Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing's 757-300 Needs To Get A Life  
User currently offline747-600X From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2792 posts, RR: 14
Posted (14 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3333 times:

Boeing's website is bragging about the 757-300 having the highest on-time performance of any jetliner. WELL DUH! It's operated by two small airlines which don't, probably, have a lot of passengers to delay, and there are only 10 in the world... come on... see if you can pull that off with 1000, eh, Boeing?


"Mental health is reality at all cost." -- M. Scott Peck, 'The Road Less Traveled'
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBarnaby From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (14 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3031 times:

I disagree for a few reasons.

Both Arkia and Condor are charter carriers that make their business transporting leisure pax around the world. These are hardly seasoned travelers, and probably couldn't give a rat's arse about things like getting to the airport on time, checking in early, etc. Factor in the huge size of aircraft like the 757-300 and the poor passenger facilities at airports like Faro, Mallorca, Lanzarote, Funchal, Madeira, Tenerife and suddenly that record looks a bit more impressive.

And by the way, who you callin' small?

Condor operates 29 752/753, 9 767-300's, 4 737-300's, 1 DC-10, and 8 A320-200 aircraft. That's hardly a small airline by any standard

Even Arkia with its 9 752/753, 2 737-200's and assorted ATR's and Dash-7's has some size to it.

In light of the above, I'd say this on-time performance is a little more impressive than you seem to think.


User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (14 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3001 times:

I believe that when Boeing states that the 757-300 has the "highest on-time performance", Boeing takes all of the data for jetliners, and weights the on-time performance so the variable is equal and all planes have a level playing field.

Even if Boeing had 1,000 757-300's on the market, the on-time performance would be at or near, what the current on-time performance level is.

FLY777UAL


User currently offlineEWR757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 360 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2964 times:


It doesn't matter about the size of the airline. When you statistically measure a given number of departures with on time dispatch rate, the percentages are on a level playing field.

We do this all the time at our company to measure among other things, T/O rejects, MX cancellations, ETOPS reliability, etc. etc.


User currently offlineNavion From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1013 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2961 times:

The 753 has one of the lowest fuel burns (if not the lowest) per seat of any of the large airliners on the market. Secondly, if you know Statistics (the actual science of numbers and probabilities), the 753's on time performance is at greater jeapardy with a small sample size compared to much larger fleets. Think of what a cancelled flight does to the figures of a fleet of 13 aircraft. While your post is well intended, it appears the opposite of your point is true.

User currently offlineAvion From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 2205 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2961 times:

Faro, Mallorca, Lanzarote, Funchal, Madeira, Tenerife are not airports with poor passenger facilities. Some of these airports are even served by 747s.

Thanks

Avion


User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 63
Reply 6, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2949 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all

Don't forget that JMC of the UK has recently placed an order for the -300.

Not sure on the quantity but it is about 3!

Regards
Gary Watt
Aberdeen, Scotland


User currently offlineBarnaby From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2920 times:

>>>Think of what a cancelled flight
does to the figures of a fleet of 13 aircraft. While your post is well intended, it appears
the opposite of your point is true.<<

Excellent observation.

>>Faro, Mallorca, Lanzarote, Funchal, Madeira, Tenerife are not airports with poor
passenger facilities. Some of these airports are even served by 747s. <<

No gates, dingy terminal building, small runways with mountains on either end. Frequent delays---call it what you like.


User currently offlineAvion From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 2205 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2918 times:

No, these Airports are as good as any other airports. They all have jetways and are nicely set up.

Avion


User currently offlineJet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2921 times:

JMC's order was 2 plus 3 options.

I think the Boeing website will mean "despatch reliability" rather than on-time performance - manufacturers never rate aircraft by "on-time departures" as this would include weather, ATC, passenger and crew related delays - if you inclued these figures it would make the plane seem less reiable than it really was. Only "despatch reliability" is measurd, which is;
How often is there a technical problem preventing the plane from leaving when it is supposed to?

Navion is correct, with such a small fleet, the figures are impressive. If you have 1000 757-200 flights and one is delayed due to techical problems, that gives a depatch reliability of 99.9%. If you have 10 757-300 flights and one is delayed, despatch reliability is only 90%.

As to the comments about FAO, PMI, ACE, FNC and TFS not having poor facilities - I'd have to disagree. Only Tenerife and Arrecife have airbridges and then only a few, most pax have to be bussed to their aircraft. This creates delays, baggage handling is generally slowed for the same reason and these airports get VERY over-congested, both with people and with aircraft. For exampe, I usually travel to Tenerife on an early morning flight from the UK (departing between 07.30 and 08.30) In my last 8 trips, the flight has left the UK on time and arrived in TFS either on-time or early. On my return trip, the plane has each time arrived early for the ruturn trip and boarding usually starts on time, however boarding with busses takes ages. When everyone is onboard, there is usually a 15-20 minute wait for taxi clearence, then you join the que of 3-6 aircraft on the taxiway awaiting takeoff, another 15-30 minte wait. In 8 trips the delays in leaving Tenerife have been between 30 mins and 2 hours - these airports definately don't have good passenger facilities! To get a plane off on time is a real challenge!


