Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CO Mike Kept Separate, Then Comes UA & No More  
User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3122 posts, RR: 5
Posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 12236 times:

I know CO Mike was a separate carrier of sorts from CO, it keep 'em flying when CO went BK years ago, why doesn't the new UA keep that going? I'm sure there is more than I know, any thoughts welcome. Seems CO has owned this priceless piece of aviation for many years, has chased competitors away (Air Marshall Islands) and done well reinforcing GUM. Think they (UA) will not only keep, but grow this section of their route network? Would IAH-AKL be a start of that? Would love to see UA planes dotting island nations in the Pacific for years to come, keeping HNL-NAN-GUM and doing more with 1-2 times weekly RAR service and stuff like that. All info and thoughts welcomed. Thanx.


AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejackhi From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 38 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11800 times:

Continental Micronesia was fully integrated into CO over a decade ago, although it has been treated as a division. It has quite a monopoly in GUM, but has always treated the community well. Although a small island and population, the military presence accounts for considerable traffic. Trying to get a seat on the HNL-GUM can often be a trying experience. I'm confident UA will treat this market as unique, much as CO has for decades and will do well.

User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3122 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11739 times:

I flew Air Mike once SFO-HNL on a DC10-30, one of the first planes with the globe livery. Great service, seemed like an intl flight, even fully packed. Good times, pulled next to a CO 727-200 when we landed in HNL.


AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1705 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11623 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

UA is increasing capacity in this market with the HNL to GUM going over to a 777 (perhaps a 777A?). Packed flights and little competition=CASH  

User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2584 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11569 times:

UA has been the largest Hawaiian legacy for years - CO and it's Pacific service can only improve their chance to increase presence. Maybe a dream, but here goes. First, I'm assuming HNL-SYD/AKL is too low yield and UA connections are better made at mainland hubs. Love it if it worked.

There are several markets within 738 range of HNL that could be added with the merged carrier. RAR, PPG, PPT could be added along with existing NAN. The question is traffic and yield and weight restrictions.

If UA wanted to, it could take on HA and AS by adding some West Coast markets to feed GUM and maybe other markets. HA and AS do fine to Hawaii, UA could go after a somewhat different market of FF and limited connections. A connection bank would support the current and potential services to potentially turn a profit on new markets. I posted on another thread, I'd like to see 738 service to HNL from SAN, SEA, PDX, YVR. Three of those aircraft could extend to the KOA, OGG and LIH and make the return trip providing cross connections at HNL

The potential hub could connect roundtrip once per day midday west and late evening east
GUM, LIH, OGG, KOA connect at HNL to/from SAN, LAX, SNA, SFO, SEA, PDX, SEA, VYR, ORD, DEN, IAH, EWR between to each other and to/from GUM. I'd put 777s on the LAX/SFO-HNL flights that connected to the bank and place 753 aircraft on other frequencies in those markets to redeploy those 763ERs internationally.

Adding markets like RAR, PPG, PPT and NAN would not make round trip connections to the mainland, but could operate out of the westbound bank, and return to feed the morning HNL-LAX/SFO aircraft, which serve the biggest markets.

[Edited 2011-08-01 10:03:14]

User currently offlinegoldenjet707 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 11493 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Thread starter):

NAN is going away this fall unfortunately!!! Yields were too low. This was announced this spring.


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3122 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 11247 times:

Too bad about NAN, I suppose it will be time that tells if UA ever is the big gorilla in the Pacific, I think they have a good amount of experience with CO's past in Polynesia and UA's legacy experience flying to the islands. Surely the 777 upgauge HNL-GUM shows a good commitment. I love the idea of using HNL & GUM as beginning and ends of multiple nation destinations, thus allowing local traffic on all segs. Connections via HNL to US mainland, Canada, Central & South America, Europe and Africa. And GUM making the Asian connections.


AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
User currently offlineUSAirALB From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 3037 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 11059 times:

I have a question, sort of off topic, but whatever. Will Air Mike 737s get DirectTV?


E135/E140/E145/E70/E75/E90/CR2/CR7/CR9/717/732/733/734/735/73G/738/739/752/753/762/772/319/320/321/333
User currently offlineaznmadsci From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 3658 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 9565 times:

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 7):
Will Air Mike 737s get DirectTV?

