Ikramerica From United States, joined May 2005, 18472 posts, RR: 60 Reply 2, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 17355 times:
CO had a plan that was shelved. My guess is the new CO/UA partnership makes these flights possible for UA. CO will focus more on Europe and South America and UA will expand into Africa and the ME as well as continue to focus on the Pacific and Asia.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
WorldTraveler From United States, joined Aug 2003, 6778 posts, RR: 30 Reply 9, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 17106 times:
I have to give UA credit for going where the money is.... Africa has been a very rich market for DL... UA found its way to the Arab middle east and is doing well there....
so much for the idea that it would be AA and CO that would fly there...
and CO and UA cannot share revenue on their respective flights.. joint ventures are not allowed between 2 US airlines. CO can code on UA's flights where it is permitted but they cannot share revenue.
also, to be clear, UA is adding one flight to Africa that is serving both ACC and LOS... also it is entirely possible that Nigeria may not approve UA's entrance into the Nigeria market. They are not happy that no Nigerian airline is serving the US and yet DL continues to grwo.... they aren't terribly enthused about seeing another US carrier - doesn't matter who it is.
Timberwolf24 From United States, joined Jun 2001, 404 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16999 times:
So what international service are they going to drop to add IAD-ACC-LOS and ORD-BRU? Those aircraft have to be pulled from someplace. It is nice to see UA add another European destination from ORD (baring AMS, MUC or CDG is not being dropped) but could they not have chosen another destination like VIE, ATH, TXL, BUD, PRG, or LIS where there is no service from ORD?
KGAIflyer From United States, joined Jul 2008, 602 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16865 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 9): UA is adding one flight to Africa that is serving both ACC and LOS... also it is entirely possible that Nigeria may not approve UA's entrance into the Nigeria market. They are not happy that no Nigerian airline is serving the US and yet DL continues to grwo.... they aren't terribly enthused about seeing another US carrier - doesn't matter who it is.
Doesn't matter, really.
New York City, Maryland, and Northern Virginia probably have the largest Ghanaian populations in the USA -- many doctors and professionals -- a large enough expat population to have formerly had Ghana Airways flying into both JFK and BWI -- that is before GH went belly-up.
Service to LOS isn't needed to make the flight profitable.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 16, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16862 times:
ACC-IAD will be UA's longest 763 flight, both distance and duration. It'll be interesting to see how it performs on a route that long, given how DL seems to have a bit of trouble with their 763's on the Africa and Middle East routes.
LHUSA From United States, joined Aug 2005, 502 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16743 times:
Quoting Timberwolf24 (Reply 13): It is nice to see UA add another European destination from ORD (baring AMS, MUC or CDG is not being dropped) but could they not have chosen another destination like VIE, ATH, TXL, BUD, PRG, or LIS where there is no service from ORD?
I believe the idea is to feed the Brussels Airline hub at BRU now that LH owns them.
United787 From United States, joined May 2005, 1469 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16718 times:
Fantastic news!!! Made my week!
Is this the first US airline to serve Bahrain? Good use of an aircraft that would otherwise be collecting sand (dust).
Very happy to see UA go head to head with DL in Africa. I always thought IAD would be a great gateway for Africa, geographically and geopolitically...
Quoting Timberwolf24 (Reply 13): So what international service are they going to drop to add IAD-ACC-LOS and ORD-BRU? Those aircraft have to be pulled from someplace.
I wondered the same thing... would it be possible to convert any of UA's domestic 763 fleet to international use for the shorter trips or doesn't they have the legs?
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 2): My guess is the new CO/UA partnership makes these flights possible for UA.
This is kind of thing I was hoping the UA/CO partnership would bring...I would think that the Middle East and Africa flights will directly benefit from some CO connecting IAH pax...
"We're Generician Airlines, Nothing Special in the Air"
BA From United States, joined May 2000, 10749 posts, RR: 72 Reply 20, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16614 times:
Glad to see UA adding Bahrain.
Bahrain is doing pretty well economically and it's just a short hop across the King Fahd Causeway to Khobar/Dhahran/Dammam and the rest of the oil-rich Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
Frostbite From United States, joined Feb 2001, 299 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16583 times:
Good move by UA to claim a share of the growing African market.
Having said that, I'm not too crazy about the tag-on itinerary for LOS (or Bahrain for that matter). It makes their service less competitive with DL from many markets...and tag services are typically very expensive to operate for the additional revenue increment. Although it all depends how you do the math, as they say. I would think UA will operate ACC and LOS independently before long.
As others have suggested, ACC may be a stand-alone service anyway, if UA can't secure approval from the Nigerian aviation authorities.
Timberwolf24 From United States, joined Jun 2001, 404 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 16576 times:
Quoting LHUSA (Reply 17): I believe the idea is to feed the Brussels Airline hub at BRU now that LH owns them.
I will admit I completely forgot about that and that does make perfect sense. I personally would like to have seen UA open a new route that is currently not served from ORD. VIE and LIS are current Star hubs and ATH will soon be a Star hub all have no current service to ORD it would have been nice for UA to announce one of those cities.
Pellegrine From United States, joined Mar 2007, 1217 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 16425 times:
Took UA long enough, they could have started IAD-ACC-LOS 5 years ago.
I'd rather eventually see separate 763s on ACC and LOS if they can gain market share (which they have a very good chance if they market it well and stick it out).
Non-Farm Payroll = time to gain or lose 100+ pips on my P/L ehh...
DeltaL1011man From United States, joined Sep 2005, 5242 posts, RR: 3 Reply 24, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 16424 times:
Quoting Airborne1 (Reply 11): I believe United already has the route authority from pan am to LOS
Wouldn't matter 99% of route authoritys are gone after 90 days. Alot of routes DL got from PA had to be re-apporved after DL didn't use them for years.
Quoting Frostbite (Reply 21): if UA can't secure approval from the Nigerian aviation authorities.
and this is the true problem. With DL having to run a 777 from Atlanta what are the chances of them getting the rights with a 76?(it is so sad that there is a good chance they wont get it because of the 767)
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 25, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 16437 times:
Quoting Timberwolf24 (Reply 13): So what international service are they going to drop to add IAD-ACC-LOS and ORD-BRU? Those aircraft have to be pulled from someplace.
Not necessarily - there are 744s in storage.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 16): ACC-IAD will be UA's longest 763 flight, both distance and duration. It'll be interesting to see how it performs on a route that long, given how DL seems to have a bit of trouble with their 763's on the Africa and Middle East routes.
DL does seem to have trouble, though the lower density on UA's aircraft might make the difference. When LAX-CDG ran on a 763, they didn't have trouble, and that's 300 nm longer. Additionally, the late night departure from ACC will help with any potential runway performance issues.
WorldTraveler From United States, joined Aug 2003, 6778 posts, RR: 30 Reply 26, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 17868 times:
Quoting KGAIflyer (Reply 15): Service to LOS isn't needed to make the flight profitable.
perhaps UA is adding the LOS tag knowing theyhave to get their name in the hopper... ACC can work for UA on its own but DL is already adding capacity to ACC... DL is not about to roll out the red carpet for UA.
Quoting Frostbite (Reply 21): and tag services are typically very expensive to operate for the additional revenue increment.
yes they are... for Bahrain it is using airplane time that was just going unused on the ground but if KWI was doing that well, it wouldn't be worth adding a tag onto the end of it... in order for BAH to work, UA will have to displace some revenue from KWI and will increase costs dramatically. I'm not sure that KWI is doing as well as some have suggested or they wouldn't be adding a tag onto it...
it might also explain why DL decided to leave KWI.
As for BRU, it is strategically necessary for Star and adds competition for AA into a historically strong market for AA; yet another AA strength market gains new competition.
Mcdu From United States, joined Apr 2005, 635 posts, RR: 16 Reply 29, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 17562 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 28): it is just that UA is offering a substandard level of service... a one stop to Nigeria compared to DL's service to Nigeria which is nonstop from both ATL and JFK.
UA will likely get the WAS local market but won't be competitive in other markets except by cutting fares.
Not sure you can call the UA service substandard. With a 3 class airplane consisting of lie flat seats in both F and C and economy +, UA will have a flight that will have a much better passenger experience. Also, if the large Nigerian and Ghana population from DC can make their trip with only going to IAD versus having to ride an RJ from the DC area then I think that makes the UA product that much better. In fact you may see DL having to cut fares to keep market share.
United787 From United States, joined May 2005, 1469 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 17226 times:
IAD is becoming quite the international hub for United. First Europe and South America...then the Middle East and Far East Asia...now Africa! It makes sense with the huge political O&D presence combined with the good geographic location...
...and with all of the infrastructure improvements there in the past few years and next few years, I think IAD will become a gold mine and NYC will only continue to become more of a cluster____...I think pulling out of JFK may have been their smartest move...
I would love to learn more about the timeline of how & when IAD became UA's hub.
"We're Generician Airlines, Nothing Special in the Air"
TWA902fly From United States, joined Dec 1999, 2860 posts, RR: 3 Reply 36, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 17081 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 16): ACC-IAD will be UA's longest 763 flight, both distance and duration. It'll be interesting to see how it performs on a route that long, given how DL seems to have a bit of trouble with their 763's on the Africa and Middle East routes.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I am under the impression that SFO-CDG, before being cancelled was operated with a 763... If so, it was a little bit longer than IAD-ACC.
'902
life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
JasonCRH From United States, joined Jun 2005, 57 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 17074 times:
wrongt - United and Continental have applied for and received antitrust immunity. they, along with Lufthansa, will all be sharing revenue over the Atlantic. Not sure if this applies to Africa, but it DEFINTELY applies to Europe.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 9): and CO and UA cannot share revenue on their respective flights.. joint ventures are not allowed between 2 US airlines. CO can code on UA's flights where it is permitted but they cannot share revenue.
Runway23 From Canada, joined Jan 2005, 1756 posts, RR: 51 Reply 38, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 17038 times:
Quoting LIPZ (Reply 30): The question is who will survive on Brussels-Chicago market.
UA or AA?
UA will. AA relies enormously on connections right now on BRU-ORD route. Once their partnership with SN dissolves all AA codeshares will be gone, simply leaving interline. Whilst it will still enable connections, it won't make BRU show on GDS' in the same way it has until now. AA's BRU flights have generally been very full lately.
For sure next summer AA's ORD-BRU will be a 763, who knows whether it will survive afterwards.
Ripcordd From United States, joined Apr 2000, 677 posts, RR: 0 Reply 41, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16857 times:
Well SN is part of the code share the major part of the BRU code share and the reason why it was upgraded to a 777 from Summer till Nov is the connections with and code share with Jet Airways to India. From what I have heard BRU is one of the better performing routes for AA into europe....UA will steal some traffic but I don't think AA will be going anywhere on this route.
WorldTraveler From United States, joined Aug 2003, 6778 posts, RR: 30 Reply 43, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 16810 times:
Quoting Mcdu (Reply 29): Not sure you can call the UA service substandard.
UA's one stop service to LOS, not its aircraft is substandard to DL's nonstop service.
The entire WAS area accounts for about 15% of the Nigeria market from the US and 12% of the Ghana market from the US. The NYC markets for both are much larger and UA will not compete effectively in either given their lower market share compared to DL and the fact that DL has nonstop service to both markets from NYC.
WAS is the 2nd largest market to Africa but given that UA will be competing w/ a substandard connecting schedule compared to DL, UA will not get the higher revenue from LOS. They have a better chance of competing for ACC passengers given they will be on a similar schedule but DL will be serving ACC from both ATL and JFK and have a several year headstart in the market.
Quoting Mcdu (Reply 29): In fact you may see DL having to cut fares to keep market share.
The fares will fall for DL but UA will not be getting a revenue premium.... the market is just not that large. The only reason UA will make it in the market is because the fares are already high enough that there is room for them to fall and UA still make money... but DL likely will be very competitive in protecting its markets and that may make it very difficult for UA to set up shop.
DL hasn't forgotten that UA has come into the MOW market and brought fares down (along w/ AA which was the casualty). DL is not interested in a repeat here and will do what it can to keep UA from getting comfortable.... any other carrier would do the same thing.
Pellegrine From United States, joined Mar 2007, 1217 posts, RR: 1 Reply 44, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16475 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 43): UA's one stop service to LOS, not its aircraft is substandard to DL's nonstop service.
1 stop is substandard yes.
But DL's 763 interiors...especially in business...are far substandard to the new UA F/J configurations. That will definitely give UA an upper hand to ACC.
I think actually UA and DL can coexist in West Africa very well. At the same time no one should forget they are also competing against the many European 1-stop options (BA, AF, LH, SN, KL) and even EK in this market (yes some people do actually backtrack). Many US-Africa travelers are conditioned to European airlines going back many, many years.
Non-Farm Payroll = time to gain or lose 100+ pips on my P/L ehh...
Frostbite From United States, joined Feb 2001, 299 posts, RR: 0 Reply 45, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16334 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 43): The NYC markets for both are much larger and UA will not compete effectively in either given their lower market share compared to DL and the fact that DL has nonstop service to both markets from NYC.
