AFa340-300E
Topic Author
Posts: 2115
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

US Airways A340

Mon Jul 10, 2000 7:28 am

Hello,

Some US Airways A330 pilots reported earlier this year that the airline could be interested in some A340s for routes like PHL-FCU (Rome) which provides additional range margins during the winter months that made it a more attractive choice (the winds off the East Coast getting stronger in winter).
Anyone heard about this?

I have heard that US Airways had a request for Japanese services a couple of years ago. Could anyone tell me more about this please?

Thank you,

Best regards,
Alain Mengus
 
D L X
Posts: 11628
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Airways A340

Mon Jul 10, 2000 8:42 am

Won't happen.  

First off, the 333 has plenty range, and is currently flying the PHL-FCO route. That route is only 4400 miles, well within the 333's range, even with a sizable payload. It was however, a bit of a stretch for the 762s.

As for the routes to Japan, unfortunately, US did not have the equipment at the time to run the route, and had to cede to Alaska Airlines as the 7th airline to be allowed to fly to Japan. What's weird is that Alaska hasn't started service, and neither has TWA. I wouldn't doubt that it is possible for US to get that authority back.

If somehow, US Airways does get into the Japanese market, 333s won't cut it of course. However, the 332 would make it, and I think that's a better option than going to the 4 engined 340.
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

RE: US Airways A340

Mon Jul 10, 2000 8:48 am

I don't think US Airways needs the 340 to operate
its longest route, Philadelphia to Rome. As stated
above, the Airbus A330-300 has sufficient range
and cargo capacity to operate the route in an
effective and efficient manner.

With widebodies now coming in (7 A330's in the
fleet by year end, up to 30 by 2002 if options
are exercised) US Airways really should fix its
short-haul fleet soon, irrespective of the UA
merger. Despite the nifty A319's and A320's,
the backbone of the fleet is still a large and
aging fleet of 737-300's, MD80's, and DC9's.

ContinentalEWR
 
AFa340-300E
Topic Author
Posts: 2115
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

RE: US Airways A340

Mon Jul 10, 2000 9:09 am

Hello,

Are you sure about that? Even in winter?

About NRT: When were they awarded these rights please?

Best regards,
Alain Mengus
 
Ryefly
Posts: 1324
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2000 7:56 am

RE: US Airways A340

Mon Jul 10, 2000 11:42 am

I think it all depends on if US Airways decides they want to go over the Pacific or not. Seeing as the A340 is virtually the same as the A330 I can't see why they wouldn't get a few A340's in the future. Its not like they are would be going way out on a limb and getting 747's. If a few of those options they have don't change to an A340, they will order some with in 5 years I would think.
 
D L X
Posts: 11628
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Airways A340

Mon Jul 10, 2000 2:18 pm

Yes, even in winter. The 762 made it in the winter (but just BARELY). The 333 has a much greater range than the 762s in the US fleet. Also, it was quite clear that US wanted a plane that could fly at least as far as PHL-FCO, and more likely PIT-ATH. Why would US buy a plane that didn't fit its needs?


The reason why US won't buy the 340 over the 332 is because they obviously have different engines than the 340. Either they buy a version with the CFM56 (which would have commonality with the 320 fleet, but supposedly underpowered, thus giving a severe disadvantage to 744 operators) or an RR powered version. Going with the 332 allows them to keep the same Pratt powerplant on all 330s.
 
Panther
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2000 3:17 pm

RE: US Airways A340

Mon Jul 10, 2000 2:29 pm

If the United Airlines merger goes through, US airways would not need to worry about equipment and routes for that matter. It would be foolish for them to put A340s on credit if United is going to take over.
 
US521
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 1999 9:15 am

UAL Here People!

Mon Jul 10, 2000 9:59 pm

US doesn't have any choice in the matter. Ask UAL.
Even though the merger may not happen there is a 95% chance it will so it is if UAL wants to keep the A330 and get A340's.
US521
 
mbmbos
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 4:16 am

DLX: Are You Sure?

Tue Jul 11, 2000 4:00 am

DLX,

Are you sure that the 762 barely has the range to complete the FCO-PHL route?

