Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
End Of DL Widebody Service At LGA?  
User currently offlineJFKLGANYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3508 posts, RR: 5
Posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 6044 times:

As a LaGuardia man, I miss the days of Eastern, TWA, UA, and AA widebody service on the short runways at LGA. DL is the only carrier left with regular widebody service into and out of LGA.

My concern is, with all of the reallocation of 767s to the int'l markets, will there be any left to run a route like LGA-ATL?
Ironically, its seems that DL has actually increased widebody service from ATL over the past few months. We currently see a nice mix of 763/764 service.

Any thoughts?

PJ

30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently online1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6557 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 6038 times:

The domestic 767-300s will NOT be moved to international services. Only 8 767-400ERs will be moved to transatlantic service.


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineSESGDL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3489 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5872 times:

DL still will continue to operate 25 domestic 767-300s. They are not ETOPS certified and therefore will stay as domestic widebodies. DL will still likely put 2-3 763s into LGA a day from ATL. 767-400s will likely end service to LGA due to their push into Europe, but ATL-LGA is a very high-capacity market, 767-300s are needed. DL's 13 remaining domestic 767-400s will fly Hawaii nonstops, a couple TPA/MCO flights in between, and the usual LAX, LAS, SEA, SLC flights from ATL. Time will tell if the 767-400 returns in the summer on ATL-LGA.

Jeremy


User currently offlineLGA777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1149 posts, RR: 19
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5787 times:

Delta's Dec 1st schedule change domestically saw a big reduction in aircraft size on key routes like LGA-ATL and ATL-Florida specifically MCO. Many of the ATL-MCO flights that were 764 are now 757 and the twice a day 777 is gone.
LGA-ATL went from I think 9 767's, a mix of 200,300, and the one -400 to 3 763's, many of the former 767 flights are actually MD88's, as is LGA-NAS.

LGA777


User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4281 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5676 times:

Personally, I think this is a great thing. I don't trust widebodies at all on the 7000 ft runways in LGA. In fact, a few years ago, when I had to fly out of LGA on DL, I went out of my way to made sure I was on either a 737 or an MD88, just because of that. The biggest plane that should be in LGA is the 757, and that plane had excellent performance characteristics in an airport like LGA. Otherwise, Widebodies have no business at LGA, send them all to JFK and EWR where they belong.

User currently offlineKahala777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5657 times:

Quoting SESGDL (Reply 2):
DL's 13 remaining domestic 767-400s will fly Hawaii nonstops, a couple TPA/MCO flights in between, and the usual LAX, LAS, SEA, SLC flights from ATL. Time will tell if the 767-400 returns in the summer on ATL-LGA

Dont forget ATL-SFO; SFO-HNL; LAX-HNL; LAX-OGG!  wink 

KAHALA777


User currently offlineLGA777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1149 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5630 times:

Apodino, no offense but your logic is little off. On LGA's short runways DL's very powerful 767's are usually airborne in about 4000 feet. A ATL bound MD88 with a full load people is close to Max Gross Takeoff weight, and will usually use 5000-6000 feet of runway to get airborne, occasionally more. If I where flying DL out of LGA I would feel 100 pct safer on a 767 than an MD88. I am not an expert but I do work for a DL competitor in a LGA ramp tower and watch these planes takeoff usually 5-6 days a week and I have 20 years in LGA so trust me please on this.
Judging from your profile you are also a knowledgeable person with these type matter so I hope my comments might make sense. Happy Holidays.

Respectfully

LGA777


User currently offlineKahala777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5597 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 4):
I don't trust widebodies at all on the 7000 ft runways in LGA.

Some past widebodies with successful New York.LGA schedules:

Air Canada 767-200; 767-300
Air Canada L1011

American Airlines 767-200; 767-300
American Airlines DC-10

Delta Airlines L1011

Eastern Airlines A300
Eastern Airlines L1011

United Airlines DC-10

TWA L1011


KAHALA777


User currently offlineLGA777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1149 posts, RR: 19
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5458 times:

To add to Kahala777's comments UA also operated the 762 in the mid 80's (to ORD and DEN) and CO operated the A-300 in the late 80's to IAH.

Today AA 763's and AC 762/763's are still a very common sight at LGA on equipment subs.

Regards

LGA777


User currently offlineDL Widget Head From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2095 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 5445 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 1):
The domestic 767-300s will NOT be moved to international services. Only 8 767-400ERs will be moved to transatlantic service.

