Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CO Upgrades EWR-TXL To 767-200ER  
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16688 posts, RR: 51
Posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10420 times:

To quote someone from flyertalk, "No fuel stops for TXL-EWR this Winter". CO has upgraded EWR-TXL to a 767-200ER, starting in November.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
102 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRdwootty From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 901 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10372 times:

I suspect that it will actually be cheaper to operate a 767-200er than keep stopping and having to rebook all the connecting passengers. I am sure it is NOT about passenger numbers. In fact the Y seating is lower than on a 757.

User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22298 posts, RR: 20
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10335 times:



Quoting STT757 (Thread starter):
I am sure it is NOT about passenger numbers. In fact the Y seating is lower than on a 757.

It may be about cargo, though. When you're having to stop for fuel on a regular basis, that's not real conducive to hauling a bunch of cargo.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinePSA727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 974 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10335 times:

I'm been waiting for this for a long, long time. Although, I've never experienced a fuel stop on the TXL-EWR run, I have on the former CGN-EWR service.

I think one of the reasons for this up-gauge is the demand for J seats (25 on a 762).
ARN,HAM,and CPH aren't that much closer to EWR than TXL, and those flights are
remaining 752s.



fly high, pay low...Germanwings!
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10246 times:

Certainly nicer to see a 762 here than a 752. We are in need of widebodies.

User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1097 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10163 times:



Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
Certainly nicer to see a 762 here than a 752. We are in need of widebodies.

Does this mean that we can expect some discussion on CO's 762ER vs DL's 763ER on this route?  Smile


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10125 times:



Quoting CV880 (Reply 5):
Does this mean that we can expect some discussion on CO's 762ER vs DL's 763ER on this route? Smile

Discussions about what?


User currently offlineSR 103 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1736 posts, RR: 40
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10089 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 5):
Does this mean that we can expect some discussion on CO's 762ER vs DL's 763ER on this route?



Quoting CV880 (Reply 5):
Discussions about what?

He means this: DL Vs CO 767-400ER - Unfairly Compared?

[Edited 2008-10-06 14:34:35]

User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6385 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10083 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 6):
Discussions about what?

Well, CO's 762ERs are newer than DL's 763ERs. They all feature the 777-style Boeing Signature Interior, and have PTVs (though not AVOD) in economy. However, DL has AVOD in BusinessElite on their 763ERs.

Also, Delta doesn't fly the 764ER on JFK-TXL. So the 764ER is irrelevant to this discussion.

[Edited 2008-10-06 14:16:19]


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10009 times:



Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 8):
Also, Delta doesn't fly the 764ER on JFK-TXL. So the 764ER is irrelevant to this discussion.

But maybe the need to counter CO's 762 with a 764, because of the PTVs in the 762. CO might respond with sending a 772. Sorry, I'm dreaming, but it would be nice if one of the two could generate enough demand for a regular 764.


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2355 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9752 times:



Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 8):
Also, Delta doesn't fly the 764ER on JFK-TXL. So the 764ER is irrelevant to this discussion.

Product-wise, CO's 762 is interchangeable with the 764. The only differences I can detect are cabin layout and smaller windows on the -200ER. Even without AVOD, CO's 767 is rather pleasant.


User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1097 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9712 times:



Quoting CODC10 (Reply 10):
Even without AVOD, CO's 767 is rather pleasant.


But what looks better rolling down the runway.......a stubby little 762 or a sleek 763?


User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2490 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 9611 times:



Quoting CV880 (Reply 11):
But what looks better rolling down the runway.......a stubby little 762 or a sleek 763?

I don't know, how old is that sleek 763?
Does an older 738 look better than a new 73G going down the runway?


User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 9551 times:

I can give you one hint about what I'd rather see: I'd rather see a plane that has more profit potential. The 762 has almost identical costs except for FAs as the 763 but generates far less revenue. It also doesn't have anywhere near the cargo capacity - but even if it did it wouldn't matter much in TXL which isn't a big cargo market. We can look at the number of recent 762ERs that were ordered and built as evidence that the market sees little need for a plane that is shorter than the 763ER which can do everything the 762ER can do with far more profit potential. The only real advantage the 762ER has is range but DL flies its 763ERs on more longhaul routes than any other 767 operator... and you will soon see them pushing into new global regions.

User currently offlineCory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 9525 times:



Quoting CV880 (Reply 11):
But what looks better rolling down the runway.......a stubby little 762 or a sleek 763?

And in all honesty, who cares? Do you think that airlines make their fleet allocation decisions based on "what looks better rolling down the runway"? If that were the case, and airlines made their decisions based upon airplane beauty, we'd have 744s shuttling back and forth everywhere.


