https://www.hawaiianairlines.com/notifi ... adjustment
https://www.sfgate.com/chris-mcginnis/a ... 704798.php

OAK-KOA, SFO-HNL added frequency canceled for now. OAK-LIH start delayed from April 11 to July 15. PDX-OGG apparently survives for now.

Are the passengers being accommodated at the Airbus's expense?

levg79 wrote:

Are the passengers being accommodated at the Airbus's expense?

Hawaiian may get compensation but the passengers likely won’t as they will likely be reaccomodated well in advance, unless passengers specifically request to be compensated.

https://www.sfgate.com/chris-mcginnis/a ... 704798.php

Looks like HA has taken a hit from their PW-powered birds and is having to cancel flights.

It's a pity, because the GTF is really promising technology. But PW won't be able to develop it further if their commercial program can't make a profit because they forgot to build the rest of the engine correctly.

Ouch. another hit for Pratt & Whitney... Just more bad news as usual...

Misleading title, the cancellations aren't because of technical issue with their aircraft. Rather Airbus/PW aren't delivering new aircraft/engines currently.

There was a post I recently viewed where HA workers were removing both engines off of an A321neo inside of a hangar.

maximairways wrote:

Misleading title, the cancellations aren't because of technical issue with their aircraft. Rather Airbus/PW aren't delivering new aircraft/engines currently.

I don’t think it’s misleading because there was a picture of an A321 missing it’s engines.

ikolkyo wrote:

maximairways wrote:

Misleading title, the cancellations aren't because of technical issue with their aircraft. Rather Airbus/PW aren't delivering new aircraft/engines currently.

I don’t think it’s misleading because there was a picture of an A321 missing it’s engines.

From the article "The carrier cited delays in the delivery of its new Airbus A321neo jets for the sudden schedule changes."

Runway28L wrote:

There was a post I recently viewed where HA workers were removing both engines off of an A321neo inside of a hangar.

I'm pretty sure every PW powered NEO has spent a at least a little time sitting with no engines on them. NK had at least 3 if not 4 of them sitting at DFW without engines for quite sometime.

Its a sad sight to see a brand new airplane sitting around for months doing nothing because of this.

It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?

dc10lover wrote:

It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?

New tech will always have teething problems, though not conventient for customers. The high bypass turbofans (P&W) had their share of teething problems.

Yikes. Hope this doesn't effect the LGB-HNL inaugural.

Does this mean that the phaseout of their 767s will be delayed? Another thread mentioned that their oldest 767 was being retired, a non-ER model if I'm recalling the thread correctly (please correct me if my wine addled brain isn't recalling things properly!). Might this cause Hawaiian to reconsider and perhaps defer this and other near future retirements? Or, will they try for some interim lift for the time being? Given that Hawaiian doesn't have the biggest fleet, these cancellations have to be really causing problems. I'm hoping to fly an A321 out of Long Beach at some point in the near future.

Many thanks!

I feel for the network planners at Hawaiian. The excited launch of the A321neo is more or less grinding to a halt. I wouldn’t be surprised if Alaska steps up their marketing for Hawaiian routes out of Oakland. Add to that the A330neos that were supposed to be delivered in 2017 and 767 schedule for being phased out changing, means the network planning department is getting many curveballs thrown at them.

maximairways wrote:

Misleading title, the cancellations aren't because of technical issue with their aircraft. Rather Airbus/PW aren't delivering new aircraft/engines currently.

Not exactly. The article states that HA “... has at least one A321neo in its fleet affected by the engine issue, according to CNN .”

My wife and I actually flew on the A321neo from OAK to OGG in January. It was a great ride.

dc10lover wrote:

It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?

You're surprised?

This is pretty much par for the course with PW. Heck, there's a reason that they haven't appeared on a new Boeing derivative in 20yrs, and I rather doubt that that'll be changing any time soon, in light of this.

Couldn't deliver on the PW4173 for A330s.

Couldn't deliver on the PW4092 for 772ERs.

Delivered PW4098s for 773As, but they missed their targets so badly that PW found it cheaper to repurchase all outstanding engines, re-outfit the aircraft with PW4090s, and compensate the airline... rather than actually improve the 4098.

And then there were the narrowbodies.....

william wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?

New tech will always have teething problems, though not conventient for customers. The high bypass turbofans (P&W) had their share of teething problems.

PW has been developing GTF for 30 years. When will it be ready for prime time?

So this is why a few PDX-OGG and OAK-OGG flights have been operated by the A330/B767 as of recently...

