scotron11
Posts: 1181
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:46 pm

Bloomberg reports that Boeing is looking to airlines in India, Asia and the Middle East to sell their 777LR as North American carriers cannot afford them.

Boeing thinks there is a market potential for 200 freighters and 200 passenger versions of the 777LR. US carriers like AA, UA, DL were the main sales target but losses at the US carriers have forced them to cut orders.

I would think CO & AA would be likely carriers for the 777LR, seeing as they are expanding their international routes to India/Asia, no?
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:41 pm

CO is in need of 777s, and the LR could allow for better cargo loads on some of their long routes, but unless CO is planning to fly to SYD from EWR or IAH, or expand into Singapore or Malaysia, I don't quite see the point. Their fleet is too small and simple. They'd be better off saving the millions and getting a few more 772ERs.

AA also doesn't operate routes that need a 772LR, so would also need to expand into SE Asia or Australia. They are large enough to have a subfleet of 772LRs with more frequency than CO could have, but I still don't see it.

UA and DL would have been likely customers if they weren't in such bad shape. UA operates to Australia, and DL needs more range since they operate out of Atlanta. But neither can buy.

200/200 is a very high number for the 772LR. I see at most 100 examples of the pax version. But for Boeing, it is still a big win, because it could bring customers into the 777 fold that would not otherwise fly them, and spawn purchase of other models as well. For example, if QF goes for the 772LR, it would likely also go for the 773ER, no? Of course, they need money, too. It might also extend the fleet life for those who own 772ERs but need to expand. A mixed 772LR/773ER for these carriers might also make sense (BA for example.)
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
airxliban
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 12:14 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:48 pm

I would think that while AA could make use of the 772LRs, they wouldn't bother with them and simply try to make the most of their regular 772ERs. They don't fly any route which would be a natural candidate for the 772LR, at least not yet.
PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
 
scotron11
Posts: 1181
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 4:18 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):

200/200 is a very high number for the 772LR

I would imagine if the original idea was to sell the 777LR to NA carriers, then Boeing must have had some serious interest from those same airlines in order for them to commit to building it in the first place, no?

Not to start another 747ADV theory, but is not the same situation taking place? It seems the 747ADV is attracting more interest cargowise rather than passenger versions, at the moment.

Looks like the 777ER will be the cornerstone of EVA and ANA's long-haul fleet for the foreseeable future, just to name two carriers that otherwise would go with a 747. Also, CX recently announced they would make a decision between the A346 and 777 for their planned order, while BA have also expressed admiration for the 777ER/LR.
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 6:09 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
AA also doesn't operate routes that need a 772LR, so would also need to expand into SE Asia or Australia.

OTOH, if recent moves are a guide, then AA may indeed move into the B772LR scope. Here, I am talking about their new Indian services and their possible decision to equip B757s with winglets to fly the Atlantic. That is, AA is looking for opportunities to expand internationally because there ain't no money at home.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
200/200 is a very high number for the 772LR.

Actually, I think Boeing has toned this down from 300/200. However, I could be mistaking forecast sales (eg. 66% of a market) with a forecast market.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
I see at most 100 examples of the pax version.

IMHO, Boeing should be able to sell more than 100. Right now, there is interest from AC, EK, EY, S2 & SQ plus some others. Of course, this year 9W, AI & QR joined the -200LR ranks.
 
User avatar
NZ1
Crew
Posts: 1772
Joined: Sat May 01, 2004 1:32 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 6:19 pm

The 772LR arrives in AKL next Wednesday, so I will glad to give it a good going over. Should be good.

NZ1
--
✈ NZ1 / Mike
Head Forum Moderator
www.airliners.net
www.twitter.com/airliners_net
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 7:56 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
UA and DL would have been likely customers if they weren't in such bad shape. UA operates to Australia, and DL needs more range since they operate out of Atlanta. But neither can buy.

