Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Didn't US Enter The Haneda Sweepstakes?  
User currently offlineNetjetsINTL From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7729 times:

Just trying to figure why USAirways didn't even attempt to get into one of the most important markets in the world???

maybe PHL-LAX-HND or PHL-PHX-HND

60 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTheGMan From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 652 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7735 times:

Doug Parker realized that they don't have a plane to fly the route from PHX, PHL, or CLT.

User currently offlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3718 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7716 times:

Because US was going to get some NRT slots in the DL/US slot swap, perhaps?

Or maybe because they don't have the widebodies to fly the route?



I don't work for FWA, their tenants, or their ad agency. But I still love FWA.
User currently offlineNetjetsINTL From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7638 times:

Quoting TheGMan (Reply 1):
Doug Parker realized that they don't have a plane to fly the route from PHX, PHL, or CLT

do you mean not enough widebodies to spare for the route or the A330 simply does not have the range for PHX-HND???


User currently offlinesurfandsnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2847 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7550 times:

- US would actually be better off serving NRT, since they would be able to serve not just Tokyo and Japan in general but all of the major Asian markets (though interline/codeshare arrangements) by flying there. HND flights will overwhelmingly cater to O&D pax: see next point...

- US does not have any hubs that generate significant O&D to Tokyo, Japan, or even Asia for that matter. Neither Philadelphia, Charlotte, nor Phoenix have significant ties with Japan, while cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Honolulu certainly do. In fact, it is highly questionable if any of the US hubs could even support a flight to East Asia.

- US doesn't have aircraft suited for U.S. East Coast-East Asia missions at this time.

- US did receive authority to fly to East Asia very recently, but did not demonstrate an ability to acquire aircraft to serve the region, nor did it show any real intent in ever flying there. Why would the DOT ever take US into consideration for HND services after what happened with PEK? Nothing has really changed...

For all of these reasons, US had no reason to apply for HND slots. They appear to be focused on expanding their European, South American, and (possibly) Middle Eastern routes...



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3034 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7444 times:

Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 4):
Quoting NetjetsINTL (Reply 3):

PHX-NRT would simply not work out. The best thing US has going for it right now is its A350, which may, bring them into the asian market.



E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7428 times:

Quoting NetjetsINTL (Thread starter):
Just trying to figure why USAirways didn't even attempt to get into one of the most important markets in the world???

They didn't want to make the same mistake they did with the failed launch of the China route.   



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlinewn676 From Djibouti, joined Jun 2005, 1031 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 7139 times:

Quoting surfandsnow (Reply 4):

  

Does anyone have any traffic numbers for PHX-Asia? Through personal observation it certainly does not seem significant by any means and is also spread out among many different countries, though I'm not sure the term marginal would fit either.

In any event, NRT is likely the only viable option for US out of PHX given the connecting opportunities it presents.



Tiny, unreadable text leaves ample room for interpretation.
User currently offlineTheGMan From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 652 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 7107 times:

Quoting NetjetsINTL (Reply 3):
do you mean not enough widebodies to spare for the route or the A330 simply does not have the range for PHX-HND???

I don't think it has the range without weight penalty.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5448 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 7013 times:

I'm not sure of their arrangement, but US certainly could simply route people PHL-LAX/SFO/ORD/UA-NRT. Of course, with UA/CO/NH, US may need to rethink their strategy in this regard. The A350's are not coming for a number of years, and they may be delayed further, so at this point I don't think US can really even create an Asian strategy unless they want to make a huge commitment financially.

In the case of US, I really struggle to find a future for them across the Pacific, or in the western US. They need a stronger anchor IMHO than PHX. But UA has LAX/SFO/HNL/SEA/ORD/IAD-NRT (I believe) covered - what does US have to offer other than a thin PHL route or an even thinner CLT one?

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offline9252fly From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 1390 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 6938 times:

US needs to merge with someone other than one of the majors. The only carrier that may offer them a future is F9. It's true,size does matter! They would make a good fit with hubs in MKE DEN PHL CLT PHX.

User currently offlineJohn From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1374 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6685 times:

The A330-200 most certainly has the range to do PHX-NRT/HND. Doesn't DL utilize their A332s on DTW-NRT?

User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7191 posts, RR: 86
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6623 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 6):
They didn't want to make the same mistake they did with the failed launch of the China route.

No need to duck; I couldn't agree more.


