HA_DC9 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 659 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1962 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.
Aq737 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 612 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1930 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?
762er From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 542 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1880 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.
Strickerje From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1832 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.
Pilotmanjoe From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1818 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.
MasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5677 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1812 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'.
HAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2585 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1791 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?
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
ATCT From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2394 posts, RR: 37
Reply 16, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days ago) and read 1682 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.
"The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing." - Walt Disney
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16403 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (12 years 2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1646 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.
KFRG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1620 times:
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.
Strickerje From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 723 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (12 years 2 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1532 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.
Usairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3505 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (12 years 2 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1468 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.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33441 posts, RR: 71
Reply 24, posted (12 years 2 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1431 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.
: 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
: 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