If UA could and would buy B777s to fly to Australia, they would buy the B777-300ER not the B777-200LR. Still, the B747Adv would probably be even better for US-OZ ops than the B777-300ER. UA could use the B777-200LR to serve SGN, SIN, MNL, BKK, CGK, etc. nonstop from SFO/LAX.
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 8:26 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 6):
If UA could and would buy B777s to fly to Australia, they would buy the B777-300ER not the B777-200LR.

What if there was an opportunity for them to try, say, SYD-ORD with -200LRs?
 
SFORunner
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 4:23 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 8:47 pm

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 7):
What if there was an opportunity for them to try, say, SYD-ORD with -200LRs?

Agree. They are doing well enough with the 744's not to need the 773ER on LAX/SFO-SYD.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:46 pm

Looking fwd to the B772LR trip in August.
Im Sure AI,9W & S2 would be keen on checking it out.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 10:46 pm

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 7):
What if there was an opportunity for them to try, say, SYD-ORD with -200LRs?

I don't think it would make sense for UA to overfly their own hub. There is not enough O+D traffic to justify ORD-SYD operated by UA. EWR-SYD operated by CO and ATL-SYD operated by DL are more plausible.

Quoting SFORunner (Reply 8):
They are doing well enough with the 744's not to need the 773ER on LAX/SFO-SYD.

That's why I suggested the B747Adv might be better for UA services to OZ than the B777-300ER. However, if SQ enter the market, then UA will have more difficulty filling B747s.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Wed Jul 13, 2005 11:42 pm

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 7):
What if there was an opportunity for them to try, say, SYD-ORD with -200LRs?

Or DC?

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 10):
ATL-SYD operated by DL are more plausible.

Plausible how? Neither have money, and DL doesn't fly to Australia now. UA doing another route is more plausible except for their whole bankruptcy situation...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:49 am

...if nothing else, I'd just ~LOVE~ to see AA eat foot after all the sh!t it raised over the 772LR's engine choice! Big grin
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
avek00
Posts: 3156
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:09 am

Doubtful on AA - the 787 family can offer AA the range necessary to run most any viable flight ex-DFW, and with less seats to fill at that. A CO 772LR is a distinct possibility, but keep in mind that the airline can barely afford its 787 order as it is.
Live life to the fullest.
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 9:09 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 10):
I don't think it would make sense for UA to overfly their own hub.

Not even to feed a different hub? I'm talking outta my ass, here, but surely there is more east coast connections for UA from ORD than SFO?

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 10):
There is not enough O+D traffic to justify ORD-SYD operated by UA.

We're going to disagree on that point.  Wink

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 10):
EWR-SYD operated by CO and ATL-SYD operated by DL are more plausible.

If CO or DL had an Australian presence, I'd be inclined to agree. Anyway, if SQ gets rights to do AU-US services, then it will be very, very hard for any US Major to stay in that game.  Sad

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
Or DC?

IMHO, it will be a long, long time before we see any direct link between D.C. and any Australian port.  Sad
 
goCOgo
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:24 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:12 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
Quoting QFA001 (Reply 7):
What if there was an opportunity for them to try, say, SYD-ORD with -200LRs?

Or DC?

No offence intended, but aren't you the one who accused us CLE people recently of coming up with ridiculous flights out of CLE that never happen? IAD-SYD ain't happening. IAD is the European gateway, and would suck for an east coast/Midwest connection to a point so west. UA doesn't offer much long haul to the west from IAD. No HNL or NRT, where they are quite strong in both cases. ORD-SYD, maybe.

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 14):
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 10):
EWR-SYD operated by CO and ATL-SYD operated by DL are more plausible.

If CO or DL had an Australian presence, I'd be inclined to agree. Anyway, if SQ gets rights to do AU-US services, then it will be very, very hard for any US Major to stay in that game.

CO does have an Oz presence. AirMike flies to CNS (Cairns). Minor, granted, but they did once have more extensive services out of SYD. Plus, wasn't SQ recently denied the route it did apply for?
"Why you fly is your business, how you fly is ours"
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:37 am

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 14):
I'm talking outta my ass, here, but surely there is more east coast connections for UA from ORD than SFO?