Incorrect. Some 767-300ER aircraft currently assigned domestic routes will be converted to INTL OPS as well.


User currently online1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6557 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5423 times:

Quoting DL Widget Head (Reply 9):
Incorrect. Some 767-300ER aircraft currently assigned domestic routes will be converted to INTL OPS as well.

I meant the non-ERs.



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4281 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5401 times:

I am not disputing the fact that airlines have run widebodies successfully into LGA in the past. That doesn't mean I have to be comfortable flying widebodies into that airport. The runway at DCA is only 150 ft shorter and widebodies have never operated into that airport. The runway at MDW is about as long as LGA maybe about 500 feet shorter, and look what happened to a 737 there the other day? Plus in BOS, they have a 7000 ft runway and a 7800 ft runway, yet more often than not widebody aircraft and a lot of narrowbody aircraft are always requesting a longer runway at that airport. I just don't trust widebody aircraft on shorter runways, because there are too many things that can go wrong, and it can be russian roulette especially in bad weather.

I suspect if the public knew how short the runways were at LGA, DCA, MDW, and SNA in relation to most of the big airports, there would be a lot less demand for travel into these airports. Thats why I think the recent WN incident will have major reprucussions at these airports as time goes along.


User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4750 posts, RR: 45
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5374 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
I suspect if the public knew how short the runways were at LGA, DCA, MDW, and SNA in relation to most of the big airports, there would be a lot less demand for travel into these airports. Thats why I think the recent WN incident will have major reprucussions at these airports as time goes along.

I think most people are aware how short the runways are at LGA. Your argument is unfounded.

You have every right to be afraid, but note it is just that - your fear!



Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4702 posts, RR: 50
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5350 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
Plus in BOS, they have a 7000 ft runway and a 7800 ft runway, yet more often than not widebody aircraft and a lot of narrowbody aircraft are always requesting a longer runway at that airport. I just don't trust widebody aircraft on shorter runways, because there are too many things that can go wrong, and it can be russian roulette especially in bad weather.

What kind of widebody flights, what kind of narrowbody flights? LGA-ATL is a relatively short flight for a 767, so not much fuel on board. This makes that the 767 has a lot of power to spare, as opposed to a MD-88 for wich it is a longer route (seen from a max. range point of view). I know I would rather be in a 767 with a lot of power to spare.



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineDL Widget Head From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2095 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 5347 times:

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Thread starter):
I just don't trust widebody aircraft on shorter runways, because there are too many things that can go wrong, and it can be russian roulette especially in bad weather.

Seems like your trying to say that widebody ops at LGA is MORE dangerous than narrow body ops yet I can not recall one incident where a widebody went off the edge of one of LGA's runways. In fact, I remember several narrow body incidents along those lines. So, statistically, widebodies at LGA are safer.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5300 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
The runway at DCA is only 150 ft shorter and widebodies have never operated into that airport.

Hardly conclusive, since the reasoning for that restriction is ramp space not runway length.

N


User currently offlineBucky707 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1028 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5224 times:

Quoting JRadier (Reply 13):
What kind of widebody flights, what kind of narrowbody flights? LGA-ATL is a relatively short flight for a 767, so not much fuel on board. This makes that the 767 has a lot of power to spare, as opposed to a MD-88 for wich it is a longer route (seen from a max. range point of view). I know I would rather be in a 767 with a lot of power to spare

LGA-ATL is a medium length flight for the 88. I have flown the 88 from LGA to DFW when we still had that route...........still plenty of power to spare. Never have felt like the 88 didn't have enough power to go anywhere from LGA.


User currently offlineNADC10Fan From United States of America, joined May 2005, 165 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5126 times:

Quoting LGA777 (Reply 8):
To add to Kahala777's comments UA also operated the 762 in the mid 80's (to ORD and DEN) and CO operated the A-300 in the late 80's to IAH.

Today AA 763's and AC 762/763's are still a very common sight at LGA on equipment subs.

You missed a classic wide-body! My own namesake - National Airlines' DC10-10s and -30s - also operated out of LGA ...
10 Series:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Howard Chaloner
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Art Brett


30 Series:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Howard Chaloner




TANSTAAFL!
User currently offlineCory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2689 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 5101 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 11):
The runway at DCA is only 150 ft shorter and widebodies have never operated into that airport. The runway at MDW is about as long as LGA maybe about 500 feet shorter, and look what happened to a 737 there the other day?

