Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A Dozen Reasons For US Airways To Pick Up 747SP's  
User currently offlineThegooddoctor From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 523 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 14900 times:

How about the dozen or so times a day when US Airways sends out 2-3 flights at one time for the same destination (as in sending out two America West operated flights at 1029am): IE. PHX-LAX, PHX-SAN, PHX-ONT, PHX-SNA, PHX-LAS, PHX-SEA, etc...

US does this at five points during the day between PHX and SFO ALONE (usually mixing an A320 with an A319 or 733 in these pairings). If you figure the capacity of an A320 (150) plus that of an A319 (124), it seems like it would be an economical place to start running high-capacity/short range widebodies.


If US has found flight times that sell lots of tickets, how about picking up some old 747SP's and saving some jetfuel?


That's my two cents for the evening (and my pipedream as well...)

S

[Edited 2006-06-27 08:04:53]


The GoodDoctor
62 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSeanp11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 14862 times:

Cause a 30yr old airframe isn't more fuel efficient than 2 or 3 smaller aircraft? A bunch of A320s and 737s will be more efficient than a 747SP, especially when they only have to fly 400nm.

Just my two cents.  Smile


User currently offlineLindy Field From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 14832 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

You've got the trends all wrong. It would be better to send five or six CRJs simultaneously. Small is good. Small is the future.  Smile

I wonder what the 747SP performance would be like out of SAN....


User currently offlineSonOfACaptain From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1747 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 14824 times:

You know, a simple 757 would do the trick.

-SOAC



Non Illegitimi Carborundum
User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2364 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 14815 times:

Quoting Lindy Field (Reply 2):
Small is good. Small is the future.

Ok, so in the future, you imagine 2,000 crj flights between JFK and LHR? No, small is not the future. High frequency is. But when you reach a point where you have a flight every 30 minutes (between two cities), you up the size of the aircraft, not continue to add more flights.


User currently offlineLegoguy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 3312 posts, RR: 40
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 14684 times:

Quoting Lindy Field (Reply 2):
You've got the trends all wrong. It would be better to send five or six CRJs simultaneously. Small is good. Small is the future.

small means more aircraft needed, more aircraft means more pilots, more pilots needed means future job for me and others  Smile Smile Smile



Can you say 'Beer Can' without sounding like a Jamaican saying 'Bacon'?
User currently offlineLindy Field From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 14654 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The trick will be to develop cockpit commonality between a greyhound bus and an RJ. This should make the transfer from bus driver to RJ pilot nearly seamless and allow airlines to get their costs down.

In the more distant future, aircraft manufacturers should try to establish full commonality between RJs and rickshaws.


User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6143 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 14580 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 747SP would be a bad choice because the real benefits from that aircraft come at very high cruising altitude on very long distance flights. I do not know the demand, but if your argument holds, they probably should order some 747-400D's like ANA and JAL These aircraft also have the benefit that they can be converted to a normal 747-400 for international operations. Although we all know how America West fared with the ex-KLM's 747's it got at some point in the 90's, I can't remember exactly.


MGGS
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4037 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 14526 times:

It would probably be better now than it was then, because of the connectivity and infrastructure improvements, but still not worth a try, in my opinion. I'd rather see some 763s or 764s. 752s are the more likely acquisition...I keep hearing rumors of purchases of these, in any case, almost any station can handle a 757, while anything bigger would be limited to stations with special equipment.

User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2951 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 14463 times:

An A333 would nearly work too.

User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 14331 times:

What a concept! Talk about thinking outside-the-box.

1. Saving fuel with the 747SP - thats funny - the 747SP was not a very fuel effecient airplane especially on a per seat basis. And the 747SP was certainly not well suited for short range hops.

2. The routes that you mention are important spokes out of the PHX hub.....in order for the HP/US route system to work, its important that the key destinations that you mention have frequent service with a departure from each "bank" of the hub operation. Also, these short routes attract biz travellers who require frequency on a route.


User currently offlineFly-K From Germany, joined May 2000, 3149 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 14161 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Thegooddoctor (Thread starter):
high-capacity/short range widebodies.

maybe he meant 747SR, not SP?

Otherwise I can't take this suggestion too seriously...



Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
User currently offlineLincoln From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3887 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 14130 times:

Not that I don't like big aircraft, but one more thing to keep in mind...

By operating high/multiple frequencies on smaller aircraft US is providing an (albeit small) degree of protection for potential misconnects, etc...

Lincoln
[Give me a twin-asile bird any day...]



CO Is My Airline of Choice || Baggage Claim is an airline's last chance to disappoint a customer || Next flts in profile
User currently offlineSan747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4941 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 14004 times:

I agree with Carpethead that an A330-300 might be a good solution, maybe one of US's current frames. Or HP/US could order a few new A330-300s specifically for the above purposes...


Scotty doesn't know...
User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13991 times:

Correct me if I'm wrong.. but it used to be that when US Send 2 planes in the same bank to a destination like LAX, only 1 returned back to PHX for the next bank and usually the other went to LAS... so by combining the flights you would loose the repositioning possibility...


Why do I fly???
User currently offlineUCLAX From United States of America, joined May 2003, 180 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 13564 times:

The SR premise works in Japan -- why not the American Southwest? It'd make me change away from UA. Welcome from another physician!


...those who wait for the Lord�s help...rise up as if they had eagles� wings Isaiah 40:31
User currently offlineGreyhound From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1026 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 13515 times:

Quoting Lindy Field (Reply 6):
The trick will be to develop cockpit commonality between a greyhound bus and an RJ. This should make the transfer from bus driver to RJ pilot nearly seamless and allow airlines to get their costs down.

I resemble that remark.



29th, Let's Go!
User currently offlineRikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1625 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13454 times:

Ahh heck, get Airbus to do an SP version of the A380!!


AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
User currently offlineIowa744Fan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 931 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13454 times:

Quoting Thegooddoctor (Thread starter):
US does this at five points during the day between PHX and SFO ALONE

First of all, can you show me where in our schedule we do this? The other pairs are all correct, but we don't do any duel ops to SFO. We do them to the other cities that you mentioned, but not to SFO.

Second, the dual ops also have a lot to do with our system network and its layout. In PHX, we have many more cities from the east where flights are coming into than there are cities to the west where flights can go to. So, we face the decision of either having planes sit on the ground and wait until the next bank heading back to the east or using them to run some additional flights to the west coast to cities with larger demands to improve utilization.

Third, bringing a 747 (whether you mean an SP or an SR) would be a poor idea for our company. We presently offer nothing of that size, and more importantly, why are we going to invest in such a large aircraft (and deal with the additional costs of operating a few of the aircraft) to get an aircraft to fly a bunch of short hops between PHX and the West. Sure, the 744 probably has a lower CASM than the 319, 320, or 733, but you still have to try to fill it (which will likely give you a pretty poor RASM on these markets). As for using the 757s or bringing out some 330s, that would only bring us back to the original problem of having a bunch of 319s, 320s, and 733s sitting on the ground at PHX waiting for the next bank. Plus, it would take these aircraft out of service from other key areas where they are needed.


User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13317 times:

Quoting UCLAX (Reply 15):
The SR premise works in Japan -- why not the American Southwest? It'd make me change away from UA. Welcome from another physician!

Because most domestic air traffic in Japan is point to point - moving lots of pax from one city to another. In the US (geographically much bigger, of course) the airline networks are based around hubs......and for hubs to work, there must be frequent departures on key routes such as the PHX-West Coast routes mentioned. Flying 5 large airplanes per day between PHX and LAX cannot replace 12 to 15 departures.

Quoting San747 (Reply 13):
I agree with Carpethead that an A330-300 might be a good solution, maybe one of US's current frames. Or HP/US could order a few new A330-300s specifically for the above purposes...

Yeah, this is gonna happen?! US is going to pull their precisious A330s off of their profit making international routes to fly them between PHX and ONT. What a great idea.


User currently offlineABQopsHP From United States of America, joined May 2006, 848 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13317 times:

There is a reason for 2 flights operating at or near the same time from say PHX-LAX or PHX-SFO or between 2 hubs. The planes dont always return to the same city they just came from. It could be a/c positioning as to why its done. NW does it between its 3 hubs, and I belive its known as "wingtip" flights.


