ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 2:38 am

*disclaimer: sorry to be the deceased nag, but curious as to this topic*

Any further word on AA's proposed ORD-HKG? With SARS on the decline, a new HKG codeshare implimented, as well as a handful of incoming 772ERs (and nowhere to really fly them)... I'm wondering if they still have such a flight in the making?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 2:51 am

I am sure that AA is watching the situation closely, but opening a new route such as ORD-HKG at this moment would be risky. Airlines are just starting to re-instate existing routes to the Far East and it will take months until existing carriers are flying a full schedule on established routes. CO, for example, is going to try to re-start EWR-HKG in August, bookings look OK but the fares are still quite low.

Look for AA to use its newly delivered 777s on more established routes to Europe, revising equipment on certain routes.
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 2:56 am

Look for AA to use its newly delivered 777s on more established routes to Europe

Would they....? Europe is also saturated with competition... and indeed when AA decided to pospone/cancel LAX-AA), Japan">NRT, they chose to fly the re-scheduled Triple7s domestically rather than place them on Euro-runs.


****

CX cannot seem to get its act together concerning its continually proposed nonstop HKG-NYC flights (though, I often wonder why they'd want to, considering that the JFK-YVR reportedly does very well for them).

Perhaps AA may consider that route as well, with its incoming fleet. Though, the performance of their JFK-AA), Japan">NRT may dissuade them from doing so  Sad

[Edited 2003-06-21 19:58:25]
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13222
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 4:02 am

"CX cannot seem to get its act together concerning its continually proposed nonstop HKG-NYC flights (though, I often wonder why they'd want to, considering that the JFK-YVR reportedly does very well for them"

Hopefully when CX launches their NYC-HKG nonstop they will keep the YVR, and perhaps switch one of their NYC flights to EWR. Most major International airlines that serve NYC serve both EWR and JFK, like Singapore.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
L.1011
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:46 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 4:05 am

I didn't even know it was proposed.
 
SegmentKing
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2000 7:16 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 4:57 am

Can a 777 even fly ORD-HKG? UA's 747-400 is already tanked off to the max on the route..

-n
~ ~ ~ ~ pRoFeSsIoNaL hUrRiCaNe DoDgEr ~ ~ ~ ~
 
blink182
Posts: 5278
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 3:09 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 5:30 am

SegmentKing- Continental puts it's 777s on EWR-HKG. AA can surely do ORD-HKG with a 777, while it is a long flight, it is possible.

My question regarding CX HKG-JFK, if CO can do EWR-HKG with a 777, I do not understand why the A346 cannot make it non stop. Is CX allowed to carry pax JFK-YVR who are not continuing to HKG?

blink
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
 
The777Man
Posts: 5923
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 1999 4:54 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 5:58 am

SegmentKing: With the new polar air routes thru Russia, the flights are not as long and therefore range is less of a problem. The days of towing the 744 for UA 895 to the runway at ORD are gone since about two years ago. Would think AA should open some new routes with their 777s and perhaps they will start ORD-HKG in the fall when demand to HKG has recovered ? Or perhaps restart flights to TPE from SJC ? That seems less likely since they again have downsized at SJC. The777Man
Boeing 777s flown: UA, TG, KE, BA, CX, NH, JD, JL, CZ, SQ, EK, NG, CO, AF, SV, KU, DL, AA, MH, OZ, CA, MS, SU, LY, RG, PE, AZ, KL, VN, PK, EY, NZ, AM, BR, AC, DT, UU, OS, AI, 9W, KQ, QR, VA, JJ, ET, TK, PR, BG, T5, CI, MU and LX.. Further to fly.. LH 777
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 7:30 am

Can a 777 even fly ORD-HKG? UA's 747-400 is already tanked off to the max on the route..

Why shouldnt it... considering that a high-powered 772ER is currently the longest ranged aircraft in scheduled commercial service; considerably longer-legged than 744s and 744ERs.

AA's ships carry relatively small pax loads and utilize Trent892s, they could easily get the job done.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 7:32 am

Is CX allowed to carry pax JFK-YVR who are not continuing to HKG?

Yes, and (oddly enough) it's said to be one of their most profitable routings
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
AFa340-300E
Posts: 2115
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 8:21 am

Hello,


ORD-HKG is probably going to happen sometime down the road. But the economci situtation and temporary loss of traffic due to SARS are srtongly playing against it happeninng anytime soon.