But DL serves Abuja, not Lagos, nonstop from JFK. If DL had its wishes, it would have served the primary market (LOS) for many months now. I am very curious how UA (and DL) will vie for approvals from the Nigerian government.
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 46, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 16222 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 43): The entire WAS area accounts for about 15% of the Nigeria market from the US and 12% of the Ghana market from the US. The NYC markets for both are much larger and UA will not compete effectively in either given their lower market share compared to DL and the fact that DL has nonstop service to both markets from NYC.
Aside from the LOS/ABJ discrepancy (which is out of Delta's hands), I think this statement is correct.
What's interesting, though, is to look at the other sixty or so percent of these markets. Are those passengers concentrated in strong UA markets like Chicago and San Francisco or strong DL markets like Atlanta and Detroit?
LAXintl From United States, joined May 2000, 12222 posts, RR: 22 Reply 48, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 15812 times:
Quoting MogandoCI (Reply 5): Good job on IAD-KWI-BAH, although i would question why BAH and not AUH (isn't AUH much more a booming town than BAH?)
Quoting Addd (Reply 12): Why Bahrain? Their KWI flight serves primarily U.S. military and contractors stationed in Iraq, but Bahrain?
As mentioned good business flow, plus US Navy traffic.
AUH can easily be served via car from DXB.
Quoting Bsalako (Reply 8): This is excellent news for the large mostly middle-class population of Nigerians and Ghanians in the DC metro area.
Yes what they have been asking for since the demise of Ghana Airways, and North American stopping scheduled service.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 16): ACC-IAD will be UA's longest 763 flight, both distance and duration. It'll be interesting to see how it performs on a route that long, given how DL seems to have a bit of trouble with their 763's on the Africa and Middle East routes.
Currently yes. But in the past UA has run longer 767 flights like CDG-SFO/LAX and LHR-LAX
But yes will be interesting to see what the performance will be since routes will undoubtedly be heavy on baggage.
Quoting LHUSA (Reply 17): I believe the idea is to feed the Brussels Airline hub at BRU now that LH owns them.
Yes with SN entering Star, BRU become a good connection point. This year IAD-BRU was upgauged to 777 already.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 26): I'm not sure that KWI is doing as well as some have suggested or they wouldn't be adding a tag onto it...
KWI market has changed recently. Kuwait is no longer the primary entry point into Iraq as the sitation there improves. One can fly directly from Europe now on people like Turkish or Austrian.
The BAH tag should nicely support and complement the KWI flight.
The one I hear is doing quite well is DXB, which might be ready for a 744 next summer, at the rate UA took denied boardings this summer.
Quoting Ripcordd (Reply 41): UA will steal some traffic but I don't think AA will be going anywhere on this route.
I'm not so sure. A good example to look back on and a market where AA was heavily relient on connections was ZRH, and how the loss of Swiss saw those flights suffer.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
STT757 From United States, joined Mar 2000, 12216 posts, RR: 55 Reply 49, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 15671 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 48): Kuwait is no longer the primary entry point into Iraq as the sitation there improves.
Also the US is drawing down forces in Iraq, which also means less need for contractors, media etc.. The US should be down to around 50,000 troops in Iraq this time next year.
"'Brown Sugar' could save the world..." Eddie Vedder 10/14/97 Oakland, California
Cyberual From United States, joined Dec 1999, 148 posts, RR: 0 Reply 51, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 15394 times:
@LAXINTL..
Since you are very well informed about UA, do you know if UA will be adding any flts out of LAX? I'm a furloughed and this is a great news! Can't wait to go back to UA....
KGAIflyer From United States, joined Jul 2008, 602 posts, RR: 1 Reply 52, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 15325 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 25): Quoting Timberwolf24 (Reply 13):
So what international service are they going to drop to add IAD-ACC-LOS and ORD-BRU? Those aircraft have to be pulled from someplace.
Not necessarily - there are 744s in storage.
Am I mistaken or does UA also have some aged 767-200s in storage?
United787 From United States, joined May 2005, 1469 posts, RR: 0 Reply 53, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 15357 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 48): The one I hear is doing quite well is DXB, which might be ready for a 744 next summer, at the rate UA took denied boardings this summer.
Well there is plenty of 744s available to UA, if this frees up a 777 than a 777 could free up a 767 somewhere...
"We're Generician Airlines, Nothing Special in the Air"
Flyiguy From United States, joined Feb 2004, 504 posts, RR: 0 Reply 55, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 15126 times:
Quoting United787 (Reply 53): Well there is plenty of 744s available to UA, if this frees up a 777 than a 777 could free up a 767 somewhere...
Not nly would it free up a 777, but one with a bunk in the rear cargo hold which is on all the Pacific/ME flights usually since it requires the duel crew...
Flyiguy From United States, joined Feb 2004, 504 posts, RR: 0 Reply 57, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 15063 times:
UA has 7 747-400's and 7 767-200's but only 2 of which are ER models in storage at Victorville.
If UA was that short on aircraft though I could see them converting some of the domestic 767 & 777's in to INT'L models before pulling a 767-200 out of the desert since they were all built in 1982/83...I can see them pulling 747's out though...
Ssublyme From United States, joined Dec 2008, 228 posts, RR: 0 Reply 58, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14571 times:
Quite frankly I think a tag on route to LOS will be short lived. Especially as LOS comes after the ACC stop. UA will need to make this a none-stop if they plan to compete with DL and W3 favourably by May '10.
Quoting Sbworcs (Reply 3): Will be interesting to see how DL responses as this is the first competition they have had to Lagos / Accra isn't it?
DL will have competition from W3 before UA joins in on the LOS route.
Flyiguy From United States, joined Feb 2004, 504 posts, RR: 0 Reply 59, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14372 times:
Quoting Ssublyme (Reply 58): Also had the same though. Wonder if they will have to upgrade?
Why would they have to upgrade? It wasn't the fact of a 767 flying the route that made the Nigerian government tell DL the aircraft was sub-par, it was the fact that the aircraft interior was not up to the standards they wanted...The 767's interiors in UA's fleet are more modern than the ones in the 777 fleet so I don't think the Nigerian government will have an issue with it.
DeltaL1011man From United States, joined Sep 2005, 5242 posts, RR: 3 Reply 60, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14337 times:
Quoting JasonCRH (Reply 37): wrongt - United and Continental have applied for and received antitrust immunity. they, along with Lufthansa, will all be sharing revenue over the Atlantic. Not sure if this applies to Africa, but it DEFINTELY applies to Europe.
I believe he is talking about Domstic flights which the airlines cant have JV, aa far as the Atlantaic you are right CO/UA do have a JV
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 44): I think actually UA and DL can coexist in West Africa very well. At the same time no one should forget they are also competing against the many European 1-stop options (BA, AF, LH, SN, KL) and even EK in this market (yes some people do actually backtrack). Many US-Africa travelers are conditioned to European airlines going back many, many years.
I believe(and agree with you) that it will be the airlines like AF/BA/LH etc. that will hurt the most. As more non-stops come up less US PAXs will go via europe.
Quoting Frostbite (Reply 45): But DL serves Abuja, not Lagos, nonstop from JFK. If DL had its wishes, it would have served the primary market (LOS) for many months now. I am very curious how UA (and DL) will vie for approvals from the Nigerian government.
I am a little schocked we haven't seen DL go after JFK-LOS again. Now that they are running a 777 on ATL-LOS......IIRC its daily but if it isn't then maybe Delta will wait before it goes to JFK-LOS to get ATL-LOS to daily 777.
Quoting STT757 (Reply 49): Also the US is drawing down forces in Iraq, which also means less need for contractors, media etc.. The US should be down to around 50,000 troops in Iraq this time next year.
Also I am thinking KWI may lose some of its PAXs as Iraqs airport(s) are cleaned up.
Quoting Ssublyme (Reply 58): Also had the same though. Wonder if they will have to upgrade?
SurfandSnow From United States, joined Jan 2009, 715 posts, RR: 0 Reply 61, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14387 times:
WOW! Here I was thinking UA may be exploring int'l expansion along the lines of IAD-IST/TLV/DEL, and then this announcement! Certainly a shocking yet pleasant surprise!
UA will now be the second U.S. airline to service all 6 continents - Delta being the first (since the demise of TWA/Pan Am) by less than a year. I am sure getting the rights for Ghana won't be a major issue but I imagine Nigeria will be a real hurdle. Leave it to the Nigerians to find a problem with UA's newly refurbished 763s . I just wonder if UA is prepared to launch ACC alone (or perhaps in conjunction with a city like DKR instead) if they can't get those elusive rights to serve LOS.
ORD-BRU sounds like a safe bet now that Brussels Airlines will be entering the Star Alliance - I imagine many will welcome a nice alternative to connecting through hellish LHR or FRA. UA has never had a vast European network, but now all six of the airline's core European destinations (UA was down to just six transatlantic destinations a few years ago - ZRH, FCO, DME, and GVA all began quite recently) will be served from both ORD and IAD. I wonder if FCO, ZRH, or even DME could be slated to get n/s ORD service sometime in the future.
The new flight to BAH is actually a bit troublesome - is KWI no longer viable on its own? It seems like UA has been doing well with its new Middle Eastern flights, but the start of a tag makes me wonder if that is not the case. Either way, good for BAH - it hasn't had a direct link to the U.S. in years!
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 62, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14286 times:
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 60): I believe(and agree with you) that it will be the airlines like AF/BA/LH etc. that will hurt the most. As more non-stops come up less US PAXs will go via europe.
What makes you say that? Europe is fairly competitive on time - from a city with nonstop service to major European hubs, it's only a 2 or 3 hour difference, and clearing customs at the final destination is a big selling point for many passengers.
A330243 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 23 posts, RR: 0 Reply 64, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14193 times:
This is a very good move on United's part. All the above mentioned routes make sense for various reasons:
IAD-KWI-BAH:
1.) Bahrain is the home base of the US Navy's 5th fleet and with the Navy's HQ in the Washington metro, they can get significant business.
2.) A factor not pointed out above is the Bahrain has historicaly been the banking hub in the region. Even with the rise of Dubai in recent years, Bahrian retains a significant financial sector and a number of major Western banks retain a significant presence there with their regional head offices there.
3.) Bahrain is not that far from Dammam (and linked by a causeway) which attracts a signifcant amount of oil related traffic, as the Eastern Province is the hub for Saudi Arabia's oil industry.
IAD-ACC-LOS
1.) Significant O&D traffic from the relatively large West African population in the Washington metro. While a lot of this traffic might be considered low-yielding, fares to ACC are relatively high even in Y class.
2.) There is a significant amount of corporate traffic from the US to LOS and to a lesser extent ACC.
I think the combination of the corporate traffic and the VFR O&D traffic from IAD, will help support yields.
***********************
If I were United, I would re-evaluate IAD-DME. DME was a very strong market two years ago, but the Russian economy has significantly cooled in the last year and yields have taken a hit. I still think the route makes long-term sense, so maybe they should try a cut to 4x weekly or something like that and retain the route to maintain market presense until the global economy gets better.
Ssublyme From United States, joined Dec 2008, 228 posts, RR: 0 Reply 65, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14228 times:
It wasn't just the interior. The 767 was clearly not the right aircraft for ATL - LOS. The lift capability wasn't adequate for the typical lbs/person flying to LOS.
Quoting Flyiguy (Reply 59): Why would they have to upgrade? It wasn't the fact of a 767 flying the route that made the Nigerian government tell DL the aircraft was sub-par, it was the fact that the aircraft interior was not up to the standards they wanted...The 767's interiors in UA's fleet are more modern than the ones in the 777 fleet so I don't think the Nigerian government will have an issue with it.
Wouldn't mind that one! DL can keep it!
Think it might go from daily service to 3 or 4 times a week in the winter season. Personally I don't want to be stuck there that long! lol
I'd heard that IAD was going to loose KWI or DXB, forget which one to FRA based crew. Because of inappropriate conduct from certain crew members!
DeltaL1011man From United States, joined Sep 2005, 5242 posts, RR: 3 Reply 68, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14121 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 62): What makes you say that? Europe is fairly competitive on time - from a city with nonstop service to major European hubs, it's only a 2 or 3 hour difference, and clearing customs at the final destination is a big selling point for many passengers.
Well Its just seems like alot of people would A) like to just fly non-stop and B) fly the US carriers. While I don't believe its going to really hurt anyone(I think the market(s) can use 2 carriers. plus the carriers to Europe) plus I think alot of people think its much shorter (even though its not that much shorter, I for one would think it would be shorter) than going via Europe. IMHO the biggest problems will be getting the rights not filling the planes up.
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3895 posts, RR: 27 Reply 70, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 14079 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 62): What makes you say that? Europe is fairly competitive on time
People in general prefer nonstops when they can get them....not only for the shorter routing, but less chance of losing luggage and less overall hassle.
Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 61): The new flight to BAH is actually a bit troublesome - is KWI no longer viable on its own?
As others have said, I would expect that KWI has weakened a bit. It's still a pretty small market and we saw how fast DL bailed out. Hopefully, adding BAH will keep the overall route viable.
Looking at next summer's schedule, I currently count 22 long-haul international flights using UA metal at IAD.
NRT
PEK
EZE
GRU
ACC-LOS
KWI-BAH
DXB
LHR (4x)
CDG
FRA (3x)
MUC
GVA
ZRH
AMS
BRU
FCO
DME
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 43): DL is not interested in a repeat here and will do what it can to keep UA from getting comfortable.... any other carrier would do the same thing.
There's not much DL can do. UA has a decent local market for these routes and some decent connections too. DL didn't stop UA from entering MOW and they didn't stop UA from entering DXB. Contrary to what you may believe, many routes can support carriers other than DL. And in some cases, other carriers are actually better options than DL.
Flyiguy From United States, joined Feb 2004, 504 posts, RR: 0 Reply 72, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 13900 times:
Quoting A330243 (Reply 64): If I were United, I would re-evaluate IAD-DME. DME was a very strong market two years ago, but the Russian economy has significantly cooled in the last year and yields have taken a hit. I still think the route makes long-term sense, so maybe they should try a cut to 4x weekly or something like that and retain the route to maintain market presense until the global economy gets better.
UA has downgraded DME to 4x weekly for the winter but time will tell if it stays that way when the spring returns...
DETA737 From Portugal, joined Oct 2000, 576 posts, RR: 1 Reply 73, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 13905 times:
Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 33): In 1980, Pan Am served BAH as a stop on their round the world route, replacing Tehran.
TWA and Braniff applied to serve Bahrain nonstop from the US in the late 1970s, with 747SPs, but neither airline began service there.
Thanks to departedflights.com for confirming that PA served BAH!
Actually TWA did serve BAH from February 1977 until January of 1979 via ATH. Pan Am then began flying the route but this lasted only until 1982. So this will make UA the first U.S. carrier to serve the destination in nearly 30 years!
Addd From United States, joined May 2007, 360 posts, RR: 0 Reply 74, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 13711 times:
Quoting Flyiguy (Reply 72): Quoting A330243 (Reply 64):
If I were United, I would re-evaluate IAD-DME. DME was a very strong market two years ago, but the Russian economy has significantly cooled in the last year and yields have taken a hit. I still think the route makes long-term sense, so maybe they should try a cut to 4x weekly or something like that and retain the route to maintain market presense until the global economy gets better.
UA has downgraded DME to 4x weekly for the winter but time will tell if it stays that way when the spring returns...
In defense of IAD-DME, it can be said that, with AA killing its ORD-DME and DL making ATL-SVO seasonal, the market for US-Moscow direct flights is much less crowded than it used to be. Of course, it can also be argued that the Russian market be better left to LH which would allow UA to focus on markets with less competition (and, I imagine, higher yields) such as Africa or Latin America.
AznMadSci From United States, joined Dec 2007, 2116 posts, RR: 2 Reply 76, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 13430 times:
Quoting Addd (Reply 74): In defense of IAD-DME, it can be said that, with AA killing its ORD-DME and DL making ATL-SVO seasonal, the market for US-Moscow direct flights is much less crowded than it used to be. Of course, it can also be argued that the Russian market be better left to LH which would allow UA to focus on markets with less competition (and, I imagine, higher yields) such as Africa or Latin America.
Though a bit of backtracking, what about feeding DME traffic via SQ and IAH?
The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
Addd From United States, joined May 2007, 360 posts, RR: 0 Reply 78, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 13264 times:
Quoting AznMadSci (Reply 76): what about feeding DME traffic via SQ and IAH?
CO is no doubt is going to take care of that - although, realistically, IAH connections' catchment area is limited to TX and Deep South (incl. Florida).
I380North From United States, joined Feb 2009, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 79, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 13216 times:
Quoting Ssublyme (Reply 65): It wasn't just the interior. The 767 was clearly not the right aircraft for ATL - LOS. The lift capability wasn't adequate for the typical lbs/person flying to LOS.
Quoting Flyiguy (Reply 59):
Why would they have to upgrade? It wasn't the fact of a 767 flying the route that made the Nigerian government tell DL the aircraft was sub-par, it was the fact that the aircraft interior was not up to the standards they wanted...The 767's interiors in UA's fleet are more modern than the ones in the 777 fleet so I don't think the Nigerian government will have an issue with it.
Great to see another US carrier fly to 6 continents!!!!
I think UA international offering is better than DL but I think UA may be making the same initial mistake that DL made. That route demands lots of luggage per pax. LH, EK, QA, BA all use bigger planes to LOS from shorter distances mostly because of luggage. Do not say I didn't tell you so. A word is enough for the wise.
MaverickM11 From United States, joined Apr 2000, 11953 posts, RR: 51 Reply 80, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 13222 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 70): As others have said, I would expect that KWI has weakened a bit. It's still a pretty small market and we saw how fast DL bailed out. Hopefully, adding BAH will keep the overall route viable.
KWI was never going to be a high volume market; it's a thin, high fare market and adding a tag is not a bad way to use the empty seats and down aircraft time. That said, tags are really tough to make work but this is the exact scenario in which one might work.
Thenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 949 posts, RR: 10 Reply 81, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 12985 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 16): ACC-IAD will be UA's longest 763 flight, both distance and duration. It'll be interesting to see how it performs on a route that long
ACC-IAD is 8,523 km's. A walk in the park for a B763 (winglets or not), even with the headwind and non-direct routing.
Thenoflyzone
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
FLY777UAL From United States, joined May 1999, 4501 posts, RR: 7 Reply 83, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 12632 times:
Quoting Piaflyer (Reply 82): the aircraft type will be a 777, read the whole article, also on skynet it shows it as a 777
No, ACC and LOS will be 767, BAH will be the existing 777 from KWI. The flights aren't even loaded into the GDS yet, there's no way they can show in SkyNet.
WorldTraveler From United States, joined Aug 2003, 6778 posts, RR: 30 Reply 84, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 12499 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 44): But DL's 763 interiors...especially in business...are far substandard to the new UA F/J configurations. That will definitely give UA an upper hand to ACC.
DL is flying a 764 to ACC in the summer when UA will be starting as they have in recent years as well.
DL is also using a 777 to LOS from ATL.
Quoting Frostbite (Reply 45): But DL serves Abuja, not Lagos, nonstop from JFK. If DL had its wishes, it would have served the primary market (LOS) for many months now. I am very curious how UA (and DL) will vie for approvals from the Nigerian government.
DL has route authority to LOS and ABJ. It would be far easier for DL to ask for a couple more JFK-LOS frequencies - including switching existing frequencies to ABJ over to LOS - than it will be for UA to get into the market. Until UA proposes nonstop US-LOS service, they won't be a serious factor in the market given DL's presence already.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 46): What's interesting, though, is to look at the other sixty or so percent of these markets. Are those passengers concentrated in strong UA markets like Chicago and San Francisco or strong DL arkets like Atlanta and Detroit?
SFO is quite a bit further down the list of top markets.. most are on the east coast... ATL is actually quite high.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 48): KWI market has changed recently.
which goes to show that chasing these kinds of war-related markets can be problematic for long-term profitability.
Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 61): The new flight to BAH is actually a bit troublesome - is KWI no longer viable on its own?
If KWI can't make it on its own any longer, both routes will die based on costs.
Quoting A330243 (Reply 64): 1.) Significant O&D traffic from the relatively large West African population in the Washington metro. While a lot of this traffic might be considered low-yielding, fares to ACC are relatively high even in Y class.
African traffic even in coach is high yielding compared to Europe but Washington does not constitute enough of the market to make up for UA's inferior 1 stop service to Nigeria.
Quoting A330243 (Reply 64): 2.) There is a significant amount of corporate traffic from the US to LOS and to a lesser extent ACC.
Yet, LOS is the market that UA will serve w/ a poor service pattern. UA wont' get the corporate traffic w/o deep discounting which undoes the whole purpose of adding the market - it no longer is high yielding.
Quoting A330243 (Reply 64): If I were United, I would re-evaluate IAD-DME.
indeed. Moscow shows no signs of returning. UA is still competing in Russia on a very poor footing relative to DL. THe chances for UA to make it in Russia long-term are not strong unless the economy turns around. 4 days/week service against other carriers dailies or better is not competitive.
Sure there is... DL can trash the fares and dump capacity just as easily as UA can.
I would stay tuned closely to this story but I can bet we will see some news from DL about Nigeria in the not too distant future.
Airsrpska From United States, joined Jan 2009, 37 posts, RR: 0 Reply 86, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 12421 times:
Quoting Timberwolf24 (Reply 22): I personally would like to have seen UA open a new route that is currently not served from ORD. VIE and LIS
Why not to have service of UA from ORD to BEG ?
That would be nice to see it, especially because in Chicago metro area you have over 200 000 people from ex-Yugoslavia! Wouldn't be nice that? And also, great oportunity?
Flighty From United States, joined Apr 2007, 4594 posts, RR: 2 Reply 87, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12371 times:
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 80): it's a thin, high fare market and adding a tag is not a bad way to use the empty seats and down aircraft time.
That's what you need. I was just going to say that as long as the outer destination brings 60 or 80 extra passengers onboard for the very expensive longhaul stage of the flight, that's a lot of new money. But if the original nonstop was a bit weak, there is room to carry new people and bring that new money in.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 89, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12331 times:
Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 81): ACC-IAD is 8,523 km's. A walk in the park for a B763 (winglets or not), even with the headwind and non-direct routing.
Not quite that simple.
On cargo-intensive routes, such as to & from LOS, EZE, SCL, etc, the 763 has a bad habit of becoming balance critical. Since it can only take pallets in the fwd cargo bay, it becomes nose-heavy pretty quickly. When it needs to tanker 12+ hours of gas, it needs an aft-CG to keep a peak-efficiency angle of attack during cruise.
As in the case with AA and DL, they'll begin weight limiting the premium cabin and fwd coach cabin to keep the 763 within dispatch tolerances on weight & balance for the longer flights.
So yes, you are right in the sense that the 763 can, indeed, do flights that long. It just can't do them very well.
Pellegrine From United States, joined Mar 2007, 1217 posts, RR: 1 Reply 90, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 12222 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84): DL is flying a 764 to ACC in the summer when UA will be starting as they have in recent years as well.
DL is also using a 777 to LOS from ATL.
Wonderful the magnanimous 764 and the 77L with the flat bed seats or the antiquated cradle type 764s and 77Es???
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84): which goes to show that chasing these kinds of war-related markets can be problematic for long-term profitability.
This is very true. I don't see KWI ultimately maintaining a US carrier nonstop. In UA's case though, I could see them potentially switching the flight nonstop to AUH, DOH, or even JED/RUH if a US carrier ever serves KSA from the US nonstop. But we will have to see if IAD-KWI-BAH works first.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84): indeed. Moscow shows no signs of returning. UA is still competing in Russia on a very poor footing relative to DL. THe chances for UA to make it in Russia long-term are not strong unless the economy turns around. 4 days/week service against other carriers dailies or better is not competitive.
I don't think UA and DL overlap too much in the US-Russian market. The last few times I was at IAD the terminals were FILLED with Russians. I'm not saying this route is healthy right now. But there is future and consistent potential for IAD-DME.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84): Sure there is... DL can trash the fares and dump capacity just as easily as UA can.
Now why would DL want to trash fares and dump capacity? These are nonsensical, hurt-everybody, old-fashioned, "who's gonna blink first?" airline tactics.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 89): On cargo-intensive routes, such as to & from LOS, EZE, SCL, etc, the 763 has a bad habit of becoming balance critical. Since it can only take pallets in the fwd cargo bay, it becomes nose-heavy pretty quickly. When it needs to tanker 12+ hours of gas, it needs an aft-CG to keep a peak-efficiency angle of attack during cruise.
Very interesting. I wonder why they can't take pallets in the aft cargo bay. Or just put the heavier bins in the aft bay, and the heaviest pallets at the rear of the fwd bay. Or maybe this is already done...
Non-Farm Payroll = time to gain or lose 100+ pips on my P/L ehh...
OA412 From United States, joined Dec 2000, 2239 posts, RR: 8 Reply 91, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days ago) and read 12015 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 44): I think actually UA and DL can coexist in West Africa very well.
Agreed
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 60): I am a little schocked we haven't seen DL go after JFK-LOS again. Now that they are running a 777 on ATL-LOS......IIRC its daily but if it isn't then maybe Delta will wait before it goes to JFK-LOS to get ATL-LOS to daily 777.
I don't think it's a matter of DL not wanting to pursue the market again (although I think they will at some point) as much as the resistance they have met from the Nigerian government. Given that they've twice denied DL's request for landing rights to operate JFK-LOS, I don't know if DL is in much of a hurry to open the route right now.