Max Q wrote:

Especially between the west coast and the Hawaiian islands, at the half way point you
are further from land than anywhere on our
planet

Which planet is this?

coolian2 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Especially between the west coast and the Hawaiian islands, at the half way point you
are further from land than anywhere on our
planet

Which planet is this?

Planet 'Murica.

If I remember correctly, Pratt & Whitney had a horrible time with the early JT9D engines--the only engines available for the 747 for a couple of years. Small wonder why Boeing more than happily accepted the offer for the GE CF6-50 and Rolls-Royce RB.211-524 engines for the 747-200 models.

I think the problem is that P&W is having serious quality control issues with the PW1100G engines. It may require a possibly a major internal redesign to finally get that engine properly working. Meanwhile, introduction of the CFM International LEAP 1-A engine is going a lot more smoothly, so it appears most of the A320neo Family deliveries are of the LEAP 1-A versions.

dampfnudel wrote:

Could HA change to the LEAP 1-A if problems persist with P&W?

Sure, they "could"... but probably not without costly legal wrangling with PW.

And even if they did, it's not like GE just has a whole bunch of engines sitting around unsold, so they'd still have to wait quite a while before receiving any.

Aptivaboy wrote:

Does this mean that the phaseout of their 767s will be delayed? Another thread mentioned that their oldest 767 was being retired, a non-ER model if I'm recalling the thread correctly (please correct me if my wine addled brain isn't recalling things properly!). Might this cause Hawaiian to reconsider and perhaps defer this and other near future retirements? Or, will they try for some interim lift for the time being? Given that Hawaiian doesn't have the biggest fleet, these cancellations have to be really causing problems. I'm hoping to fly an A321 out of Long Beach at some point in the near future.
Many thanks!

The current plan sees 5 of the 7 retired in the second half of this year and the final two in early 2019. 3 of the 7 are going to UA so those cannot be extended and will go H2-2018 regardless of the 321 issues. Can the other 2 due to be retired this year be extended, perhaps. But this is still 6-10 months away so HA may wait and see what happens with the 321s prior to making the call.

Forgive me, I’m not much of an engineer my results are too technical - in simple terms what’s the new tech involved, and why can’t the get it right?

Also I think the Leap1 engines are being pushed out as fast as they can, which is still a little slower than A and B can make planes, IIRC.

Newbiepilot wrote:

I feel for the network planners at Hawaiian. The excited launch of the A321neo is more or less grinding to a halt. I wouldn’t be surprised if Alaska steps up their marketing for Hawaiian routes out of Oakland. Add to that the A330neos that were supposed to be delivered in 2017 and 767 schedule for being phased out changing, means the network planning department is getting many curveballs thrown at them.

Perhaps. I also wouldn't be surprised if they just rode it out until WN jumps into the market and then shift their flights to SFO. I'm a little surprised they haven't already, given the focus on building up SFO and the lack of any effort to do anything at OAK.

smi0006 wrote:

Forgive me, I’m not much of an engineer my results are too technical - in simple terms what’s the new tech involved, and why can’t the get it right?

The GTF has a gearbox between the core and the fan rather then having them directly connected. My understanding is that means the core can run at higher speeds and the gearbox gives more torque to the fan, allowing it to be larger for a given core size. The other aircraft to use Geared Turbofans is the BAe 146 / Avro RJ - but that's more because their engines are derived from Helicopter engines!

Ironically it seems like the gearbox is working well, the problems seem to be in the core itself.

bgm wrote:

coolian2 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Especially between the west coast and the Hawaiian islands, at the half way point you
are further from land than anywhere on our
planet

Which planet is this?

Planet 'Murica.

coolian2 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Especially between the west coast and the Hawaiian islands, at the half way point you
are further from land than anywhere on our
planet

Which planet is this?

The Hawaiian Islands are the most isolated group of islands on planet Earth that you can just hop in an airliner and go to. Yes, it is also the 50th State of America as well.

ucdtim17 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

I feel for the network planners at Hawaiian. The excited launch of the A321neo is more or less grinding to a halt. I wouldn’t be surprised if Alaska steps up their marketing for Hawaiian routes out of Oakland. Add to that the A330neos that were supposed to be delivered in 2017 and 767 schedule for being phased out changing, means the network planning department is getting many curveballs thrown at them.

Perhaps. I also wouldn't be surprised if they just rode it out until WN jumps into the market and then shift their flights to SFO. I'm a little surprised they haven't already, given the focus on building up SFO and the lack of any effort to do anything at OAK.