Then don't ever fly into OGG from the mainland. Its runway is only 6995', but there are 767s going as far as ATL, ORD, IAH, and DFW.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16878 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4952 times:

Quoting Apodino (Reply 4):
don't trust widebodies at all on the 7000 ft runways in LGA

I remember flying LGA-MIA on a Eastern L1011 in December '89, the flight was originally scheduled to depart at around 7Pm but we were delayed because of a Snow storm until 11pm. When we took off it was still snowing really hard and I remember thinking about skidding off the runway and into Flushing bay.

Take off was fine though and I even remember the movie, "Honey I shrunk the Kids".



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16878 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4943 times:

Quoting LGA777 (Reply 8):
To add to Kahala777's comments UA also operated the 762 in the mid 80's (to ORD and DEN) and CO operated the A-300 in the late 80's to IAH.

CO flew DC-10-10s into LGA from Houston in the Eighties, also the latest CO flew A300s into LGA was 1991 or very early 1992 (from Houston).



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineLat41 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4862 times:

Dosen't the lack of widebody operation at DCA have someting more to do with runway loading and the radius of taxiways than purely the airstrip length as mentioned above?


Cheers


User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4702 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 4668 times:

Quoting Bucky707 (Reply 16):
LGA-ATL is a medium length flight for the 88. I have flown the 88 from LGA to DFW when we still had that route...........still plenty of power to spare. Never have felt like the 88 didn't have enough power to go anywhere from LGA.

I'm not saying it doesn't have enough power, but it has less power to spare in case of an emergency then a lightly loaded 767 (wich is what you get when you put it on such a 'short' route



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineOOer From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1472 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 4655 times:

Personally, I would feel the safest on a 757, I have seen 757 takeoff from JAC...which has a shorter runway, and is at an elevation of over 7000 feet...which means less lift. The 757 is an awesome plane!!!!

User currently offlineJFKLGANYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3508 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4516 times:

"Quoting JFKLGANYC (Thread starter):
I just don't trust widebody aircraft on shorter runways, because there are too many things that can go wrong, and it can be russian roulette especially in bad weather. "

Um, I never said that . . . Also, I highly disagree with the statment.

I see no problem with widebody service at LGA. As a matter of fact, at a capacity controlled airport, widebodies are the solution...not the problem.

PJ


25 Lincoln : I could be wrong, but I would imagine in addition to the ramp limitations listed above, the permiter restrictions on DCA flights also has something t
26 Apodino : LGA also has the same perimeter restrictions, and I believe they are more restrictive than DCA, since some DCA carriers are exempt from this. Most pe
27 TinPusher007 : You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it is a very ignorant one that is not based in fact. A 764 with enough range to fly from NY to Europe
28 WindowSeat : As everyone has amply proved to you that widebodies can safely operate in and out of LGA, I won't harp on it any more. What the airlines gain out of
29 N62NA : Given the choice, the USA legacy carriers have an aversion to running widebodies to EWR (with the obvious exception of CO). History has shown that EW
30 Milesrich : One of the design criteria of the L-1011 and DC-10 is that they be able to operate in and out of LGA with a full load of passengers and enough fuel to
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...
End Of Domestic Widebody Service For NWA posted Sun Dec 2 2001 02:55:03 by Airbus_330_340
DL New Service At ILG..How Did Day 1 Go? posted Sun Jul 2 2006 01:16:37 by N917ME
The End Of UPS DC-8 Service? posted Sun Jan 1 2006 14:05:48 by Duke
Embarrassing Condition Of DL's Premium Service posted Mon Jul 25 2005 16:11:53 by Pope
End Of DL 727's posted Fri Sep 21 2001 02:23:03 by 767-332ER
End Of DL Flights To The Mid East posted Wed Sep 12 2001 02:44:53 by Chepos
Widebody Svc At LGA posted Sun Jan 23 2000 17:50:31 by Bpat777
Light At The End Of The Tunnel? posted Tue Sep 19 2006 20:32:24 by Exarmywarrant
AA RDU-LGW Back To 777 At The End Of October posted Sun Sep 3 2006 23:13:12 by Dank
CBB End Of Service:furious Reactions From Airlines posted Fri Sep 1 2006 10:57:05 by 777