Planes4you wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

What will FRA-AUS be flown on? A333, A359, or A343 I'd imagine are the three options.

Did you seriously think they’ll send an A350 to AUS?

It will definitely be no A 350-900, as all of these aircraft are based in MUC.

C010T3 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

MUC is highly congested and nearly out of slots. That is why they are increasing the size of the aircraft there. This will be a trend until a 3rd runway gets built.

That's quite an exaggeration. Lufthansa will be able to grow at MUC for the next ten years: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/u ... 10347.html

BA will also continue to grow in LHR for the next 10 years. Are you saying LHR is not highly congested and out of slots?

flyer1225 wrote:

Lufthansa does play a pretty large role in the US-India market.

Not nearly as large as it once was. Not only have they dropped routes but their fares are ridiculously high which tells me that they're not really interested in competing in that market, which is not necessarily a bad thing by the way given how cheap the J fares are. Advanced booking on BA goes for less than $3,000 R/T. But the biggest problem is that their India flights don't connect very well with their U.S. flights at FRA. A conx can take as much as 7 hours. Who wants to spend 7 hours in FRA? That's really the biggest problem.

airbazar wrote:

But the biggest problem is that their India flights don't connect very well with their U.S. flights at FRA. A conx can take as much as 7 hours. Who wants to spend 7 hours in FRA? That's really the biggest problem.

For some connections you can wait a little longer, thats true, but for most connection the transfer time is pretty good. (I only checked India -> US though)

The flights from India arrive between 7:30 and 9:00 and the LH flights to the US leave between 10:00 and 14:00

BOS: 13:05 & 17:55
EWR: 13:20 +1 UA flight
JFK: 11:00 & 17:10
IAD: 10:40 & 13:25 +2 UA flights
ORD: 10:45 & 17:15 +2 UA flights
MIA: 10:45
TPA: 13:40
ATL: 10:20
DTW: 10:00
IAH: 10:00 +1 UA flight
DFW: 10:20
DEN: 13:25
SFO: 10:30 +2 UA flights
LAX: 10:15 + 14:05
SEA: 10:45
SJC: 10:40
SAN: 10:05

So if you want to fly to DEN, TPA, EWR, BOS or book the late flights you don't have to wait that long.

cityshuttle wrote:

Planes4you wrote:

BWIAirport wrote:

What will FRA-AUS be flown on? A333, A359, or A343 I'd imagine are the three options.

Did you seriously think they’ll send an A350 to AUS?

It will definitely be no A 350-900, as all of these aircraft are based in MUC.

Thank you. I been waiting all day for someone to mention this.

Congrats to AUS! Nice add.

klm617 wrote:

UGH !!!!!!!!!!!!! and still no MUC-DTW

I am also surprised there is no DTW-MUC on LH. Automotive traffic alone should make that work. But it's also not a zero sum game with AUS...

airbazar wrote:

Blerg wrote:

How many A380 gates does MUC have? Nice to see more flights being added, MUC is a great airport.

MUC is highly congested and nearly out of slots. That is why they are increasing the size of the aircraft there. This will be a trend until a 3rd runway gets built.

Yeah, not really. While building a 3rd runway would be considered future proofing the airport, at the moment the two runways are fine. They are increasing aircraft size as MUC is the better transit airport and to up the pressure on FRA.

klm617 wrote:

UGH !!!!!!!!!!!!! and still no MUC-DTW

You have some much AMS and CDG service.

airbazar wrote:

BA will also continue to grow in LHR for the next 10 years. Are you saying LHR is not highly congested and out of slots?

There is really no comparison.

Bobloblaw wrote:

klm617 wrote:

UGH !!!!!!!!!!!!! and still no MUC-DTW

You have some much AMS and CDG service.

But what does that have to do with MUC-DTW on Lufthansa. If anything that's a clear indicator as to why LH should start DTW-MUC

Maybe not a clean start, but rather a move of the FRA-DTW to MUC-DTW?

LH779 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

But the biggest problem is that their India flights don't connect very well with their U.S. flights at FRA. A conx can take as much as 7 hours. Who wants to spend 7 hours in FRA? That's really the biggest problem.

For some connections you can wait a little longer, thats true, but for most connection the transfer time is pretty good. (I only checked India -> US though)

The flights from India arrive between 7:30 and 9:00 and the LH flights to the US leave between 10:00 and 14:00

BOS: 13:05 & 17:55
EWR: 13:20 +1 UA flight
JFK: 11:00 & 17:10
IAD: 10:40 & 13:25 +2 UA flights
ORD: 10:45 & 17:15 +2 UA flights
MIA: 10:45
TPA: 13:40
ATL: 10:20
DTW: 10:00
IAH: 10:00 +1 UA flight
DFW: 10:20
DEN: 13:25
SFO: 10:30 +2 UA flights
LAX: 10:15 + 14:05
SEA: 10:45
SJC: 10:40
SAN: 10:05

So if you want to fly to DEN, TPA, EWR, BOS or book the late flights you don't have to wait that long.