It's true that UA have more east coast connections at ORD than at SFO -- even than SFO and LAX combined, which is the real question -- but not by all that much and the additional markets are mostly minor markets. The markets that UA don't serve from SFO or LAX are divided amongst DEN, ORD, and IAD. So now, a SYD bound UA passenger in Podunk needs to fly Podunk-DEN/ORD/IAD-SFO/LAX-SYD. Adding an ORD-SYD nonstop saves one connection for too few passengers to be worthwhile. The main benefit would be for the ORD-SYD O+D market rather than for the Podunk market for every Podunk town which UA serves via ORD but not via SFO or LAX.

Please don't forget that a UA ORD-SYD flight would canibalize SFO-SYD and LAX-SYD reducing loads and yields on those flights. That is not something UA wants to do.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 10):
EWR-SYD operated by CO and ATL-SYD operated by DL are more plausible.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):

Plausible how?

In terms of having the feed to fill a plane with high enough yield passengers without canibalizing existing operations.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:40 am

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 15):
No offence intended, but aren't you the one who accused us CLE people recently of coming up with ridiculous flights out of CLE that never happen?

When a dumb comment is directed toward me, why should I take offence? Or even offense?

This is exactly why I made that comment. CLE people somehow equate their fair city to much larger, more international cities like ORD and Washington DC, and expect flights to match. Sorry again to burst CLE fan bubbles, but CLE is no Chicago and it is no Washington DC.

That is why these two cities support so many airlines and flights all over the world, but CLE flies summers to LGW, and a few Canadian and Carribean/Mexico destinations. People don't generally fly in from destinations far to visit Cleveland, Buffalo or Pittsburgh, but they do come to Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, DC, Chicago, Miami, Boston, etc. Just a fact some people in CLE don't seem to understand. So it would only work if CLE were a big enough hub. But considering COs regional focus at CLE, and considering proximity to EWR, if you are going to connect internationally, EWR is a better place to do it.

There is far, far, FAR more of a chance of an ORD-SYD non-stop flight than a CLE-just about anywhere international, as ORD is an international hub for two of the largest airlines on earth. UA would be flying it, or QF would be to connect with AA. And if it were already possible and QF/UA already owned the planes, you would be seeing SYD-NYC nonstop, SYD-MIA nonstop, and SYD-DC nonstop (though maybe not daily) as well.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
QFA001
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 6:47 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:16 pm

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 15):
CO does have an Oz presence. AirMike flies to CNS (Cairns).

Very true. However, FWIW, I had a premium AU-US market in mind.

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 15):
Minor, granted, but they did once have more extensive services out of SYD.

It's been a long, long time. The 'old' CO couldn't cut-it trans-Pacific but perhaps the 'new' CO could? As US Majors seek out new opportunities I do certainly believe that BNE/MEL/SYD would at least be worthwhile looking at. Perhaps B772ERs would be too large for CO, but in future with B788s...?

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 15):
Plus, wasn't SQ recently denied the route it did apply for?

Talks continue on that one. Eventually, I think SQ will be given the rights.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 16):
It's true that UA have more east coast connections at ORD than at SFO -- even than SFO and LAX combined, which is the real question -- but not by all that much and the additional markets are mostly minor markets. The markets that UA don't serve from SFO or LAX are divided amongst DEN, ORD, and IAD. So now, a SYD bound UA passenger in Podunk needs to fly Podunk-DEN/ORD/IAD-SFO/LAX-SYD. Adding an ORD-SYD nonstop saves one connection for too few passengers to be worthwhile. The main benefit would be for the ORD-SYD O+D market rather than for the Podunk market for every Podunk town which UA serves via ORD but not via SFO or LAX.

Great explanation. Many thanks. I wish I had a follow-up question but I don't for now.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 16):
Please don't forget that a UA ORD-SYD flight would canibalize SFO-SYD and LAX-SYD reducing loads and yields on those flights. That is not something UA wants to do.

