PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 10166 posts, RR: 32
Reply 4, posted (2 years 9 months 8 hours ago) and read 26877 times:
Well, Europeans sit in planes for over a dozen hours just to get to beaches in the Caribbean or South East Asia and other remote places. Why not HNL?
Recently I saw someone mentioning the HNL-ANC-LHR service (or was it LGW) by WA in the 80s I guess which was not very profitable. LTU tried DUS ANC HNL with L15 but only for a few test runs. All did not work. If Europeans want to go there it is a fine combination with California or the Pacific Northwest.
For those who only want to fry at a beach for 3 weeks I never understood in first place why they do that overseas, The Canary Islands are good enough for that. Not mentioning Hawaii.
You tell 'em LY777! Everryone should visit Hawaii at least one in his/her life.
That being said, and having no expertise in the industry, I think a 17 hour non-stop flight from Europe to Hawaii - with today's fuel prices - is unlikely. Even in Y class, HA would have to give a bit more room so its passengers don't succumb to DVT - which would mean fewer seats and even higher costs. It would make a lot more sense for HA - or any other airline marketing Hawaii to Europeans -- to permit a free layover in LA, SFO or SEA or SAN (a lil shout out to my hometown!) and then proceed on to the islands.
So my question is - what is the optimal mission of the 350? How far must HA fly the plane and with what loads to make it most efficient?
sevenheavy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 1164 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (2 years 9 months 7 hours ago) and read 26626 times:
With regards to the flight time, the actual time comes up as more like 13.5 hrs, not 17. The route taken from say LHR to HNL is way up over Greenland, Over northern Canada and almost into Alaska before heading out over the pacific. Winds at those latitudes would likely not change the time of the flight by much in either direction. This was calculated at a cruise speed of M0.82 which should be realistic. CDG, FRA etc. are not much different time wise.
As to whether it would make money, possibly. People are increasingly looking for more than just a beach holiday. There will always be those that will stick to the Caribbean, Spain, Florida etc. but there are plenty who will seek out less accessible destinations and Hawaii has a huge amount to offer.
HNL is not much further than somewhere like Vietnam, which now has direct flights to/from Europe. It's also a reasonably viable alternative as a stop off to AKL, and SYD, and it could be used as a 2 centre with LAX, LAS, SFO etc. all huge markets for Europe.
I don't necessarily think it would work right now, but it's certainly getting there and by the time the A350s turn up I think they could make europe work.
Edit....it seems I may have underestimated the A350s cruise speed, which is actually in line with the A380s M0.85, making LHR-HNL more like 13 hours, not 13.5
What did you use to work that out? I'm interested because It can routinely be done in 15 hours flying time with a stop in somewhere like SFO.....10 hrs to SFO, another 5 to HNL. That's allowing for having to land and take off twice, the extra 450mn flying and more exposure to headwinds on the westbound sector (eastbound you could do it in 13.5 hours flying time WITH a stop in SFO)
I still say that 13-13.5 hours is entirely realistic for LHR-HNL based on the A350's specifications and the likely route taken.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 10166 posts, RR: 32
Reply 13, posted (2 years 9 months 6 hours ago) and read 26286 times:
been to Hawaii a couple of times and I know that there is more than beaches, which I am not too fond of anyhow. The question is, which European gateway they would chose. Connecting to their South Pacific and Australian routes would eventually make that flight viable.
Stop over in HNL is much more exotic than SIN or BKK.
Ben175 From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 747 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 9 months 5 hours ago) and read 26108 times:
I travel to Hawaii every July (from Perth, Australia) and every time I go there I meet more and more Europeans (especially English, French and Italian) tourists. I think a 2 x weekly HNL-LHR service would definitely work if HA snap up a few codeshares LHR-CDG/FCO/MXP to feed the flight.