You forgot MCO

I'm actually surprised by AUS..

I would have bet a return to PDX, or the opening of Baltimore, Minneapolis or Cleveland, or the launch of new MUC flights to DTW, SEA, or the multitude of other US destinations not served from MUC (DFW, PHL, ATL, MCO)

AUS is the new OC (Orange County)....just run when the next recession hits, although AUS is the State Capital & home of the Longhorns whereas OC has Fantasyland.

Nicoeddf wrote:

airbazar wrote:

Blerg wrote:

How many A380 gates does MUC have? Nice to see more flights being added, MUC is a great airport.

MUC is highly congested and nearly out of slots. That is why they are increasing the size of the aircraft there. This will be a trend until a 3rd runway gets built.

Yeah, not really. While building a 3rd runway would be considered future proofing the airport, at the moment the two runways are fine. They are increasing aircraft size as MUC is the better transit airport and to up the pressure on FRA.

I also wonder if this has to do with Japanese tourists. MUC area is way more popular for Asian tourists than FRA. Also MUC is a better connection point (geographically) than FRA from KIX to places like Croacia, Italy, Greece, Vienna, Prague, Budapest... and for the Westernmost part of Europe (France, UK, Spain) does not change anything.

aaexecplat wrote:

Where is the forum member that was arguing with me not even a couple of weeks ago saying that including AUS in the pool of possible next TATL options was preposterous?

Certainly wasn't me

JonNYC wrote:

AA/BA will soon have a new headache in this area

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1402791&p=20685491#p20685491

Just curious, are these simply announcements for new routes for 2019, or has the official 2019 LH timetable been made available?

ORDfan wrote:

Just curious, are these simply announcements for new routes for 2019, or has the official 2019 LH timetable been made available?

Pretty sure the timetable will become available October 4th.

stylo777 wrote:

Maybe not a clean start, but rather a move of the FRA-DTW to MUC-DTW?

FRA-DTW isn't going anywhere Detroit could easily support a MUC and FRA flight alongside of each other.

klm617 wrote:

stylo777 wrote:

Maybe not a clean start, but rather a move of the FRA-DTW to MUC-DTW?

FRA-DTW isn't going anywhere Detroit could easily support a MUC and FRA flight alongside of each other.

We know you love DTW, but every thread turns into a referendum on DTW: DLs hatred (even though they announced HNL), Wayne County inhales vigorously, YYZ/ORD are evil, etc. If a market was there, LH would put a plane there instead of liberal redneck Austin. I’m avoiding the DTW thread so you all can talk all you want about how great DTW is and how it should be the ATL/DXB/FRA/HND/JFK/LAX/LHR/MIA/ORD/SFO of the world.

Please stop destroying this forum by making every thread about DTW! Even your own thread disowns you for the good of DTW.

Blerg wrote:

NZ321 wrote:

I don't rate MUC as a transfer point. Prone to delays and many missed connections. So good luck to LH on this. Let's hope they don't time their connections so tight.

I think the situation in FRA is far worse than in MUC. Both of their hubs are getting too crowded for the amount of traffic they handle.

What is the status of the third runway at MUC?

Do FRA and MUC play the same or different roles in LH’s network? If different, what purpose does each serve?

questions wrote:

Do FRA and MUC play the same or different roles in LH’s network? If different, what purpose does each serve?

Read the OP article, it explains a lot of that.

Blerg wrote:

NZ321 wrote:

What is the status of the third runway at MUC?

State legislature elections will take place in Bavaria on October 14th. Largely thanks to Angela Merkel, the ruling "conservative" CSU, which supports the third runway, is expected to lose its absolute majority. Many political observers think that the CSU will then have to form a coalition with the Green party, which - bizarrely - is considered the best match in Bavaria's/Germany's broken-beyond-repair poltical landscape.

Needless to say, the third runway at MUC will then not even be talked about for at least the next four years.

And lets not even think about what results an election might bring in four years' time, at which point Mutti's continuing stubbornness may well have eradicated moderate politics altogether.

I was yesterday few hours at muc for a connection. Love that airport. Add another runway and a new satellite and it will it will surpass FRA as LH hub.

I wish they would restart MUC-DXB again. I hate travelling via FRA.