I had an article on AA's Asia operations on my website, published in October 2002 but still available.

BTW, R-R and AA celebrated this week the million-hour mark milestone at Paris on the 777/Trent 800 at the carrier. Is their plan to have one single configuration on all the 777s still on?



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Matthew Willmott-Sharp



Best regards,
Alain Mengus
ATB - Paris Air Show 2003
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 8:34 am

My question regarding CX HKG-JFK, if CO can do EWR-HKG with a 777, I do not understand why the A346 cannot make it non stop.

It certainly can, at least as well as CO's underpowered 772ERs can.

I think CX just also has very optimistic cargo requirements.

N
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 8:55 am

Is their plan to have one single configuration on all the 777s still on?

AA threw an incredible tantrum when GE won exclusivity on the 777NGs.... it sent lobbyists in an attempt to convince Boeing's board to override the decision, and later even threatened to order A345s. Boeing/GE would have to come up with a sweet little package to get them to switch.

AA could however upgrade some of its incoming 772ERs from Trent892 to Trent895... it would certainly be a boost for that slow-selling engine variant, though AA has given no indication that it's within their interest to do so.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

Some Easy Switch, Some Not?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 9:01 am

speaking of AA's RR-related temper tantrums....

anyone else notice that PW4000 users (JL, NH, KE, VN, ...[and stated by] UA) seem to have no problem with introducing GE90-powered 777s into their otherwise PW-powered 777 fleets; but Trent800 users (SQ, AA, CX, MH) seem to all have strongly objected??

Odd. Is there any underlying reason? The PW4000 and GE90 seem to be as fundamentally different as the Trent800 and GE90, so why the objection?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
The777Man
Posts: 5923
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 1999 4:54 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Sun Jun 22, 2003 9:34 am

From what I heard, CX was VERY close to order 777-300ER just before the problems with SARS started. This from CX Flyboy who works for the airline. So CX must have changed their mind about the GE90-115B.

The777Man
Boeing 777s flown: UA, TG, KE, BA, CX, NH, JD, JL, CZ, SQ, EK, NG, CO, AF, SV, KU, DL, AA, MH, OZ, CA, MS, SU, LY, RG, PE, AZ, KL, VN, PK, EY, NZ, AM, BR, AC, DT, UU, OS, AI, 9W, KQ, QR, VA, JJ, ET, TK, PR, BG, T5, CI, MU and LX.. Further to fly.. LH 777
 
hkg82
Posts: 1303
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 4:24 pm

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Mon Jun 23, 2003 2:04 am

Yeah I’ve heard JFK-YVR-JFK is a very profitable sector for CX. I do wonder, if CX did start a direct HKG-JFK-HKG A346 service, would they still keep YVR-JFK-YVR? I would think the vast majority of passengers on the YVR-JFK & JFK-YVR legs originate from HKG & JFK. I doubt CX captures a lot of the traffic between YVR & JFK. There are probably at least 4-5 daily flights on a number of airlines (AC, UA, AA, etc.) between the two cities & such flights are more attractive to the business traveler compared to the 1 daily flight CX offers.

I believe Don Carty himself said last year (he was quoted in the HK-based South China Morning Post) that AA would be flying to HKG from ORD with the 777-200ER by the end of 2003. But with SARS & AA’s financial problems, it’s very unlikely AA would start the route at this time.

Hkg82.
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Mon Jun 23, 2003 3:15 am

I doubt CX captures a lot of the traffic between YVR & JFK

I've heard quite the opposite... which stands to reason as correct, considering for a route to be profitable, high-yield O&D is typically required.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Mon Jun 23, 2003 4:23 am

You know, if AA has such a hardon for the RR engines on longhauls, why didn't they go with the RB211 on their 767s, at least on their 767-300ERs?

Is British Airways the ONLY operator of the RB211 on the 763ER? If not, they're one of two or three.

N
 
ConcordeBoy
Topic Author
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Any Further Word On AA's Proposed ORD-HKG?

Mon Jun 23, 2003 5:26 am

why didn't they go with the RB211 on their 767s, at least on their 767-300ERs?

They looked into it, but the RB211 offered the lowest thrust and the highest dry weight on the 767.... both undesirable, to say the least.



Is British Airways the ONLY operator of the RB211 on the 763ER?

Nope. QF operate(d?) the type as well.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!