LiveTV planes could be routed through, but would not be able to get signal beoynd the US continent border. They could show the CO channel movies on them once beyond.



The journey of life is not based on the accomplishments, but the experience.
User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2071 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 8324 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 3):
UA is increasing capacity in this market with the HNL to GUM going over to a 777 (perhaps a 777A?). Packed flights and little competition=CASH

They have a near monopoly because the former U.S. Trust Territories are tiny and poor. They are very dependent on air service which helps but Guam has a population around 170,000 and most of the rest of the island groups have a population of 100,000 or less. Few will try to muscle in on that. HNL-GUM can only fill the 772 because of the passengers aggregated at GUM.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 10, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7970 times:

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 7):
Will Air Mike 737s get DirectTV?

Doesn't matter - Guam is outside the Direct TV satellite coverage area.


User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2571 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days ago) and read 7703 times:

I read somewhere in these forums that under the U.S. - China bilateral, GUM gets open skies.
While it's a detour for U.S.-China routes, UA could try B737 service from GUM to a couple of cities in south China and perhaps PVG.
With that in mind, probably now an EWR/ORD-ANC-GUM flight a couple of times per week may be feasible.
The former CO Mike has potential under UA. UA just need to study which routes would be better served via GUM hub and probably take advantage of now "UA Mike" impressive presence in Japan.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlinephxmkeflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 291 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 12 months 2 days ago) and read 7703 times:

Has there ever been a LAX-GUM nonstop? I think a n/s a few times a week could potentially work, no? Especially with UA/CO feed into LAX.

User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3122 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6775 times:

I know BN used to fly n/s LAX-GUM on 747sp aircraft, I know CO has never flown to GUM n/s from the west coast. But I do think UA could fly to GUM from SFO a few days a week rotating through NRT. I do think UA is poised to make the Pacific a big profitable part of their system, let the GUM and HNL stations be their crossroads. I love these well thought out answers you guys have given. I am obviously not the only one who sees the real potential for what I'm saying. Folks who live out on these islands are well used to infrequent, high priced travel, if UA adds a real level of reliability by a big carrier, they could fully capture a large and profitable market of pax and of course cargo operations.


AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
User currently offlinejackhi From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 38 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6636 times:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 13):
But I do think UA could fly to GUM from SFO a few days a week rotating through NRT. I do think UA is poised to make the Pacific a big profitable part of their system, let the GUM and HNL stations be their crossroads.

If I remember the numbers correctly, when consulting with Air Mike the demand, both military and public was much greater for SFO/GUM than it was for LAX/GUM. It was possible then ('90's) a few days a week, but CO felt they already had a captive market and there was no need to dilute revenues by taking away demand on the HNL sector. SFO should work quite well now with enough demand to profitably the market two to three times a week, while continuing to maintain high load factors and yields on the HNL/GUM segment.


User currently offlineThePalauan From Guam, joined Oct 2006, 264 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6579 times:

Air Mike had it's operating certificate surrendered back to the FAA on December 23, 2010. Since then, all flights have been operated under mainline CO standards and not subsidiary CS.

Quoting goldenjet707 (Reply 5):
NAN is going away this fall unfortunately!!! Yields were too low. This was announced this spring.

I think the idea was to pick up Japanese traffic after FJ abandoned the route. Most flights left with less than 50 people although the summer season has brought it up near the 100 mark. Sadly, I don't believe the flight has left with more than 100 passengers ever. GUM-NAN is operated by a 737-700 every Mon/Fri while HNL-NAN is operated only on FRI by a 737-800 rotating from GUM-MAJ-HNL. Don't know the HNL-NAN loads, though...

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 3):
UA is increasing capacity in this market with the HNL to GUM going over to a 777 (perhaps a 777A?). Packed flights and little competition=CASH

The flight is indeed changing gauges to a 777A with 348 seats. While more seats and E+ are good benefits, the sad part is the downgrade of the front cabin from BFirst to UA domestic first and the lack of PTVs in economy. Also, what is uncertain is whether or not there will be free meals or the buy-on-board program. Currently, GUM remains the only part of the system still serving free meals at meal time in both cabins. Currently, on short segments like GUM-YAP, GUM-ROR, GUM-TKK, and KSA-KWA (island hopper segments) you get a sandwich, fruits, and a dessert snack (cookies, usually) at no charge (all other flights are above 2 hours and automatically receive meals). Some of the smaller airports don't even have food vendors beyond security (much less even at the airport!) and so the free food is welcomed by most folks.

