b764
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2001 10:49 am

US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 11:10 am

Could it be seasonal?
 
The Coachman
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:57 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 11:15 am

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 avatar
HA_DC9
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 1999 3:16 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 11:24 am

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
Posts: 540
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2000 10:47 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 12:09 pm

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
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 12:24 pm

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
 
BA
Posts: 10133
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 12:40 pm

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
 
762er
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2001 8:18 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 1:25 pm

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
Posts: 706
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 1:35 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 3:47 pm

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
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 1999 5:44 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 4:18 pm

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
Posts: 4407
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 4:26 pm

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.
 
HAL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 1:38 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 6:20 pm

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.
 
LPL
Posts: 1038
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 2:13 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 6:33 pm

How long would the flight take?
 
Alaskaairlines
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 12:28 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 7:09 pm

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 avatar
United_fan
Posts: 6355
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 11:11 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 10:31 pm

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 .
Champagne For My Real Friends,and Real Pain For My Sham Friends
 
dvk
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2000 12:18 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 11:24 pm

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.
 
HUYfan
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 9:38 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Fri Dec 27, 2002 11:39 pm

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
 
atct
Posts: 2472
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:42 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sat Dec 28, 2002 12:24 am

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
Trikes are for kids!
 
User avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sat Dec 28, 2002 2:41 am

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.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
KFRG
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 10:37 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:07 am

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 avatar
yyz717
Posts: 15689
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 12:26 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:18 am

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
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:37 am

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.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
762er
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2001 8:18 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sat Dec 28, 2002 6:04 am

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.
 
strickerje
Posts: 706
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 1:35 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sat Dec 28, 2002 8:11 am

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
Posts: 3534
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 11:59 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sun Dec 29, 2002 9:34 am

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
Posts: 24519
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Sun Dec 29, 2002 4:12 pm

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.
 
haveric
Posts: 1219
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 9:31 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Mon Dec 30, 2002 1:28 am

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 passenger-friendly airports. With new int'l terminals in PHL (opening shortly) and CLT, US can prove a viable alternative to AA.
 
westjet_8
Posts: 437
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2001 11:38 am

RE: US, Why Not PHL-HNL W/ A333?

Mon Dec 30, 2002 3:25 am

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 ough so I hope they both do very well.
Canadian. RIP 1999

Who is online