762s have been used on European flights out of Atlanta, Raliegh, Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

The stated maximum range on a 762 is 6,600 statute miles.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 7982
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: US Airways A340

Tue Jul 11, 2000 6:28 am

I really doubt that US Airways would want to buy the A340. The reason is simple: none of their current routes demand a plane capable of very long range flying that the A340 can do.

Now, if US Airways do fly PIT/PHL to NRT, then they might get the A340-300. After all, Singapore Airlines is trading in a number of them and US Airways might be interesting in this case.
 
USAirways737
Posts: 986
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 7:20 am

RE: US Airways A340

Tue Jul 11, 2000 7:39 am

I think US Airways has the older 767-200s not the 767-200ERs so that might be why their 767s can barely make the phl-fco route.
 
Gregg
Posts: 313
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2000 12:49 pm

RE: US Airways A340

Tue Jul 11, 2000 11:39 am

USAirways got their first ~ 6 767 from Peidmont. All the Peidmont aircraft were 767-200er with 6600 mile range. At leat the 767 Usairways got from Piedmont has greater range then the A330-300. USAirways purchased about 1/2 of the rest of their 767-200 fleet after they got the Peidmont aircraft, and I don't know if there wer ER or not.
 
D L X
Posts: 11628
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Airways 762

Wed Jul 12, 2000 1:46 am

The version that US Airways has does not have the maximum range offered on the 762 by Boeing. Since most of their routes are shorter, carrying around all the extra weight for bigger fuel tanks and such would be a waste of more fuel and money.

Off the top of my head, I cannot remember where I heard this information, but I'll look again. BTW, who uses 762s from the West Coast to Europe? I know 763s get used, and they are the fully decked out versions that can fly that far.
 
D L X
Posts: 11628
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

US521

Wed Jul 12, 2000 2:12 am

Why are you so sure that the merger will go through? Congress seems to want otherwise. The DOJ didn't let CO and NW merge either. Why will UA/US get an exception?
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 3619
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

RE: US Airways A340

Wed Jul 12, 2000 2:13 am

All US Airways 767's are the -200ER version, including those acquired from
Piedmont and those ordered directly from the manufacturer. The 767-200
ER can make it to Rome without much trouble. It just so happens that this
is US Airways' longest route. TWA used to fly the 767-200ER from JFK to
FCO, before pulling the route in January 2000.

The 767-200ER can fly many long-routes. I once flew American Airlines
from Chicago O'Hare to Zurich in 1991 in 767-200ER. The -200ER does
not, however, have the range to fly from the West Coast to Europe.

ContinentalEWR
 
D L X
Posts: 11628
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: US Airways A340

Wed Jul 12, 2000 4:13 am

Actually, that's not quite true.

Some 767-200ERs do have the range to run to the west coast from Europe. Some do not. Some can, but with weight restrictions. Apparently, US's 762s can do the FCO-PHL run with weight restrictions. (And a flight with less cargo is more expensive to operate.)

Different airlines configure their planes differently. Some of US Airways' 733s and 734s can run transcontinentally year round. United's can't. (Their 735s come close, doing East Coast-DEN and SJC-ORD.) Why is this? US Airways paid extra to have some of its fleet fitted with larger fuel tanks in order to make that trip. (These are the 737s with TVs.) US elected not to install large tanks in the 767s since they were bough to fly the shorter London routes.
 
tupolev154b2
Posts: 1269
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2000 9:01 am

RE: US Airways A340

Wed Jul 12, 2000 4:17 am

Off the topic, but doesn't CO use 733's on such routes as CVG-LAX?
 
mlsrar
Posts: 1384
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 7:41 am

Range

Wed Jul 12, 2000 11:12 am

Continental, The LAX-LHR route is 5440 mi. estimated. The 762's range is 6653 mi. with full pax payload, and 5609 with pax/cargo. the pax/cargo load would be against FAA regs for emer. fuel consumption, but with a full pax, or partial pax/partial cargo load, lax-lhr in a 762er is extremely feasible. Remember that it was, at its introduction, the longest-range twinjet in the world, and barring the 747SP, longest range aircraft.
I mean, for the right price I’ll fight a lion. - Mike Tyson

Who is online