I also wonder if UA may possibly face some resistance from the Nigerian government. I'd assume it's not very likely since Arik Air is supposed to begin LOS-JFK soon but you never really know.
Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 61): Delta being the first (since the demise of TWA/Pan Am)
How funny that the two airlines that purchased PA's Atlantic, Pacific, and Latin American division are now the only two serving all 6 continents.
Quoting A330243 (Reply 64): While a lot of this traffic might be considered low-yielding, fares to ACC are relatively high even in Y class.
Not so much low yielding actually. While I do not know where JFK-ACC stands now, it became DL's 2nd highest yielding flight (after CVG-CDG) shortly after it's launch. While ACC may not see as many C passengers as routes to Asia or Europe, the more expensive Y fares tend to balance things out making these flights quite high yielding. I expect that UA will likely see similar results with IAD-ACC.
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 90): the magnanimous 764 and the 77L with the flat bed seats or the antiquated cradle type 764s and 77Es???
If I'm not mistaken, the 764s should all have lie flats by next summer. As far as LOS, I believe it's the 77E operating that service.
Pellegrine From United States, joined Mar 2007, 1217 posts, RR: 1 Reply 93, posted (1 month 1 week 3 days ago) and read 11915 times:
Quoting OA412 (Reply 91): If I'm not mistaken, the 764s should all have lie flats by next summer. As far as LOS, I believe it's the 77E operating that service.
Ah ok.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 92): Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 90):
if a US carrier ever serves KSA from the US nonstop.
Pan Am did. 747SP's
Never knew, I'm so young.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 92): Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 90):
I wonder why they can't take pallets in the aft cargo bay
Cargo door is too small.
Makes perfect sense. Didn't even think about the door. ROFL...
Non-Farm Payroll = time to gain or lose 100+ pips on my P/L ehh...
Panamair From United States, joined Oct 2001, 3616 posts, RR: 27 Reply 94, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11505 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 92): Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 90):
if a US carrier ever serves KSA from the US nonstop.
Pan Am did. 747SP's
Indeed it was JFK-Dhahran (PA24 / PA25). Later on (late '80s or early '90s), way after Dhahran was cancelled, Pan Am did go back into KSA but this time to RUH from FRA with the A310. Flight was routed FRA-RUH-KHI.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84):
DL is flying a 764 to ACC in the summer when UA will be starting as they have in recent years as well.
It will be interesting to see what Delta does with ACC this coming summer. S'10 schedules are not finalized yet but to date, JFK-ACC has been loaded as 4x weekly on the 763ER while ATL-ACC is 3x weekly on the 763ER as well. JFK-ACC went daily last summer on the 764ER and I was wondering whether they were going to split ACC next summer between JFK and ATL for the daily service.
BrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1048 posts, RR: 4 Reply 96, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 11134 times:
BRU makes perfect sense with the entry of SN in Star Alliance. SN is in need of new partners accross the pond and UA to ORD plus CO to EWR will provide a one-to-one replacement for SN's existing code shares with AA on those cities.
The good news is that If CO and UA are so quick on opening up the codeshare routes together with SN, it must be that SN actually generated a strong share of the traffic on these routes.
This may put AA in trouble at BRU.
As for Africa, it's always a pleasure to see the world going back to its roots.
Rscaife1682 From United States, joined Feb 2008, 227 posts, RR: 0 Reply 97, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 11100 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 44): I think actually UA and DL can coexist in West Africa very well. At the same time no one should forget they are also competing against the many European 1-stop options (BA, AF, LH, SN, KL) and even EK in this market (yes some people do actually backtrack). Many US-Africa travelers are conditioned to European airlines going back many, many years.
The choice of not having to get a transit visa will be very attractive to most travellers.
BRJ From United States, joined Jul 2008, 81 posts, RR: 0 Reply 98, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 10357 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 93): Quoting OA412 (Reply 91):
If I'm not mistaken, the 764s should all have lie flats by next summer. As far as LOS, I believe it's the 77E operating that service.
Yes Delta is operating the 77E on the ATL-LOS route.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 46): Aside from the LOS/ABJ discrepancy (which is out of Delta's hands), I think this statement is correct.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84): DL has route authority to LOS and ABJ. It would be far easier for DL to ask for a couple more JFK-LOS frequencies - including switching existing frequencies to ABJ over to LOS - than it will be for UA to get into the market. Until UA proposes nonstop US-LOS service, they won't be a serious factor in the market given DL's presence already.
Just to clarify - Abuja is ABV, as ABJ is actually Abidjan, Ivory Coast.
Ripcordd From United States, joined Apr 2000, 677 posts, RR: 0 Reply 99, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 10339 times:
AA gets more and most code share out of BRU from Jet to India than from SN that being said they will be fine with the loss of SN.....It will hurt no doubt but they will be fine.
KU747 From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 227 posts, RR: 0 Reply 100, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 10113 times:
It looks like everyone is agreeing that UA flights to KWI is not doing as good as before.
Don't you think if UA reduces the frequency from daily flights to 4X or 5X a week flights might be full in both ways?? Unless the cargo is full all the time!!
Cjuniel74 From United States, joined Oct 2009, 3 posts, RR: 0 Reply 101, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 10001 times:
WOW is all I can say! Myself and a buddy of mine who works for UA were JUST talking about the African market yesterday before I saw the announcement. I believe that the two carriers can peacefully coexist in Africa. I honestly thought the next US carrier to Africa would be Continental. United will benefit from a HUGE Ghanian population in the Metro DC area for that flight. Will be interesting to see how the Nigerian authorities play out Lagos though.
AA interest lies in South Africa, as Miami doesn't have a large African ethnic diaspora like Washington or New York. The African market from JFK is getting well served by Delta and probably not a market AA wants to have a war on. AA likes routes where thay cam dominate LHR, EZE, GRU.
1.) Bahrain is the home base of the US Navy's 5th fleet and with the Navy's HQ in the Washington metro, they can get significant business.
2.) A factor not pointed out above is the Bahrain has historicaly been the banking hub in the region. Even with the rise of Dubai in recent years, Bahrian retains a significant financial sector and a number of major Western banks retain a significant presence there with their regional head offices there.
3.) Bahrain is not that far from Dammam (and linked by a causeway) which attracts a signifcant amount of oil related traffic, as the Eastern Province is the hub for Saudi Arabia's oil industry.
#1 Do all military people fly on special discounted military fares, including the lieutenants and the generals? If so, doesn't that destroy the RASM?
#2. Even if BAH is a banking hub, IAD is not, so a better flight should be BAH-XYZ-ORD or BAH-XYZ-JFK, or make those nonstop.
#3. IAD is not an oil hub either, so most of this "oil" traffic is just between KWI and BAH/Damman. Is that route currently underserved?
727forever From United States, joined Jan 2006, 629 posts, RR: 6 Reply 105, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9526 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 9): also, to be clear, UA is adding one flight to Africa that is serving both ACC and LOS... also it is entirely possible that Nigeria may not approve UA's entrance into the Nigeria market. They are not happy that no Nigerian airline is serving the US and yet DL continues to grwo.... they aren't terribly enthused about seeing another US carrier - doesn't matter who it is.
If they approve it in the first place, I give it 6 months or less before Nigeria demands that UA upgrade to a 777 as they did with DL.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 16): ACC-IAD will be UA's longest 763 flight, both distance and duration. It'll be interesting to see how it performs on a route that long, given how DL seems to have a bit of trouble with their 763's on the Africa and Middle East routes.
Really, I've not heard that there were problems. Source? I realize that there were bulk cargo issues as African passengers like to take everything they own with them, but the airplane can handle it without a problem. When I flew ACC-JFK we were full, full on cargo, had 2,000 lbs of leeway on mtow, and landed with over 20,000 lbs of fuel on board for the 12 hour flight. How's that having problems with distance or duration?
I'm happy for UA. They have just been spinning their wheels for so long that I'm happy to see them getting in the game a little bit. I am curious as to how the senior FAs are going to handle going to Africa. It's a lot different from a round trip to CDG. On one hand they'll need deet, on the other hand the tree house restaurant in ACC has amazing regional cuisine.
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 107, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9409 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 70): People in general prefer nonstops when they can get them....not only for the shorter routing, but less chance of losing luggage and less overall hassle.
They do - but LAX-LOS and DFW-ACC passengers won't be getting a nonstop any time soon, and those are the passengers I was discussing. UA will pick up most of the D.C.-originating traffic, just as Delta picks up most of the New York-originating traffic now. The connecting traffic is a more interesting story.
Abrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 3193 posts, RR: 25 Reply 109, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9342 times:
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 80): KWI was never going to be a high volume market; it's a thin, high fare market and adding a tag is not a bad way to use the empty seats and down aircraft time. That said, tags are really tough to make work but this is the exact scenario in which one might work.
= This summarizes the entire argument for the BAH tag very well. Do you work in network planning ?
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84): which goes to show that chasing these kinds of war-related markets can be problematic for long-term profitability.
= In the long-term, no airlines make a profit . Market opportunities exist at a moment in time. One takes benefit of it, and as the market evolves, must evolve with it. KWI was a brilliant choice for UAL and has served it well.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84):
Yet, LOS is the market that UA will serve w/ a poor service pattern. UA wont' get the corporate traffic w/o deep discounting which undoes the whole purpose of adding the market - it no longer is high yielding.
= I would have to disagree. I rather take a well-timed tag flight from the U.S. than do a Euro transit which adds time and sometimes money.
Quoting Airsrpska (Reply 86):
Why not to have service of UA from ORD to BEG ?
That would be nice to see it, especially because in Chicago metro area you have over 200 000 people from ex-Yugoslavia! Wouldn't be nice that? And also, great oportunity?
= BEG is super low-yielding ... and is served extremely well by the de facto national airline of Lufthansa.
Quoting Rscaife1682 (Reply 97): The choice of not having to get a transit visa will be very attractive to most travellers.
= Expect the dumb European rule to be dropped as airlines hurt. It will not be that fast as Africa does not generate the volumes ... but it will go. Case in point ... introduction of nonstops on India-US and subsequent withdrawal of air-side transit visas from most major Euro cities for Indians.
Quoting KU747 (Reply 100): It looks like everyone is agreeing that UA flights to KWI is not doing as good as before.
= Listen, it is still holding its own ... but premium demand has slackened.
UAL has done extremely well on both KWI and DXB. KWI premium demand has fallen a bit ... while DXB has remained stable. What has been interesting is the explosion of Y demand ... flights are usually filled with a combination of local (defined as local market plus DMM and Iraq) and feeder traffic from the sub-Continent. DXB is a popular feed for PIA flights and the 9W partnership has yielded passengers for UAL at both KWI and DXB. Of course, this has nothing to do with yields.
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3895 posts, RR: 27 Reply 110, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9231 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 107): The connecting traffic is a more interesting story.
But even for the connecting traffic, the U.S. carriers option will likely be preferred. I'd much rather connect through IAD than LHR. Less hassle and less travel time. Not to mention that the shorter routing and overall reduced cost structures of U.S. carriers will make them price competitive as well. Both DL and UA can undercut BA/LH/AF on these routings and still make a profit.
It may take some time to break people's habits (of connecting through Europe), but over time I expect the U.S. carriers will take a significant chunk of traffic in this market.
Ssublyme From United States, joined Dec 2008, 228 posts, RR: 0 Reply 111, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9098 times:
Quoting UALWN (Reply 106): Who needs a transit visa to connect in Europe from the US on to Africa?
It's been atleast 2yrs since the first Western European country waived transit visa requirement for Nigerians and Ghanians flying to countries like US, Canada etc. Now if I'm not mistaken, Germany, France, Netherlands (not sure about U.K) have all waived that requirement as well. The issue of transit visa is no longer as much a hassle as it previously was.
UALWN From Spain, joined Jun 2009, 307 posts, RR: 0 Reply 112, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9059 times:
Quoting The777Man (Reply 108): Probably passport holders from most African countires.
Foreign nationals who have a valid US visa can transit through most (all?) European airports without the need of a transit visa when going from/to the US to/from a non-European country.
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 113, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 9036 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 110): But even for the connecting traffic, the U.S. carriers option will likely be preferred. I'd much rather connect through IAD than LHR.
As would I, but JFK versus LHR is a much, much closer question, and I think I'd spend an hour or two extra to avoid JFK.
Soups From Ghana, joined Jun 2004, 3346 posts, RR: 18 Reply 116, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 8764 times:
Quoting The777Man (Reply 95): was wondering whether they were going to split ACC next summer between JFK and ATL for the daily service.
DL probably does not have more frequencies to ACC then 7 so they probably have to split if they want to serve ACC from both ATL and JFK.
I wouldn't be surpised if they go daily ATL-ACC and JFK-ACC during peak seasons (mainly xmas) flights are usually overbooked month in advance i recall SR,AZ,ME,used to add extra frequency to ACC during christmas. Flights from London to Accra are about $1800-$3500 in economy and thats for a 6.5 flight during christmas peak
Next destinations, Suarabaya, beirut, paris, Accra
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3895 posts, RR: 27 Reply 118, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 8530 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 117): From most places in North America with an LHR flight, the difference in travel to ACC between LHR and JFK is about 2 hours.