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6388 times:

I can't help but wonder if previous US management made a mistake in getting the A330 instead of the 777. Until about the mid 1990's US was a loyal Boeing customer and had just about every Boeing type in their fleet up to that point. For some reason, Stephen Wolf decided to place a huge Airbus order even though US had no experience with the AIrbus. This was the same thing Wolf did when he was at United. I believe Wolf left the company before US took delivery of their first A330. If they had been able to secure a Boeing Order at the time instead, which included 777's, they would have easily had an airplane capable of doing Asia. Not only that, but the order also would have included 737 Next Gens, which would have given the company much more flexibility with crews and stuff like that. They would have easily had a fleet that almost looked identical to the Continental fleet.

Now because US has committed themselves to Airbus, Doug Parker and Scott Kirby felt they had to go with Airbus, and now they have to wait for the A350 to come out, if it ever does, while the 787 despite the delays, is going to be ready a lot sooner and would be a much better fit based on specs that I have seen.


User currently offlinethegman From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 652 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6358 times:

Quoting John (Reply 11):
The A330-200 most certainly has the range to do PHX-NRT/HND. Doesn't DL utilize their A332s on DTW-NRT?

DTW isn't 100F all summer long either.

Quoting 9252fly (Reply 10):
US needs to merge with someone other than one of the majors. The only carrier that may offer them a future is F9. It's true,size does matter! They would make a good fit with hubs in MKE DEN PHL CLT PHX.

F9 is not F9 anymore. Republic runs them and the rumor mill says that Republic is going to dump all the Airbus products and buy a ton of E190s.


User currently offlinepanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4875 posts, RR: 25
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6326 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting John (Reply 11):
Doesn't DL utilize their A332s on DTW-NRT?

No, they have been using 744s (as had NW).


User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22723 posts, RR: 20
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6213 times:

Quoting John (Reply 11):
The A330-200 most certainly has the range to do PHX-NRT/HND.

What about takeoff perfomance ex-PHX? LH had trouble with the 343s - better performers on a similar length eastbound flight - on PHX-FRA.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5448 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5923 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 13):
I can't help but wonder if previous US management made a mistake in getting the A330 instead of the 777. Until about the mid 1990's US was a loyal Boeing customer and had just about every Boeing type in their fleet up to that point. For some reason, Stephen Wolf decided to place a huge Airbus order even though US had no experience with the AIrbus. This was the same thing Wolf did when he was at United. I believe Wolf left the company before US took delivery of their first A330. If they had been able to secure a Boeing Order at the time instead, which included 777's, they would have easily had an airplane capable of doing Asia. Not only that, but the order also would have included 737 Next Gens, which would have given the company much more flexibility with crews and stuff like that. They would have easily had a fleet that almost looked identical to the Continental fleet.

To me, it was a fantastic decision for US at the time. They were able to consolidate to one narrowbody fleet type, getting the best deal possible - something they sorely needed. And I think it's clear that in the 90's US was an east coast airline with limited ops to Europe and the caribbean. They had no need at all for the heavier 777 when the A330 accomplished pretty much everything they needed it to do. The 777 would have been overkill - even the A330 was at times a huge leap over the 762's they were flying up until then.

In my personal opinion, say what you want about Stephen Wolf's other decisions at US, the choice to place the huge Airbus orders was the best thing he could have done for US.

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22723 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5850 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 17):
They were able to consolidate to one narrowbody fleet type, getting the best deal possible - something they sorely needed.

I'll give you the second part of that assertion but not the first. At the time they placed the 32x order (late 1996), the 73G had been available for three years and the 738 had been available for two. A 737 order would have resulted in one fewer narrowbody fleet type than the 32x order did.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineluckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 2163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5776 times:

Quoting thegman (Reply 14):
DTW isn't 100F all summer long either.

100F is almost jacket weather in Phoenix around July and August  


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5448 posts, RR: 29
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5762 times:

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 18):
I'll give you the second part of that assertion but not the first. At the time they placed the 32x order (late 1996), the 73G had been available for three years and the 738 had been available for two. A 737 order would have resulted in one fewer narrowbody fleet type than the 32x order did.

I understand that the 737 classic and 737NG are similar, but if you are replacing everything with something new over time, then the end result it the same. Frankly, I don't know what they planned at the time, but I'm guessing that they didn't anticipate flying the classics well into the second decade of the new millenium.

When Frontier chose Airbus, they weren't going from one fleet type to two, they were changing to a new fleet type, but had two for a while. I take the US decision at the time as a similar move. IMHO.

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offlineUSAir1 From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 71 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5708 times:

Quoting thegman (Reply 14):
F9 is not F9 anymore. Republic runs them and the rumor mill says that Republic is going to dump all the Airbus products and buy a ton of E190s.