Quoting aznmadsci (Reply 8):
LiveTV planes could be routed through, but would not be able to get signal beoynd the US continent border.

I believe mainland CO 737s cannot rotate into Micronesia on a substitute basis due to their lacking of open-water survival gear. All CS 737s have additional life raft storages above the aisle near the 2 main exit groups, if I'm not mistaken.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 11):
I read somewhere in these forums that under the U.S. - China bilateral, GUM gets open skies.
While it's a detour for U.S.-China routes, UA could try B737 service from GUM to a couple of cities in south China and perhaps PVG.

U.S. Congress needs to resolve the visa waiver issue. PVG and PEK are obvious candidates and charter bookings were strong. It's being explored as a reliever market for tourism ailment following the downturn in Japanese traffic.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 11):
With that in mind, probably now an EWR/ORD-ANC-GUM flight a couple of times per week may be feasible.

Even if ANC were just a fuel stop, there really isn't that kind of traffic to justify a nonstop. Hence NRT is an alternative routing to HNL.

Quoting phxmkeflyer (Reply 12):
Has there ever been a LAX-GUM nonstop? I think a n/s a few times a week could potentially work, no? Especially with UA/CO feed into LAX.

LAX-GUM was on Braniff way back before I existed. It wasn't popular then but today, this could be a reasonable route once or twice a week. It's a potential 787 route. If UA catches on, they could even try LAX/SFO-GUM-MNL and try to take traffic from PR. Currently, the main runway 6L/24R is undergoing extensions to even make such nonstops possible without weight restrictions.



You can take the boy out of the island, but not the island out of the boy!
User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2584 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6111 times:

Regarding LAX or SFO to GUM, I would think that with SFO being a larger hub, that it would make more sense. If SFO-GUM or LAX-GUM were added, it could be a one-stop from EWR, which currently doesn't connect westbound at HNL. ANC would not work as the only advantage would be less mileage, but sacrificing tons of passengers at LAX or SFO.

Quoting ThePalauan (Reply 15):
I believe mainland CO 737s cannot rotate into Micronesia on a substitute basis due to their lacking of open-water survival gear. All CS 737s have additional life raft storages above the aisle near the 2 main exit groups, if I'm not mistaken.

Do you know the regulations on why the extra overwater gear is needed. Mainland -Hawaii flights do not carry this gear to my knowledge. Would added service from HNL to places like RAR, PPT need this type of gear?

Quoting ThePalauan (Reply 15):
The flight is indeed changing gauges to a 777A with 348 seats. While more seats and E+ are good benefits, the sad part is the downgrade of the front cabin from BFirst to UA domestic first and the lack of PTVs in economy.

While BF would change to Domestic First, note that Flat beds has not been installed on the 764ERs and that the front cabin will go from 20 to 36 seats.
Regarding West Coast-GUM nonstops, the 5050-5300nm flights would most likely need to be 772ERs or 787s. The 762 may have a shot at it, but the CASM cost it too high and the 763ER would probably be pushing it on that leg, especially westbound. My guess is a 787 after the HNL-GUM market matures with the 772 and after probably more lucrative 787 routes are added as 787s are delivered.


User currently offlineThe777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6500 posts, RR: 55
Reply 17, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5846 times:

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 16):
Quoting ThePalauan (Reply 15):
I believe mainland CO 737s cannot rotate into Micronesia on a substitute basis due to their lacking of open-water survival gear. All CS 737s have additional life raft storages above the aisle near the 2 main exit groups, if I'm not mistaken.

Do you know the regulations on why the extra overwater gear is needed. Mainland -Hawaii flights do not carry this gear to my knowledge. Would added service from HNL to places like RAR, PPT need this type of gear?

UA ETOPS aircraft do have "open water survival grear" like life rafts; that's why they are designated ETOPS aircaft. I think there are about 16 PMUA ETOPS 752s and only those can fly ETOPS flights to Hawaii. I'm sure this is a FAA requiement for ETOPS flights and that it would be required for flights to PPT, RAR etc.