I don't know about that. Using DFW, the trip added about 7 hours on BA via LHR vs. UA via IAD. Using ATL, the trip added about 5 hours on BA via LHR vs. UA via IAD. Even ORD was about 4 hours longer.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 121, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 7812 times:
Quoting Thenoflyzone (Reply 115): Very insightful post. Thank you. Did not know that about the 767. How about the 777, does it have the same restrictions?
Not at all. The 777 was designed, of course, to do 14+ hour flights from the get-go. It can take LD3's and pallets in both fwd and aft cargo bays and, as far as I know, almost never becomes balance critical. The 777 tends to only take limits when it reaches MGTOW or there is some performance restriction. Hot & high airports, for example.
The 767 is disadvantaged due to it's late-70's design in that at the time, ETOPS didn't yet exist. Boeing initially built the 767-200A and later 767-300A as strictly domestic widebodies. As such, Boeing [seemingly] didn't think it was necessary to have quite such a large and flexible cargo-carrying ability. Then ETOPS was 'invented' and 767's began regularly flying across the oceans. (is it true that 767 crosses the Atlantic each day more than any other aircraft?? I think I read that somewhere once)
Only recently the 767 seems to have the extreme edge of its performance and range envelope tested, especially with DL doing routes like LAX-GRU, ATL-LOS, JFK-AMM, and SEA-PEK (summer 2010).
WorldTraveler From United States, joined Aug 2003, 6778 posts, RR: 30 Reply 122, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7486 times:
Quoting Addd (Reply 85): Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84):
indeed. Moscow shows no signs of returning
Returning? It is not a seasonal service for UA...
I'm talking about the economy, not UA
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 90): Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84):
Sure there is... DL can trash the fares and dump capacity just as easily as UA can.
Now why would DL want to trash fares and dump capacity? These are nonsensical, hurt-everybody, old-fashioned, "who's gonna blink first?" airline tactics.
because DL is an airline... DL is capable of doing the same thing all airlines do.
Quoting BRJ (Reply 98): Just to clarify - Abuja is ABV, as ABJ is actually Abidjan, Ivory Coast.
exactly... thanks
Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 102): AA interest lies in South Africa,
AA won't compete effectively in S. Africa given DL's 77Ls which are the only aircraft that can fly nonstop to the US in both directions. AA can't possibly compete w/ DL by using a 77E and a fuel stop. They'll get the MIA passengers w/ or w/o a fuel stop but will not possibly be able to compete in the connecting markets.
UA is not going to get premium revenue in any LOS connecting market. They will require more transit time than DL due to DL's nonstops. The only LOS market that UA will be competitive in from a schedules standpoint is IAD-LOS.
yes, they do but int'l routes take time and money to develop.
UA has done very well in KWI but their revenue in 2009 is down 20% from 2008's high levels. Winding down of the Gulf war is impacting KWI and will continue to do so.
Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 109): = I would have to disagree. I rather take a well-timed tag flight from the U.S. than do a Euro transit which adds time and sometimes money.
UA isn't competing with a connection via Europe. THey are competing w/ DL who also does need to transit Europe.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 89): On cargo-intensive routes, such as to & from LOS, EZE, SCL, etc, the 763 has a bad habit of becoming balance critical. Since it can only take pallets in the fwd cargo bay, it becomes nose-heavy pretty quickly. When it needs to tanker 12+ hours of gas, it needs an aft-CG to keep a peak-efficiency angle of attack during cruise.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 121): Only recently the 767 seems to have the extreme edge of its performance and range envelope tested, especially with DL doing routes like LAX-GRU, ATL-LOS, JFK-AMM, and SEA-PEK (summer 2010).
The notion that the 763ER is not capable of operating 12 hr flights w/o operating restrictions is not based on reality at DL.
First, DL does not carry huge amounts of cargo to/from LOS... there just isn't the physical lift available on a 767 given the fuel... bags can be moved around quite easily and the 763ER will not bulk out on bags on a 12-13 hr flight before it hits weight limits, esp. to/from Africa where bags are heavy.
SCL is a cargo heavy market but there is still more than enough flexibility for AA and DL to carry more than enough cargo to hit takeoff weights... and Latin cargo is different than African cargo.
So, the reason the 767 may not be ideal is because of range, esp. for DL using it to ATL, than for weight and balance issues.
Further, UA is NOT flying LOS-IAD nonstop. ACC-IAD is more than within the range of a 763ER w/o restrictions - however, I'm not sure that UA's 763ERs have the same capabilities as DL's, even considering that some of DL's 763s are wingletted and higher MTOWs.
However, every aircraft has performance issues at it reaches the end of its envelope - but the 767 on a 13 hr flight is more likely going to be limited by takeoff weight.
And I can assure you that neither DL or any other airline is going to restrict business/first capacity due to performance issues. there are more than enough other things that can be done to ensure premium revenue can be obtained.
Abrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 3193 posts, RR: 25 Reply 123, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7468 times:
Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 109):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84):
which goes to show that chasing these kinds of war-related markets can be problematic for long-term profitability.
= In the long-term, no airlines make a profit Wink. Market opportunities exist at a moment in time. One takes benefit of it, and as the market evolves, must evolve with it. KWI was a brilliant choice for UAL and has served it well.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): yes, they do but int'l routes take time and money to develop.
UA has done very well in KWI but their revenue in 2009 is down 20% from 2008's high levels. Winding down of the Gulf war is impacting KWI and will continue to do so.
= I was under this false pretense that Delta had reneged on both announced flights and cut back quickly on services where it did not make "long-term" profitability. Guess I was wrong .....
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3895 posts, RR: 27 Reply 124, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7308 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): UA is not going to get premium revenue in any LOS connecting market.
Not totally true. In markets like ORD, SFO and DEN, UA will still command a premium over DL, because those markets have large loyalty to UA and will prefer UA even with the extra stop. And in many cases, the difference between a UA and DL is only 1-2 hours which gives DL only a small advantage.
Cws818 From United States, joined Aug 2008, 430 posts, RR: 0 Reply 126, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 7137 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 109):
= I would have to disagree. I rather take a well-timed tag flight from the U.S. than do a Euro transit which adds time and sometimes money.
UA isn't competing with a connection via Europe. THey are competing w/ DL
UA will be competing with more airlines than just DL in this market.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 90):
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 84):
Sure there is... DL can trash the fares and dump capacity just as easily as UA can.
Now why would DL want to trash fares and dump capacity? These are nonsensical, hurt-everybody, old-fashioned, "who's gonna blink first?" airline tactics.
because DL is an airline... DL is capable of doing the same thing all airlines do.
But what would the point be - it would hurt DL too.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 127, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 6960 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): The notion that the 763ER is not capable of operating 12 hr flights w/o operating restrictions is not based on reality at DL.
Is this your blind patriotism to DL speaking??
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): bags can be moved around quite easily and the 763ER will not bulk out on bags on a 12-13 hr flight before it hits weight limits, esp. to/from Africa where bags are heavy.
So DL limited the number of checked bags on routes like LOS-ATL was just some shenanigan, not an operational need?
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): So, the reason the 767 may not be ideal is because of range, esp. for DL using it to ATL, than for weight and balance issues.
Wrong again.
You need only look at the countless anecdotal evidence on this site in order to appreciate the degree of quite how bad the 767's are at operating routes that long.
I'd even go so far as to post DL dispatch releases to drive the point home, but that'd only get myself and some other people in a lot of trouble
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): I'm not sure that UA's 763ERs have the same capabilities as DL's
UA 767-322/ER's have PW4060's which have lower dry weights and are more efficient in cruise than the GE CF6's. In addition to this, UA configures their 763's for a lower seating capacity than DL.
So as long as the UA birds don't have a takeoff performance limitation or restriction, they are longer-ranged than DL's.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): but the 767 on a 13 hr flight is more likely going to be limited by takeoff weight.
False.
Given how I've had to correct you on these types of operational questions before, why do you persist??
But, in the spirit of discussion, I'll pose a question: why do you think DL is slowly shifting 763's to the Pacific and A330's to the Atlantic?? Hint: because the A330-200's are better able to perform on those long-haul routes
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): And I can assure you that neither DL or any other airline is going to restrict business/first capacity due to performance issues.
*sigh*
You need only look at TravelNet to see for yourself this is not even close to correct.
While Worldtraveler does have an intense loyalty to DL, I agree with what he says. DL is running a payload restriction program on the long flights to maximize revenue but this is only impacting non-revs in favor of carrying revenue cargo. It has nothing to do with the capability of the airplane. Sure they could run a 777 on these flights, as they have done with ATL-LOS, but only if the demand is there.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127): UA 767-322/ER's have PW4060's which have lower dry weights and are more efficient in cruise than the GE CF6's. In addition to this, UA configures their 763's for a lower seating capacity than DL.
Yes, the CF-6 is heavier, but it makes more thrust and has a higher mtow than the PW4060 airplanes.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127): But, in the spirit of discussion, I'll pose a question: why do you think DL is slowly shifting 763's to the Pacific and A330's to the Atlantic?? Hint: because the A330-200's are better able to perform on those long-haul routes
My guess is matching capacity to demand. The A330 has more capacity which is needed on the Atlantic right now, not Asia.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127): You need only look at TravelNet to see for yourself this is not even close to correct.
Now there's an always accurate source for you.
The 767-300ER is a fine airplane. I agree that it has it's limitations as all airplanes do. For starting a route like this it is the perfect airplane for both DL and UA until the market matures. I'd be shocked if UA did not either upgrade to the 772 by 2012 or have two flights going non-stop instead of the stopover in ACC before LOS with a 763. I do agree though that 12 hours is about the limit for revenue potential on a 763 without winglets and about 13 with the winglets. All of these flights are within that timeframe.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 129, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6658 times:
Quoting 727forever (Reply 128): Yes, the CF-6 is heavier, but it makes more thrust and has a higher mtow than the PW4060 airplanes.
Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I know, all DL 767-300ER's are 407,000# MGTOW save for ships 1607-1613 that have 412,000# MGTOW.
Quoting 727forever (Reply 128): Now there's an always accurate source for you.
Haha I know, but one of the few publicly available.
Quoting 727forever (Reply 128): I do agree though that 12 hours is about the limit for revenue potential on a 763 without winglets and about 13 with the winglets.
Again correct me if I'm wrong, but the blended winglets only increase the MZFW weight, not the MGTOW (save for ships 1607-1613), right??
Do the winglets give them an additional hour endurance??
OA412 From United States, joined Dec 2000, 2239 posts, RR: 8 Reply 130, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6604 times:
Quoting 727forever (Reply 128): Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127):
UA 767-322/ER's have PW4060's which have lower dry weights and are more efficient in cruise than the GE CF6's. In addition to this, UA configures their 763's for a lower seating capacity than DL.
Yes, the CF-6 is heavier, but it makes more thrust and has a higher mtow than the PW4060 airplanes.
Anyone know what the split is in terms of PW and GE powered 763ER's in the current DL fleet?
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 131, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 6602 times:
Quoting OA412 (Reply 130): Anyone know what the split is in terms of PW and GE powered 763ER's in the current DL fleet?
15x active 763A's, only 4x have PW's. Important to note though, those 4 are the only DL 763A's that are ETOPS and go to Hawaii.
57x active 763ER's, 29x have PW's, 28x have GE's. Ships 1607 through 1613 (the highest MGTOW birds with winglets and crew rest bunkrooms for the 12+ hour flights) are all GE-powered.
Alibo5NGN From United States, joined Oct 2006, 485 posts, RR: 1 Reply 132, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6503 times:
A direct non stop flight to LOS is inevitable. Nigeria is the 500lb Gorilla in African Aviation. The equation in Nigeria is simple: "who ever flies a modern wide body aircraft with PTVs and lots of room for cargo wins". Ghanaians are in general more price sensitive than Nigerians and less concerned about aircraft size. Ghana also is a far smaller market than Nigeria. It took Delta less than six months to figure that out.
The idea of first landing in Accra before Lagos could do damage to UA's future efforts in developing a major market in Nigeria. Imagine Iberia doing Madrid - Havana - Miami and then Miami - Havana - Madrid when there are other alternatives directly to Miami?
It takes knowledge to make a career. It takes wisdom to live a life.
AznMadSci From United States, joined Dec 2007, 2116 posts, RR: 2 Reply 134, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6391 times:
Out of curiosity, while many talk about making LOS nonstop as DL has done, for safety from a crew perspective, wouldn't it be safer for crew to overnight in ACC than in LOS? I had remembered a few airlines have done that whereby the crew does XYZ-ACC, overnight, do ACC-LOS-ACC, overnight, and then do ACC-XYZ. How does DL provide safety for their crews that overnight at LOS or ABV?
