mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1269 posts, RR: 1 Posted (4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2663 times:
Now that twin engine aircraft can short-cut over the North Pole is there any chance we might see HNL become a stop over point from LHR to SYD or AKL etc ?
13 hours to HNL then 10 hours to SYD is very 'do-able' !
Few days on the beach en-route could be a great selling point for a new kangaroo route ?
The options/combinations for airlines, hotel resorts, the Hawaiian tourist agencies etc must surely be worth at least exploring ?
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
mogandoCI From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1829 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2607 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Thread starter): Now that twin engine aircraft can short-cut over the North Pole is there any chance we might see HNL become a stop over point from LHR to SYD or AKL etc ?
13 hours to HNL then 10 hours to SYD is very 'do-able' !
Slight problem - it'll be filled with HNL-SYD customers leading to a half-empty HNL-LHR leg
Maybe if we use HNL as a scissor hub and do SYD/MEL/BNE/AKL - HNL - LHR that *might* work
You'd only get the low yield tourist traffic via HNL. The premium class passengers that generate much of the profits want to get where they're going as fast as possible, not spend a few days on the beach. Carriers operating via HNL would have to match the fares of the many carriers operating via Asia (there must be at least 20), many of which have lower costs than U.S., European or Australian carriers which would be the only ones that could operate via HNL. Carrying a passenger about 17% further at the same (or lower) fare isn't a good way to make money when your costs are already higher to start with.
And for passengers going all the way without stopping you also have the issue of the additional U.S. security and visa hassles to transit HNL.
IrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 978 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2462 times:
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2): You'd only get the low yield tourist traffic via HNL. The premium class passengers that generate much of the profits want to get where they're going as fast as possible, not spend a few days on the beach.
This point is key. ULH flights between two points greater than 8000 NM need to stop over in cities that can command high-yielding traffic on legs between both points. This is why NZ, KE and others go via LAX (onward to AKL and GRU, respectively), and QF and BA go via SIN, etc. And even in those instances, certain high-yielding markets like HKG (BA/QF between LHR and SYD) or JFK (JL between NRT and GRU) have proven to be unsustainable.
mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1269 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2462 times:
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 1): Maybe if we use HNL as a scissor hub and do SYD/MEL/BNE/AKL - HNL - LHR that *might* work
Well I was kinda thinking that but I suppose it's all a bit much isn't it !
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2): You'd only get the low yield tourist traffic via HNL. The premium class passengers that generate much of the profits want to get where they're going as fast as possible, not spend a few days on the beach. Carriers operating via HNL would have to match the fares of the many carriers operating via Asia (there must be at least 20), many of which have lower costs than U.S., European or Australian carriers which would be the only ones that could operate via HNL. Carrying a passenger about 17% further at the same (or lower) fare isn't a good way to make money when your costs are already higher to start with.
Point taken.
Oh well, it was a nice idea before reality got hold of it.
ETOPS - Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim...I love that !!
[Edited 2012-01-11 11:41:15]
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
Viscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 18467 posts, RR: 17 Reply 6, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2266 times:
Quoting tjwgrr (Reply 5): Many moons ago Qantas operated SYD-NAN-HNL-SFO-JFK-LHR
As did BOAC (I think they became British Airways shortly before they dropped that route).. The BOAC route began via SFO but the California stop was later moved to LAX. Similar BOAC (and JAL) route LHR-JFK-SFO-HND also operated until sometime in the 1970s.
All those routes ended about the time the 747 and other widebodies replaced the 707s, DC-8s and DC-8s. When BA dropped the transpacific routes they were using the Super VC-10 on the South Pacific route to SYD and the 707 on the North Pacific route to HND (which continued to HKG).
mikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1269 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2241 times:
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 1): Maybe if we use HNL as a scissor hub and do SYD/MEL/BNE/AKL - HNL - LHR that *might* work
Don't laugh but what about BA A380's to HNL connecting to an AA 'mini-base' in HNL serving SYD/MEL/BNE/AKL.....?
I know, I know...crazy.
Hawaii is the sort of place that everyone in the UK talks about visiting but never actually gets round to going. If I was going to Australia I know I'd give it a go...kill two birds with one stone so to speak.
Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 7619 posts, RR: 51 Reply 10, posted (4 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1714 times:
Routes that require a stop have far more competition than a route nonstop. Ultra long haul routes usually have airlines based in an intermediate point carrying the majority of the traffic (European & Middle Eastern airlines dominate US - India and Asian & Middle Eastern airlines dominate Europe - Australia). As other posters have said, there are dozens of carriers competing on LHR-SYD. It is so many that there is little profit to be made on it. Unless one day an airplane can make it nonstop, it isn't a route that is going to have any worthwhile yields.
Choosing a city like HNL would not make sense. HNL-LHR is a small market as Hawaii - Europe is a small market that can't warrant a nonstop flight on its own. Adding low yielding feed isn't going to help sustain a profitable route. The only chance on this route would be if Hawaiian decided to go after Europe when it receives A350s, which I personally think is doubtful.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 7619 posts, RR: 51 Reply 11, posted (4 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1709 times:
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 7): Don't laugh but what about BA A380's to HNL connecting to an AA 'mini-base' in HNL serving SYD/MEL/BNE/AKL.....?
I know, I know...crazy.
First off A380 would never make any sense on a long thin route. HNL is farther from LHR than any other city that is served nonstop.
Also, AA is the number 5 US airline in Hawaii behind United, Hawaiian, Delta & Alaska. They are not likely going to start anything up from Hawaii. They've been shrinking.
Quoting mikey72 (Reply 7):
Hawaii is the sort of place that everyone in the UK talks about visiting but never actually gets round to going. If I was going to Australia I know I'd give it a go...kill two birds with one stone so to speak.
While it adds a couple hours of flight time, going via SEA, SFO or LAX to Hawaii from Europe is likely where most of the traffic goes. Nonstop would command a premium, but historically it isn't a big enough route to sustain service. If any airline started it, Hawaiian with its A350s and dense configuration would be most likely. And LGW is just as likely as LHR.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
Talking of LGW, we could see a HNL route in the near future as Thomson is suppose to get the 787's soon. They did say once they got 787's HNL would be one the first routes. Guess we would have to wait and see!
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1269 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1829 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 18467 posts, 
From South Africa, joined Jul 2006, 611 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