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3125 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2894 times:

"No gates, dingy terminal building, small runways with mountains on either end. Frequent delays---call it what you like."

You make me laugh Barnaby, Faro gates are being built right now, it's true but we have rwy's for all types of aircrafts, we don't have mountains near the rwy's and we have delays like in any airport of the world. What do you call a dingy terminal building?
Have you been here before to make such declarations?

Luis, Faro, Portugal


User currently offlineJet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2882 times:

I hadn't read Barnaby's second post - Faro airport is on marshes on the coast - they're definately are no mountains anywhere near it! The terminal is quite modern - but no airbridges! The terminals at the other airports are also modern, they're just inadequate.

I've flown from all the airports mentioned, they all get very overcrowded - long waits to check-in etc...

And yes these airports do have frequent delays as a result of their inadequacy to deal with the number of flights they choose to accept. Some delays are also caused by en-route ATC however, but weather and techical delays are rare.

Arrecife does have a mountain near the runway, but it is not an obstacle for departing aircraft.


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3125 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2874 times:

Sometimes the long waits at check in's are because charter airlines want to save money in everything and instead of requesting let's say 6 check in counters, they request 4 or 5, what can the airport do?

The airport authority accepts traffic according to its declared capacities of pax per hour and traffic per hour, we can't do nothing if the ATC is congested or if some flight is delayed due to a previous rotation.

It's not that simple as you may think.

Luis, Faro, Portugal


User currently offlineJet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2870 times:

A 757 shouldn't need 6 check in counters (or 4, or 5!) - in the UK it usually gets 2-3 and the delays aren't as bad checking in.

Of couse I accept an airport has no resposibility for en-route ATC delays and late inbound aircraft.
Luis, I'm not having a dig at Faro in particular, it's problems are common to all Mediterranean airports I know of - I know things have improved. I made 16 flights in and out of the old Faro Airport, outside check-in desks and all!!!!! There's no denying the new terminal, which I have travelled through 6 times is a vast improvement!

Just for comprison I've flown through Palma six times, Malaga twice, Arrecife 4 times, Naples twice, Venice once, Pisa twice and Tenerife 8 times. The best?
Agadir (Morocco) without question, a very modern airport, with a spacious terminal in a very traditional Moroccan style - great airport


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3125 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2875 times:

You're right, a 757 don't need 6 check in counters, 2 or 3 are enough but it was just an example, applicable for a wide body. Other caracteristic of seasonal airports with charter flights is that the passengers arrive all at the same time in buses and from one minute to the other you have more than 30 pax waiting for check in.
Just in case you'll be back here, the new terminal is under works to increase its capacity by 35% in pax movements per hour.

best regards from sunny Algarve  


User currently offlineJet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2866 times:

I'm glad Faro are making improvements, they are already one of the more modern airports on the Med.
I used the 757 as an example as it's the most common type for the MAN-FAO flight (or seems to be)
I appreciate all your comments, it's just that the whole setup of the holiday business (Airlines, Airports and Holiday Companies) seems to cause problems - the tour companies want all their flights to arrive together - so the airlines have to schedule all their flights at similar times - which leads to congestion at the airport!

Judging by the number of past trips I've made to Faro, It shouldn't be too long before I'm back!


User currently offlineBarnaby From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2862 times:

>>>You make me laugh Barnaby, Faro gates are being built right now, it's true but we have rwy's for all
types of aircrafts, we don't have mountains near the rwy's and we have delays like in any airport of the
world. What do you call a dingy terminal building?
Have you been here before to make such declarations? <<<

You'll have to forgive my ignorance Luis. I have been to Faro, but it was a very very long time ago indeed!--my observations were based on very old information. I'm glad to hear things have changed for the better.


User currently offline747-600X From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2792 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2834 times:

my statements were uncalled for and presumptuous, thank you all for correcting me.


"Mental health is reality at all cost." -- M. Scott Peck, 'The Road Less Traveled'
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...
NWA Boeing 757-300 Inbound To San Diego! posted Fri Oct 25 2002 23:12:11 by Maiznblu_757
Delta Needs To Get A Life posted Fri Sep 1 2000 22:13:07 by YankeeFan
COA 757-300 Inbound To SRQ Now And TPA Traffic posted Tue Mar 14 2006 14:54:39 by CMHSRQ
Continental Starts 757-300 Service To ANC posted Thu Apr 8 2004 01:12:25 by Randy4920
Delta Boeing 767-300 Diverted To YUL posted Sun Jun 8 2003 04:22:26 by Quebecair727
Will NWA 757-300 Come To Anc? posted Sat Jan 5 2002 09:28:18 by Alaskaairlines
ATA New Boeing 757-300 First Aug 3 2001 posted Fri Jun 1 2001 22:33:46 by LUISDEAF
Boeing 757-300 posted Tue May 8 2001 02:05:43 by Flight152
Boeing 757-300 - Sales Prospects... posted Thu Mar 8 2001 23:47:50 by Crosswind
US Airways Needs To Get It's Act Together posted Sat Jul 22 2000 15:50:29 by AerLingus A330