The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
I380North From United States, joined Feb 2009, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 135, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6353 times:
Quoting AznMadSci (Reply 134): I had remembered a few airlines have done that whereby the crew does XYZ-ACC, overnight
Please tell us what airlines have done that. The last time I checked BA, VS, LH, AF, KL, DL and EK (2xdaily) still fly to LOS. or is this your imagination?
OA412 From United States, joined Dec 2000, 2239 posts, RR: 8 Reply 136, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6336 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 135): Please tell us what airlines have done that. The last time I checked BA, VS, LH, AF, KL, DL and EK (2xdaily) still fly to LOS. or is this your imagination?
Whether or not these airlines serve LOS is not the point at issue here. There have been threads in the past indicating that airlines have their crew working these flights overnight somewhere other than LOS given the security concerns.
I380North From United States, joined Feb 2009, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 137, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 6301 times:
Quoting OA412 (Reply 136): Whether or not these airlines serve LOS is not the point at issue here. There have been threads in the past indicating that airlines have their crew working these flights overnight somewhere other than LOS given the security concerns.
What exactly is your point.
Well, since you can not name the airlines that avoid LOS to overnight in ACC. I will assume you are ill-informed and have no clue what you are writing about. If it is good enough for EK, why not UA?
Here's also an old a.net post back in 2004 sorta mentioning what I had talked about: LH Daily To Accra?
I never gave specific airlines, but since you thought I was imagining them, guess I had to dig some references from older posts that was more than just my imagination! I knew LH was one of them, but thought they had done FRA-ACC-LOS instead of FRA-LOS-ACC.
The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
OA412 From United States, joined Dec 2000, 2239 posts, RR: 8 Reply 139, posted (1 month 1 week 2 days ago) and read 6197 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 137): What exactly is your point.
Well, since you can not name the airlines that avoid LOS to overnight in ACC. I will assume you are ill-informed and have no clue what you are writing about. If it is good enough for EK, why not UA?
No need for the attitude. As the previous poster mentioned there are indeed airlines that tag ACC onto LOS in order for their crew to avoid overnighting in LOS. Additionally, if you read the following thread: LH Daily To Accra? (by JoFMO Jul 31 2004 in Civil Aviation) you'll see that at one point AF was sending its CDG-LOS to Benin to overnight.
I380North From United States, joined Feb 2009, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 140, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6147 times:
Quoting AznMadSci (Reply 138): I never gave specific airlines, but since you thought I was imagining them, guess I had to dig some references from older posts that was more than just my imagination! I knew LH was one of them, but thought they had done FRA-ACC-LOS instead of FRA-LOS-ACC.
if LOS was unsafe why would DL apply for additional JFK-LOS which was denied. I did say you are ill-informed and I stand by that. First this is 2009 and almost 2010 and your only evidence was a 2004 post of AZ route. Pal, a lot has changed in the world and in African aviation since then. The benefit of belonging to this social network called A,net is to learn and not perpetuate some outdated myths.
The fact of the matter is UA is venturing to other parts of the world because there is money to be made and with that comes some risks. LOS is perhaps no more dangerous than JNB, GRU and DTW, WAS, MSY. It is a calculated risk. Safety is relative.
Byrdluvs747 From United States, joined Jul 2004, 1214 posts, RR: 1 Reply 141, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6087 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 140): I did say you are ill-informed and I stand by that. First this is 2009 and almost 2010 and your only evidence was a 2004 post of AZ route.
Huh? Did you skip 2009 altogether? This was a pretty nasty year for violence in northern and southern Nigeria. Any responsible airline would be concerned for their crew's safety.
Quoting I380North (Reply 140): Pal, a lot has changed in the world and in African aviation since then.
Aviation maybe, but these religious/ethnic clashes have been going on for centuries. Irregardless of the age of the article, the safety concerns still apply.
Quoting I380North (Reply 140): The benefit of belonging to this social network called A,net is to learn and not perpetuate some outdated myths.
What myth is being perpetuated when the violence has been happening all year?
[Edited 2009-11-07 01:26:58]
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
Alibo5NGN From United States, joined Oct 2006, 485 posts, RR: 1 Reply 142, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6028 times:
Quoting AznMadSci (Reply 134): for safety from a crew perspective, wouldn't it be safer for crew to overnight in ACC than in LOS?
Enough of old out dated and worn out cliches. Lagos is just as safe as any city with 12 million people. Safer by far than Mexico City, Johannesburg or Sao Paulo. Those who talk about safety should visit Lagos before perpetuating myths. Delta found that out the hard way by paying huge amounts of money to bogus foreign security outfits when their service were not required.
Quoting OA412 (Reply 139): No need for the attitude. As the previous poster mentioned there are indeed airlines that tag ACC onto LOS in order for their crew to avoid over nighting in LOS.
There is no tag between ACC and LOS. 4 airports are currently served by foreign airlines and their crew overnight in these cities - Lagos, Abuja, Kano and yes Port-Harcourt. When did peoples personal opinions on Anet threads constitute authoritative statements. Foreigners constitute more than half of Arik Air's 200 plus pilots. They are based in Lagos and Abuja. Enough of this already.
Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 141): Huh? Did you skip 2009 altogether? This was a pretty nasty year for violence in northern and southern Nigeria. Any responsible airline would be concerned for their crew's safety.
What has religious or ethnic tensions got to do with safety at LOS? Does yesterdays violence at Fort Hood make Dallas or Houston unsafe?
Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 141): What myth is being perpetuated when the violence has been happening all year?
So crews to Mexico City should over night in Costa Rica because of the ongoing violence all over Mexico? So crews to Rio De Janeiro should over night else where because of the ongoing violence in the city. The level of ignorance on this site is sometimes appalling.
It takes knowledge to make a career. It takes wisdom to live a life.
Ssublyme From United States, joined Dec 2008, 228 posts, RR: 0 Reply 143, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5901 times:
Quoting Alibo5NGN (Reply 142): The level of ignorance on this site is sometimes appalling.
Hopefully this gets alleviated in the not too distant future. In general most US based companies are timid about Africa, more so than European and Asian ones. People fail to realize the potential in Africa, Nigeria especially. I can't think of the last time any airline pulled service from Nigeria citing safety concerns, meanwhile DL's planned service to Kenya was denied by homeland security just this year. A decision which I feel ends up hurting all parties.
People initially felt Nigerian's should be 'satisfied' with DL's inadequate 767 when it first started the ATL - LOS route, not knowing Nigerians have already been used to far better for a very long time. Others claimed the market was not there to support the 777. What we have now is DL chomping to start another daily to LOS and UA about to join in the mix. Ofcourse by the time UA joins in, Arik should already be flying LOS - JFK daily. Why people felt there were no viable options so they should take what they get or that demand wasn't there is beyond me.
"If we fly to LOS, we must send our crew to a different country to overight for their safety." -- Ridiculous. Well, to the airlines detriment as that will definitely hurt the bottom line of that route.
Alot of old, biased and outdated thinking. Much of it continuously perpetuated by false unverified information like alot of responses in threads like this. At the end of the day, there is money to be made, and the risks associated with it obviously do not outweigh the opportunities. No different than any other route an airline flies.
Jfk777 From United States, joined Aug 2006, 3473 posts, RR: 0 Reply 144, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5840 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 122): AA won't compete effectively in S. Africa given DL's 77Ls which are the only aircraft that can fly nonstop to the US in both directions. AA can't possibly compete w/ DL by using a 77E and a fuel stop. They'll get the MIA passengers w/ or w/o a fuel stop but will not possibly be able to compete in the connecting markets.
If JNB is the destination a 77E would have to stop on the way back, but Miami to Capetown could be done both ways nonstop with a 77E. SAA flew Miami to CPT nonstop with daily service until 2001 with a 744, the route was then transfered to Atlanta.
About the connecting markets, MIA serves AA quite well for the Latin markets so adding a flight to South Africa from the cities AA serves nonstop should do ok.
BMI727 From United States, joined Feb 2009, 3397 posts, RR: 1 Reply 145, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5624 times:
Quoting Ssublyme (Reply 143): People initially felt Nigerian's should be 'satisfied' with DL's inadequate 767 when it first started the ATL - LOS route,
Are you defending the Nigerian government strong-arming a private corporation into changing their services just because they want TVs?
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
A330243 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 23 posts, RR: 0 Reply 146, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5573 times:
Quoting MogandoCI (Reply 103): #1 Do all military people fly on special discounted military fares, including the lieutenants and the generals? If so, doesn't that destroy the RASM?
#2. Even if BAH is a banking hub, IAD is not, so a better flight should be BAH-XYZ-ORD or BAH-XYZ-JFK, or make those nonstop.
#3. IAD is not an oil hub either, so most of this "oil" traffic is just between KWI and BAH/Damman. Is that route currently underserved?
1.) BAH probably gets a lot of contractors flying in and out, so this would help boost yields.
2.) Obviously they have to provide onward connections from IAD to the likes of JFK, LGA, EWR, ORD, etc. Remember, KWI is low-volume, high-yielding and thus adding BAH as a tag makes sense. ORD-BAH is very low-volume, even with feed from other domestic destiations and makes no-sense what so ever.
3.) Again, they will have to feed IAH, YYC to capture the Dammam traffic.
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 110): But even for the connecting traffic, the U.S. carriers option will likely be preferred. I'd much rather connect through IAD than LHR. Less hassle and less travel time. Not to mention that the shorter routing and overall reduced cost structures of U.S. carriers will make them price competitive as well. Both DL and UA can undercut BA/LH/AF on these routings and still make a profit.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 120): DFW-LHR-ACC on AA/BA is 20:00. On DL via JFK, it's 16:25, so it's a bit more than three hours different.
ORD-LHR-ACC is 17:35 minimum via LHR, 14:24 minimum via JFK
LAX-LHR-ACC is 20:05 via LHR, 17:25 via JFK.
On most (all?) of this type of itinerary, UA via IAD will be a bit faster than DL.
Remeber though that on the in-bound Africa-US leg, a domestic connection through IAD or JFK will require you to clear Immigration/Customs at JFK/IAD and thus REQUIRE a long connection at JFK/IAD to your domestic flight. ACC/LOS-LHR-LAX/SFO/ORD/etc. routing means that you can have a shorter connection time at LHR and I would prefer to transit there and clear Immigration/Customs at my destination (LAX, SFO, ORD, or whateer).
Bottom line is that I prefer to make an international to international transfer as opposed to international to domestic, due to the shorter connection time.
Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 109): = I would have to disagree. I rather take a well-timed tag flight from the U.S. than do a Euro transit which adds time and sometimes money.
See above. This is true if you are going Domestic-IAD-Africa, but on the return leg, you get a much longer domestic connection time to account for clearing Immigration/Customs.
PIA does do a heavy amount of Sales Promotion Agreements with Western carriers at DXB. They should beef up their JFK-Pakistan routes or codeshare with United or Delta to North America and consider dropping JFK. They should keep YYZ on their own metal though as that route is still doing well.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 147, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5547 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 140): I did say you are ill-informed and I stand by that.
You are remarkably ill-informed as well, since UA crews will never layover in LOS!!
There will be two overnight crews in ACC. The crew that brought in IAD-ACC will layover in ACC. The crew from the previous day will operate ACC-LOS-ACC, and then layover in ACC again, doing the flight back to IAD the next day.
Quoting I380North (Reply 137): Well, since you can not name the airlines that avoid LOS to overnight in ACC. I will assume you are ill-informed and have no clue what you are writing about.
Quite the haughty attitude for someone who is even further ill-informed
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 148, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5503 times:
Quoting Ssublyme (Reply 143): Alot of old, biased and outdated thinking. Much of it continuously perpetuated by false unverified information like alot of responses in threads like this.
Are you suggesting that Nigeria poses no more operational difficulties than, say, Canada? That's just wrong. Nigeria may not be as bad as some say, but there are definitely challenges there.
Quoting A330243 (Reply 146): Bottom line is that I prefer to make an international to international transfer as opposed to international to domestic, due to the shorter connection time.
WorldTraveler From United States, joined Aug 2003, 6778 posts, RR: 30 Reply 149, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5460 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127): You need only look at the countless anecdotal evidence on this site in order to appreciate the degree of quite how bad the 767's are at operating routes that long.
I've seen actual 763ER data from multiple airlines. The aircraft is fully capable of 12 - 12.30 hrs in the air or 13 hrs block w/ winglets and full pax/bags (standard US carrier bags). The simple reason why the 763ER was not capable of carrying LOS bags is because the bag weights used for LOS are more than 2 times the standard bag weights used for East Asia or Europe.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127): But, in the spirit of discussion, I'll pose a question: why do you think DL is slowly shifting 763's to the Pacific and A330's to the Atlantic?? Hint: because the A330-200's are better able to perform on those long-haul routes
Simple, because the 330s are LARGER which makes the 767s better suited for flying NEW ROUTES across the Pacific.
In case you weren't aware, the Pacific is a LARGER OCEAN.
