Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?  
User currently offlineB764 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 753 posts, RR: 1
Posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1844 times:

Could it be seasonal?

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineThe Coachman From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1428 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1838 times:

I suspect there might be a range problem?

Also, there is no point because it's a low-yield route, better to stick to Europe where yields are much higher.



M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
User currently offlineHA_DC9 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 653 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1827 times:

It is probably a low-yield route. Also, many travelers who fly into HNL from the continental US fly using their FF miles instead of paying a full fare ticket. Finally, hasn't US always focused it's business and strength on the East Coast? The market may be pretty swamped for US to start flying into HNL. It is already served heavily by UA, HA, AA, CO, DL, AQ, NW and ATA plus the numerous charter airlines.

User currently offlineAq737 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 612 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1795 times:

With their current condition, if it ever happens, it would be a 762, weight-restricted or having a stop at SEA, LAX, SFO... I doubt that US will op to HNL because their current west coast ops aren't very good either. A 333 is not goof for HNL because it is too big for their routes. An airline makes about the same $$ operating a 757 and a 767 on the same LAX-HNL. You just need to say if you want to accomadate FF travellers. Maybe US could op 757s PHL-LAX-HNL or PHL-SFO-HNL, but are their 757s ETOPS certified?

Aq737


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1787 times:

How weight restricted would a 762ER have to be? Its only 4275 nmi from PHL, 4042 from PIT, and 4065 from CLT. Not that far.

The A333 would have no range issues.



N


User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1773 times:

The 762ER has the longest range out of the entire 767 family and can EASILY fly to Hawaii from the East Coast.

The 762ER can fly approximately 500nm farther than the A333 can.

Gigneil,

Those distant numbers you got there are for the great circle route which is always the shortest route. However, many times the great circle route is not used because out skies have become crowded.

Regards



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently offline762er From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 542 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1745 times:

US 767-200ERs would never have weight restriction issues on a PHL-HNL run regardless of winds. The 762er has a lot more range and a much better takeoff performance than people give it credit for. Keep in mind it has nearly the identical wing and engines of the 763. It could even fly out of OGG(7,000 ft rwy) nonstop to PHL at near max payload. I've done detailed studies on our 76's performance and it really is a spectacular machine designed for high hot and heavy performance.

The A330 would be somewhat restricted for cargo but not too bad. It could still haul a hell of a lot more cargo than it's would-be competitor, CO 767-400(EWR-HNL) not to mention pax. There were rumours a couple of months ago that some people in management were seriously considering a hawaii route because it was being so heavily demanded by our FFs. The fact that US is the only major not serving the islands is considered to be a big downfall of our FF program. Originally the rumoured plan was PHL-HNL with A330. It was thought there would be significant demand from the FFs and O&D pax out of PHL to warrant the 330. But then about a week later it was rumoured that PIT-HNL would be better, mainly because there would be significantly better payload capabilities out of PIT resulting from: a. the shorter distance(about 260 miles) and b. longer runways at PIT. Heavier loads/more cargo means more revenue. And on the Hawaii flights, with their low yields and FF award traffic, every cent of revenue counts.

But again, this rumour only lasted about a week in the office before it was shot down. We simply can't afford taking a 330 or even a 76 off of a lucrative transatlantic routes. We just don't have enough airplanes for that. So I guess we'll have to keep on dreaming. Although I wouldn't be at all surprised if a couple years down the road we saw it happen. I can only pray.


User currently offlineStrickerje From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1697 times:

Continental's EWR-HNL has switched to a 767-200ER (from 767-400), and as far as I know, it isn't weight restricted, so surely a US 762ER could make the flight from PHL-HNL. But while a Hawaii route may attract FF's due to the demand for it by current FF's, what increase in FF's there would be as a result would probably not be enough to merit pulling an A330 or 767 from the lucrative transatlantic routes. If the projected US/UA alliance ever starts, US would be able to sell seats on UA flights to Hawaii, so US probably should not start service to Hawaii with its own aircraft.

User currently offlinePilotmanjoe From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1683 times:

CO EWR-HNL is still with the 767-400. When the schedule says 764, that's the config with 35 business, 200 coach, but when it just says 767, it's the 20 business, 236 coach. But the aircraft is always the 767-400.



User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5401 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1677 times:

Access to Hawaii (and similar traffic points) is one of the best reasons for the codeshare with UAL. It will keep the FF's happy without having to waste US assets on a low-yield route, one-flight-a-day route.


I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2560 posts, RR: 53
Reply 10, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

Just keep looking behind you for us (Hawaiian) to start an east-coast HNL route soon. Our CEO is looking seriously into it and I'd guess by next summer we'll be starting. Look for JFK, IAD, and ATL to be nonstops to HNL with our 767-300ER's. After that maybe BOS/PHL/PIT to HNL?

HAL



One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineLPL From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 1055 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

How long would the flight take?

User currently offlineAlaskaairlines From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1632 times:

HAL, that would be great! BTW, did you get my e-mail? If so please reply to it - it is on file.

-Dmitry

P.S. any idea how much longer the 10's will be around? After they leave, will HAL bring the 767 into ANC instead of the 10?


User currently offlineUnited_Fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7482 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 1603 times:

Just a side question - does US share any FF programs with airlines that do serve Hawaii. I remember reading that Airtran FF's can redeam miles to places that AirTran doesn't serve like LAS .


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineDvk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1579 times:

Delta's non-stops from ATL to HNL were nine hours on an L1011 ( I took that flight a couple of years ago before the TriStars retired). It would be a little longer on a 763 because of its lower speed.


