Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MUC-PHL On US: With A A333 Today  
User currently onlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4722 posts, RR: 3
Posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3023 times:

On MUC´s website the flight is shown as a A333 today. Are loads so good on the route so that they can/have to use a 333 to MUC? The MUC timetable on the same website shows as equipment "EQV" on the flight while earlier it was only the 762. Is this an indication that we can see the route completely changed to the A333?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Denis Roschlau




Exceptions confirm the rule.
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3768 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2970 times:

US0014 from PHL to MUC is scheduled to be a Daily 333!

It's probably that MUC's website hasnt been updated to show the 333!

US used to operate the 762 to MUC, not sure if it will change back for the winter?


User currently offlineLGA777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1149 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2947 times:

I am pretty sure MUC is a 330 for about a month, changes back to 762 on the October schedule change, I believe it was taken from PHL-FRA who gets a 762 for the same time period.

LGA777


User currently offlineIntothinair From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 392 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2944 times:

Quoting B742 (Reply 1):
US0014 from PHL to MUC is scheduled to be a Daily 333!

Good news for MUC. But where do they get the A333 from, i thought they only had 9. My guess would be that they switched a route from a A333 to a 762, so the A333 could go to MUC. If so, which other route that used to get the A333, get's a 762 now? Thanks for any answers.

Cheers, Konstantin G.


User currently offlineLxsaab2000 From Switzerland, joined Feb 2004, 325 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2921 times:

Quoting Intothinair (Reply 3):
But where do they get the A333 from, i thought they only had 9. My guess would be that they switched a route from a A333 to a 762, so the A333 could go to MUC. If so, which other route that used to get the A333, get's a 762 now? Thanks for any answers.

Maybe from MAD? The route seems to be downgraded to 762 from 1st Sep.

Bye


User currently offlineUsairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3474 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2921 times:

the 333 doesn't come from PHL-FRA because that is still 2x daily with a 762 and 333.

the 333 came from PHL-MAD. It is currently scheduled as a 762 but used to switch to a 333 for the summer schedule. Although they have PHL-MAD as a 333 Sept 19th and 24th but that's it.


User currently offlineSupa7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2839 times:

This is for for Oktoberfest... when demand to MUC skyrockets relative to other cities in Europe.

User currently offlineA330323X From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 3039 posts, RR: 43
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2809 times:

Quoting A342 (Thread starter):
On MUC´s website the flight is shown as a A333 today. Are loads so good on the route so that they can/have to use a 333 to MUC? The MUC timetable on the same website shows as equipment "EQV" on the flight while earlier it was only the 762. Is this an indication that we can see the route completely changed to the A333?

They're just running it for this month, while the loads are still good but the temperature is a bit cooler. They can't fly the 333 there during the summer without taking a big payload hit, which is why the route has been a 762. It could certainly support a bigger plane, now with the LH partnership.



I'm the expert on here on two things, neither of which I care about much anymore.
User currently onlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4722 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2714 times:

Quoting A330323X (Reply 7):
They can't fly the 333 there during the summer without taking a big payload hit, which is why the route has been a 762.

Why? According to the great circle mapper, MUC-PHL is 6649 kms long. The A333´s range with max. payload is well over 7000 kms. I know that PHL´s longest runway isn´t that long (about 3200 meters) and that the PW-powered aircraft don´t have the best thrust, but PHL is neither very hot nor high and on the PHL-MUC leg they have tailwinds. MUC is a fair bit higher and in the summer temperatures can easily surpass 35° C, but despite of the headwinds on the MUC-PHL leg I can´t imagine why they would have problems as MUC´s runways are 4000 long.



Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlineAvianca From Venezuela, joined Jan 2005, 5934 posts, RR: 41
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2629 times:

Quoting A342 (Reply 8):
Quoting A330323X (Reply 7):
They can't fly the 333 there during the summer without taking a big payload hit, which is why the route has been a 762.

Why? According to the great circle mapper, MUC-PHL is 6649 kms long. The A333´s range with max. payload is well over 7000 kms. I know that PHL´s longest runway isn´t that long (about 3200 meters) and that the PW-powered aircraft don´t have the best thrust, but PHL is neither very hot nor high and on the PHL-MUC leg they have tailwinds. MUC is a fair bit higher and in the summer temperatures can easily surpass 35° C, but despite of the headwinds on the MUC-PHL leg I can´t imagine why they would have problems as MUC´s runways are 4000 long.

A342 you must be correct, for example the fra-phl route or even the fra-clt route witch es even longer goes without any payload problems ex fra on the journey to phl/clt, as they alway fill up the flights with many many cargo.

regards



Colombia es el Mundo Y el Mundo es Colombia
User currently onlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4722 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2611 times:

Quoting Avianca (Reply 9):
A342 you must be correct

Finally someone agreeing with me. welcome on my RR list!



Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlineAvianca From Venezuela, joined Jan 2005, 5934 posts, RR: 41
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2602 times:

Quoting A342 (Reply 10):
Finally someone agreeing with me. welcome on my RR list!

thank you!  bigthumbsup 



Colombia es el Mundo Y el Mundo es Colombia
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...
PHL To ANC On US In The Future? posted Mon May 29 2006 05:58:39 by Jdwfloyd
Buying A Ticket On LH With US Miles? posted Wed Feb 16 2005 01:51:37 by MNeo
What Is Going On With VS11 Today? posted Thu Aug 5 2004 16:37:27 by VS11
Drinks On Y Class With US Carriers posted Mon May 17 2004 18:22:57 by Saigonhouston
Why Not Inflight Map On US A333? posted Mon Dec 23 2002 03:01:17 by B764
? On US Air 767 Write-off @ PHL posted Tue Dec 25 2001 21:40:56 by FlagshipAZ
Anyone Flown With Bike On US Carrier? posted Fri Jun 22 2001 05:32:23 by Watewate
PHL-FRA On US A330-ENVOY! posted Wed Mar 8 2000 23:09:12 by Hypermike
Why No More Intl First On US posted Sat Dec 2 2006 01:58:02 by Boeing 747-311
Threatening Note Found On US Plane posted Tue Nov 7 2006 21:49:11 by PHLJJS