Where did you hear that? If that is true, sounds like a major mistake to me. F9 has done a very good job making the Airbus work for them, and recently added seats to them and invested in the airplanes so I would be very surprised. Plus there are many markets F9 flies from DEN to the east and west coasts that could certainly use the extra capacity that the Airbus offers over the 190. Then again nothing would surprise me, the whole F9, YX, RP thing is a big cluster. I used to work for and love YX, but their brand has been destroyed. They might as well put it out of its misery.... hopefully they will at least keep the F9 brand alive.

RE US Air and Asia... we dont have the planes to fly to HND, and if we do chose to go there weight restricted it would likely be PHX to NRT (since NRT has all *A connections) on a 332 which has been stated in the past by Doug Parker. Of course we all know DP would never knowingly fly a plane with a weight restriction.... therefore, we will all wait for the 350's.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8403 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5573 times:

Quoting USAir1 (Reply 21):
DP would never knowingly fly a plane with a weight restriction....

That's a joke, right? Anyhow, a new A332 should be capable of PHL-NRT, the most likely market. It's no more unreasonable than CO flying EWR-HKG on 77E. They are both pushing it, but not totally outside feasibility.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25004 posts, RR: 85
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5490 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting USAir1 (Reply 21):
Where did you hear that? If that is true, sounds like a major mistake to me.

It has been on the rumor mill since Republic first bid for Frontier.

In fact, Frontier has 3 (new) x A320 arriving, in March, April and May - new build - which will have LiveTV installed.

Will there be more E190/E170 at DEN? For sure. Will there be more Airbus at MKE? Frontier/Midwest is opening an Airbus crew base at MKE in April.

Is Republic reviewing their Frontier/Midwest fleet needs for the next ten years? For sure. The CEO was just at Airbus in Toulouse.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3034 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5391 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 13):
I can't help but wonder if previous US management made a mistake in getting the A330 instead of the 777. Until about the mid 1990's US was a loyal Boeing customer and had just about every Boeing type in their fleet up to that point. For some reason, Stephen Wolf decided to place a huge Airbus order even though US had no experience with the AIrbus. This was the same thing Wolf did when he was at United. I believe Wolf left the company before US took delivery of their first A330. If they had been able to secure a Boeing Order at the time instead, which included 777's, they would have easily had an airplane capable of doing Asia. Not only that, but the order also would have included 737 Next Gens, which would have given the company much more flexibility with crews and stuff like that. They would have easily had a fleet that almost looked identical to the Continental fleet.

Now because US has committed themselves to Airbus, Doug Parker and Scott Kirby felt they had to go with Airbus, and now they have to wait for the A350 to come out, if it ever does, while the 787 despite the delays, is going to be ready a lot sooner and would be a much better fit based on specs that I have seen.

Many people and insiders believe that US held Boeing responsible for the crash of flight 427.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 22):
That's a joke, right? Anyhow, a new A332 should be capable of PHL-NRT, the most likely market. It's no more unreasonable than CO flying EWR-HKG on 77E. They are both pushing it, but not totally outside feasibility.

I really don't see why the 332 isnt capable of PHL-NRT, as PHL-NRT is 6775 mi and the range for a 332 fully loaded is 7700 miles.