I'm actually surprised by AUS..

I would have bet a return to PDX, or the opening of Baltimore, Minneapolis or Cleveland, or the launch of new MUC flights to DTW, SEA, or the multitude of other US destinations not served from MUC (DFW, PHL, ATL, MCO)

Blerg wrote:

NZ321 wrote:

IWhat is the status of the third runway at MUC?

I believe the voters reluctantly approved on the 3rd try. Not sure if construction has started.

PlaneInsomniac wrote:

Needless to say, the third runway at MUC will then not even be talked about for at least the next four years.

And lets not even think about what results an election might bring in four years' time, at which point Mutti's continuing stubbornness may well have eradicated moderate politics altogether.

For whatever reason, I thought 4-5 yrs ago the vote did approve for the 3rd runway. Recall lots of colleagues in the Friesing area who were pretty animated about the 'need' for 3rd runway.

Great new service for the new terminal extension at AUS! Should be a treat to all passengers in the airport.

LH779 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

But the biggest problem is that their India flights don't connect very well with their U.S. flights at FRA. A conx can take as much as 7 hours. Who wants to spend 7 hours in FRA? That's really the biggest problem.

For some connections you can wait a little longer, thats true, but for most connection the transfer time is pretty good. (I only checked India -> US though)

...

So if you want to fly to DEN, TPA, EWR, BOS or book the late flights you don't have to wait that long.

Eastward leg (North America -> India) connections through FRA, however, are less convenient compared to Westward leg as you addressed; most of LH & its partners flights arrive from North America early morning while LH to Delhi/Mumbai both depart after 1pm, therefore you would see most connections Eastward having 5 - 7 hours of transit time, Chennai may be less affected as it departs from FRA before 11am.

JonNYC wrote:

aaexecplat wrote:

Where is the forum member that was arguing with me not even a couple of weeks ago saying that including AUS in the pool of possible next TATL options was preposterous?

Certainly wasn't me

JonNYC wrote:

AA/BA will soon have a new headache in this area

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1402791&p=20685491#p20685491

I don't remember who it was, but it definitely wasn't' you.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

vadodara wrote:

PlaneInsomniac wrote:

Needless to say, the third runway at MUC will then not even be talked about for at least the next four years.

And lets not even think about what results an election might bring in four years' time, at which point Mutti's continuing stubbornness may well have eradicated moderate politics altogether.

For whatever reason, I thought 4-5 yrs ago the vote did approve for the 3rd runway. Recall lots of colleagues in the Friesing area who were pretty animated about the 'need' for 3rd runway.

The 2012 referendum by the inhabitants of Munich resulted in fairly clear NO vote (i.e., against the 3rd runway). However, that referendum was really mostly symbolic to begin with and it basically had no binding legal value. MUC is quite a distance away from the City on Munich in a different district. The only (indirect) influence the City of Munich has is through an ownership stake and a seat on the board of the airport corporation. Much more important is the will of the government of Bavaria. The present prime minister, who is effectively up for re-election on October 14th, is an outspoken supporter of the 3rd runway. However, he has postponed any further actions in this regard until after the state legislature elections in October. If his party will have to form a coalition with the Green party - as now seems likely - any further planning concerning the 3rd runway will almost certainly be pushed back many years.

MUC is almost at capacity, runway-wise. It'd be a shame to leave the significant investments made to the terminal buildings (the new "satellite", which is really another terminal, and the announced major overhaul of Terminal 1) as relatively under-utilized as they are...

LH779 wrote:

For some connections you can wait a little longer, thats true, but for most connection the transfer time is pretty good. (I only checked India -> US though)

The flights from India arrive between 7:30 and 9:00 and the LH flights to the US leave between 10:00 and 14:00

So if you want to fly to DEN, TPA, EWR, BOS or book the late flights you don't have to wait that long.

You forgot ot check the other direction: USA>India.
With the exception of when/where they have 2x daily, flights from the U.S. generally arrive in FRA early in the morning (5-6am) and flight to India all depart in the afternoon. This is one of the main reasons why connecting in DXB or LHR is preferable.

Nicoeddf wrote:

Yeah, not really. While building a 3rd runway would be considered future proofing the airport, at the moment the two runways are fine. They are increasing aircraft size as MUC is the better transit airport and to up the pressure on FRA.