A line is evidence that other people exist.
User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3767 posts, RR: 19
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 13135 times:

I can see where your coming from, but I don't think it will happen!

I think PAX would rather have more frequencies on smaller a/c such as A32S's and 737's rather than just have a few daily frequencies on a 747 sized aircraft!

Who know's, maybe when the A350's (or A370's) arrive then the 767's or maybe even A330's could be used!

Rob!  wave 


User currently offlineCruzinAltitude From United States of America, joined May 2004, 415 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 12873 times:

Quoting Legoguy (Reply 5):
small means more aircraft needed, more aircraft means more pilots, more pilots needed means future job for me and others

the above qoute should read as follows:

more aircraft means more pilots, more pilots means more overhead for airlines, more aircraft means more fuel, more fuel means more overhad for airlines, more overhead for airlines means more airlines tetering on the brink of bankruptcy, more airlines teetering on the brink of bankruptcy means more pilots being furghloghed.


User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 12757 times:

No way a 747 will be used on these. A 757 would be just fine with another 737 maybe. First off they already have 757's in their fleet. So HP/US would not have to start from scratch again with 747's. And if anything, they would use a 747 on the FAT-LAS flight  Wink just a joke! But here at FAT we were just upgraded to mainline equipment from a CRJ to a A319 and a CRJ to LAS. So in short, 757 is best bet. 747 is asking way to much


Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineQantasA380 From Australia, joined Apr 2005, 212 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 12215 times:

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 14):
Correct me if I'm wrong.. but it used to be that when US Send 2 planes in the same bank to a destination like LAX, only 1 returned back to PHX for the next bank and usually the other went to LAS... so by combining the flights you would loose the repositioning possibility...



Quoting ABQopsHP (Reply 20):
There is a reason for 2 flights operating at or near the same time from say PHX-LAX or PHX-SFO or between 2 hubs. The planes dont always return to the same city they just came from. It could be a/c positioning as to why its done. NW does it between its 3 hubs, and I belive its known as "wingtip" flights.

This is exactly why US would prefer to send two or more smaller aircraft on the same route at the same time than to send one larger aircraft - because those smaller aircraft feed onto flights on a number of routes out of the original destination. Happens over here as well, though not perhaps on the same scale as in the USA... and not only on the SYD/MEL pair.



Virgin Blue - what colour's RED????
25 Adam727 : I thought that AWA/US used the 757 on a dual flight from lax-phx or phx-lax I could be wrong but I thought I saw them use a 757 along with a 737. I co
26 Post contains images B777-700 : In a related story, why doesn't United buy some IL62's? And people wonder why no one takes this forum seriously.
27 AirTranTUS : Here in TUS, we have four CR9's between 6AM and 8AM, including two at 7AM. Most of the time, three will leave in a 15-20 minute period because of traf
28 FlyDreamliner : Uhh, it would hit that parking ramp at the end of the runway. Uhh, last time i checked 757 does not equal 733 plus 319 plus 320. More like 763 or A33
29 Steeler83 : Yeah... I think so too... I agree with this statement as well. More flights to me equals more choices for pax to choose from. Just having a few large
30 HPRamper : You're getting a permanent mainline upgrade on July 1, I think that's a start. But again, it's more about frequency. The majority of passengers would
31 Post contains images Zone1 : I think this is a great idea. Not only would you not have to fly at the same time to LAX, ONT, and SAN because they are pretty much the same destinati
32 Thering : A 747-SP waist more full that a bunch of A320/319 or B733! A 30 years old airplane can't be more efficient than a brand new one like A320 or 733. A s
33 UPSMD11 : US has been doing the wingtip flights for years. When I used to commute between EWR and SDF there were always 2 flights leaving EWR bound for PIT. Thi
34 Post contains images ATCme : Don't forget that if a 747 breaks down, 400 some passengers are stranded, but if a 737 or A320 breaks down, less than 150 are stranded. Thus there is
35 Thering : Also it's better to have 3 or 4 flights than only one, the pax has more time options!
36 OneSkyJet : dumbest thread I've ever seen
37 Phelpsie87 : hahahahaha agreed!
38 Ca2ohHP : Yeah CR9 maintenance is also in TUS, and if those aircraft didn't leave before 9am they would be no good in the system for the rest of the day. Lindy
39 FURUREFA : Wow... First of all, why use an SP? Is it because it's 747? It can carry about the same amount of PAX as a 772/A333 or as a DC10. It has 4 engines whi
40 Usair320 : I say put a 762 on the route and save the A333's for transatlantics.
41 Thering : For me there is no discussion: 4 A319/320 flights are much better than a widebody plane flight! And tell me, why this idea of 747SP? 763, M11, A300/31
42 Jetdeltamsy : This has been common practice throughout the industry for decades. I'll never forget the first time I "saw" it. It was TWA out of DCA to STL. There w
43 FCYTravis : Worst. Thread. Evar.
44 ABpositive : Check. Your. Spalling.
45 PADSpot : That's what A300s were made for ... Keep an eye on your fixed costs! Capital costs of a 762 or A300 are certainly lower than that of serveral relativ
46 Post contains images SonOfACaptain : Periods. Are. Annoying. -SOAC
47 AR385 : Then don't bother to respond and do not waste the time of anyone here by making us read your stupid comment. There are many other threads you can go
48 Cactus739 : I'm sorry...I'm confused. Are you guys actually serious or working on next years April Fools thread ideas? Spelling needs a bit of work...but I agree
49 Dutchjet : Agreed. And it gets worse as it goes along.
50 Tommy777 : Stupid thread... . And a 747SP?? Come on...
51 DreamsUnited : Why the hell would you buy an SP? First, where would you get one. Second, why would you take the offer up if you could get one and third it would look
52 Post contains images M180up :
53 Post contains images Thegooddoctor : ROTFLMAO! That's the point - they have 2-3 flights going out within 15 minutes of each other (usually at the same exact time - ie. 1029am), hence the
54 Iowa744Fan : Actually, only one pair anymore is operated with a 757 and this is on an evening bank to SNA. If you look at the timing, this flight comes in from OR
55 Bennett123 : Quite apart from anything else, finding 12 B747SP/SR could be interesting.
56 FCYTravis : Check. Your. Sense. Of. Humour. That whoosh you just heard was not a Cactus jet taking off - it was the joke flying over your head.
57 Post contains images B777-700 : This is the Civil Forum man...the line between 'just kidding' and 'dead serious' is very hard to distinguish. This is the same place that produced su
58 USADreamliner : I don't know about a dozen reasons why US should pick the 747SP, but I know a dozen reason why they shouldn't! The 747SP was not profitable for any ai
59 Post contains images RogerThat : TheGoodDoctor has the right prescription for what ails US Airways. Here's a few that could be had on the cheap:
60 Ballsdeep : What a stupid thread.
61 Post contains links and images Malaysia : This will make more sense! View Large View MediumPhoto © Steve Williams
62 Thegooddoctor : What a great repetition of yet another useless comment... I was thinking something more along the lines of used 767s... Indeed - I shall put on wear
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...
Time For US Airways To Get A New Scheme? posted Mon Apr 21 2003 07:59:44 by USAir330
Air Wisconsin To Begin Ops For US Airways posted Sat Jul 2 2005 17:03:23 by Checkraiser
US Diverts Plane To Pick Up Bush Twins, 22 Others posted Wed Aug 4 2004 13:38:18 by Nicedream
Unions Call For US Airways' Siegel To Resign posted Wed Dec 17 2003 01:05:49 by Aa757first
I Didn't Realize US Airways' 767s Were Up For Sale posted Tue Oct 1 2002 04:36:18 by John
SkyWest To Fly For US Airways? posted Wed Feb 20 2002 18:02:17 by Flashmeister
Icahn To Bid For US Airways! posted Mon Aug 6 2001 05:28:16 by Boeingfan4life
US Airways To Remain For 2 Years posted Thu Jan 4 2001 06:44:52 by 767-332ER
Could US Airways Be Picking Up EK's A346s? posted Sat Nov 4 2006 23:22:29 by FWAERJ
US Airways To Fly A330 PHL-ATH, 767 -ZRH, 757 -BRU posted Thu Oct 26 2006 16:24:43 by A330323X