The777Man



Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....CI, MU, LX and LH 777s
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5801 times:

Quoting ThePalauan (Reply 15):

U.S. Congress needs to resolve the visa waiver issue. PVG and PEK are obvious candidates and charter bookings were strong. It's being explored as a reliever market for tourism ailment following the downturn in Japanese traffic.

This is not likely to happen anytime soon. China has some stringent VIsa requirements to enter their country and the US is not going to enter into a Visa Waiver agreement with a country that won't reciprocate. Not to mention the fact that China is still ruled by the Communist Party and thus the US has to be careful with letting in just anyone from China for that reason.


Just wondering. Continental had a MX hanger in HNL pre merger. Could UA use this for some of their own MX work?


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3122 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5145 times:

If what I've bern discussing here were to unfold UA would want and need MX in HNL. A long way to ferry a plane elsewhere if needed in the Pacific. I think UA sits poised on a potential cargo and pax goldmine with GUM & HNL


AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
User currently offlineThePalauan From Guam, joined Oct 2006, 264 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4852 times:

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 16):
Do you know the regulations on why the extra overwater gear is needed. Mainland -Hawaii flights do not carry this gear to my knowledge. Would added service from HNL to places like RAR, PPT need this type of gear?

I'm not sure about specifics but I've heard that part of it is due to some of the outer islands not being capable of conducting a recover/rescue operation in the event of a water landing. The Coast Guard plays a major role in recovering missing vessels in Micronesia and some searches can take a long time to conduct before anyone or anything is found because of the vast open Pacific.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 19):
If what I've bern discussing here were to unfold UA would want and need MX in HNL.
Quoting apodino (Reply 18):
Just wondering. Continental had a MX hanger in HNL pre merger. Could UA use this for some of their own MX work?


My understanding is that it's staying for the new UA. It was mainly for the CO/CS 767s but I think they've also included 737s since they have more of them rotating in and out.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 19):
I think UA sits poised on a potential cargo and pax goldmine with GUM & HNL

You bet. There's plenty of goods flowing in from Asia and mail/freight flowing back and forth between the islands. Rumors say that A319s/A320s and even the return of the 757 are considered especially with all the cross-fleeting going on and that could tap into potential and help bolster existing markets. We'll see down the road... So far, NAN and the 767s are leaving us while OKA and the 777A are in. Plus, this Thursday, we'll have new flight numbers on most of our flights (CS/CO 890-999 now goes to 071-199 range because of the existing UA flight numbers in that range). Things are changing out here in GUM...



You can take the boy out of the island, but not the island out of the boy!
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24857 posts, RR: 46
Reply 21, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4839 times:

Guys, don't get to excited about a West Coast-Guam flight. The market is not as big as people think.

Total pure O&D demand between the Guam and the US is only about 166 daily o/w passengers. Military makes up 20-25% of the demand.
Air Mike's HNL-GUM services today rely on connections beyond GUM to work and to now support the upgauge to the UA 777.

So adding a nonstop to the West Coast would really flood the market with capacity, and rob the HNL-GUM of most of its traffic. In essence West Coast - Guam is truly a "long thin route"

(as a point of reference for size - GUM-Japan demand is over 2,400 passengers daily!)

Quoting jackhi (Reply 14):
both military and public was much greater for SFO/GUM than it was for LAX/GUM.

Might have been back in the day, but current O&D is skewed to LAX.

Maybe the closure of NAS Alameda in the 90s might be part of it ??

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 19):
If what I've bern discussing here were to unfold UA would want and need MX in HNL

UA already has maintenance in HNL, and now with the merger gets a hangar courtesy of CO.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (2 years 12 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4085 times:

Lets just be clear that Air Mike and its routes are alive - and the only thing that went away is the operating certificate.

The blended operating certificate is superior to the three standalone ones in terms of authorizations and technology certifications, and that makes it easier to operate it.

This was just the right time to do it, you know?

NS


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3122 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (2 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 3649 times:

The travel beyond the GUM hub is exactly why I think a n/s from SFO a few days a week is not as far in the future as one may think. What I'm hoping happens is GUM becomes a bigger Asia hub with 738's into lots of secondary destinations and 777 or 787's into bigger cities as well as routes to the mainland. It would be the icing on the cake running more 738's from HNL via a myriad of island nations ie... NAN, PPG, RAR onto GUM taking control of lost pacific air services and stabilize currently weak routes by weak carriers making UA the formidable presence throughout the vast pacific region.


