Dc10s4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5939 times:
I was at NRT yesterday and counted at least 5 NWA 757s there. Just currious where they fly to out of NRT? Do they have crews for 757s based at NRT, or do they commute.
With all the widebody aircraft at NRT a 757 really looks out of place.
Bayareapilot From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 71 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5698 times:
NRT-CAN is bogus. When the number of China slots available to US carriers is so few, 752 service is such a waste. UA, AA, and CO use 772s or 744s to serve China with their precious slots. If NW can't sell enough tickets I'm sure any of the other US carriers would be happy to use the slot with a larger aircraft.
AS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5818 posts, RR: 23 Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5603 times:
Warren: I do believe they are used only for Narita service. I don't think that NW has any other 752 that are ETOPS. The 757 I was on last year from NRT-NGO was very beat up. It was time for that plane to head back for a once over. And I'd imagine yes, they would fly them via ANC.
ASLAX
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
AS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5818 posts, RR: 23 Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5491 times:
Lapper: They have had A320's in Japan, but the primary narrow body is the 757. Remember the A320 can't do the Japan-Guam/Saipan legs due to ETOPS. For a while the A320 did bounce around Asia.
Calvin99 From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2001, 223 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5443 times:
Quoting AS739X (Reply 11): They have had A320's in Japan, but the primary narrow body is the 757.
I believe there isn't anymore A320s that are based in Japan. A320 came when SARS happend, demand reduced significantly, so A320 was used to substitute their flight to Asia. I remembered seeing one of their A320 at HKG before.
AS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 5818 posts, RR: 23 Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5420 times:
Calvin: Yeah I knoe there are no more, thats why I said "Have had". But I think your right, I think it was cause of SARS that they sent the A320 to Japan.
ASLAX
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
MaxQ2351 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5319 times:
Quoting Dc10s4ever (Thread starter): Do they have crews for 757s based at NRT, or do they commute.
All I know for sure are the pilots on this issue, I don't know about FA's on this. Anyhow, pilots bid each month for the NRT legs on the 757 at NW. It used to be a VERY senior trip to bid, because the crews got paid full time just to commute over to NRT. A senior CA or FO could get all their hours for the month in just one or two trips. Now, since the new contract has been approved, the 757 NRT trips will most likely (time will tell) become very junior on the bidding since one of the deals in the new contract was that 757 crews will only be paid half time (or something like that) for the commute to NRT, not full time.
Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 15): I don't believe the NW 752's are ETOP certified
Some of them are.....well, to some degree at least. The 5500 series, with the type-2 exits aft of the wing, and the older in NWA's fleet, are not. The 5600 series, with overwing exits, are overwater certified, just not ETOPS.
PSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 6867 posts, RR: 29 Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5306 times:
There are multiple frequencies on NRT-GUM & NRT-SPN, where one of the dailies is a 742 and the other is a 752.
752's are not ETOP's, but they are overwater equiped. They replaced the A320's in Asia in order to offer increased capacity and to offer additional WBC (First) seats, range is not the issue.
The 752's are rotated over to Asia for approximately 6 months, bridged through ANC. These are the 5600 series international configuration 752's. Crews deadhead over to fly their trips and deadhead back to the states.
NRT-CAN is not bogus. This route does not take away a US-China slot, since it is within Asia. This route would never work with a larger widebody aircraft at NW. You are comparing apples and oranges here. No US carrier would offer a nonstop to CAN from the states.
FlyGuyClt From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 537 posts, RR: 9 Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5302 times:
The 752' are not ETOPS. They are over water equipped. The 753's are mostly or all ETOPS at this point.
As far as the CAN comment. The 752' s to CAN are full and run from NRT. (Block time 5:15) There is no airplane that can fly U.S. mainland to CAN at the moment in any U.S. airlines fleet with out being severly weight restricted. The others you had mentioned run directly from the U.S. to China and don't fly into CAN. NWA is the only U.S. airline serving CAN. So sounds good to me. Right sized airplane for the right sized market. Plus. There are two runways in NRT. One for widebodies and one for narrow bodies. NWA did not have the extra wide bodied slot to run a larger airplane to CAN.
