Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Should CO Order The 777-300ER?  
User currently offlineCslusarc From Canada, joined May 2005, 839 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8134 times:

We all know that soon CO will run out of widebody long-haul airplanes for intercontinental capacity growth. [They do have 2 777-200ERs and a bunch of 787-8s on order.] But they need much more capacity growth for 2008-09.

Do you think the 77W is a complementary aircraft for CO?
Do you think CO will be able to absorb the capacity generated by the 77W?
Which of CO's routes would the 77W be most suited for flying?


--cslusarc from YWG
38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEI787 From Ireland, joined Jan 2006, 1513 posts, RR: 21
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8126 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

An idea of what a 77W would look like in CO colours:

Modified Airliner Photos:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Joe Perez
Template © K.L.Yim


[Edited 2006-05-31 23:37:41]

User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4050 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8078 times:

Both CO and DL should order the 777-300ER. I think DL will need it on their ATL or JFK to LGW, FRA and CDG routes. The 767-300ERs presently used are always packed.


DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8046 times:

I think CO won't order anything else for right now... they have to find what going to work for them and make them profietable... I have a feeling thats number one on their list right next to figureing out what their going to do about replacing the missing XJet Capacity... they haven't even replaced that yet...


Why do I fly???
User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8001 times:

They (CO) could probably use between 8 and 12.

First of all, what routes are we talking about?

EWR-China
EWR-Japan
EWR-London
EWR-Paris
EWR-India
Houston-Hawai'i
Houston-Brazil

That is 7 routes....any other ideas?

I think United could use at least 25.

Northwest could use also 25.

Delta probably 10-15.

American about 20.

But they all need to clean their houses first.



Delete this User
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9604 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7985 times:

Quoting Stirling (Reply 4):
EWR-China
EWR-Japan
EWR-London
EWR-Paris
EWR-India
Houston-Hawai'i
Houston-Brazil

Add to that list EWR-Israel. Continental now has double daily 777 service to Tel Aviv.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5771 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7959 times:

No, they don't.

Why on earth would they buy a bigger aircraft, which would only add more capacity, and further depress yields?
Continental's future fleet will, in my opinion, be built around the 787. The 777-300ER is just too big. IT's almost got the same capacity as the classic 747s... and you don't see any US airlines able to fill those, either. Except NW and UA... and both of those have tangoed with bankruptcy in recent memory.

CO doesn't need BIGGER planes, they need MORE planes.
But, clearly, they don't feel that way, otherwise they'd have more orders.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30898 posts, RR: 87
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7939 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

UA and NW could definitely use them as they would cover their current 744 missions pretty well.

With the other domestic 747 operators getting rid of their frames for the 772ER, I am not sure they could justify a 773ER. A good deal of international traffic seems to be seasonal. UA, for example, flies 767s trans-Atlantic in the winter and 777s in the summer on the same routes.

But a 773ER would be the next logical step for most of them if they could justify the capital outlay.


User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7726 times:

Whilst, it may already be suitable for some routes, seasonal and flutuating changes in traffic demand may mean it becomes awkward to fill at other times.

Sticking with the -2ER means you likely never have too much capacity, and can always just increase prices to cope with increased demands if necessary.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7529 times:

CO should not order the 77W.

They SHOULD order 10 787-9s to go with their 10 787-8s, plus 10 options and 10 purchase rights for unspecified 787s.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7420 times:

Quoting Bomber996 (Reply 16):
Honestly I think the chances of DL ordering the 773ER are VERY slim. They're bankrupt, they only have 8 or so 772ER's, and their 772's use RR instead of GE. although I'd love to see it I highly doubt it.

Agreed plus isn't the reason that their 777 fleet is so small to begin with is because they couldn't come to terms with the pilots on the pay scale?



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7329 times:

CO Needs some more 772ER's, which they are getting (perhaps they need to order the LR as well). As someone said above, they need more aircraft, but not necessarily larger ones.

The best candidates for the 773ER in the US would be as follows.