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8924 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (2 years 9 months 5 hours ago) and read 26100 times:
Hawaiian is probably not the airline fly nonstop from Honolulu to London. They have a "First Class" that is very US domestic in pitch, about 40 inches only. Virgin Atlantic would be the airline to make this market viable, as they have 787-9 coming in a few years. Their Upper Class and Premuim Economy classes are the type of products such a flight should have. VA could do it from their LGW base.
LY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 9 months 5 hours ago) and read 26040 times:
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 15): They have a "First Class" that is very US domestic in pitch, about 40 inches only. Virgin Atlantic would be the airline to make this market viable, as they have 787-9 coming in a few years. Their Upper Class and Premuim Economy classes are the type of products such a flight should have. VA could do it from their LGW base.
I heard someday that Virgin wanted to launch a London-HNL flight. But, once again, they need a few codeshare to London to feed these flights
cargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1287 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (2 years 9 months 5 hours ago) and read 26014 times:
It's hard to see Europeans traveling to Hawaii in large enough numbers to ever really make a direct flight work. HA could no doubt put any aircraft that might be capable of doing this on more profitable, reliable routes to Asia.
There are just too many closer alternatives for Europeans - even Phuket and/or Aruba are closer. Phuket is a long way from, say, London, but it's still much closer than Honolulu.
And for customer who can't afford that or don't want such a long trip, there's always the Mediterranean.
Hawaii is also much more than just the beach, but for tourists in Europe who aren't interested in the beach but are interested in the natural aspects and touring islands, there's also the Azores.
azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4153 posts, RR: 27
Reply 18, posted (2 years 9 months 5 hours ago) and read 25910 times:
I don't think HA even knows the answer to this question. However, I think people that want to go to Hawaii are going for more than just the beaches. There's no other place on earth like Hawaii the full experience cannot truly be replicated by going to some other island. I suspect cost would make this route prohibitive, not distance or demand.
ER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2771 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (2 years 9 months 2 hours ago) and read 25088 times:
I think it's much more likely that they'd code-share with a European carrier and do a plane change at a US West Coast airport they serve (SFO, LAX or SEA for example). For example LH from FRA to SFO, HA SFO/HNL
GRUIAD From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 80 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 9 months 2 hours ago) and read 25087 times:
I think Hawaiian has greater "closer" higher yielding opportunities in Asia. As the China visa situation improves and open skies evolves - look at how many Chinese cities HA could link into HNL - tons of cities with over 1 million people. That is my hunch where HA will grow.
Concordski From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 90 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 9 months 1 hour ago) and read 24503 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 23):
LHR-HNL (6289 nm) is 167 nm further than YVR-AKL where NZ 772 block time westbound is 14 hrs.
MEL-DXB (6283 nm) is almost exactly the same distance as LHR-HNL and EK block time westbound (77W) is also 14 hrs.
ATL-ICN (6215 nm) is 74 nm shorter than LHR-HNL and KE block time westbound (77W) is 14:45.
I would agree with others that 13-13.5 hrs as a published block time (gate to gate) for LHR-HNL is a little too short to be realistic. It would be about right eastbound.
I don't see why the route can't be flown entirely going East. Looking at Great Circle Mapper, I could see them traveling along the northern edge of Norway on the flight to HNL. I'm not familiar with ETOPS regulations in the northern latitudes or diversion airports there. What ETOPS would be required?
: 14hrs block time is a realistic one... I know it may sound unrealistic but I've been "flying" LHR-HNL with a PMDG 747-400 on Flight Simulator X. I wa
: Not sure what you mean. Europe-HNL is westbound and HNL-Europe is Eastbound. The great circle route crosses Greenland and northern Canada before reac
: I think HA could make HNL-LHR and possibly even FRA work. What would help it are connections on the Europe side. I'm positive BA and LH could make the
: That type of operation is very costly, especially in crew utilization. A 1x weekly operation means an entire crew spending a week of the company's mo
: The only European airport I could see a direct Hawaii flight working from would be LGW, maybe twice a week on a B787. It has the O&D to support a
: Europeans coming to Hawaii and Europeans coming to Hawaii nonstop are two different things. Although the Europeans who will travel to Hawaii will like
: I know it's purely anecdotal evidence, but everytime I've been in HNL, I've met a good deal of English folks. I also know a couple who recently moved
: This is where I agree with all of the yield comments. Sure HA or several other carriers could fill a non-stop flight, but at what CASM? When discussin
: This topic sure keeps coming back. One thing one needs to realize is that European tourism to Hawaii is tiny in comparison to other markets. Sure HA c
: Why? European travelers already do that when they choose Asia, South Africa or South America destinations. These are vacation destinations in the sam
: Let's see HA add cities like DEN, DFW, IAH, ORD before we talk about Europe.