E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
25 USPIT10L : Wolf did not leave the company before the first delivery of the A330s. They arrived in 1999, he left in early 2002. Wolf bought Airbus because they g
26 OA412 : The A330 is perfectly suited to the US route network. Why in the world would assume that the A350 may never be introduced?
27 PlanesNTrains : I wouldn't have minded seeing a US 763ER, but I doubt that it would happen today. -Dave
28 surfandsnow : Those higher capacity 767s (-300s or even -400s) would be perfect for those high-density treks to the Caribbean and Western Europe during peak period
29 Cubsrule : Yes and no. The 733s and 734s have stuck around, at least in part, because there isn't a good reason to get rid of them. Why not get your commonality
30 Post contains images PlanesNTrains : True, but again I don't know what the original projection was for 737classic retirement. 8 years out would be a much different argument for the 32X t
31 Cubsrule : Not at all - my point isn't that they shouldn't have bought the 32x given the price difference. My point was that it was price, not commonality or pe
32 DeltAirlines : Take a look at Delta using A330-200s on SLC-NRT that need to be weight restricted. Granted, SLC is a bit higher elevation, but PHX is about a 350 mil
33 USAir1 : No that was not a joke. This company is so cheap now they would not start a new route if they knew it would have a regular weight restriction. PHL-PE
34 etops1 : This route will not be a profitable route for USAirways from our hubs . Remember that AA,CO,DL,and UA all have strong hubs to operate these flights fr
35 USAirALB : In my opinion, I believe that someday, an airline will fly from PHL-NRT. Again, as I said before, the 332s are within the range of PHL-NRT. Actually,
36 etops1 : Yes your right ,They are within the range ..But just because they are within range dosen't mean it will be a profitable route out of PHL.
37 Post contains images PlanesNTrains : I understood that, and am not arguing that you said that at all. I agree. I think (thought?) that they were striving to eliminate fleet types as part
38 wn676 : I found an old A332 FCOM from 2004 that gives a few numbers to work with: At 122ºF and 11,400 ft of runway available, takeoff weight would be limite
39 thegman : As they should have because that was a manufacturer defect from Boeing. No they would not but it has happened on CLT-HNL but not often.
40 FutureUScapt : While the A332 has the legs to do PHX-HND, the problem is that the flight would likely need connections on BOTH ends in order to be successful. Witho
41 sancho99504 : So what your implying is that if US had bought all Boeing, they'd be in a better off? The A333 operating on US east coast to Europe has a better CASM
42 NetjetsINTL : With all due respect but that argument does not hold water. Many routes need conections on both ends in order to be succesfull. DTW, PDX, and MSP hav
43 Cubsrule : With the aircraft on property, opening the route in October would not be a problem. You all are addressing two separate questions, I think. At the ti
44 Post contains links and images mandala499 : The 777 would have been overkill, at that time their long haul and potential markets didn't warrant ordering the 777. But then we're talking 772ER...
45 USAir1 : Great analysis mandala499! Thanks for taking the time to look at the actual numbers. Obviously PHX-NRT/HND would be a stretch in a 332. The 350 is pr
46 Post contains images mandala499 : No worries! Glad someone liked the jumble of numbers I put up... and PHL-NRT/HND is longer but whilst it can carry less, you can carry the full pax l
47 Post contains images AirframeAS : Recently? I don't know which rock you have been living under, with all due respect.... but the seats have been the same over the last several years:
48 wn676 : Thanks for going in depth with those numbers. I was assuming 1000 ft pressure altitude and a 3500m runway and converted metric to U.S. just for conve
49 Cubsrule : I'm not sure. The 739 (non-ER), which was not yet launched but probably was available in the sense that US could have ordered them (launch order was
50 apodino : In a company newsletter today, US actually answered this question. They feel that with their current hubs, they don't have sufficient O and D to Tokyo
51 Post contains images mandala499 : The reason why I mentioned the 739ER is that the non-ER 739s are limited to 190 seats only, whereas the 739ERs are limited to 215 seats... hence the
52 thegman : There are not any ex HP 321s. All were brought on after the merger, and not until about 2008.
53 mandala499 : Cheers for that... where did these IAE 321s come from then???? Mandala499
54 wn676 : They were delivered new to US Airways, the first being N507AY in November 2008. The ex-Braniff 320s are equipped with V2500-A1s and they do have a lo
55 Post contains images mandala499 : -A1s??? Performance issues? Tell me about it! There's an operator of 2500-A1 320s here, and yes, it goes beyond performance issues... the engine acce
56 Post contains images FutureUScapt : But DTW and MSP (PDX to a limited degree as well if you count the AS codeshare) already have the added benefit of connections on both ends, so it's h
57 thegman : Yes. Post merger US Airways decided that US-West needed 321s and decided to equip them with the IAE engines for commonality. These birds also have th
58 wn676 : There were five delivered with CFMs, ships 193-197.
59 hjulicher : Being that Detroit/South Eastern Michigan and Japan are heavily manufacturing based, automotive especially, you'd be surprised to learn that O&D
60 Cubsrule : Absolutely. But what else would they be unable to do in the next 6 months? With China, airplanes was a big problem; with Brasil, they got it together
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Didn't Delta Order The 757-300? posted Wed Nov 21 2007 17:24:35 by 1337Delta764
Why Didn't CO Buy The 763 posted Sun Aug 5 2007 05:17:45 by DL767captain
Why Didn't AA Keep The TWA 717s? posted Mon Jan 1 2007 00:14:17 by 1337Delta764
Why Are US Using The 767 To GLA? posted Thu May 25 2006 15:38:06 by Ba757gla
Why Didn't FedEx Buy The 737-900F? posted Sun Jan 8 2006 19:48:52 by OyKIE
Why Didn't AC Keep The 747 Longer? posted Tue Mar 29 2005 07:00:43 by AC787
Why Didn't AA Keep The 717? posted Sat May 15 2004 23:23:41 by Akjetblue
Why Didn't Boeing Lengthen The New 777s posted Sat Mar 13 2004 23:54:39 by Horus
Why Didn't NW Take The 764? posted Wed Jan 21 2004 00:57:27 by ORBITJFK
Why Didn't IAE Build The PW6000? posted Fri Jan 24 2003 10:07:09 by Gigneil