In recent times, QF has pushed down the UA market share on AU-US. Of course, there are several reasons for this (C-11 being a prominent one!). However, to push back at QF (or SQ or whomever else enters the fray) UA may need another product differentiation, don't you think?
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4953
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:27 pm

ORD has been strongly hinted enough times on this list as a new NZ destination to give credibility to the notion that there is a market awaiting someone to serve it from Aus. and NZ. Speaking for myself, transferring at ORD to DTW or YYZ instead of LAX/SFO is a no-brainer.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:45 pm

Quoting QFA001 (Reply 18):
In recent times, QF has pushed down the UA market share on AU-US. Of course, there are several reasons for this (C-11 being a prominent one!). However, to push back at QF (or SQ or whomever else enters the fray) UA may need another product differentiation, don't you think?

UA differentiates their product by employing octogenarian FAs -- which QF cannot match.  Smile
 
UA_727
Posts: 155
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2001 7:53 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:56 pm

It sure is a graceful craft - saw it doing touch-and-go's all afternoon in BIL today. Love that new Boeing Livery!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chaocewei
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Royal S King



Salute,

UA  Wink
"AW - I'm on Board..."
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4299
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:58 pm

One route UA could definately put the 777LR right NOW (given the money, of course!) is LAX-MEL. The B744 can not do it profitably so UA flies via SYD (concentrating both LAX-MEL & SFO-MEL pax on to one plane, SYD-MEL) they have got to be getting killed by QF offering non stop and full up to date three class service to LAX. And MEL-LAX will be QFs first A380 route.

A brand new fleet of 777LR operating at least LAX-MEL & maybe SFO-MEL would allow UA to compete much more effectively, and IF SQ gets the go ahead something dramatic is going to be required by UA to even stay in the game.

However, UAs money worries will probabley kill it however.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
joeman
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:55 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:41 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
This is exactly why I made that comment. CLE people somehow equate their fair city to much larger, more international cities like ORD and Washington DC, and expect flights to match.

So it would only work if CLE were a big enough hub. But considering COs regional focus at CLE, and considering proximity to EWR, if you are going to connect internationally, EWR is a better place to do it.

And it always will be. And increased international service for CLE only if the hub were bigger as you state. Many CLE people believe in CO supreme devotion to CLE while it's other two hubs continue to grow by leaps and bounds. Further, they have believed CO rhetorik without putting two and two together:

CO can't fly CLE-LGW with a widebody because all the new ones on order were to replace aging DC-10's. Maybe after the new runway is built is suggested. That was in 1999-2000. Any new routes added with 767's or 777's since then?

After the first year of CLE-LGW service THRU WINTER, the Cleveland Plain Dealer announced the route was doing "Jolly well" and far better than CO predictions. Then CO gave the vibes that it was only doing "marginally" well. Then 9/11 happened and they had an out from winter service.

CLE-LGW needs more feed traffic. Then they wipe out a slew of smaller city service and potential feed to go all mainline and RJ for awhile. (Most since restored with Continental Connection)

Naturally there have been new service announcements that never came to be like Portland, OR and Ottawa Canada, but that happens.

A bunch of new routes opened from CLE prior to this year with a bunch of publicity, decreasing other flights, and ultimately canceling a bunch of the new ones anyway. Yield, yield, yield.

CO simply can't add any more flights to CLE because it is so overcrowded until a new runway is built all the while decreasing flights as that statement was made and before 9/11. Looks like CLE will wait a LONG time to even achieve a level that was there circu 1999 when CLE-LGW began. 50+ flights. Happy new runway usage to all using and paying for it.

There was a time in CO's less than reputable days when CLE was their most profitable hub. Whose fault for any decline? Clevelanders chasing all the other airlines instead? Maybe the vast concentration on EWR and IAH development? But, Gordon Bethune comes to town to bully civic leaders and big business with the threat of shutting down the "hub" because CO is in such a financial crunch, CLE is the weakest "hub", the CLE landing fees are high (thanks to a new runway built mainly for them and all their RJ's), and people are flocking to a few cheap flights offered by AirTran out of CAK. Better support CO or else! Now AirTran has added more flights there and F9 too. GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And on and on...

