Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Trans Pacific Operations  
User currently offlineCloudNine From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 68 posts, RR: 0
Posted (15 years 1 month 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1277 times:

Hello,I'm new to this forum and don't want to ask a redundant question-however.With all the aircraft on the market,I.E. B764,B777 ER's & the old standby B744's as well as the A340-500's & A380's,will the future of U.S. to Asia operations be dominated by the 350 plus passenger capacity aircraft or the smaller 250 seat varities?.Also,Is a Quad actaully safer crossing the Pacific over a twin and how doesthe economics work into a carriers epuipment desision for these routes?

3 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineWolfy From Taiwan, joined Mar 2001, 337 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (15 years 1 month 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1250 times:

Hello, welcome to this ofrum!  Smile
I guess, I mean in my opinion, they'll want more medium size aircrafts with more frequencies to Asia, aslo shorter flying time I guess.



User currently offlineMason From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 749 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (15 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1246 times:

I can answer your question with the following information. From SEA, UA switched its 744 flights to NRT to 777s, and AA switched from MD-11 to the 777 on this route, as well. Asiana is switching to the 777 to SEL, replacing 744s. Now, KE operates 777s to SFO and LAX, replacing 744s. Although the 744 dominates the trans-Pacific market, the 777 has certainly found a niche on some of these routes. As far as which is safer, a large twin has yet to have problems with engine reliability. Keep in mind that with a four-engine aircraft, there is twice as much to go wrong than on a twin. I would feel equally safe on either, but I cannot say the same for everyone. I hope that helps. Welcome to the forum!

User currently offlineModesto2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2898 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (15 years 1 month 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1228 times:

While some people get nervous about 207 ETOPS, I really don't have any problems with two engines. Ultimately, it's less fuel and cheaper. However, keep in mind that a larger passenger capactiy can only be transported with a 747. We have yet to see an aircraft (both two engine and four engine) that can rival both the 747's range and capacity.

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...
UA Pacific Operations Fleet Post PA Route Purchase posted Tue Jan 29 2008 12:35:08 by TranStar
Qantas Profits On Trans Pacific Route posted Thu Aug 16 2007 17:12:19 by Gemuser
CX Trans-Pacific Competition posted Mon May 7 2007 22:19:04 by AirlineFanatic
Virgin Blue Going Trans-Pacific? posted Sat Sep 23 2006 18:31:01 by Thorben
Why Is N805NW Flying Trans-Pacific? posted Sat Jul 22 2006 07:12:07 by Pilottim747
NZ And QF Will Merge Trans-Tasman Operations posted Wed Mar 29 2006 12:54:39 by 777ER
767 Trans-Pacific? posted Sun Dec 18 2005 17:35:28 by Warreng24
I'm On A NWA Trans Pacific Flight Now, Biz Class posted Mon Dec 12 2005 12:29:26 by Redneckslim
New Concept (To Australia) In Trans-Pacific Flights posted Sun Dec 4 2005 04:24:44 by Simpilicity
Need For Trans-Pacific Charters DEC06-JAN07 posted Wed Nov 16 2005 07:29:38 by Simpilicity