Some people here need a reality check.
The airport was planned from day 1 to have 3 runways. That was future proofing. It needs that 3rd runway now.
https://blog.adbsafegate.com/munich-air ... structure/
"The current two-runway system is already operating at full capacity during peak hours, and requests for additional slots from airlines have been declined."
That was 3 years ago.
There's a reason why you're not seeing LCC fly TATL from MUC. It's because they can't get slots. Lack of LCC's means fares stay artificially high and of course that benefits LH. But it hurts the local market.
LH as the largest operator at MUC and a partial owner has some flexibility in what it can do to mitigate the slots restrictions. Much like what BA is doing at LHR.
MUC and LHR aren't really that different with the exception that LHR has reached its peak capacity many years ago. MUC is on the same exact path as LHR.

To pluralize the word “lot”, simply add an s. Adding ‘s makes the word lot possessive, which is not what you’re doing and would not make sense. Again, just add an s- it should say lots.



quote="colindm"]

IAHWorldflyer wrote:

I was just in Austin this week for work, and was thinking the city might be able to support another large carrier to Europe. Anecdotal, but walked past two 20somethings conversing about job opportunities ( I assume tech) where the salaries were between 80-90k. When businesses can pay young people that, they can afford to send their employees wherever they need to.
The DFW flight operates as an A330. IAH operates as an A380, but down gauges this winter to a 748. I would think AUS will get the A330, and IAH will remain a 748 next summer.

Yeah, Austin's a young city with lot's of tech workers fleeing bay area prices. In the last 10 years most of the houses in my neighborhood have doubled in value, unemployment is near 0 but lot's of businesses are having trouble attracting workers. Overall thing are on the up and up but I'm curious to how a recession might hit Austin.[/quote]

airbazar wrote:

LH779 wrote:

For some connections you can wait a little longer, thats true, but for most connection the transfer time is pretty good. (I only checked India -> US though)

The flights from India arrive between 7:30 and 9:00 and the LH flights to the US leave between 10:00 and 14:00

So if you want to fly to DEN, TPA, EWR, BOS or book the late flights you don't have to wait that long.

You forgot ot check the other direction: USA>India.
With the exception of when/where they have 2x daily, flights from the U.S. generally arrive in FRA early in the morning (5-6am) and flight to India all depart in the afternoon. This is one of the main reasons why connecting in DXB or LHR is preferable.

Nicoeddf wrote:

Yeah, not really. While building a 3rd runway would be considered future proofing the airport, at the moment the two runways are fine. They are increasing aircraft size as MUC is the better transit airport and to up the pressure on FRA.

Some people here need a reality check.
The airport was planned from day 1 to have 3 runways. That was future proofing. It needs that 3rd runway now.
https://blog.adbsafegate.com/munich-air ... structure/
"The current two-runway system is already operating at full capacity during peak hours, and requests for additional slots from airlines have been declined."
That was 3 years ago.
There's a reason why you're not seeing LCC fly TATL from MUC. It's because they can't get slots. Lack of LCC's means fares stay artificially high and of course that benefits LH. But it hurts the local market.
LH as the largest operator at MUC and a partial owner has some flexibility in what it can do to mitigate the slots restrictions. Much like what BA is doing at LHR.
MUC and LHR aren't really that different with the exception that LHR has reached its peak capacity many years ago. MUC is on the same exact path as LHR.

I give you that reality check.

I fly there as my Homebase, averaging four flights a day, 5 days a week at every thinkable time of a day.
No slots? Hardly. Neither for approaching A/C, nor for take offs is runway space a limiting factor. Busy at peak hours? Yes. Therefore rightfully planning for a third runway? Yes.
Limiting at the moment? Yeah...no.

LAX772LR wrote:

questions wrote:

Do FRA and MUC play the same or different roles in LH’s network? If different, what purpose does each serve?

Read the OP article, it explains a lot of that.

Duh. Thanks!

I am surprised that neither LH or AUS has made any announcements about the new service outside of the LH press release last week. Are there technical problems to iron out before the airport announces new routes?

tkoenig95 wrote:

I am surprised that neither LH or AUS has made any announcements about the new service outside of the LH press release last week. Are there technical problems to iron out before the airport announces new routes?

No technical problems as far as I know, it’s likely the official announcement will be Thursday when the route becomes bookable.

No sense to make big public announcements if the route is not bookable

LH Austin Press Release

Aircraft will be an A330-300, first flight May 3rd, 5 weekly flights

LH779 wrote:

LH Austin Press Release

Aircraft will be an A330-300, first flight May 3rd, 5 weekly flights

Now if only they would load the flights (excited to see the flight times and the prices).

dfwneedsqf wrote:

LH779 wrote:

LH Austin Press Release

Aircraft will be an A330-300, first flight May 3rd, 5 weekly flights

Now if only they would load the flights (excited to see the flight times and the prices).