Alaskas Hawaii network intentionally avoided conpeting directly with United and to a lesser extent Hawaiian. OAK kept them out of UAs turf, who leads by far in capacity from California to Hawaii. The A321s have let Hawaiian compete directly with Alaska. Hawaiian's A321 problems help Alaska.

tb727 wrote:

bgm wrote:

coolian2 wrote:

Which planet is this?

Planet 'Murica.

coolian2 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Especially between the west coast and the Hawaiian islands, at the half way point you
are further from land than anywhere on our
planet

Which planet is this?

The Hawaiian Islands are the most isolated group of islands on planet Earth that you can just hop in an airliner and go to. Yes, it is also the 50th State of America as well.

The original point was that halfway between Hawaii and the US mainland is the furthest you can be from land. That is utterly false.

hkcanadaexpat.

Thanks for the update and info. I appreciate it!

I'm literally sitting here on A.Net and HA's website simultaneously, wanting to purchase a ticket from Long Beach to Hawaii in June, but I'm concerned about my trip being postponed or cancelled if the A321s can't be made right. Ugh... Right when I get nearly two confirmed weeks off, too! Grrr...

I agree, this can only help Alaska and United, the other two really heavy hitters in the Hawaiian market. Let's hope it can be cleared up relatively quickly. I want to fly (safely) on that pretty new bird!

FA9295 wrote:

So this is why a few PDX-OGG and OAK-OGG flights have been operated by the A330/B767 as of recently...

Yes that was the reason for why the A330/767 were substituted for the A321neo, N204HA, which was taken out of service due to the FAA/EASA directives that affected the P/W engines after a specific manufacturing date. P/W was able to get couple engines that were manufactured before the certain date, hence HA was able to bring back the N204HA back into service quickly. However like everyone else stated, pretty much all P/W powered A321neos that used the same engines and manufactured are giant paperweights for Airbus.

HA was suppose to have taken a third A321neo this month, but now been pushed back until P/W can get a workaround or fixed the "new" design that was suppose to have fixed another problem.

Aptivaboy wrote:

hkcanadaexpat.

Thanks for the update and info. I appreciate it!

I'm literally sitting here on A.Net and HA's website simultaneously, wanting to purchase a ticket from Long Beach to Hawaii in June, but I'm concerned about my trip being postponed or cancelled if the A321s can't be made right. Ugh... Right when I get nearly two confirmed weeks off, too! Grrr...

I agree, this can only help Alaska and United, the other two really heavy hitters in the Hawaiian market. Let's hope it can be cleared up relatively quickly. I want to fly (safely) on that pretty new bird!

Hopefully the delay is not going to affect this flight. More than likely, they would just substitute the either PDX or OAK with a 767/A330 and have the A321neo run this flight. Just my thought.

william wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?

New tech will always have teething problems, though not conventient for customers.

The trouble isn't with the new tech, though. It's with the seals, shafts, bearings, and casings. The gearbox is working wonderfully. I haven't heard of any problems there.

Wow, as usual, some confusion and lack of clarity due to lots of misinformation. Here are the facts:

- An AD affecting the PW engines is affecting further delivery of aircraft. Interestingly the issue with the engine isn't with the new GTF technology.
- HA got 204 back into service pretty quick and is in service today along side 202. Both are flying OGG-OAK and OGG-PDX.
- The 330 will be substituting for the planned HNL-PDX transition to the 321neo in March due to the delay in the 3rd aircraft.
- As announced the 2nd HNL-SFO and OAK-KOA will not launch this year. Guests are being rebooked on other HA flights
- LIH-OAK service resumption is delayed until later summer
- All other 321neo marketed flights are as scheduled barring any other delays. This means OGG-SAN, HNL-LGB and other later summer changes
- This isn't going to mean Alaska will pounce on anything. Nor will it give Southwest an itch to start early
- There likely will be a 767 that was recently retired, returning to the fleet as a backup plan. Though that could take months before EIS.
- PW/Airbus are suggesting deliveries will resume in April/May, so this isn't the end of the world for HA as some are eluding to.
- Competing directly against Alaska and all the others is nothing new and I don't see how this issue would change the competitive dynamics

MrHMSH wrote:

tb727 wrote:

bgm wrote:

The original point was that halfway between Hawaii and the US mainland is the furthest you can be from land. That is utterly false.