Iluv747400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 368 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5250 times:
Quoting FlyGuyClt (Reply 18): There is no airplane that can fly U.S. mainland to CAN at the moment in any U.S. airlines fleet with out being severly weight restricted
That is so not true! First, UA and NW both have 744s that could do the trip easily from just about anywhere in the US. I'm no expert on weight restrictions, but UA runs 744s from ORD to HKG which is further than SFO-CAN or ORD-CAN would be.
Second, CO, UA and AA all have 772s which could make the trip. COs 772s do EWR to HKG, albeit with some weight restrictions I imagine. I bet from the west coast they wouldn't be "severe."
Third, UA has applied for new China allocations to run SFO-CAN non-stop with a 772 I imagine. It's not like it can't be done except with a stop in Tokyo.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10188 posts, RR: 63 Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5241 times:
Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 17): NRT-CAN is not bogus. This route does not take away a US-China slot, since it is within Asia.
Yes, it does. If Northwest were not using its precious U.S.-China authority for NRT-CAN, another carrier could be using it for a flight nonstop from the U.S. There are only a very limited number of weekly frequencies allowed for U.S. carriers to land in China -- regardless of the flight's origin. Northwest is now the only airline that continues to use its frequencies for flights from Japan, rather than the U.S.
Quoting FlyGuyClt (Reply 18): There is no airplane that can fly U.S. mainland to CAN at the moment in any U.S. airlines fleet with out being severly weight restricted.
Huh? You might want to tell that to China Southern, then, since they fly a 777 several times weekly from LAX nonstop to CAN, and to UA, which has proposed flying a 747-400 daily SFO to CAN.
FlyGuyClt From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 537 posts, RR: 9 Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5225 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 20): Huh? You might want to tell that to China Southern, then, since they fly a 777 several times weekly from LAX nonstop to CAN, and to UA, which has proposed flying a 747-400 daily SFO to CAN.
Just seeing if anyone was paying attention of just spouting BS again.
MaxQ2351 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5225 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 20): There are only a very limited number of weekly frequencies allowed for U.S. carriers to land in China -- regardless of the flight's origin. Northwest is now the only airline that continues to use its frequencies for flights from Japan, rather than the U.S.
So??? Most likely it is more profitable for them to run flights from Japan as opposed to the US. Why should they, for any reason, feel any obligation, to use their "precious" China slots for flights originating in the US. Those slots are NW's, and they will use them as they see fit. If they use them on a route that you simply do not personally approve of:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 20): Yes, it does. If Northwest were not using its precious U.S.-China authority for NRT-CAN, another carrier could be using it for a flight nonstop from the U.S.
You seem to think that only flights from the US should be allowed. I think that is a very obtuse comment. As I said, if Northwests owns the rights to those slots, they'll use them as they damn well please. They will not surrender the rights to them simply because they do not use them for a flight from the US, which would be to your satisfaction, of course, if they did. I also can't get over this "another carrier could be using it [...]" comment. Since when do airlines surrender their routes so another airline, they are in direct competition with, could take it over?!?!?!?!?!
"Oh, okay, I'll give up my CAN slot so you can use it for one of your own flights. I'll give up my profit, and allow you to get even more profit, but as long as you are flying from the US I think it's worth it!!"
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10188 posts, RR: 63 Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5143 times:
Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 22): Most likely it is more profitable for them to run flights from Japan as opposed to the US. Why should they, for any reason, feel any obligation, to use their "precious" China slots for flights originating in the US.
Nobody's discussing profitability. Obviously NW is more profitable from NRT, or they would be flying it from somewhere else. And nobody ever used the word "obligation." They have an obligation only to use the slots, not to use them in any specific market. However, I think it would be more benificial for the market overall, and for the U.S., if seven of the few frequencies available to U.S. carriers were used for flights by U.S. carriers to China from, say, LAX, SFO, DFW, ATL, IAH, EWR, ORD, etc., rather than NRT.
Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 22): I think that is a very obtuse comment.
