Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Plane Size On Transatlantic Flights: US Vs Europe  
User currently offlineNorwegian737 From Norway, joined Mar 2011, 41 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18453 times:

How come many European airlines, in general, use bigger planes on transatlantic flights than many American airlines does? For example, AA, UA, and DL use 757s on routes that European airlines use 747s, 777s, A330/A340s on. Does it has to do with frequency? Or ticket demand for a specific airline?

83 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinedelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1496 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18431 times:

Pardon the generalization but...the US airlines are funneling pax through multiple hubs TATL whereas the European carriers fly out of a single hub.

User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2738 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18332 times:

Quoting delimit (Reply 1):
the European carriers fly out of a single hub.

Not really. IAG flies TATL out of LHR, LGW, MAD and one BCN flight. AF/KL flies out of CDG, ORY and AMS. The LH group flies out of FRA, MUC, DUS, ZRH, VIE, and, soon, one BRU flight.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3196 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18289 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 2):
Not really

Yes really.

BA flies out of LHR
IB flies out of MAD
IAG own both however they are most certainly not one airline. The same goes for AF / KLM and LH / LX / OS.

Hence one main hub per European airline with the exception of LH which has two along-with some secondary long haul from other cities.


User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1362 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18216 times:

The old airline brand vs airline ownership discussion...

What should also be considered is the equipment available. Not many European carriers have 752 in their fleet, thus they cannot use a 752 on TATL routes. If you look at the routes flown by 752 like STR-EWR or TXL-DTW, those routes couldn't sustain service on a bigger plane. After all, US airlines also bring 767, 330, 747, and 777 across the pond. Only in very rare occasions there is a route served by a EU widebody and a US narrowbody at the same time.



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21504 posts, RR: 56
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18176 times:

Quoting delimit (Reply 1):
Pardon the generalization but...the US airlines are funneling pax through multiple hubs TATL whereas the European carriers fly out of a single hub.

That's pretty much it.

Quoting UALWN (Reply 2):
IAG flies TATL out of LHR, LGW, MAD. AF/KL flies out of CDG, ORY and AMS.

There is very little route-duplication between LHR and LGW in the long-haul market. Same for CDG and ORY. And you can't consider BA and IB to be one airline, nor can you consider AF and KL to be one airline.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18148 times:

As others have said, it's a combination of several factors.

First, U.S. airlines serve a vastly larger market than European brands, which tend to be segmented along national identity lines, and thus have a single hub (and at most two U.S.-Europe gateways) whereas the fewest hubs any major U.S. carrier has is three. Thus, funneling traffic through multiple hubs, there is less need to upgauge aircraft size for U.S carriers.

Secondly, U.S. carriers have 757s - which are really the prime aircraft for the thinner U.S.-Europe segment, whereas none of the major European network carriers do (any more). In the case of BA, Air France, KLM, Lufthansa, etc., the smallest that most of them have is a 767 or A330. That gives the U.S. carriers far more flexibility.

Finally, it's a matter of geography and stage length. For the U.S. carriers, virtually all the 757 flying to Europe (with the exception of a few AA flights out of ORD) are to/from hubs in the Northeast U.S. (JFK, EWR, IAD). The reach/range of a 757 from these hubs into Europe gives these hub airlines more flexibility to fly into smaller European markets, whereas most of the smaller, 'thinner' U.S. markets a European carrier would ideally like to use a smaller plane on are far outside the range of where a 757 could go from their respective European hubs. In other words: U.S. carriers put 757s where they couldn't otherwise fill a 767 or larger, and European carriers would do the same except that most of those U.S. markets where they would want to put a 757 are far too far away from LHR/CDG/AMS/FRA.


User currently offlineCX Flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6582 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17973 times:

I think it is a valid question, and despite the vastness of the US market, when you look at a route in isolation, you can still ask the same question. Why for example can an airline like BA fly a 747 on one route where the US-based competiton flies something much smaller?

User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1362 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17965 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 6):
First, U.S. airlines serve a vastly larger market than European brands, which tend to be segmented along national identity lines

Although I agree with most of your post, I don't think this is valid (any more). Most people will fly any airline offering them the best price. I know hardly anybody who would fly LX because he's from Switzerland, or refuse to fly AF because as a "good German" he has to fly Lufthansa.

Furthermore, one has to add that the AA TATL routes fall into the AA/BA/IB cartel, and UA/CO's flights into the Atlantic PlusPlus cartel (w LH/LX/OS/LO/SN). Via those cartels, also European carriers can benefit from the US airlines' flexibility of sending 757 to thinner markets.