User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 9445 times:

I think that with the winter jetstream picking up, the EWR-TXL is hard to make for 752, and diversions are expensive. Additionally, I think CO has cultivated a good premium traffic market on the route, and the 762 allows for more premium seats and revenue.

Quoting CV880 (Reply 5):

Does this mean that we can expect some discussion on CO's 762ER vs DL's 763ER on this route? Smile

Pfff, there is no competition there. The DL 763ERs (esp. in Y) look like they right out of 1988, with all of the wear to prove it. The CO 762ER's have the signature interior, PTVs, and are all around fantastic. They can lift more weight in cargo than 763ER, also.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3843 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9371 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):

We dont ship cargo from TXL.........adn I doubt we just picked up a contract to warrant the upgrade based on that.



okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineSoxfan From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 862 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9367 times:

Where is the 762 coming from? Is a seasonal route ending, or is another route being switched to a 752 or another aircraft?


Pilot: "Request push, which way should we face?" JFK Ground: "You better face the front, sir, or you'll scare the pax!"
User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2490 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9304 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 13):
I can give you one hint about what I'd rather see: I'd rather see a plane that has more profit potential.

I agree that 763 and 764 aircraft have more profit potential than 762 aircraft. As are 738 and 739 vs. 73G aircraft, which must be ordered for thinner or special situation markets. Surely similar cost vs. revenue is apparent with 737 as it is with 777 types.
But, the fact is that CO bought 762ER aircraft and are using them on routes that need the BF seats and cargo capacity. I'd think CO would love to part with them in light or fuel prices if they can find replacement aircraft. Pending the economy, they may go away when more 777 and 787 units come online.


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2355 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9276 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 13):
I'd rather see a plane that has more profit potential.

To blow your argument TOTALLY out of proportion, why isn't every airline flying a 773ER or A346 on every route? As I understand, when full of reasonably high-yielding pax, there isn't a more profitable airplane in service anywhere...  Wink

Realistically, the 767-200ER is the toughest airplane to make money with in the CO fleet, because it does have a fairly high trip cost, not a lot of revenue seats, a hefty crew complement, and a rather rich configuration in terms of J/Y mix. However, on the right route, the aircraft can be a serious moneymaker. The Y cabin is small enough where yields can be protected (limited supply) but the J cabin is able to support strong premium loads, which is why you see the airplane in ZRH/GVA/EZE/GRU/LHR. If you can fill most of those 25 big seats with paying pax, the rest of the load becomes much less important.

We are in agreement that the 767-300ER is a more capable airplane and can do just about everything the 762 can, plus generate more revenue with its additional capacity. I'm still not entirely sure why CO went for the -200ER, when the SEC filings clearly indicate they knew what they were getting into with that airplane. Regardless, it's not quite the dog you make it out to be, but it's close!

From a passenger's perspective, though, the CO 762 is tough to beat. I love the 2-1-2 configuration up front. The airplane is a little hot rod too, has a similar 'rocket ship' effect to the 757-200, which is always a treat after spending most of my time with CO on much more sluggish 737-800/900s. On the inside, the Signature interior is great, the 32" pitch is excellent, and in the back, the B Zone mini cabin is a cool place to sit. With the smaller load, you don't have the same crowds at immigration (unless you're at LHR) and the boarding/deplaning process is very fast. Even though there's no AVOD, the IFE system is still better than what AA/DL/UA have in Y on most of their 767s, so I can't really complain about that.

I understand the economics of operating the 762 are not ideal, but as a passenger, I will be a little sad to see them go, hopefully later rather than sooner!


User currently offlineVfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 3901 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9246 times:

While all the arguments about the -200 hold water, it remains a fact that CO ordered the -200 at a time when for many many years no other airline at all had ordered the -200 and the sub-type more or less had been dead as a pax aircraft. So they must have thought about their order for a minute or two unless Boeing threw them in for free.

User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1097 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 9129 times:



Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15):
Pfff, there is no competition there. The DL 763ERs (esp. in Y) look like they right out of 1988, with all of the wear to prove it. The CO 762ER's have the signature interior, PTVs, and are all around fantastic. They can lift more weight in cargo than 763ER, also.