I guess CO can't compete regionally with DL at CVG or NW at DTW very effectively even with US downsized at PIT and HP out of CMH, not to mention the downsized STL not so far away. They boast of record load factors on the website, but of course, it's all about yield.

CO's big new contributions to CLE in 2005 were renewing a 10 year gate lease with great publicity thereby tying them up and offering a Saturday only Cleveland-Albuquerque flight with an RJ! Whoop di do!

CLE people look to CO for things other airlines provide "hubs" they are devoted to like continuity in service, competitive expansion as opposed to downsizing, and the likes of DL going CVG-CDG, NW going MEM-AMS, or US going CLT-FRA. Year round yet!

It isn't happening and it ain't gonna. CLE is a large focus city similar to US at PIT and AA at STL.
 
goCOgo
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:24 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:55 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
When a dumb comment is directed toward me, why should I take offence? Or even offense?

This is exactly why I made that comment. CLE people somehow equate their fair city to much larger, more international cities like ORD and Washington DC, and expect flights to match. Sorry again to burst CLE fan bubbles, but CLE is no Chicago and it is no Washington DC.

You entirely missed to point of my comment. You accuse us of suggesting ridiculus flights, but than suggest something as crazy as IAD-SYD by UA when there isn't even a IAD-HNL or a IAD-NRT. I would expect to see those before they get one of the longest flights in the world. I'm not saying some suggestions made on this board in regards to CLE aren't crazy, but that we aren't the only ones.

By the way, just because I suggest that I'd like to see Cleveland have more international service, I'm all the sudden equating it with JFK, EWR, IAD, BWI, ORD, LAX, etc? The comparison I was going for (well, I wasn't going for a comparison, but since you want one) was CVG, MSP, etc, where there is more international service, but being similar in size to CLE.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
There is far, far, FAR more of a chance of an ORD-SYD non-stop flight than a CLE-just about anywhere international, as ORD is an international hub for two of the largest airlines on earth.

I agree

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
And if it were already possible and QF/UA already owned the planes, you would be seeing SYD-NYC nonstop,

I agree

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 17):
SYD-MIA nonstop, and SYD-DC nonstop (though maybe not daily) as well.

 confused  What are you smoking?

Quoting Joeman (Reply 23):
CLE-LGW needs more feed traffic. Then they wipe out a slew of smaller city service and potential feed to go all mainline and RJ for awhile. (Most since restored with Continental Connection)

Couldn't agree more.

Quoting Joeman (Reply 23):
CLE landing fees are high (thanks to a new runway built mainly for them and all their RJ's),

Ah, the landing fees argument. CLE has high landing fees, yes, but cheep gate/counter fees. It all averages out to CLE being about the same as many other airports.

Quoting Joeman (Reply 23):
CO's big new contributions to CLE in 2005 were renewing a 10 year gate lease

Shows CO's commitment to CLE. I don't believe that have that long of lease at EWR or IAH. Kinda stupid to sign a long term lease if you are on the verge of pulling lots of service.

Quoting Joeman (Reply 23):
Better support CO or else! Now AirTran has added more flights there and F9 too. GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who the heck are you? Mayor White? Are you suggesting we run CO out of town? If CO left town, do you think we would see improved air service? Are you nuts?


The simple fact is, CLE is indeed the red-headed stepchild. It's not going to see improved service for a while. But to say it will never receive expanded service, or that we would be better off if CO packs up and leaves is foolish.
"Why you fly is your business, how you fly is ours"
 
N60659
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 7:39 am

Okay. Reality check time. The title of the thread is "777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East". How did this degenerate into whether CO should remain in CLE?

-N60659
Nec Dextrorsum Nec Sinistrorsum
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 7:46 am

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 24):
SYD-MIA nonstop, and SYD-DC nonstop (though maybe not daily) as well.
   What are you smoking?

I'm not smoking anything. Just because impossible routes don't exist now doesn't mean that if they were technically possible they still wouldn't exist.

