are a few exceptions to that
35 Gigneil : SJU is. And the route they fly JFK-MIA requires the extra overwater gear necessary, which is expensive and a pain in the ass. N
36 Lrgt : Extra overwater geer (life vests) are a pain in the ass but are now on nearly every aircraft. While it may be a pain in the ass and expensive, THAT IS
37 Gigneil : Extra overwater geer (life vests) are a pain in the ass but are now on nearly every aircraft. These routes require rafts, not just vests, and most pla
38 Post contains images Lrgt : Even if it were 20nm farther, they could fly a slightly less direct flight plan to fly closer to the islands so they do not have to go through ETOPS.
39 Penguinflies : While there is a lot of scheduled capacity, also don't forget the charter capacity. HA use to fly LAS charters. ATA, World, North American, and Omni a
40 Lrgt : Yes, they ARE common use (international terminal style). Slots at HNL are not really a problem unless none are available and they have to park you out
41 UAL747DEN : This will add some fuel to the fire! A319's are equipped to fly farther than the A320 because of the weight difference so if they wanted HNL why didn'
42 Lrgt : HELLO UAL747DEN....F9 doesn't have 1 A320. They are ALL A319s (plus some A318's and 737s).
43 UAL747DEN : LRGT, Your a smart one! I wasn't talking about F9 I was talking about B6, someone said that they ordered A320's for this reason and after review I lea
44 Gigneil : The 320 does come with significantly extra power, to offset the additional weight, just not the extra range. An A320 or a 319 should be able to serve
45 UAL747DEN : Checking the Airbus website there is really not that much additional power but the A319 has about an additional 700nm in distance compared to the A320
46 Swaluvfa : Just FYI: AirTran orders for the 737NG are about a 50/50 mix of planes owned by AirTran (first time since the DC-9) and those financed by GECAS. Only
47 Lrgt : Thanks for the info Swaluvfa; that makes sense then why they (FL) are ETOPS. While that makes it seem that FL then does not show intentions to fly LAX
48 Gigneil : It is most likely that F9 will be the first LCC on Hawaii ATA has been serving Hawaii with scheduled flights for years. The A319 would have no problem
49 Cloudy : Gigneil is right, DEN to Hawaii could not be done by any 737 or A320 series aircraft with a reasonable payload, unless you are talking about the bizje
50 Penguinflies : Heck all the times i've flown UA DEN-HNL, we've always had problems with range on the 777. Usually the flight would take a delay because operations wo
51 Gigneil : Well, that's not really because of the range of the craft, the A market 777 certainly has enough. Perhaps its due to last minute cargo scheduling? N
52 Cloudy : Well, that's not really because of the range of the craft, the A market 777 certainly has enough. ---- The DEN - HNL route was actually used as kind o
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
JetStar Denied Flying To Hawaii? posted Thu Dec 7 2006 08:29:39 by Safs
ATA Airlines Adding New Service To Hawaii posted Mon Nov 20 2006 23:05:04 by ATA767
Alaska To Hawaii? posted Mon Oct 30 2006 14:30:15 by Wedgetail737
ATA 737-800 To Hawaii... posted Sat Oct 14 2006 21:06:36 by SWABFA
AirTran BOS To Fla posted Wed Aug 9 2006 16:25:09 by LawnDart
NYC To Hawaii Questions posted Tue Aug 8 2006 02:23:52 by LGAtoIND
How Will The Go! CRJ's Get To Hawaii? posted Fri May 12 2006 18:39:42 by Congaboy
AirTran Moving To The HHH Terminal At MSP posted Fri Apr 28 2006 06:28:45 by Pilottim747
An Easier Way For AS To Get To Hawaii, Merge W/ AQ posted Wed Apr 26 2006 07:43:58 by Gmcc
AS To Hawaii: Vol 2 posted Tue Apr 18 2006 00:39:16 by AS739X