1. AA (LHR, LGW, NRT)

2. UA (LHR, FRA, NRT, SYD, MEL) - replace some 744 routes

3. NW (NRT ops, AMS).

UAL


User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7301 times:

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 23):
1. AA (LHR, LGW, NRT)

I honestly don't know the range on the a/c but from what I hear the yeild/loads on the China route and DEL route could use the xtra seats



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineNuggetsyl From United States of America, joined May 2006, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7226 times:

it takes 18 months for boeing to build a 777. I am guessing that cal will wait for the 787.

User currently offlineSupa7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7084 times:

DL is really more of a big-bore airline. 773ERs would strengthen DL's overgrown domestic feeder network by putting some long distance, high capacity cherries on top of the DL network.

CO tightly targets its capacity, high yield and relatively low volume.


User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 7027 times:

I would think Continental would have no trouble at all filling up a 77W to bilaterally constrained markets such as China, and Brazil.
India wouldn't be bad either, along with Tel Aviv.
And why couldn't it work to Paris from Newark in the high season?...or Frankfurt....or any other high-demand Euro destination.

But I see the niche primarily in Asia, where there is no debating traffic will only continue to grow.....

The 777-300ER is different from the 747 Classic in one big aspect, 2 engines versus 4. It can accomplish the same mission with half the moving parts.
Same load, same distance, lower CASM. Just because airlines have retired that part of their fleets, doesn't mean there aren't specialized situations where they need the ability to uplift a ginormous amount of people.

The 787-10 does not have this capability.



Delete this User
User currently offline777WT From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 875 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6937 times:

Co uses GE engines in their fleet so I don't see a problem for them other than the cost of the 77W.

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 6869 times:

Quoting 777WT (Reply 30):
the cost of the 77W

Bingo. 50% more than a 787-9, burning far more fuel per pax, but not 50% more capacity or 50% more cargo.

it would make more sense to buy more 788s or add 789s than for CO to add a new type to the fleet in the 77W.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5503 posts, RR: 29
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6767 times:

Well there is that IMHO inevitable consolidation that may still be coming. Not that it changes anything drastically, but if they have that idea on the near/mid term horizon, it might be another way via route/fleet rationalization to grow without ordering more planes.

CAL+UAL
CAL+DAL

Others? Not out of the realm of possibilities, and to me it makes more sense to pick up 772ER's on the used/lease market as available and wait for the 788/789's instead of taking on yet another derivative.

You never know, though.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineANNOYEDFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 451 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6735 times:

Why does everyone think bigger is better? The 777's are being removed from most european routes and being replaced with 75's or 76's. Just because a plane is packed doesn't mean it's profitable. The 75's should be used for shorter and medium length european route's like they are and add frequencies, and the 76's go deeper into Europe while the 777's are used for ultra long haul route's. I can see a 777LR option this way the belly, front, and back can go out full. Often the back of the 777's are blocked out and weight restricted for cargo.


"TWA... One Mission, Yours."
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5503 posts, RR: 29
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6703 times:

Quoting ANNOYEDFA (Reply 33):
Why does everyone think bigger is better?

Careful not to say that around the A380 crowd.

Actually, though, within your point, Boeing7E7 posted in another thread about a potential 6000nm (IIRC) 737RS. That would play right into your comments - why operate a 773 JFK-FRA when you can operate a 737RS BDL-HAM (or whatever)? And who wants to be left holding 20-30 773;s when that competitive wave hits?!

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 6454 times:

I personally think the 772LR would make much more sense for CO than the 77W. It would be the perfect aircraft for flights to India and HKG, which are flown nonstop and probably with some weight restrictions due to the distance. 4 aircraft, two for each route, perhaps even a 5th one as a spare might do the trick. CO could also capitalise on the potential cargo market which seems to be developing in India in this way, and given the 772LR's range capabilities, they could fill up those cargo holds a lot. Any weight restrictions currently in place for those flights would be alleviated by this aircraft.

User currently offlineJakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1253 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4893 times:

The 787-10. If Boeing does go through with it, the chances of a 773ER in CO is very unlikely.


Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
User currently offlineChiGB1973 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1615 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4893 times:

Too much capacity. The 773 is not the appropriate aircraft for CO, they have what they need.