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently offlineshufflemoomin From Denmark, joined Jun 2010, 471 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17946 times:

Quoting AustrianZRH (Reply 4):
Only in very rare occasions there is a route served by a EU widebody and a US narrowbody at the same time.

CPH is one example since CO send a 757 while SAS send an A330.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8273 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17926 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

European airline do not use 757 and very 767's. The A330/340, 777, 744 and A380 are 99 % of the airplanes flown to the USA by Euro airlines.

User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11409 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17857 times:

Quoting AustrianZRH (Reply 8):
Although I agree with most of your post, I don't think this is valid (any more). Most people will fly any airline offering them the best price. I know hardly anybody who would fly LX because he's from Switzerland, or refuse to fly AF because as a "good German" he has to fly Lufthansa.

I was not suggesting that European carriers don't draw passengers from various markets/countries beyond/behind their hubs, but merely where the hubs themselves are placed, and how that effects the size of the planes European carriers use. Again - generally European carriers funnel all of their U.S.-bound traffic through a single hub each. As such, that hub can in many cases support larger aircraft on a per-route. You don't see European carriers splitting their traffic over multiple hubs the way AA, Delta, United, etc. do.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5308 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 17733 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 6):
Finally, it's a matter of geography and stage length. For the U.S. carriers, virtually all the 757 flying to Europe (with the exception of a few AA flights out of ORD) are to/from hubs in the Northeast U.S. (JFK, EWR, IAD). The reach/range of a 757 from these hubs into Europe gives these hub airlines more flexibility to fly into smaller European markets, whereas most of the smaller, 'thinner' U.S. markets a European carrier would ideally like to use a smaller plane on are far outside the range of where a 757 could go from their respective European hubs.

   We have a winner! This is the best phrasing of the correct explanation I've seen on this forum.

Western Europe is smaller than the U.S. The effect is that much of Western Europe is within 757 range of a well-placed U.S. hub (like EWR), whereas only a small bit of the U.S. is within 757 range of a well-placed European hub (like LHR). From LHR, BA would be able to fly 757s only to Northeastern markets, whereas from EWR, UA can fly 757s to all of Great Britain and Ireland; all of the Low Countries and the Iberian peninsula; all of Scandiavia; and significant chunks of France and Germany. So it makes a lot more sense for UA to maintain a TATL 757 fleet.

Quoting AustrianZRH (Reply 8):
Most people will fly any airline offering them the best price. I know hardly anybody who would fly LX because he's from Switzerland, or refuse to fly AF because as a "good German" he has to fly Lufthansa.

We've just seen an exception in the head-spinning TATL 757 thread going on right now... a Swiss guy who insists all LX aircraft are new and shiny but all U.S. carrier aircraft are held together by speed tape and prayers.

[Edited 2012-01-09 06:17:38]

User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1362 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 17597 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 11):
I was not suggesting that European carriers don't draw passengers from various markets/countries beyond/behind their hubs, but merely where the hubs themselves are placed, and how that effects the size of the planes European carriers use.

Ah, that makes sense. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 12):
a Swiss guy who insists all LX aircraft are new and shiny but all U.S. carrier aircraft are held together by speed tape and prayers.

There are exceptions everywhere (and from what I got to see that perception of superiority of the own national product is more prevalent in Switzerland than anywhere else in Europe), but they are not the rule (also not in CH  ).



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2738 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16826 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 3):
Yes really.

Sorry, but no.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 3):
IAG own both however they are most certainly not one airline. The same goes for AF / KLM and LH / LX / OS.

To all purposes AF and KL operate as a single airline, as LH and LX do. BA and IB will do in due time.

Quoting Mir (Reply 5):
And you can't consider BA and IB to be one airline, nor can you consider AF and KL to be one airline.

Yes, I can. Why did AF and KL merge otherwise? To operate as two separate airlines? Please.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16704 times:

Several Factors:

Single Hub Carriers with a smaller amount of take-off and landing slots to use
Congested airports in the EU and UK
Higher Population Densities in Europe/UK
Lower Population Densities in the US
US airlines cover much more ground, need more hubs
US Airlines have the luxury of focusing on Frequency
US Airlines have the luxury of operating out of Mega Airports. DFW, for example, has 7 or 8 active runways, LHR has 2? ATL and DFW are the busiest airports in the world, yet most of that is domestic traffic. Only BA, Korean, LH, and QF fly into DFW, the same for ATL I believe minus QF.
While EU/UK airports are structurally just as large, they have many more regulations and space constraints to deal with.