To hijack the thread, what would be the right answer? That at the half way point you are furthest from land? Considering flights, would it be NZ between Auckland and Buenos Aires?

Newbiepilot wrote:

ucdtim17 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

I feel for the network planners at Hawaiian. The excited launch of the A321neo is more or less grinding to a halt. I wouldn’t be surprised if Alaska steps up their marketing for Hawaiian routes out of Oakland. Add to that the A330neos that were supposed to be delivered in 2017 and 767 schedule for being phased out changing, means the network planning department is getting many curveballs thrown at them.

Perhaps. I also wouldn't be surprised if they just rode it out until WN jumps into the market and then shift their flights to SFO. I'm a little surprised they haven't already, given the focus on building up SFO and the lack of any effort to do anything at OAK.

Alaskas Hawaii network intentionally avoided conpeting directly with United and to a lesser extent Hawaiian. OAK kept them out of UAs turf, who leads by far in capacity from California to Hawaii. The A321s have let Hawaiian compete directly with Alaska. Hawaiian's A321 problems help Alaska.

That was likely their thinking when they started OAK and SJC Hawaii flights 10 (?) years ago but since the VX purchase it's been all systems go at SFO (at least until the past few weeks - MSP, MEX, FLL). No way to build up a hub at SFO and not go against UA.

ikolkyo wrote:

maximairways wrote:

Misleading title, the cancellations aren't because of technical issue with their aircraft. Rather Airbus/PW aren't delivering new aircraft/engines currently.

I don’t think it’s misleading because there was a picture of an A321 missing it’s engines.

If your going to note there is a pic. Please place a link to it. Otherwise it's a rumored pic.

william wrote:

dc10lover wrote:

It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?

New tech will always have teething problems, though not conventient for customers. The high bypass turbofans (P&W) had their share of teething problems.

Pratt has had new engine issues dating back to the multi day delayed 747 first commercial service, and rough run for the first year.

Max Q wrote:

How long before the ‘promising new technology’ meets its promise ?

I mean the problems with this engine just
go on and on


I would not ride on an aircraft powered by these GTF engines at the moment


Especially between the west coast and the Hawaiian islands, at the half way point you
are further from land than anywhere on our
planet

not true.

The most distant point from land is the Pacific pole of inaccessibility (also called "Point Nemo"), which lies in the South Pacific Ocean at 48°52.6′S 123°23.6′W, approximately 2,688 km (1,670 mi) from the nearest land (equidistant from Ducie Island in the Pitcairn Islands to the north, Motu Nui off Rapa Nui to the northeast, and Maher Island off Siple Island near Marie Byrd Land, Antarctica, to the south).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_p ... Remoteness

- The 330 will be substituting for the planned HNL-PDX transition to the 321neo in March due to the delay in the 3rd aircraft.

This wasn’t scheduled to happen until November.

jbpdx wrote:

- The 330 will be substituting for the planned HNL-PDX transition to the 321neo in March due to the delay in the 3rd aircraft.

This wasn’t scheduled to happen until November.

False. It was scheduled to switch mid March.

jbpdx wrote:

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/276476/hawaiian-w18-honolulu-portland-or-aircraft-changes/

Ah yes, because things like this never evolve. When this was discussed, I cautioned that LOTS can change between January and November. And it did. HA allocated the 3rd 321 to HNL-PDX in a subsequent filing effective mid March. Looks like at this point, it's been pushed to a May 1st launch due to the late arrival of a/c #3.

rbavfan wrote:

Max Q wrote:

How long before the ‘promising new technology’ meets its promise ?

I mean the problems with this engine just
go on and on


I would not ride on an aircraft powered by these GTF engines at the moment


Especially between the west coast and the Hawaiian islands, at the half way point you
are further from land than anywhere on our
planet

not true.

He may not be technically correct, there are places that would be further from land, but is correct in terms of normally flown air routes. The stretch from the mainland of the US to Hawaii places you further from an ETOPS airport than any other route.

azjubilee wrote:

jbpdx wrote:

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/276476/hawaiian-w18-honolulu-portland-or-aircraft-changes/

Ah yes, because things like this never evolve. When this was discussed, I cautioned that LOTS can change between January and November. And it did. HA allocated the 3rd 321 to HNL-PDX in a subsequent filing effective mid March. Looks like at this point, it's been pushed to a May 1st launch due to the late arrival of a/c #3.

Haven’t heard of any updates. Portland’s getting a capacity cut with higher fares, even without any potential aircraft problems.