"Obtuse?" Seen 'Shawshank Redemption' lately? Don't put words in my mouth. Those frequencies are NW's fair and square, and they can use them however they want. Nobody is saying they can't. All I'm saying is that it is unfortunate that when a market is so incredibly restricted relative to its overall market size, some of the precious few frequencies that are allocated by the governments to serve this huge and booming market are being used for flights not from the U.S. nonstop to China, but from Japan to China.
MaxQ2351 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5108 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 23): Seen 'Shawshank Redemption' lately?
No, I've actually never seen that movie though everyone says it's one of those classics that you have to.
Anyhow, what's so wrong with Japan to China?? While I will not argue the fact that it is beneficial to fly US to China, I think there is still great benfit in flying such routes. If JAL or Air France or someone (just examples, no insinuation intended!!) started flying (hypothetically) domestic flights within the US, we'd all go ballistic. However, we don't really care if they fly from JFK or LAX internationally. I'd imagine it's the same case with China. So, perhaps that's why it's good that a US carrier operates such routes in the Far East. While I'm sure I will take heat for saying this, operating such routes, if for nothing else, reinforces the USA's global economic dominance. Anyone can fly LAX-NRT or LAX-CAN, etc etc, but opening a market that NW has with their NRT 752's is quite the venture, and they should be commended, not ridiculed for it.
It's the American way!! Why do they do it??? Because they can.
-Max
25 Commavia: Nothing! It's just that when a market is so capacity-constrained, my view is that it would be more benificial to the U.S. economy if those precious f
26 AeroWesty: A case could also be made that operating via NRT gives more access to CAN from the U.S., instead of half the country having to backtrack to MSP or DT
27 Burnsie28: Yes they are configured differently then the ones here in the states. You think maybe its because NW has more slots, each airline has so many slots.
28 Commavia: If UA had the frequencies instead of NW, they would be flying nonstop from the U.S. mainland, from a huge U.S. gateway, namely SFO, and would provide
30 AeroWesty: Obviously, when the authority was granted, the U.S. thought it would be better for NW to have them. I don't know the history of the CAN rights issue-
31 FlyGuyClt: On a side note. Have any of you ever been there? The facility is like nothing you have ever seen. The place is mamoth ! ! ! Safe Flying
32 AS739X: Bobnwa: The A320 can easily do flights to Guam/Saipan. Its only 3 1/2 hrs from Japan. Its the over water issue's. I do believe most of the 757's over
33 PSU.DTW.SCE: Some A320's are overwater equipped - hence the ones that fly into the Carribean, CUN, and used to operate to BDA. It was additional capacity and abili
34 ANITIX87: Random question. Can someone book NRT-CAN on NW alone? Or do they have to be transit passengers with tickets for another NW flight originating or goin
36 Centrair: This is why sometimes NW is considered Japan's 3rd International Carrier. Its the nice thing about 5th freedom. Note...this thread is a breath of fre
37 Crownvic: I recently flew the NRT CAN sector using NW and the economy section was packed full, while first class was empty...Thank goodness as I was the only We
38 Jad0761: what american global dominance????, last time i checked and i also did read the book The World Is Flat, the U.S. doesn't have that world dominance th
39 Azjubilee: The reason NWA uses the authority to CAN from NRT and not nonstop from DTW is SIMPLE. They can provide CAN service to ALL their worldwide customers. I
40 Stirling: For some reason, NW is 45 minutes slower on the west-bound, and about 25 on the east-bound.....I didn't think the 757 was that much slower than the 7
41 FlyGuyClt: NWA has to use the "narrow" body runway in NRT for 757's and this adds taxi time as it is on the other end of the airport in comparrision to their gat
42 Gigneil: Sure it can. Yeah. You're missing the point. The flights are from Japan to other countries. They're not domestic routes. UA has sufficient rights tha
43 Nwa744tpa: I recall that NW has a finite number of slots for widebody traffic, and that when the new runway was opened it was too short to operate with widebody
44 Bobnwa: You are right. In my haste, I was trying to point out that none of the Northwest narrow bodied aircraft were ETOPS except 753, while all the mainline
45 FlyGuyClt: There are currently "0" A 319's in the NWA fleet that are over water equiped. Safe Flying
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, 
From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, 
From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2002, 1507 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2001, 223 posts, 
From Eritrea, joined Feb 2005, 1086 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