In many instances, Non-US airlines are subsidized or completely owned by their governments. Many routes with EU airlines are subsidized heavily. There are quite a few routes in the US that are subsidized, but more on a national level. I also think this is why you notice quite a big difference in upper level classes of travel between US airlines an non US airlines. (EK comes to mind). I don't think that airline would be what it is today if it wasn't heavily funded by the goverment of the UAE.

I also have a feeling that at the end of this decade, there will be no more 4 engined airliners in the US, unless UA or DL buys the 748 or A380, and it's been discussed to death that they won't.


User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2738 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16675 times:

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 15):
Many routes with EU airlines are subsidized heavily.

Any examples you can provide?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinedelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1496 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16620 times:

Even if you consider AF/KL one airline you're talking 2 points to funnel passangers versus, say DL, who flies TATL from from 4 hubs an an additional 4 cities.

IAG from 2 hubs and 2 cities, UA from, what 4 or 5 hubs as well as 2 or 3 more cities.

The European aiines and the US airlines are structurally different.


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16502 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 3):
Hence one main hub per European airline with the exception of LH which has two along-with some secondary long haul from other cities

SK

Quoting commavia (Reply 6):
Secondly, U.S. carriers have 757s - which are really the prime aircraft for the thinner U.S.-Europe segment

TATL 757 is a fairly recent occurrence and there was a thread a little while ago stating 767 is still the most frequent model.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 15):
There are quite a few routes in the US that are subsidized, but more on a national level. I also think this is why you notice quite a big difference in upper level classes of travel between US airlines an non US airlines. (EK comes to mind)

You may want to stay away from EK. They are "subsidizing" the government.


User currently offlinencflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 476 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 16484 times:

Seems to me the push to fly 757's overseas really began by CO, they are a very well run airline (or at least they were-- who knows about the future) and to their credit they figured out that 757's could really hum on long haul flights. I'd have to assume the business they are giving up on are the low yield passengers who are the last to squeeze on. So maybe this thread is really about 1 carrier. . . . .

User currently offlinecomair25 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 216 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 16418 times:

Look at the size difference between the US and all of Europe. So many big cities that need to be served. US airlines seem to have come to the realization, that frequency is more important than capacity on one flight. If Europe was all one country it would work the same way obviously. For example, I don't think the country of Germany would say let BA set up a major hub at one of its airports.

[Edited 2012-01-09 16:37:55]

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24796 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 16737 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 14):
Quoting skipness1E (Reply 3):
IAG own both however they are most certainly not one airline. The same goes for AF / KLM and LH / LX / OS.

To all purposes AF and KL operate as a single airline, as LH and LX do.

I disagree. Have you ever flown those carriers? Many aspects of their operations and service is quite different. LH and LX have completely separate managements. They certainly coordinate various aspects of their network planning and scheduling etc., but in terms of day-to-day operations they are totally separate, as are AF and KL.


User currently offlinedelimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1496 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 16699 times:

Off the top of my head...DL flies a couple I believe. PIT - CDG (if they haven't killed it yet) and Portland - NRT.

User currently offline1stfl94 From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 16587 times:

There are two big reasons for this
1) Congestion at the main European hubs. The European majors are putting all their transatlantic through 1 or 2 hubs at most of which have little room for expansion compared to the US carriers who are much split across their networks and generally are operating from larger and more flexible airports.
2) Geographically the EU carriers are at a disadvantage because they can only realistically reach the US Northeast and some of the Eastern seaboard with a 757. Therefore the cost of keeping a separate and less flexible fleet outweighs the advantage of the smaller aircraft.


User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2738 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 15095 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 25):
Have you ever flown those carriers?

All the time. Have you?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 25):
LH and LX have completely separate managements.

Yeah, I guess that's why the former LX's CEO is now LH's CEO.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 25):
They certainly coordinate various aspects of their network planning and scheduling etc.