SEA-PEK is within 40 miles of both LAX-NRT and SLC-NRT, both of which were 332 routes added by DL; DL flies its 767s further than NW flew its 330s although the 330s are capable of flying longer routes, something you will see happen, esp. when DL adds the performance improvement package to the 332.
ATL-SVO has been flown by a 764 and I believe is longer than any 333 route which NW has flown.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127): You need only look at TravelNet to see for yourself this is not even close to correct.
Let me know which route DL has restricted capacity in the Business cabin but not in the back.
Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 144): If JNB is the destination a 77E would have to stop on the way back, but Miami to Capetown could be done both ways nonstop with a 77E.
It is possible that AA could operate CPT nonstop to MIA but they will not be able to fly nonstop JNB-USA w/ a 772E. IN the JNB market, DL will have the upper hand until someone - anyone - is able to fly JNB nonstop in both directions to compete w/ DL. CPT is just not as large of a market and adding a CPT stop to JNB will erode yields... further there are significant crew rotation issues when flying a XXX-JNB-CPT-XXX route.
I380North From United States, joined Feb 2009, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 150, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5446 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 145):
Are you defending the Nigerian government strong-arming a private corporation into changing their services just because they want TVs?
Gee..another misinformation or spin.
Yes, the Nigerian aviation minister now famous "crappy plane" comments related to the non availability of PTV on the 767. But the broader complain which is now lost or rewritten in our 30 second commercial world, was DL initial poor service on the ATL-LOS route. The nigerian pax were complaining about lost luggage and overbooked flights, and overall mess during the initial DL furay into LOS. Should I expect the same service level of DL wheather I am in ATL, LHR, DSM or for that matter LOS? Yes. therefore, I do not expect less for the nigerian fee-paying pax. The DOT and the FAA react to US pax complaints so why should the nigerian aviation minister not do the same. I remember when that rage was going on on this very board and I remember some Anetter saying we should take our marbles and come on back home. Am glad DL did not listen to these cut and run advocates and for that DL is happier today as they are planning more profitable expansions.
Oh coming back to your strong-arm remark: On the same grounds as I would defend the DOT for refusing little VK LOS-JFK rights because of its VS parental connections, Again, did the DOT "strong-arming" VS for attempting to use the back door to circumvent TATL routes. Need I remind you that those that live in glass houses don't throw stones.
In these open skies days, does it ever occur to you why should the US govt worry if VX is 100% owned by VS. Do I care who owns the airline I fly on as long as it gets me there safe and gives me value for my money. May be you and I are better off writing our congressman/woman that it is about time to change this law.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 151, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5464 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 149): The aircraft is fully capable of 12 - 12.30 hrs in the air or 13 hrs block w/ winglets and full pax/bags
Since you can provide no hard numbers or evidence yourself other than us blindly taking your word for it, I'll do it myself.
Delta 767-332ER with winglets (ships 1607 to 1613):
MGTOW: 412,000#
MZFW: 291,300#
At MZFW, that means you can carry 120,700# of fuel which most definitely is not enough for 13 hour block flights. By that, in order to tanker enough gas for 13+ hours, the 763 is already payload restricted from the start.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 149): In case you weren't aware, the Pacific is a LARGER OCEAN.
No kidding?!?
In case you weren't aware, flying ATL-LOS is longer than many routes across the LARGER OCEAN.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 149): ATL-SVO has been flown by a 764 and I believe is longer than any 333 route which NW has flown.
So?? The plane can do it, no once has tried to argue that. The point being argued is that the planes can't do them *well*
I380North From United States, joined Feb 2009, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 152, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5441 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 147): You are remarkably ill-informed as well, since UA crews will never layover in LOS!!
There will be two overnight crews in ACC. The crew that brought in IAD-ACC will layover in ACC. The crew from the previous day will operate ACC-LOS-ACC, and then layover in ACC again, doing the flight back to IAD the next day.
so I will quess that you are a UA employee or you have an inside track of UA routing. UA is yet to fly the route so it can not be said that UA overnights in ACC. Since you are so informed can you tell us which airline currently lands in LOS and send their crew to LCC.
"UA crews will never layover in LOS!!!" Using the word NEVER what a remarkable statement for an airline route planning personnel and a very informed one at that. So while you are at it, is the layover in ACC based on safety or cost? Because we all know LOS is a very expensive city.
WorldTraveler From United States, joined Aug 2003, 6778 posts, RR: 30 Reply 153, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5390 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 150): In these open skies days, does it ever occur to you why should the US govt worry if VX is 100% owned by VS. Do I care who owns the airline I fly on as long as it gets me there safe and gives me value for my money. May be you and I are better off writing our congressman/woman that it is about time to change this law.
that's fine in a free market but global aviation is most definitely not a free market. If other countries allowed US carriers unlimited access to their markets and vice versa, we'd have no problems.
Who sees a 13 hr flight has to operate at MZFW?
The OEW of a 763ER w/ winglets is about 210k#s.
You don't need 80,000 pounds of payload for 215 passengers, or more than 370 pounds per passenger.
60K of payload is more realistic which leaves 140K for fuel which given the efficiencies that have been seen w/ winglets is more than enough for a 12.5 hr flight or 12 hrs in the air.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 151): In case you weren't aware, flying ATL-LOS is longer than many routes across the LARGER OCEAN
sure is... and the average of routes across the Pacific is longer than the average of routes across the Atlantic including to Africa.
Your statement that the 330 is needed for the longer routes across the Atlantic is false.
The longest routes across the Atlantic are to Africa and the 330s aren't flying there.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 151): So?? The plane can do it, no once has tried to argue that. The point being argued is that the planes can't do them
And the 764 has diverted for fuel how many times between SVO and ATL?
How many flights do you know that have left passengers behind?
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 154, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5408 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 152): UA is yet to fly the route so it can not be said that UA overnights in ACC.
Yes, they will. The crew cannot operate ACC-LOS after having just flown IAD-ACC. They'd long since be outside of duty time to schedule them to operate the entire IAD-ACC-LOS.
And, since ACC-LOS is a very short flight, UA will more efficiently utilize their crew in having them fly ACC-LOS and back LOS-ACC. Why would they layover the crew in LOS - both dangerous and expensive - when they can fly immediately back to ACC??
UA does this all the time, as do other airlines. Other UA examples: 744 crews flying SYD-MEL-SYD, 763 crews flying GRU-GIG-GRU.
And, before you get all upset about the "dangerous" comment, DL transports their crews in armed escorts to and from the hotel. I'm not sure if it's still done, but previously DL crews have not been allowed to leave the LOS hotel while on layover. Mind you, that's not a simple suggestion, but policy that they DO NOT leave the hotel.
Quoting I380North (Reply 152): Since you are so informed can you tell us which airline currently lands in LOS and send their crew to LCC.
Random quizzes to test someone's credibility??
Quoting I380North (Reply 152): So while you are at it, is the layover in ACC based on safety or cost?
Neither.
Efficient crew utilization. Examples:
Day 1: IAD-ACC
Day 2: Arrival, layover
Day 3: ACC-LOS, layover
Day 4: LOS-ACC, layover
Day 5: ACC-IAD
or
Day 1: IAD-ACC
Day 2: Arrival, layover
Day 3: ACC-LOS-ACC, layover
Day 4: ACC-IAD
The choice is quite obvious, wouldn't you say?? Paying for crew hotels and per diems for 4 days vs 5 days.
Ssublyme From United States, joined Dec 2008, 228 posts, RR: 0 Reply 155, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5383 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 145): Are you defending the Nigerian government strong-arming a private corporation into changing their services just because they want TVs?
Nope, not at all, but what you just wrote is yet another misconception. The bulk of the complaints by passengers were service related, specifically missing/left luggage. Hence DL's move to enforce strict weight limit (which still didn't resolve the problem) before eventually being forced to upgrade.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 148): Are you suggesting that Nigeria poses no more operational difficulties than, say, Canada? That's just wrong. Nigeria may not be as bad as some say, but there are definitely challenges there.
Not sure how you interpreted that from my post, but no. I didn't say Nigeria had less difficulties than say Canada, neither did I suggest there were no challenges. Every route has it's challenges, some challenges bigger than others. Some challenges more common than others.
Why would anyone schedule a route to a city so dangerous they would ferry their crew (and perhaps the plane itself) to a neighboring country until the return flight?
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 157, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5347 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 153): The longest routes across the Atlantic are to Africa and the 330s aren't flying there.
Yet
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 153): And the 764 has diverted for fuel how many times between SVO and ATL?
I should hope none. If it did, that represents a serious miscalculation on the part of DL.
Of course you'd know it is illegal to dispatch an aircraft with less than minimum fuel requirements, given FAA reserve requirements, yes??
That's somewhat of a moot point on ETOPS though, as twins need to carry significantly higher fuel loads to compensate for single-engine driftdowns. Higher burn at lower altitude, compensate for increased drag, etc. And at these higher burn-rate conditions, that's what 180-minute divert time is calculated off of. This only adds to my point though, that if a 764 had to divert for gas on ETOPS... something seriously went wrong along the dispatch process.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 153): How many flights do you know that have left passengers behind?
Ssublyme From United States, joined Dec 2008, 228 posts, RR: 0 Reply 158, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5339 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 154): And, before you get all upset about the "dangerous" comment, DL transports their crews in armed escorts to and from the hotel. I'm not sure if it's still done, but previously DL crews have not been allowed to leave the LOS hotel while on layover. Mind you, that's not a simple suggestion, but policy that they DO NOT leave the hotel.
Over-reaction to misinformation of how dangerous LOS is. Afterall homeland security should have let them duplicate the same strategy on their planned expansion to Kenya. Danger is the same reason cited for denying the service. DL also wasn't interested in flying LOS at one point, now they can't wait for the chance to start a 2nd daily. First hand experience and an objective/open mind usually dispels such misinformation.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 159, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5336 times:
Quoting Diesel33 (Reply 156): Out of curiosity, what would the crews do for the almost 5 hour layover in LOS? Stay on the plane?
Grab a bite to eat in the airport
NW does this rather frequently with the NRT "interport" flying, crews flying two interport flights per day. ICN-NRT-ICN, PVG-NRT-PVG, etc. Most of these have 4-5 hour layovers in NRT as well.
OA412 From United States, joined Dec 2000, 2239 posts, RR: 8 Reply 160, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5273 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 140): if LOS was unsafe why would DL apply for additional JFK-LOS which was denied.
You're using specious reasoning here. Airlines fly to unsafe destinations all the time and even increase flying to those destinations when it proves profitable. Airlines are in business to make money and if they believe that they can make money flying to an unsafe destination they will do it. If airlines avoided unsafe destinations no one would be serving places like GIG or JNB. DL applying to serve JFK-LOS does not prove that the destination itself is safe.
Quoting I380North (Reply 140): I did say you are ill-informed and I stand by that.
Given that others have shown that you yourself are severely ill-informed, you should perhaps take your own advice.
Quoting I380North (Reply 150): Need I remind you that those that live in glass houses don't throw stones.
I380North From United States, joined Feb 2009, 54 posts, RR: 0 Reply 161, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5260 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 154): Quoting I380North (Reply 152):
Since you are so informed can you tell us which airline currently lands in LOS and send their crew to LCC.
Random quizzes to test someone's credibility??
Quoting I380North (Reply 152):
So while you are at it, is the layover in ACC based on safety or cost?
Neither.
I am attempted to call you out but I pass.
Since there are two sets of flight crew, why could they take it all the way to LOS and layover for 2 days, and repeat back to IAD. Still same 4-day cycle and a more efficient one at that.
United1 From United States, joined Oct 2003, 3177 posts, RR: 4 Reply 163, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5239 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 161): Since there are two sets of flight crew, why could they take it all the way to LOS and layover for 2 days, and repeat back to IAD. Still same 4-day cycle and a more efficient one at that.
That would be an option however FAA regulations won't allow that to occur. The Pilot and F/A routing will look just like Transpac posted above. Whether LOS is safe is irrelevant the FAA wont let the flight or cabin crew fly through all the way to LOS in a single day.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 154): Day 1: IAD-ACC
Day 2: Arrival, layover
Day 3: ACC-LOS-ACC, layover
Day 4: ACC-IAD
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 164, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5230 times:
Quoting I380North (Reply 150): Should I expect the same service level of DL wheather I am in ATL, LHR, DSM or for that matter LOS? Yes. therefore, I do not expect less for the nigerian fee-paying pax. The DOT and the FAA react to US pax complaints so why should the nigerian aviation minister not do the same.
When have DoT or FAA told an airline what airplane to use on a specific route? Compare the situation with US/China, where US got the frequency despite not having an airplane capable of flying the route on property.
When have DoT or FAA told an airline that they have too many complaints on a specific route?
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 154): UA does this all the time, as do other airlines. Other UA examples: 744 crews flying SYD-MEL-SYD, 763 crews flying GRU-GIG-GRU.
In fact, I am not aware of any tag that doesn't operate this way; triangle flights are different, but this isn't a triangle.