If there were a way to go non-stop SYD-MIA, it would be done. SYD-MCO would likely be served as well. But it isn't possible and because of the warm climate in Florida and ETOPS 207 restrictions, it probably won't be economically with the 772LR, either.

As for HNL-IAD? Who's talking about that? Do you bring that up because of the CLE-HNL idea? It's a low yield vacation market with little business or government travel for IAD, easily served via EWR, ORD, ATL, IAH, DEN, DFW, DTW, etc. with a short connection from various DC airports. There's no JFK-HNL non-stop service, or LHR-HNL non-stop service, yet those airports seem to get by. And there's no MIA or MCO to HNL service, either. I also assume that if SYD were served already by all those other airports, you wouldn't have IAD-SYD, but that isn't the case, now is it?

So as for SYD-IAD, it is more likely than CLE. Far more likely. Nor is it outlandish. Why? Because all the european flights from IAD with large jets prove an existing large O&D and connecting market. And as you don't seem to know, ANA does serve IAD non-stop from NRT with a 777. In fact, they think so little of this service, they have only labeled it flight 1 and flight 2!

But I still said a non-daily SYD-IAD service. Maybe 3x weekly would be workable as it would require only 1 jet. The only reason it doesn't exist now is that there is no way to do it, not because I'm smoking anything.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
highflyer9790
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 1:21 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 9:37 am

I think the 777LR is one of the best Boeing aircraft to be made. Maybe down the road Boeing will get some orders from the US...maybe AA, CO, or DL? UA is a ways away from making a profit....I'd like to see some nice flights out of BOS if AA picks up an 777LR, possibly to asia or SYD...

As far as Asian carriers go, they've ordered the 787 and I think we can look for ANA, JAL, Air India, Cathay, Quantas, Emerates, or maybe even PIA!

I forgot who already has ordered the 777LR, please forgive!! lol
121
 
goCOgo
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:24 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:29 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 26):
If there were a way to go non-stop SYD-MIA, it would be done. SYD-MCO would likely be served as well.

What evidence do you have that there is sufficient demand for so much Florida-Oz service? Also remember that as this is an ultra long haul flight. O&D of 250 passengers won't cut it, as likely many would opt to stop somewhere rather than face an 18 hour flight, such as why SQ still offers one stop SIN service form JFK when it operates to EWR nonstop.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 26):
As for HNL-IAD? Who's talking about that? Do you bring that up because of the CLE-HNL idea?

No, I bring that up because, like NRT, UA is strong in HNL (leading US carrier to Hawaii, I do believe), but they don't see the need to serve this long-haul westbound route. Why would UA jump on an even longer-haul westbound route? IAD is a domestic and European hub for UA, not Aisan, African, or Oceana hub.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 26):
Because all the european flights from IAD with large jets prove an existing large O&D and connecting market

European O&D proves there is Oz O&D?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 26):
ANA does serve IAD non-stop from NRT with a 777. I

I was referring to UA, not ANA, which I failed to make clear. Is ANA going to serve IAD-SYD? No. What about Qantas? They would likely serve ORD, DFW, or both as the are an AA partner. Plus, connecting traffic would be an important factor in the flight working, and IAD is a bad place to connect for such a flight due to the need to backtrack for the rest of the US.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 26):
I also assume that if SYD were served already by all those other airports, you wouldn't have IAD-SYD, but that isn't the case, now is it?

I would also say there is a lot more East Coast - Hawaii traffic than East Coast - Oz traffic. One or two flights to any of those cities would preclude a Washington flight. Plus, on this point, I refer you to the second point I made in this post.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 26):
The only reason it doesn't exist now is that there is no way to do it,

And even when the first 772LR is delivered, it still won't happen, because there isn't enough demand.

Quoting N60659 (Reply 25):
Okay. Reality check time. The title of the thread is "777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East". How did this degenerate into whether CO should remain in CLE?