They coordinate everything. For instance, LH buys the planes for LX, or actually just shuffles planes around the group. How much "closer" can you get?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 25):
in terms of day-to-day operations they are totally separate

They are as separated as, say, Ted was from United., or Song from Delta. Did anybody consider Ted or Song as separate airlines?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
25 Viscount724 : As far as I know, LX doesn't operate any aircraft that were previously operated by LH, and vice versa.[Edited 2012-01-09 19:08:36]
26 VV701 : Of course "fairly recent" is not a precise term. But BA were operating 752s on the thin and ultimately unsustainable - at least for them - routes bet
27 Viscount724 : I believe the only scheduled service with 757s on transatlantic routes before BA was Icelandair and that was of course via KEF, not nonstop. There ma
28 SSTsomeday : Plus American airlines compete with each other at lot of those American gateways, whereas comparatively speaking on the European side AF has little l
29 Mir : Well, they do operate as two separate airlines. If you're flying through CDG, you're on AF (unless you're going to AMS). And if you're flying through
30 KaiGywer : And less than the DL A333, which seats 298 (yes, I know they don't fly it to LHR at this time, but they used to)
31 FlyASAGuy2005 : PDX-NRT is always scheduled on a 763 and i've seen an occasional 330 but very rare. The 75Es/As are all out of JFK to Europe and ATL-South America. T
32 UALWN : I'll give you just one example: HB-IQR, an A332, was operated by LH from 2002 to 2006, then by LX from 2006 to 2009, with a short interlude in 2008 i
33 Mir : Out of the same airports (unlike AF and KL). There was no Song headquarters (AF and KL have their own). Song did not have its own CEO (AF and KL do,
34 Burkhard : Another thing to add is that time in average is more costly to Americans than Europeans, frequency and low trip times have a larger impact on decision
35 vegas005 : Actually I am a US guy married to a German and my point was the US Airlines due to many reasons have not modernized nor maintained their fleets as we
36 UALWN : No, sir. I don't want you to admit you're wrong (though I think you are). I complained when you wrote that you had already admitted that you were wro
37 Post contains images cmf : How do you reach this conclusion? In my opinion there is very little difference but if pushed I would state the opposite.
38 skipness1E : Transatlantic B757s started in 1989. One of the first was Air 2000 which operated from the UK to BGR-MCO. 1990 saw Odyssey and Canada 3000 flying the
39 FlyASAGuy2005 : Oh brother. Umm, no. Operated separately as a brand but for all legal purposes, SONG was DL in different paint. On every single a/c, it said, "Operat
40 UALWN : But I don't care about the legal issues. AF and KL are two separate airlines only because of the bilateral agreements signed separately by France and
41 rheinwaldner : True, US airlines operate from multiple hubs. But there is only a rather small number of airlines and as far as this has an impact on aircraft size i
42 cipango : BA LHR-BWI is heavily subsidized by the Government of Maryland AFAIK.
43 UALWN : Yep, we went through this in a series of posts that were, unfortunately, removed by the moderators. This is the only example the poster could find, a
44 FlyASAGuy2005 : Right...but they're separate companies.. you didn't say that before. So which is it. didn't they know before the "merger" that they would have to ope
45 UALWN : Which for all purposes operate as one,,, No, and they do not operate separately. Again, otherwise, what would have been the point of the mergers arou
46 airportugal310 : My question here is if they operate with two different boards of directors. If so, they I would consider them two different companies. If with one, t
47 Viscount724 : Sounds like BA had the first scheduled service with the 757 on nonstop transatlantic routes (not counting Icelandair to/from KEF). All the other carr
48 Mir : To make more money by having control over other airlines. Doesn't change the fact that they're still other airlines. Unless you'd also say that AF an
49 Post contains images FlyASAGuy2005 : Okay, you can keep saying that if you want. I just turned my button on so...you can have at it
50 dank : I disagree. US airlines bought a lot of 757s for transcons and similar. Once they didn't need them in those roles, they deployed them on transatlanti
51 avek00 : I'm surprised (OK, not really) there's been little mention of the #1 reason for the difference in plane size between US and European carriers -- COSTS
52 Norwegian737 : How does this make sense? If this is the case, why doesn't the American airlines do the same thing? I agree with this! Even if many of the US airline
53 david_itl : Both AA and CO had 757 ops into MAN in 1995.
54 Centre : For the brand and service they have, that's all what they can fill !!! a 757 is even a stretch for some US operators.
55 rheinwaldner : If the competing offering is not cheaper, there are not many other factors to explain a larger market share than quality IMO. So a larger market shar