Well they are at least hinted in the linked press release:
Apart from Tuesday and Thursday, LH 468 will leave the Lufthansa hub in Frankfurt in the morning and reach Austin in the afternoon (local time) after a travel time of around ten hours. The return flight departs from Texas in the late afternoon and lands at Frankfurt Airport in the morning of the following day. On board, passengers can expect the usual high level of Lufthansa comfort in 255 seats in Business, Premium Economy and Economy Class. A return flight to Austin can already be booked from 499 euros for the introduction.

Question for the group here: Here at my home airport of SAN we are loving the Lufthansa service, but it is only five days a week. Is there any chance - however remote - of LH ever starting A350 service to MUC on the "off" days when there is no FRA flight?

I've always found it odd that LH has never coordinated with Edelweiss Air to its non-operation days, but I know they've done their homework, and one doesn't detract from the other. But that would certainly add to our "type list" at SAN!

LH779 wrote:

LH Austin Press Release

Aircraft will be an A330-300, first flight May 3rd, 5 weekly flights

Excellent! and the Munich-Bangkok route operated by the new Airbus A350, I hope that soon Thai will send its A350 to MUC!

FRAAUS 1005/1420 A333
AUSFRA 1605/0910 A333
MUCBKK 1640/0755 A359
BKKMUC 1025/1650 A359

behramjee wrote:

Its good to see LH expand its long haul Asia Pacific presence out of MUC as I'm sure they have been feeling the pinch here with their market share being rapidly poached away by EK, QR, EY and WY.

MUC-BKK daily nonstop will hurt all the main 4 Gulf carriers a bit as BKK is one of the top 3 feeder destinations for not only MUC but also few other EU tier 1 cities. In 2017, demand on MUC-BKK-MUC round trip grew to 267,000 passengers versus 250,000 in 2016.

MUC-ICN-MUC grew from 82,000 in 2016 to 88,000 round trip pax in 2017 whilst MUC-SIN v.v. grew from 83,000 in 2016 to 99,000 in 2017.

Any news about MUC-China routes ?

Additional S19 changes were posted today. Main highlights:

FRA-ADD and FRA-MAA switch from mainline to CityLine
333s FRA-ALA-TSE/FRA-ALA now 343
FRA-BKK planned 346 cancelled; will remain a 343
333s to Detroit and Philadelphia now 346/744 respectively
San Diego expands to 346 3x weekly
Tehran reduced from 744->343 instead of initially planned 744->333. 5x weekly flights will be 333 for two weeks at the beginning of April.

Munich changes:
-BOS, YVR, MEX, HND: 359 -> 346
-IAD, YYZ, CLT, BOM: 359 -> 333

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-10oct18/

leftcoast8 wrote:

San Diego expands to 346 3x weekly

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-10oct18/

Time to update my next Germany trip plans to add the A346 to my list - thank you, Lufthansa!! And I'll be the first customer to book if you'll give us an A350 to/from MUC!!

In all seriousness, though, the switch of BA and now LH to aircraft offering a true first class cabin speaks volumes about the demand from SAN. I may never be able to afford it (I'm just a high school teacher), but the fact that it exists at all means the market is expanding and not cannibalizing each other's premium customers.

leftcoast8 wrote:

San Diego expands to 346 3x weekly

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-10oct18/

Time to update my next Germany trip plans to add the A346 to my list - thank you, Lufthansa!! And I'll be the first customer to book if you'll give us an A350 to/from MUC!!

In all seriousness, though, the switch of BA and now LH to aircraft offering a true first class cabin speaks volumes about the demand from SAN. I may never be able to afford it (I'm just a high school teacher), but the fact that it exists at all means the market is expanding and not cannibalizing each other's premium customers.

It seems like switch to A350 on KIX route will also end scheduled 747 service for the airport
Also it seems like some people are worried about connectivity at Munich compares to FRA

leftcoast8 wrote:

Additional S19 changes were posted today. Main highlights:

FRA-ADD and FRA-MAA switch from mainline to CityLine
333s FRA-ALA-TSE/FRA-ALA now 343
FRA-BKK planned 346 cancelled; will remain a 343
333s to Detroit and Philadelphia now 346/744 respectively
San Diego expands to 346 3x weekly
Tehran reduced from 744->343 instead of initially planned 744->333. 5x weekly flights will be 333 for two weeks at the beginning of April.

Munich changes:
-BOS, YVR, MEX, HND: 359 -> 346
-IAD, YYZ, CLT, BOM: 359 -> 333

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... f-10oct18/

They are freeing up a lot of A330 capacity at MUC would be nice to see them add 5 weekly Detroit-Munich in summer 2019 with one of those A330 aircraft.