: This a kind of chicken and egg situation. If you have a good direct flight (14hrs should not be a problem - I fly 13+hrs on a regular basis in 77E Y-
: I only mentioned FLYING time, not block time. I would agree that 14 hrs BLOCK is about right. Bear in mind that this is not your regular eastound/wes
: Yes, I've noticed that sentiment as well. The majority of Americans prefer to stay inside our borders, so I can see some average Joe assuming that, b
: Not really, as private airlines are not in the business of developing longhaul markets. Look at how HA is watching China. They are waiting for the ti
: The only thing I'd say is that "Europe" is a pretty big place. :- ) They need to pick one city to start with. If London, then that's a market of roug
: This topic surfaces all the time with the same predictable responses. Why would anyone travel so far to go to the beach when ______ is just a 2 hour f
: Hmmm... virtually everyone I know has been to Mexico. Ditto Canada. Many to the Caribbean. I know they aren't exotic, overseas destinations but they
: Our American cousins keep trotting this one out, don't they? POINT 1: Significant numbers of Europeans already do travel similar distances for tropic
: My only memory of Stockholm was a rude waitress. Because of that, I will avoid the whole country.
: Somehow Europeans by the millions tolerate horrid charter conditons mid-long haul that make the domestic US airlines seem downright civilized. if the
: Was this paragraph even necessary? Somebody had to say it. A rude waitress = don't visit Oahu. Oye. Ya, for a minute I thought everyone flew VS on va
: If HA every wanted to fly to Europe, IMO they would have to get a flat bed on those aircraft's for F. The domestic F seats they have now are not going
: But this thread isn't talking about either that demographic or that distance. Firstly, you have to remember that in the UK over 70% of residents have
: Furthermore, Hawaii has an amazing climate all year round: contrary to the Carribeans, there is (almost) no risk of a hurricane: the weather is dry in
: Rubbish loads of Europeans fly package to Thailand and Indonesia and aren't interested in a full service product, they just want to get there as chea
: I'm going London to Hawaii next year - but via Canada so will avoid the "US domestic" experience![Edited 2012-08-31 04:48:59]
: While it's clear that Europeans do travel to Hawaii, they will always be able to get there via the US mainland for much cheaper than what the prices w
: Depends on who you fly. If going by AC, no you will get an older 763 with no proper First from Canada to the Hawaiian Islands which I found to be suf
: I think you have me confused. Australia being in the Asia Pacific region is a much more natural market to Hawaii then Europe would ever be. Also Aust
: In the late eighties CP-AIr and associated tour companies were selling Hawaii via Vancouver in considerable numbers from the UK with flights from Gat
: Remember HA's order is, at least currently, for the A350-800. They need the range for something - where else unless Europe?
: At the time they said they ordered the -800 because its the smallest in capacity. Yes the -800 might have lots of range, but jump to -900 or -1000 was
: They are a valued Airbus customer and the A350 will give both a pax and cargo uplift from ASIA before serving a vanity project into Europe. Its not a
: Just out of interest, I ran a LHR-HNL flight through a planning utility to see how it looks. Handily, once you are past the north of Scotland there ar
: I don't think regular non-stop charters will happen either. In mature markets tour operators have actually been moving to cheap rates now available o