56 VV701 : Where did they operate from? I've checked my April 1995 ABC World Airways Guide. I can find only four direct flights between MAN and the USA: MAN-ATL
57 TomB : The Wall Street Journal had a front page article today. It said that due to increased headwinds this winter, Continental Airlines (United) has had a n
58 yeogeo : Well, the facts may one factor. However, I admit I don't have the complete picture, do you? Given that you don't provide any data to back up your ass
59 Post contains links david_itl : CO launch EWR-MAN on19th July 1995 (alternated N12114 in "international" config and another 757 until N14115 was also in "international" config) This
60 VV701 : Thanks. So that still appears to leave BA as the trail blazer with scheduled TATL 752 flights with their start up date of 5 January 1995 for flights
61 airindia787 : EU carriers use larger aircraft than US carriers because they have no other aircraft capable of TATL flights. For example AF has nothing smaller than
62 cmf : The big question is why don't they have them? Boeing certainly sold plenty to Europe. I would suggest it is more about purposely selecting other mode
63 AustrianZRH : Not really (at least not 757s to network carriers - the majority of 757 to Europe were sold to charter carriers). The 757-200 was designed as an airc
64 cmf : I would suggest it is more about purposely selecting other models. Since US carriers mostly moved 757 from domestic to TATL I'd suggest it is more abo
65 yeogeo : Mostly? That would be a surprise to me. Can you defend that statement? yeo
66 cmf : I'll just use AustrianZRH's statement.
67 Post contains links AustrianZRH : According to this thread: 757 Transatlantic History (by anyong Jul 20 2011 in Civil Aviation) the 757 transatlantic market emerged in the mid-90s. Ab
68 VV701 : Here it is worth remembering who the launch customers were for the 752. In August 1978 BA committed to purchase 19 frames and EA committed to 21. On
69 Post contains images lexer : Domestic state subsidies to airlines to maintain services on thin routes do occur, and are fundamentally similar. Good work! (even if you could be ch
70 Post contains images yeogeo : But how does any of that that tell us how many 757's of U.S reg sched operators (UA, US, AA, DL, CO, G4) are now used in TATL service? CMF's statemen
71 AustrianZRH : My point was not that the 757 are now mostly used on TATL routes, but that those which are used TATL weren't specifically bought for the TATL role bu
72 cmf : Since you're nitpicking on an nonessential part just remove domestic and accept they were moved to TATL, in numbers, late in their service life.
73 seabosdca : We know the current answers to this (757-200s only listed). US: 15 TATL/24 total UA: 41 TATL/134 total DL: 26 TATL/155 total AA: 18 TATL/120 total In
74 AirbusA6 : On a classic point to point route like LHR-JFK, BA operates a high frequency service of 744s, filled with C and F, whereas the US airlines have less f
75 Post contains images yeogeo : Thanks, seabosdca, for taking the time to supply some actual numbers! Its a subject often discussed on A-net in one form or other, but I've never act
76 avek00 : 1. European legacies typically have significantly higher costs than their peers elsewhere in the world (and especially compared to legacies in North
77 pnwtraveler : This discussion happens over and over and over and over again. Non North American posters don't understand the convenience factor that is extremely h
78 cmf : The convenience you talk about does not exist in reality, see below. Not even close. There is no difference. Rightsizing is always a requirement. You
79 pnwtraveler : London and Frankfurt were the examples I used. I could have used CDG from YUL on AC. The other European centres don't have enough volume to warrant d
80 cmf : Actually, London and Frankfurt is the extension of the TATL network outside of Toronto and Montreal. So you now agree the convenience you claimed ear
81 pnwtraveler : Aboslutely not. You are either misunderstanding what I am saying, nit picking, or I am not presenting it clearly enough. Of course no one expects a d
82 dfambro : Thanks for doing the work for ORD! I haven't done work for BOS, but here it's pretty clear that EU-based carrier seats far out number US-based carrie
83 Post contains images yeogeo : No problem! I had some time on my hands that day I started the task pretty certain the EU carriers would come out ahead in seats, actually, so you ne
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...
Questions Re US Vs Europe/Asian Business Class posted Sun Mar 11 2007 18:47:06 by Ansett767
Airport Terminal Designs US Vs Europe posted Thu Jun 10 2004 19:44:36 by Bruce
737 On Transatlantic Flights? posted Sat May 8 2004 14:00:56 by Zweed
9/11 Fees On Transatlantic Flights....WTF? posted Wed Jan 1 2003 16:56:42 by Bapilot2b
Delta M11 Replacement On Transatlantic Flights posted Fri Nov 8 2002 14:23:31 by Panamair
US Vs. Europe posted Tue Jun 4 2002 23:54:46 by Sk945
Delta MD-11s On Transatlantic Flights. posted Fri Jan 4 2002 01:08:58 by Airplanetire
How Is TWA On Transatlantic Flights? posted Sun Nov 5 2000 00:01:31 by Aer777
US To Europe Flights Arriving Very Early posted Wed Jan 4 2012 08:13:05 by TWA1985
Whats Going On With These US Flights? posted Thu Dec 18 2008 13:42:34 by Clrd4t8koff