Refurbished interiors on the 200's... and You don't really know (nor does anyone at this point) what DL intends to do with the coach cabin interiors on the 300ER for the long term. Your cargo capacity stats seem quite a bit off as the 300/300ER has 30 LD2 cargo positions, and the last time that I saw the interior of a 200, it had only 22 positions. Each LD2 has a capacity of about 2500lbs, or 20k more capacity for the 300, or the same for two additional P96 pallets.
You forget that DL did have 15 or 16 stubbies in the fleet, but they were 200's as opposed to 200ER's. The CO 762's don't hold any more pax than the 757's, so not exactly pulling in a greater amount of revenue as it's unlikely that the BF cabin is all revenue (unless it's LHR or another hot spot).


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 8927 times:



Quoting CV880 (Reply 21):
nd You don't really know (nor does anyone at this point) what DL intends to do with the coach cabin interiors on the 300ER for the long term.

As of now, the 763ER's are still scheduled to receive the cozy suite mods which will include AVOD.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7025 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 8697 times:

As far as I know, CO will cancel the flight to Athen over the winter and the 767 that is been used on the Athens flight is being used for TXL instead.
This is just a temporarily solution over the winter. When CO begin to fly to Athens next Summer TXl will be a 757 again.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 8):
Well, CO's 762ERs are newer than DL's 763ERs. They all feature the 777-style Boeing Signature Interior, and have PTVs (though not AVOD) in economy. However, DL has AVOD in BusinessElite on their 763ERs.

This might be a reason to fly to EWR over the winter  Smile
I am not a fan of flying a 757 over the pond and that is why I did not fly CO last year as I was flying to EWR.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineLHR777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 8645 times:



Quoting Soxfan (Reply 17):
Where is the 762 coming from? Is a seasonal route ending, or is another route being switched to a 752 or another aircraft?

It's coming from LHR -

LHR adds a 3rd EWR service this month, but switches flights 110/111 and 18/19 to 757 for the Winter schedule. 28/29 is still a 777.

IAH switches from 1 x 777 and 1 x 762 to 2 x 777.

So, the 762 for TXL comes from either CO18/33 or CO32/CO19.