Quoting Ssublyme (Reply 155): Why would anyone schedule a route to a city so dangerous they would ferry their crew (and perhaps the plane itself) to a neighboring country until the return flight?
UA won't be ferrying anything.
Quoting I380North (Reply 161): Since there are two sets of flight crew, why could they take it all the way to LOS and layover for 2 days, and repeat back to IAD. Still same 4-day cycle and a more efficient one at that.
IAD-ACC-LOS is too long for a single crew; it's 15 hours block time.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 10972 posts, RR: 13 Reply 165, posted (1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5150 times:
Quoting A330243 (Reply 146): they will have to feed IAH, YYC to capture the Dammam traffic.
I can't see many people wanting to take a routing YYC-DMM that requires 3 stops and 2 connections, and still requires a 50+ mile trip by road to get from BAH to DMM, when they can fly YYC-FRA-DMM or YYC-AMS-DMM with just one stop and good connections both ways.
YYC-ORD-IAD-KWI-BAH-DMM is also about 1,400 miles further than the one stop route via Europe.
Klwright69 From United States, joined Jan 2000, 1184 posts, RR: 6 Reply 166, posted (1 month 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 4818 times:
I would like to chime in about BAH.
I have lived in AUH now for a couple of months. I have not yet been to BAH.
I flew over BAH flying to AUH on EY. My EY flight from JFK had very few people on it. BAH is not a big place, with not a lot of oil. BAH is known as a "sin" destination for Saudis coming over on the bridge. If you blink while flying over BAH, you miss it entirely.
I talked to some of my friends who flew on QR to AUH via DOH and IAH. Their flights had light loads.
Yes, I know all this is anecdotal. Tags are expensive and I know CO does not really care for them all that much. Is this a sign of distress for UA in KWI?
I do not work in the industry anymore. I just find this an unexpected move. BAH is not a big place, with not a lot of traffic anyway. Here in AUH people on the street don't really ever talk about BAH that much as being much of a big GCCC player (Gulf Countries Council). Yes, there is the military presence. Will that be enough? Are all these military people flying commercial all the time to justify it?
I know some think this move is just brilliant. Well, it could be. I just don't see it yet. Sorry.
Directorguy From Egypt, joined Jul 2008, 996 posts, RR: 3 Reply 167, posted (1 month 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 4794 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHAT OPERATOR
Quoting Klwright69 (Reply 166): I do not work in the industry anymore. I just find this an unexpected move. BAH is not a big place, with not a lot of traffic anyway. Here in AUH people on the street don't really ever talk about BAH that much as being much of a big GCCC player (Gulf Countries Council). Yes, there is the military presence. Will that be enough? Are all these military people flying commercial all the time to justify it?
I'm wondering if this is some sort of preemptive move to block a possible GF/AA nonstop to North America. BAH as mentioned has demand for North America-bound traffic. LH, KLM, BA and GF's Europe ops all carry some traffic. And any BAH traffic will carry pax originating in the Eastern Province of the KSA. Yes, this may sound unfeasible to some, but this is a popular way of travelling from the KSA. The distance between DMM and some residential districts and BAH is about the same anyway (during off-peak hours at least, when the Causeway's relatively empty).
DeltaL1011man From United States, joined Sep 2005, 5242 posts, RR: 3 Reply 168, posted (1 month 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 4810 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 127): But, in the spirit of discussion, I'll pose a question: why do you think DL is slowly shifting 763's to the Pacific and A330's to the Atlantic?? Hint: because the A330-200's are better able to perform on those long-haul routes
Um, Aren't all the longest routes arcross the Atlantic still on 763s? Or did i miss something.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 131): 57x active 763ER's, 29x have PW's, 28x have GE's. Ships 1607 through 1613 (the highest MGTOW birds with winglets and crew rest bunkrooms for the 12+ hour flights) are all GE-powered
Right and the 76Qs have the smaller GE CF6-80A2(IIRC this is what DL had on the 762s also) while the 767s and the 76P share the same Pratts.
BTW is it that the GECF6-80C2B6F have better fuel burn vs the big Pratts or what? I know the PWs have more thrust(so I would think they would use these on the 12+ hour trips but all the 76Ts are GE(as said above.)
Quoting I380North (Reply 137): Well, since you can not name the airlines that avoid LOS to overnight in ACC. I will assume you are ill-informed and have no clue what you are writing about. If it is good enough for EK, why not UA?
Lets put it this way. The F/As (Tpac may be able to give you what they pilots have to deal with) get am amored car/bus and an armed gaurd who IIRC stays with them at the hotel. Its one of those trips you need to take some food and a good book and just stay inside.
IIRC alot of the north Africa stuff at Delta is pretty jr. While JNB (and CPT was) on the more SR. side.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 153): How many flights do you know that have left passengers behind?
the 764 has been known to leave NRs in JNB. I assume it was because it was JNB because i have never heard bad things about the 764 on ATL-SVO.......was kinda shocked they didn't cut JFK over ATL on that one. ATL-SVO always seemed strong, I guess demand just crashed. Is JFK still on the 764 or did it go 300?
(how do i know? My aunt use to pick this trip up a good bit before it went 777........now its hard to get.)
A330243 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 23 posts, RR: 0 Reply 169, posted (1 month 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 4476 times:
Quoting Klwright69 (Reply 166): I flew over BAH flying to AUH on EY. My EY flight from JFK had very few people on it. BAH is not a big place, with not a lot of oil. BAH is known as a "sin" destination for Saudis coming over on the bridge. If you blink while flying over BAH, you miss it entirely.
The flight probably had a light load, as a lot of the traffic on the Gulf carriers from NYC is connecting traffic to cities in the Sub-continent, namely DEL, BOM, KHI, LHE, ISB, etc. Towards the end of summer loads tend to be very heavy in the other direction and rather light eastbound. Most of the traffic this time of year eastbound is business related and thus lighter in volume.
Quoting Klwright69 (Reply 166): I talked to some of my friends who flew on QR to AUH via DOH and IAH. Their flights had light loads.
Same thing. IAH-DOH will be a mix of oil and connecting traffic to India/Pakikstan. They probably get a good mix of corporate oil traffic and connecting traffic to Subcontinent (both business and leisure), but this time of year, there won't be much VFR traffic, just corporate/business which is much lower volume.
QR have very aggressive pricing during peak season, as their product is relatively new to the market and it has definately had an impact on EK, the European carriers that serve IAH and CO to a lesser extent.
Quoting Klwright69 (Reply 166): I do not work in the industry anymore. I just find this an unexpected move. BAH is not a big place, with not a lot of traffic anyway. Here in AUH people on the street don't really ever talk about BAH that much as being much of a big GCCC player (Gulf Countries Council). Yes, there is the military presence. Will that be enough? Are all these military people flying commercial all the time to justify it?
As stated above BAH and KWI are high-yield, low volume thus the tag makes sense.
GF are different matter. If they launched BAH-US route, they will need high volume to capture connecting traffic from Subcontinent, Mid-east and Africa in addition to the high-yielding traffic. They had planned at one time an IAH service but fell through for whatever reason and were actually the pioneer in US-Gulf non-stop traffic.
United will layover in ACC.. LOS will be a turn because once we land we can't continue for
Legality issues.. same for BAH.. we will still layover in KWI and next day do turn to BAH and LAYOVER. Just like we do in Sao paulo for GIG.
727forever From United States, joined Jan 2006, 629 posts, RR: 6 Reply 171, posted (1 month 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 4213 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 151): At MZFW, that means you can carry 120,700# of fuel which most definitely is not enough for 13 hour block flights. By that, in order to tanker enough gas for 13+ hours, the 763 is already payload restricted from the start.
I've flown a lot of airliners both big and small and I can honestly say that I've only come close to MZFW once. It was when I flew freight on the 727-200F during the Christmas rush. We bulked out about a 1,000 lbs prior to MZFW. That's the closest that I've ever come. The 767 has always bulked out for me before coming within 20,000 lbs of MZFW. It's just not a concern.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 154): And, before you get all upset about the "dangerous" comment, DL transports their crews in armed escorts to and from the hotel. I'm not sure if it's still done, but previously DL crews have not been allowed to leave the LOS hotel while on layover. Mind you, that's not a simple suggestion, but policy that they DO NOT leave the hotel.
I've not flown LOS in a while, but ABV does still have the armed convoy. There are a lot of AK-47s in Nigeria I've come to learn.
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 157): Of course you'd know it is illegal to dispatch an aircraft with less than minimum fuel requirements, given FAA reserve requirements, yes??
Before getting high and mighty yourself, learn a little. It's called a planned re-dispatch. An airline will have it approved in its operation specifications. DL does.
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 164): IAD-ACC-LOS is too long for a single crew; it's 15 hours block time.
I don't know the contractual rules at UA, but legally it would be possible to go onto LOS using a 4 pilot crew but wouldn't be the best. Instead, they will more than likely have the layover be in ACC with a continuous duty stay at a hotel in LOS during the 5 hours.
Okay, now time to eat a little crow myself. I dug out the manuals, blew the dust off of them and boy was there a lot, and found a little info. DL has 60,200 lbs on the PW4060 and 49,200 on the CF-6-80A2 and 60,200 on the CF-6-80C2. I don't have the other volume here, it's at the airport, but I thought I read in the differences section that certain versions of the CF-6-80C2 had been turned up to 62,900 lbs. Just going off of memory so I could be wrong. Also memory says there are 3 mtows for the -300ER. 407,000, 409,000, and 412,000. I have flown her at 412 a couple of times and wow is it uninspiring. She really likes the ground and doesn't want to leave it.
Transpac787 From United States, joined Jul 2007, 2081 posts, RR: 16 Reply 172, posted (1 month 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 4142 times:
Quoting 727forever (Reply 171): Before getting high and mighty yourself, learn a little. It's called a planned re-dispatch. An airline will have it approved in its operation specifications. DL does.
If this is what I think it is, NW calls it a "short-release", though I'm not completely sure.
Quoting 727forever (Reply 171): Also memory says there are 3 mtows for the -300ER. 407,000, 409,000, and 412,000. I have flown her at 412 a couple of times and wow is it uninspiring. She really likes the ground and doesn't want to leave it.
I don't see a revision date so this could be wrong but here's what I have:
Cubsrule From United States, joined May 2004, 13815 posts, RR: 14 Reply 173, posted (1 month 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 4100 times:
Quoting 727forever (Reply 171): I don't know the contractual rules at UA, but legally it would be possible to go onto LOS using a 4 pilot crew but wouldn't be the best. Instead, they will more than likely have the layover be in ACC with a continuous duty stay at a hotel in LOS during the 5 hours.
You are correct on the 4-pilot crew, but can't IAD-ACC, ACC-LOS-ACC, and ACC-IAD all be done with 3-pilot crews (and ACC-LOS-ACC would actually only require two)?
given that the LR is doing the same thing, I have a feeling it is related to 1. DL's commitment to obtaining any revenue possible - including cargo - before NRs and 2. JNB is more than a mile high.
We can come up w/ instances where any plane has limitations if we find examples where altitude and heat is involved or there are unusual circumstances - ie bag weights...
but the 763ER will do just fine for UA on ACC-IAD just as it has for DL on routes that are even longer - even considering DL's more powerful, wingletted 763ERs.
727forever From United States, joined Jan 2006, 629 posts, RR: 6 Reply 176, posted (1 month 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 3984 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 173): You are correct on the 4-pilot crew, but can't IAD-ACC, ACC-LOS-ACC, and ACC-IAD all be done with 3-pilot crews (and ACC-LOS-ACC would actually only require two)?
IAD-ACC/ACC-IAD might be able to be done by a 3 man crew. Depending on the winds, JFK-ACC/ACC-JFK have to be sped up regularly to keep the average block time safely under 12 hours for the 3 man crew. I would imagine that this will be a problem if UA wants to fly 3 man.
DeltaL1011man From United States, joined Sep 2005, 5242 posts, RR: 3 Reply 178, posted (1 month 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 3956 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 174): given that the LR is doing the same thing, I have a feeling it is related to 1. DL's commitment to obtaining any revenue possible - including cargo - before NRs and 2. JNB is more than a mile high.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3895 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 581 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Austria, joined Jun 2006, 571 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2005, 1756 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 1833 posts, 
. I just wonder if UA is prepared to launch ACC alone (or perhaps in conjunction with a city like DKR instead) if they can't get those elusive rights to serve LOS.
From Portugal, joined Oct 2000, 576 posts, 
the magnanimous 764 and the 77L with the flat bed seats or the antiquated cradle type 764s and 77Es???
From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1048 posts, 
From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 227 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2009, 307 posts, 
From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 3193 posts, 
From Ghana, joined Jun 2004, 3346 posts, 
I knew LH was one of them, but thought they had done FRA-ACC-LOS instead of FRA-LOS-ACC.
That was my point
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 10972 posts, 
From Egypt, joined Jul 2008, 996 posts,