I'm not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information.
User currently offlineHUYfan From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 1406 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1564 times:

not strictly related to the topic, but i think USairways' A330-300s are the best looking US airliners, so smart and beautiful! Have seen them at LGW and CDG.

regards

mike


User currently offlineATCT From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2283 posts, RR: 38
Reply 16, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1547 times:

On the PHL-HNL thing, anyone ever stop to think about the 757, sure i know many people dont like its narrow-body (hey, it still flies last i checked) and it is ETOP's capable. (US Airways' are certified). I believe 4,000nm would be about the stretch of its range, though you could always do a fuel stop at LAX or DEN (The used to do stops in DEN on the 727 PIT-LAX flights). It holds around 180 passengers (so you wouldnt have to worry about tooo many seats, if it gets sold out, great!). I just thought this was an interesting solution (Or to get wierder....737-300LR.....). Anywho, just my two cents.
ATCT



"The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing." - Walt Disney
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1511 times:

A 1-stop PHL-LAX-HNL would effectively just be a nonstop LAX-HNL route. The LAX-HNL is already the most competitive route in the US with 5 of 6 majors competing. Combined with the low yields and the need for US to set up an HNL station, I doubt it would ever make money.


Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineKFRG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1485 times:

Everyone,
I might be wrong, but from what I understand US's B762's are earlier models (Ex. Piedmont) with a lower payload weight. Im not sure if the same holds true for the later model US ordered 762's though.

-Tom


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1474 times:

All US 762's are ER's and roughly the same age. 10 of the 11 were built betw 89 and 91.

Are you thinking of their mixed 752 fleet which includes some early ex-EA 752's and some relatively younger ones?

Neil



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1464 times:

k for JFK, IAD, and ATL to be nonstops to HNL with our 767-300ER's.

HA is always sending its 763s to ATL for maintenance anyways, may as well put one in for pax service  Big grin Would solve DL's 764 pilot issues as to the whole ATL-HNL nonstop fiasco as well.


User currently offline762er From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 542 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1428 times:

KFRG: All of our 762s are the ER version, If my memory serves me right they have a 387,000 lb. MTOW.

ATCT: None of our 75's are ETOPS certified. Just thought I'd let you all know.

And as some have mentioned, the United code share pretty much sealed the fate of any chance for a US Airways airplane in Hawaii in the near future.


User currently offlineStrickerje From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (11 years 7 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1397 times:

When the schedule says 764, that's the config with 35 business, 200 coach, but when it just says 767, it's the 20 business, 236 coach. But the aircraft is always the 767-400.

I stand corrected - I just checked the flight tracker, and it is still a 767-400. That's odd though... 767 usually exclusively refers to the -200, but with it set up as you described it, there's no way to know whether 767 is a -200 or a -400 unless it's the 35/200 configuration that's listed as 764. I wonder why they publish it that way.


User currently offlineUsairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3401 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1333 times:

It wouldn't be profitable. US would be better off sending big planes to more European destinations or to a Carribean destination here and there. US is slowly knocking on the door of AA's dominance in the Carribean. US currently has 15-17 carribean routes from PHL and around the same from CLT, however some of these flts are weekends only.

User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32689 posts, RR: 72
Reply 24, posted (11 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1296 times:

US is slowly knocking on the door of AA's dominance in the Carribean.

Everytime US knocks on the door, AA knocks right back.

August 2002: US announces CLT-BZE
Septeber 2002: AA up capacity on MIA-BZE to 11 flights a week.

August 2002: US announces plans for CLT-PUJ
September 2002: AA announces MIA-PUJ before US even schedules CLT-PUJ

American also just started CLT-MIA services to lure Caribbean travelers. There is no doubt that the Caribbean is where USAirways has been very strong during very weak times, but AA will not allow US to kill thier dominance. As you said it yourself, many of the flights are weekend only. Every Caribbean destination in the AA Caribean network (about 25-30) is served at least daily. American Airlines is even the largest carrier at Las Americas airport in Santo Domingo.



a.
25 Haveric : I think US Airways can be successful sending passengers through less congested / run-down facilities in PHL / CLT. MIA & SJU are not known as the most
26 Westjet_8 : I really hope that US gets good yeilds on the CLT routes. It will be good if then can shake up American in the carribean. I do like both airlines th o
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...
US Airways PHL-SLC Or CLT-SLC? Why Not? posted Fri Jul 14 2006 22:17:59 by Slcdeltarumd11
Why Not Inflight Map On US A333? posted Mon Dec 23 2002 03:01:17 by B764
US-Russia; Why Not More US Airlines? posted Tue Nov 28 2006 13:49:15 by Ualcsr
Why Not A340 For US Carriers? posted Thu Aug 10 2006 22:28:47 by Eastern023
Q 400 And ATR 72 Why Not More Orders In The US? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 22:15:15 by Cumulonimbus
Why No AC/US Codeshare YYZ-PHL And YYZ-CLT? posted Sun Nov 20 2005 20:29:14 by PlaneLuver
Paris, Farnborough, Dubai - Why Not A Major US? posted Wed Jun 15 2005 23:20:33 by Soundtrack
Euro Airlines Profitable - US Airlines Not: Why? posted Fri May 20 2005 02:37:31 by Saab2000
Why Not US Airways Hubs At LGA And DCA? posted Sat Feb 5 2005 16:31:11 by ACAfan
Why Not More US Carriers In India? posted Thu Dec 2 2004 20:10:21 by Jacobin777