United Airline wrote:From what I heard due to union+ETOPS issues back then staff were unwilling to fly a twin engine aircraft via north pole. They wanted to use the B777-200ER but was forced to use the B747-400 with restricted payload and thus this route became unprofitable.
UA857 wrote:Did United need modified 747-400s to fly JFK-HKG?
evanb wrote:United Airline wrote:From what I heard due to union+ETOPS issues back then staff were unwilling to fly a twin engine aircraft via north pole. They wanted to use the B777-200ER but was forced to use the B747-400 with restricted payload and thus this route became unprofitable.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying. Both the B777-200ER and B747-400 should be able to get out of JFK at or near MTOW, due to JFK being at sea level and not having particularly hot temperatures and having decent runway length in multiple directions. If anything, the one that would take a payload hit by not being able to go out at MTOW it would be the B777-200ER, rather than the B747-400 (twin versus quad).
The next question is what paying payload (pax and cargo) it would have to leave behind to carry the fuel, and again, I'm pretty sure that the B747-400 would leave less behind compared to the B777-200ER.
The bigger question though would be fuel burn where the B777-200ER would win. But I think it's incorrect to say that the B747-400 became unprofitable on this route due to payload penalties when the B777-200ER would have suffered a similar, if not worse fate.
jfk777 wrote:What was the "miracle" which allowed United to fly nonstop from JFK to HKG that was not used by other airlines. Cathay Pacific only flew nonstop with a 744 once, the day the new airport opened in Hong Kong. IF CX could have flown nonstop with a 744 they would have but they did with A340-600 and now 777-300ER's. If the proposition of flying nonstop from JFK to HKG with a 744 was so good others would have done it. What was the secret sauce ?
jfklganyc wrote:It flew for a month or two at most in response to CO nonstop from EWR.
Ended before 9/11
slcdeltarumd11 wrote:This route never had a chance against continental at EWR. Wouldn't have mattered what type of plane. They had no feed.
I don't buy the 747-400 had restrictions out of JFK as stated its not hot and at sea level. It hasn't been over 100 official degrees in NYC since 2006 or something and JFK is on the water. It's extremely humid but not hot.
TWA85 wrote:Why did UA feel the need to respond to CO starting EWR-HKG? It would make more sense if UA was responding to AA starting ORD-XXX or DL starting LAX-ZZZ, etc; where UA would be trying to protect their market share at their hubs. JFK wasn't a hub for UA so there wasn't much market share to protect. Was JFK-HKG more about UA protecting their market share in HKG?
Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe
Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days
Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit
Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior
Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft
Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials
Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions
Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin
Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon
Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos
Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft
Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries
Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground
Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos