767-300ER From United States of America, joined May 1999, 130 posts, RR: 0 Posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
the IAH-GRU-GIG flights have been doing very well. since the day after daily service began, the flight has been oversold, and involuntary bumping had to be done. every seat in coach and bus. first was full. my question is, could this flight ever be upgraded to a 764? i mean if there are people to fill the seats why not? also this is another example of how the 767-300ER would fit nicely for CO, about 20 more seats than the 762, but about 20 less than the 764 (roughly) which would be perfect for this flight. Do you all think CO should go for the 763? it has commonality which CO stresses all the time. I think IAH-GRU and routes like it could support 763s. What is everyone opinion? im glad the flight is doing so well!!!!
Ishky15 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 717 posts, RR: 13 Reply 1, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1108 times:
I'm happy to see that Continental has been doing quite well on the Houston-Sao Paulo flight, but I wish that they had as high load factors when it was first opened. They would still have those three weekly frequencies to Brazil and would be able to operate Newark-Rio on a daily basis instead of taking three frequencies from thsi route instead for IAH-GRU.
I think that Continental may upgraded to Boeing 767-400s on this route once more come available. That will free up some 767-200ERs so that routes like Newark-Moscow and Houston-Rome can be launched.
I don't really think that 767-300s are needed in the Continental fleet. Their main intercontinental aircraft in the next five years will consist of the 757-200, the 767-200, the 767-400, and the 777-200. This seems simple enough for Continental and offers great benfits because of that reason.
767-300ER From United States of America, joined May 1999, 130 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1098 times:
another thing that i thought was interesting the business first cabins load factor is an amazing 92%!!!!!! good CO is gettin those important business travelers filling those business first seats. that is the most important thing, if business first is always full and coach and cargo are decent the flight is profitable..........way to go Continental!!!!!!
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1096 times:
CO's 762's carry 174 passengers, their 764's carry 235 passengers, leaving a 61 passenger difference. I think that they could fit a 763 into this gap, carrying 200-210 passengers, but it's not completely necessary.
Klwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1954 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1037 times:
Republic, I would like to point to out that your data is old. The last month you have data for is nearly 9 months ago. No, I don't have data from the last few months, but I just thought I'd point that out.
By reading carefully one notes that . . . .
Ishky15 pointed out that the flight has been packed since it went to DAILY, which was just VERY recently. He did NOT say it was packed when it first started. Therefore even though Republic is trying to dispute what Ishky claims, he is really only providing the data to support the first thing Ishky15 said, and that was that the flights didn't do well when they FIRST STARTED.
Republic From Canada, joined Dec 2012, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1034 times:
What is your point? Why did CO see the need to go from a DC-10 to a 762 on a flight that is constantly packed, as was asserted?
The question remains: where are the figures indicating that the IAH-GRU flight is packed coming from? I am not saying if it is or not. But this post goes counter to what I have read elsewhere, so I am asking this question.
767-300ER From United States of America, joined May 1999, 130 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1021 times:
the figures are that the flight is not old at all, its only a few months, and the dc-10 was way too big for the route. if the flight wasnt going to be profitable do you think they would change it to daily? and i am stating that the flight is packed with the 762. so before you go saying the load factors are low, remember that flight had an extra 60 seats to sell. so get your facts straight and read before making conclusions, everyday since DAILY flights began they have not had one non rev get on, because all the seats were taken by paying passengers, i seriously doubt CO would change a poor unprofitable route to daily.
767-300ER From United States of America, joined May 1999, 130 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1018 times:
also, altough the flight is with smaller aircraft, there are more available seats per week, with the dc-10 4 days a week there were roughly 956 seats availale per week on the IAH-GRU flight. now w/ daily 762 service there are 1218 seats a week, obviously there was a need ofr more capacity
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3 Reply 11, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1012 times:
Remember that the 764 is much more profitable to operare than the DC-10, so even if CO has the same loads on the 764 as on the DC-10, they would still make more money. However, they seem to be happy with the 762. If they can fill the 762 with passengers and cargo, then they're making a great profit on the route.