AA-AC-AQ-AS-BN-BD-CO-CS-DL-EA-EZ-HA-HP-KL-KN-MP-MW-NK-NW-OO-OZ-PA-PS-QX-RC-RH-RW-SA-TG-TW-UA-US-VS-WA-WC-WN
User currently onlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8544 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (2 years 12 months 17 hours ago) and read 3621 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 23):
running more 738's from HNL via a myriad of island nations ie... NAN, PPG, RAR onto GUM

I am very skeptical of the ability of a 738 to operate RAR-GUM (or even PPG-GUM for that matter) . These are pretty long sectors (RAR-GUM approx 3870 nm , PPG-GUM around 3120) , both beyond the -800's according to Boeings own figures',

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737family/pf/pf_800tech.html

even before you look at other factors such as the need for alternates, seasonal winds etc.

I am also skeptical at where the pax would come from for these services, if they can't fill GUM-NAN I really don't see them filling GUM-RAR vv.



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
25 carpethead : CO might have a monopoly on the inter-island stuff from Guam, but hardly a monopoly when flying to anywhere in Asia. JL is just a shadow of what used
26 RWA380 : What if EWR, IAD, ORD, IAH, DEN, SFO had connection, direct or limited non- stop service to GUM & HNL making connections to Islands, Australia, de
27 CALPSAFltSkeds : Maybe he was seeing service to those airports from HNL, which are doable and could connect to the mainland at HNL. The only GUM route that works is G
28 Flyingsottsman : So will Cairns see UA from GUM?
29 TOMMY767 : If I'm not mistaken, UA flight #1 will soon route ORD-HNL-GUM so there's you're one stop option for ya.
30 dutchflyboi : Since Continental / Air Mike flies there now, you will see it becoming UA. Service is on a 737-700
31 Loran : What do you believe will happen to the Island Hopper? Will it remain as it is today? I heard CO has removed one stop on a few flights per week. Thanks
32 kiwiandrew : Maybe, but what he said was : which suggests to me that he was thinking of HNL-NAN/PPG/RAR-GUM.
33 RWA380 : I was thinking exactly that with arrival times in GUM, that those who boarded in say NAN or PPG could connect tp Japan and all over Asia. While those
34 COSPN : its UA 200/201 ORD-HNL-GUM 777-200 Hawaii Version Starts Oct 31st
35 gigneil : I will be surprised greatly if nonstop SFO-GUM isnt launched after a decent fleet of 787s arrive. I also wonder just how profitable the destinations b
36 CALPSAFltSkeds : Unless it's cancelled. SFO-GUM would make sense with the 787. The route would probably be flown about noon west, arriving at 1800. I would turn the a
37 gigneil : With 22 hours, I'd bet it could do Paris. It could also just do Newark twice. Or go GUM-SFO-EWR-LHR-and so on. NS
38 CALPSAFltSkeds : You can't even do SFO-LHR in 22 hours with turn time. Sure, domestic flights could work, maybe with the aircraft extending to a maintenance hub with
39 ThePalauan : For now, the Island Hopper remains. It's a vital route for the people of the Marshalls and FSM which links them to U.S. points at both ends. Also, th
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...
No More BD A320s On The ABZ Run Then? posted Sat Oct 4 2008 10:37:12 by Glom
No More E+ On UA (for *G/S And Full Fare Pax) posted Wed Sep 13 2006 19:57:12 by ManchesterMAN
UA Channel 9 ATC: No More On 737s? posted Sun May 8 2005 04:31:20 by ATLhomeCMH
No More CO Jobs In LOS? posted Wed Apr 6 2005 01:53:26 by Cory6188
Upgrading On CO: No More Reward Seats! +more posted Wed Mar 2 2005 20:06:10 by Geoffm
No More Domestic UA 747 Flights posted Tue Jan 11 2005 15:33:11 by UnitedTristar
NO More UA-DELTA Miles?!? posted Wed Mar 17 2004 03:58:07 by UA777222
No More EWR-HKG For CO posted Thu May 1 2003 03:53:42 by CB777
No More CO Mainline @ GSO posted Fri Oct 11 2002 16:15:49 by Bhmal
No More SFO-YYZ On UA posted Tue Dec 11 2001 11:33:05 by SFOintern