DL too, the 763 is fine, it is full. Simple supply and demand. Full flights are what is needed. DL has other options, ie upgrade to 764 or 772 and they are not. I am relatively sure DL's and CO's 764s and 772s are stretched to the limit now, but, if there was money to be made on these routes with larger aircraft, it would probably already be done? If DL or CO thinks a route needs more capacity and could make more money, they will add frequency vs capacity in the form of an aircraft larger than what they already "own."

If the plane, a 773, is good for only a few routes, it is not worth the trouble. It is not interchangeable on all like routes. If either carrier had a need and could afford at least 5+, that would make the plane more of a viable option. DL can substitute the 763 and CO can substitute the 772 fairly easily, use them on all 763 or 772 routes where as the 773 would not be as flexible for either carrier.

I still stick with my supply and demand theory as a major, and probably deciding factor.

I rambled a little, but I hope you got the gist of my opinion.

M


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4375 times:

Bethune stated himself on several interviews that he didnt think CO needed anything bigger than the 767-400 outside of a very few frames. I wonder if he was wrong?


One Nation Under God
25 Dutchjet : Its not gonna happen........the 773ER (and 772LR) are both hugely expensive aircraft that CO can not afford to acquire; CO has been very conservative
26 Nwab787techops : There is no need in co's feet for a B777-300 a/c. CO needs more planes of the same size a/c I.E B777-200 and have more flights times on the same rout.
27 C172pic : YES YES YES!!!! If CO ordered -300s, they would have my undying respect!!! Why haven't any US airlines ordered -300s? A crying shame! At least finally
28 CALMSP : i think we would love to have a few 773s.............TLV would be a great route for the airplane. Also EWR-HNL would be another.........this route is
29 Post contains images Zvezda : The B777-300ER is too large for CO and, more important, the CASM are too high. More B787s is a much better choice. The bilateral constraints are ebbi
30 Triley1057 : Of course operated out of EWR instead of IAH, right?
31 CALMSP : absolutely!! Who would dare think of a thing for IAH!!!
32 AirMailer : Forgive my ignorance but what is the problem with the RR engines on the 777? IIRC Modern Marvels said that the GE engine for the 777 was the most pow
33 Dutchjet : The Trent engine on the 772/ER is a good engine, no discussion.......but, the 772LR/773ER are offered only with the GE engine due to an exclusively a
34 Jakob77 : CO doesn't even fly to China yet at this point when they lost out to AA, which started flying to Shanghai.
35 Dutchjet : CO has daily service from EWR to PEK and HKG.......and has applied for EWR-Shanghai service for the 2007 route allocations.
36 JEdward : Speaking of that, does anyone know the timeframe for when the decision will be made on who to award the route?
37 AirMailer : The world changes fast Dutchjet, 2 days ago DL posted an operating profit (still lost money, but not from running the airline) and got the huge conce
38 Dutchjet : I am aware of the points in your post, however, unless and until: 1. DL has a real profit (that is after reorg costs and bankruptcy costs) and, 2. DL
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...
CO And The 767-300ER posted Fri Nov 3 2006 03:07:08 by TrijetFan1
TAM Order 4x 777-300ER posted Wed Nov 1 2006 01:50:55 by Sq212
Who Is Flying The 777-300ER? posted Thu Dec 15 2005 18:14:57 by NYC777
"The 744 Is Dead, Long Live The 777-300ER!"? posted Fri Mar 25 2005 20:33:15 by Transtar
How Is The 777-300ER Performing In Service? posted Sun Aug 29 2004 20:18:29 by Raggi
The 777-300ER Coming To Mexico? posted Wed Mar 10 2004 20:09:40 by Cdeanda
Is Continental Likely To Order The B777-300ER? posted Sat Nov 15 2003 19:07:30 by American 767
Will CO Fly The 777 Domestically? posted Sat Dec 23 2000 22:39:31 by CX747
Is The 7880nm 777-300ER Flying Yet? posted Sat Nov 19 2005 18:42:21 by WestWing
The Next 777-300ER Customer posted Fri Aug 12 2005 21:30:05 by FlyingHippo