SJC>SFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 12 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3546 times:
Charvette has a point. AA flies fully packed A300s in a domestic configuration (highest density in their fleet) and as I said they are flying down there full. This is definetly very profitable, as well as the fact that they have huge dominance over the route. ALSO though. I think United SFO-IAD service has to be HUGELY profitable. There is little to no competition on the route, as well as many high yield passengers coming out of both sides.
Cch362 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 12 months 2 days ago) and read 3519 times:
Consider the Taipei-Hong Kong route. There are 34 daily flights in each direction, almost all on widebodies (747-400, 777, MD-11, A330/340). Huge profits are likely, as many people are "captive" to flying this route because direct air link between Taiwan and mainland China is forbidden. More flights will begin soon as Dragonair is now permitted to serve this route along with the incumbents China, Cathay and EVA.
TOMASKEMPNER From Mexico, joined May 2001, 389 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (13 years 12 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3483 times:
I think that TPE-HKG is more profitable, but is shorter than NYC-LON.
And besides I´m talking about long haul routes, not domestic as SFO-IAD, or AA´s domestic A300.
The only narrow body flight between NYC-LON is CO´s EWR-STN.
CO uses 764, 777 to LGW
AA uses 4 AB6, 2 777 and 1 763 for their 7 daily flights.
BA uses 6 744 and 2 777 for their 8 daily flights
UA uses 2 777 and 2 763 for their 4 daily flights
VS uses 744 for their 5 daily flights.
AI uses 744
KU uses 777
Besides NYC-LON is one the most used routes by "premium passengers "