My apologies. I frankly agreed with his point in another thread that sometimes Cleveland's are a little to anxious to to list flight we might be getting, even though they are quite unlikely, but I took offense when he comes to another thread and proceeds to do the same thing he just complained we did. I'll now leave this thread for good so you can discuss the topic at hand.
"Why you fly is your business, how you fly is ours"
 
shawnnyc
Posts: 234
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 9:48 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:34 am

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 28):
O&D of 250 passengers won't cut it, as likely many would opt to stop somewhere rather than face an 18 hour flight, such as why SQ still offers one stop SIN service form JFK when it operates to EWR nonstop

I think SQ offers the one stop from JFK as they feel:
1) They, as a major business airline, need to serve both airports in NYC
2) They are STAR and can make money flying to FRA, a STAR hub, from a very large market, NYC.

I think very few people fly to SIN or asia from NYC via SQ's one stop service it is just too long. THe only ones that might are those that cannot get a cheap flight on SQ out of EWR. I've flown both the JFK and EWR flight both are very long but JFK is brutal to SIN, brutal.
 
avek00
Posts: 3156
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:32 pm

SQ flies JFK-FRA-SIN because it does well on both JFK-FRA and FRA-SIN.
Live life to the fullest.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:41 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 26):
ut it isn't possible and because of the warm climate in Florida and ETOPS 207 restrictions

No USA carrier is permitted to utilize ETOPS207 over the southern Pacific
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
joeman
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:55 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:46 pm

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 24):
Who the heck are you? Mayor White? Are you suggesting we run CO out of town? If CO left town, do you think we would see improved air service? Are you nuts?


The simple fact is, CLE is indeed the red-headed stepchild. It's not going to see improved service for a while. But to say it will never receive expanded service, or that we would be better off if CO packs up and leaves is foolish.

The implication of support or hub closure was made by Gordon Bethune. I never said CLE would be better off without CO, but with an operation which is and has remained stagnant, a little low cost competition isn't so bad, even if it's down the road. I actually wish CO would show more interest.

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 24):
Ah, the landing fees argument. CLE has high landing fees, yes, but cheep gate/counter fees. It all averages out to CLE being about the same as many other airports.

That's good to know.

Quoting N60659 (Reply 25):
Okay. Reality check time. The title of the thread is "777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East". How did this degenerate into whether CO should remain in CLE?

You're right. Although all the references to Australia above do not quite qaulify, ORD-SYD would be my vote.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: 777LR: All Eyes On India, Asia & Middle East

Fri Jul 15, 2005 3:51 pm

Quoting GoCOgo (Reply 28):
I was referring to UA

BUT I WASN'T! You never said "I am referring specifically and only to UA" because that would be silly.

I was referring to the routes, not UA. UA has no money. They aren't going to buy planes. My point was that if this route was possible when UA could buy planes, or when QF was buying those 744ERs, the route would already exist.

The shear number of non-stop flights to IAD and MIA from Europe DOES tend to prove that non-stop to Oz would likely have enough O&D for 3x weekly service. Why? Because despite the location, Oz is a "western" country and westerners do share a lot of the same interests, including visiting New York, Florida and Washington DC.

The Oz-California O&D market is not big enough for the number of flights QF, NZ and UA fly to LAX, yet they do it because there is no alternative, and LAX offers many connections on AA and UA. We're not talking 1000 seats a day to IAD here, we're talking 750 seats a week! If QF could do it, they would. The flight isn't much longer than SYD-LAX (3.5-4.5 hours) and in the grand scheme of things, 25% isn't horrible.

If there was a way to do non-stop JFK or MIA, you would have had have less frequency on LAX and have it replaced with these routes. But the planes don't exist, or didn't, and now, the airlines don't really have the money to buy them, considering they have already invested in the other routes with the 747 and the A380.

But they are all far more plausible than CLE, because you will probably see all these routes in the next 10 years, but are unlikely to see many new CLE routes at all.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, aviationaware, Baidu [Spider], dk44, euroflyer, flipdewaf, Google Adsense [Bot], intotheair, KarelXWB, LA704, LAX772LR, Ncfc99, qf789, sirtoby, springtx, StTim, Tvilum, Yahoo [Bot] and 202 guests