Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
levg79 wrote:Are the passengers being accommodated at the Airbus's expense?
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.
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.
Runway28L wrote:There was a post I recently viewed where HA workers were removing both engines off of an A321neo inside of a hangar.
dc10lover wrote:It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?
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.
dc10lover wrote:It's been what, a year now and P&W still having troubles?
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.
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
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?
RayChuang wrote: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?
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!
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
FA9295 wrote:So this is why a few PDX-OGG and OAK-OGG flights have been operated by the A330/B767 as of recently...
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
- The 330 will be substituting for the planned HNL-PDX transition to the 321neo in March due to the delay in the 3rd aircraft.
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.
jbpdx wrote:https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/276476/hawaiian-w18-honolulu-portland-or-aircraft-changes/
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.
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.