25 Tsnamm : Or perhaps ATH which is going seasonal till next spring...
26 Keesje : Is CO going put put new BusinessFirst / winglets on the 762ER ? UA and Delta are upgrading business class. CO used to be the best.
27 AA777223 : I don't think he was actually insinuating the aesthetics of the aircraft are important, so much as simply saying he liked the looks of the -300 bette
28 COGlobeTrotter : ATH was a 764 this summer so it is most likely coming from LHR.
29 Cubsrule : ...because there's no way you reliably could have with a 752 on the route.
30 AznMadSci : I thought one of the 762 from the IAH-LHR flight will be doing the new IAH-GIG nonstop while IAH-GRU-GIG would be on the 764.
31 MaverickM11 : DL doesn't get the premium traffic anyway from TXL. CO and LH do. But I'm glad you like your 763
32 COGlobeTrotter : I believe that plane is coming from one of the IAH-HNL flights.
33 LACA773 : It's too bad this 767 version is a tough plane to see and make money from. I feel it has it's niche markets as well where flights needing a larger J
34 FlyDreamliner : Ugh. You're missing my point. I know that a 763 has more cargo volume than 762. Both, however, have the same MTOW, so on the same route, a 762 has mo
35 PA101 : Great news, since I'll be flying that route in February. Never had a 762 before...
36 Panamair : Care to provide any hard evidence?
37 IAHERJ : I think the reason TXL was upgraded had more to do with our entry into the Star Alliance and securing our place in the joint ventrue we intend to do w
38 Eyeonthesky17 : IAHERJ, I think you found the reason!!! It won't be long before there is an Lufthansa and United codeshare on this flight. And Miles & More/ One Pass
39 Soxfan : I don't want to get off topic, but is there much of an interior difference between CO's 762 and 764 (apart from total seats, galley configurations, et
40 COGlobeTrotter : I don't think CO would upgrade a flight to secure their position in Star Alliance since they have already been invited to join. What makes the most s
41 AA777223 : I think it's because those seats are too wide for the 767. The 757 can handle them because there are fewer of them across, and the 777 offers an exce
42 COGlobeTrotter : There is no difference apart from what you have already mentioned.
43 WorldTraveler : absolutely true. the problem is that there is no economically viable widebody with less 200 seats that can fly 380+ miles reliably. And the market is
44 FlyDreamliner : Part of that might be JFK. JFK seems to yield higher than EWR on international routes in general, for whatever reason.
45 MaverickM11 : CO gets 10% more front cabin bookings than DL; LH gets about 40% more front cabin bookings and they don't even fly the route nonstop. What do you sup
46 CV880 : Was quoting the max capacity of the can, and simply stating, in other terms that the revenue potential of the 300ER vs the 200ER is far greater, both
47 Cubsrule : I don't see how you can make that argument with respect to cargo unless you assume something about the density of the cargo you're shipping; maybe th
48 IAHERJ : The way the joint venture works says otherwise. You are correct in that we have been invited to join already but the reason we are joining in the fir
49 Panamair : 10% in what? Relative to what? In which period? And where are you getting your data from?
50 MaverickM11 : Premium bookings, relative to DL, L12M, MIDT
51 DeltaL1011man : CO ordered all three 767ER types. (762ER,763ER and 764ER) but CO stopped the 763s. DL has 1-2 of them.
52 WorldTraveler : not true. CO gets higher yield than DL on a number of northern Europe routes; just not TXL. in terms of average fare, DL does better. DL obviously ge
53 CODC10 : They were produced around CO's 2nd bankruptcy filing in 1993 and NTU. Not really relevant to present-day CO anyway since we are talking about the pre
54 Alitalia744 : Isn't DL's avg fare higher?
55 MaverickM11 : Perhaps in economy; what are the numbers? I'm only talking about the front cabin bookings.
56 Soxfan : Maybe I'm missing something, are you referring only to the 763s that were produced? Or, do some of CO's 762s and 764s go back to being manufactured i
57 Cubsrule : No. It's just one plane (N394DL MSN 27394) and was delivered in 1998. It looks like (and AFAIK, DL treats it like) one of the ex-GF birds; it has 6 d
58 DualQual : I think it is just reference the 763's. The 764 was not even in production in 1993 (not sure it was even on the drawing board yet)
59 DeltaL1011man : Not 100% true. DL has had the 767-200,767-300,767-300ER and 767-400ER but never had any 767-200ERs. Almost but didn't make it. As for the number of 7
60 Lambert747 : And sometime soon.. The largest operator of the A330! Bottom line is that DL is the only airline in the World that has operated: B767-200 B767-300 B7
61 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : Of the 5 767-324ERs built for CO but not taken up, 1 is with DL (previously with Asiana), 1 is with North American Airlines (previously with Ansett A
62 CO 757-300 : figures... i just flew came into Berlin yesterday (i flew into FRA then took the train to avoid the 757 for 8 hours, but my aircraft was subbed from a
63 CV880 : If the 767-300 can hold about 30% more cargo by volume or wt, as a general rule it should be more profitable. There are variables, such as MTOW. Carg
64 Thorben : Don't worry, it'll get better once they start flying 767s.
65 Cubsrule : But it can't hold 30% more by weight. The 762 can hold more by weight (assuming we're shipping something dense enough that volume isn't an issue).
66 CastropRauxel : Ahhhm - may I? According to IATA passenger intelligence services, on the year SEP07-AUG08, CO had a 42% market share in the premium classes (5015 pax
67 Columba : I picked up family from EWR-TXL a couple of times this year and every time I spotted one famous politician getting out of the aircraft last time it w
68 WorldTraveler : The 763ER can easily carry 40-50K pounds of cargo on 8-10 hr flights from Europe and S. America; AA and DL do it all the time. The 763ER and 764ER al
69 Lambert747 : At the same time the 767-200 is the perfect aircraft to operate slimer TATL and South American routes without having the additional and unrequired se
70 Viscount724 : How do you know those routes were all profitable? LY for example recently dropped their TLV-MIA route that had been operated by the 762 for years and
71 CODC10 : Gotta disagree with you there. IAH-EZE requires a 2-airplane rotation due to its schedule (overnights in both direction) and routinely sells out in b
72 Mbm3 : Isn't EWR-HNL-EWR the longest route for the 764? It is my understand that this route got upgraded to a 767 as it experienced the most issues with fue
73 CODC10 : Nope, check the great circle mileage. IAH-AMS edges it by about 50 miles, 4962 to 5012. EWR-TXL is/was the longest 757 route in the system, so the up
74 CALPSAFltSkeds : Actualy all three routes are withing 100 miles of each other and the block to block are all 10:20 to 10:40 on the longest direction. There must not b
75 Cubsrule : BOG, GYE, and LIM are all decent options.
76 Post contains images CV880 : It certainly can hold 30% more(cargo). The MTOW is determined by the fuel load, with cargo & pax, and this would not be a factor from JFK-TXL. That e
77 Cubsrule : Well, it becomes a factor for all that trade in lead bricks between New York and Berlin (this is a hypothetical discussion, after all).
78 WorldTraveler : it makes no sense to ever fly an airplane that has almost identical costs to a larger aircraft. The 762ER has almost identical costs to the 763ER. Re
79 Transpac787 : While I'm a bit of a late entrant to the thread, I'm always interested in seeing how you can literally turn just about any thread into some shameless
80 Panamair : You might want to check those numbers again, particularly the DL number of 1861 pax in the premium cabin over 12 months, which I can almost guarantee
81 CastropRauxel : Ok, I just did. those numbers are correct - but refer to revenue pax only, of course. maybe the rest are non revs, bonus tickets, upgrades, you name
82 Panamair : The reason I'm questioning it is because the disparity between the CO and DL stats is simply too big, especially since CO offers 16 Business seats ve
83 Hypercott : Would you please be so kind to post a link to the source of these numbers? Please excuse my ignorance on where to obtain such information.
84 COflyerBOS : Why is CO filling 13 out of 16 bizfirst seats on the EWR-TXL segment hard to believe? CO has built up a loyal following over the last 2 decades in Man
85 Viscount724 : Using those arguments, I'm curious why the smaller A330-200 has more orders than the A330-300, although the 333 went into service a few years earlier
86 CALPSAFltSkeds : Then why did DL buy 73Gs vs. 738s?
87 CastropRauxel : Sure. the numbers are in the IATA intelligence systems, coming directly from the airline's database, by which the airline debits IATA travel agents.
88 CV880 : You are probably correct on medium range high density routes, but in this case (TXL) the demand doesn't seem to warrant either the A332 or 333. The D
89 Tommy767 : Well, its good to see CO step it up in TXL to a 762. A 757 from EWR--Germany is just simply stretching the limits and this switch is almost overdue. H
90 LHR777 : It's just to avoid the winter fuel stops the 757 invariably has to make when flying westbound. The 762 has more range and can easily make it non-stop
91 STT757 : In that case DL missed out by not ordering the 737-900ER, 757-300 and 787-9, although they will get 15 757-300s from the NWA merger.
92 WorldTraveler : because the 763ER still has 12 + hours of range which is as much as anyone seems to be willing to push a small widebody; the extra hour of range on t
93 DeltaL1011man : I would say it means something. Try running a 762/763D on ATL-ATH. Not just about range. AFAIK the 762 vs. 762ER have Higher thrust engines and highe
94 Transpac787 : AA does not have domestic widebodies. They have domestic routes with them, but no domestic-configured widebodies. UA and DL are the only airlines wit
95 DeltaL1011man : Yes and No. A 762ER can fly routes like ATL-ATH and carry Cargo..........763ER can't. Because it's a thread about CO so WT must try to make DL look b
96 Transpac787 : How typical. Ahh, touche. Forgot about the AA A300's. The 762ER's are in a 3-cabin international configuration, though, as they used to be used along
97 OA412 : Perhaps because the increase in range is not as important on routes that would be served by a 762 or 763 versus those being served by a 738 that can
98 Viscount724 : AC uses the 767-300ER YYZ-TLV.
99 WorldTraveler : DL has carried cargo on ATL-ATH in both directions. The flight is more limited coming back westbound but it does not always take off at max take off
100 DeltaL1011man : Was being a smart ass. Ok your right I should have said the 762 can take a full load when the 763 has to leave some behind. A order for a few more wi
101 Transpac787 : Transpac on a 767 is already well within their capability, as routes like LOS-ATL are considerably longer in blocktime than would be a west coast-Jap
102 MaverickM11 : I asked about the DOT fares, not about the 767.
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 Upgrades IAH-EZE To A B777 posted Tue Nov 14 2006 11:52:31 by ADXMatt
CO Upgrades AMS Service To B777 posted Sat Jun 29 2002 15:18:25 by LJ
CO Upgrades DUB - EWR To 764 posted Wed Apr 23 2003 13:45:52 by Rw774477
CO FL# 143 BCN To EWR, Another 757 Diversion posted Sat Jul 12 2008 00:59:45 by Jumbojet
Does CO Regret Buying The 767-200ER? posted Mon Dec 31 2007 13:09:37 by 1337Delta764
Why Does CO Have The 767-200ER? posted Wed Nov 28 2007 13:39:38 by Lesismore
Why Did CO96 (EWR-TXL) On 8/28 Divert To Goose Bay posted Fri Aug 31 2007 05:54:51 by PA101
SilverJet Update - 2 Extra 767-200ER To Join Fleet posted Mon Jun 4 2007 15:03:03 by Gilesdavies
CO 43 FCO-EWR Diverted To Gander posted Mon May 28 2007 19:55:09 by Nycfly75
What % Of CO's Delays Are Attributable To EWR posted Tue Apr 24 2007 15:20:22 by Lincoln