ostentatious
Topic Author
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:08 pm

Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:21 pm

It seems the new aircraft's range unlocks SEA/SFO/LAX-CTS non-stops, but there are still caveats:
1. ETOPS
2. O&D demand, although the aircraft has fewer seats than 788/332 etc.
3. Connection feasibility. CTS might not have good weather in winter months, but at the same time it's the most on-time (>90%) large airport in the world.
4. Time. The new aircraft might not be able to fly as fast as wide-bodies. 10 hours for SEA-CTS would be very disappointing.

Any insight on this?
 
RainerBoeing777
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:42 pm

China Airlines, Eva Airways, Cathay Pacific, Korean Air, Asiana Airlines use large aircraft in CTS many connections from hubs I do not see a profitable A321 XLR flying to the west coast
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
Turnhouse1
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:53 pm

Just a minor (but much more general than this thread) point, if you're referring to an obscure airport i.e. it's not LHR/JFK could people please just mention the city in the title. It's not you specifically, but it happens so often.
 
hiflyeras
Posts: 2011
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:48 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:58 pm

Turnhouse1 wrote:
Just a minor (but much more general than this thread) point, if you're referring to an obscure airport i.e. it's not LHR/JFK could people please just mention the city in the title. It's not you specifically, but it happens so often.


Thank you...I like to think I'm pretty savvy when it comes to airport codes but this one threw me.
 
User avatar
SANFan
Posts: 5028
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:10 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:01 pm

Turnhouse1 wrote:
Just a minor (but much more general than this thread) point, if you're referring to an obscure airport i.e. it's not LHR/JFK could people please just mention the city in the title. It's not you specifically, but it happens so often.

:checkmark: I must now go find out what city "CTS" is!

bb
 
SEU
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:02 pm

Yep I had to google CTS airport lol.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 923
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:21 pm

Sapporo is definitely growing. Finnair recently announced HEL-CTS. Wouldn't be surprised to see the XLR open up all sorts of secondary cities.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5436
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:29 pm

Why do you think there's sufficient demand for a nonstop West Coast to CTS? Stats for Passengers Daily Each Way? Even KIX has struggled to support U.S. non-stops.

LAX-CTS into winter winds? Where are you planning the tech stop?
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 3831
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:37 pm

ostentatious wrote:
It seems the new aircraft's range unlocks SEA/SFO/LAX-CTS non-stops, but there are still caveats:
1. ETOPS
2. O&D demand, although the aircraft has fewer seats than 788/332 etc.
3. Connection feasibility. CTS might not have good weather in winter months, but at the same time it's the most on-time (>90%) large airport in the world.
4. Time. The new aircraft might not be able to fly as fast as wide-bodies. 10 hours for SEA-CTS would be very disappointing.

Any insight on this?


Indeed it seems this aircraft's range unlocks those routes, but this is actually not true. This range would be in still air, but the air isn't still. Far from it. In the north Pacific you'd be flying against some of the strongest winds on the planet, which would greatly reduce the aircraft range. It's very doubtful if the plane would even make it non-stop. A fuel stop halfway would be required, which could be in Alaska or Hawaii.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 923
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:37 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
Why do you think there's sufficient demand for a nonstop West Coast to CTS? Stats for Passengers Daily Each Way? Even KIX has struggled to support U.S. non-stops.

LAX-CTS into winter winds? Where are you planning the tech stop?


That's honestly true. I believe CTS used to have flights to HNL on Hawaiian Airlines. That might've been on an A330 though, which could've been too much capacity.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 3831
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:46 pm

Ishrion wrote:
That's honestly true. I believe CTS used to have flights to HNL on Hawaiian Airlines. That might've been on an A330 though, which could've been too much capacity.


No doubt it was on an A330 or at least a wide body. Until the A321XLR came around, narrow bodies had insufficient range for these routes.

Of course the A321XLR could open up a whole lot of destinations from Hawaii that would have been too small before. A lot of secondary Japan and South Korea and some coastal China could be linked to Hawaii from where you could connect to about halfway the USA and Canada and a large part of Mexico. I'd say this plane would really open up Hawaii as a hub for the Pacific.
 
ostentatious
Topic Author
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:08 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 10:07 pm

Well, current cross-pacific flights are all wide-bodies, while A321XLR is supposed to have fewer seats than them.

MIflyer12 wrote:
Why do you think there's sufficient demand for a nonstop West Coast to CTS? Stats for Passengers Daily Each Way? Even KIX has struggled to support U.S. non-stops.

LAX-CTS into winter winds? Where are you planning the tech stop?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 3393
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:08 am

Hawaii is too far south to be a Pacific hub except for routes to Australia or New Zealand.
 
ostentatious
Topic Author
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:08 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:25 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Hawaii is too far south to be a Pacific hub except for routes to Australia or New Zealand.


Right, SEA/SFO are better options. Although there's a concern that the XLR might not be able to make LAX-CTS due to wind, I do see China Eastern is using A332 for LAX-NKG which is a bit surprising.
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3480
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:22 am

Ishrion wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Why do you think there's sufficient demand for a nonstop West Coast to CTS? Stats for Passengers Daily Each Way? Even KIX has struggled to support U.S. non-stops.

LAX-CTS into winter winds? Where are you planning the tech stop?


That's honestly true. I believe CTS used to have flights to HNL on Hawaiian Airlines. That might've been on an A330 though, which could've been too much capacity.


Not used to. Still does. A330
I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
 
Ishrion
Posts: 923
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 4:37 am

airportugal310 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Why do you think there's sufficient demand for a nonstop West Coast to CTS? Stats for Passengers Daily Each Way? Even KIX has struggled to support U.S. non-stops.

LAX-CTS into winter winds? Where are you planning the tech stop?


That's honestly true. I believe CTS used to have flights to HNL on Hawaiian Airlines. That might've been on an A330 though, which could've been too much capacity.


Not used to. Still does. A330


Ouch. My bad. Misread. Thought the page said cut “since 2012” but it started in 2012
 
c933103
Posts: 3793
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:13 am

CTS will also get a seasonal nonstop flight to Australia since December
Say NO to Hong Kong police's cooperation with criminal organizations like triad.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2040
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:27 am

Anecdote: I was on an initial (maybe the first) regularly scheduled intl pax flight into the (then) new intl terminal at CTS back in 1998 (IIRC), ICN/CTS on KE. Disembarked, down the jetway and corridor, into an empty and dark arrivals hall. Chaos in the dimly lit hall, as pax filed in. I went past the immigration booths, down the hall looking for C&I staff, found them drinking coffee, and told them they were needed in the arrivals hall. Lights came on, queues formed as if nothing extraordinary had happened.
 
gregn21
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 10:27 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:43 am

JAL will be starting NGO-LAX later this year. That should give us a a pretty good gauge of how sustainable the US - secondary Japan market really is. If LAX ends up supporting year round flights to both KIX and NGO I think Sapporo and CTS are both definitely possibilities- either year round on a 787-8 or summer seasonal on an A321XLR to avoid winter winds.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:52 am

strfyr51 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Why do you think there's sufficient demand for a nonstop West Coast to CTS? Stats for Passengers Daily Each Way? Even KIX has struggled to support U.S. non-stops.

LAX-CTS into winter winds? Where are you planning the tech stop?

,

Fron LAX? The Tech stop would be SEA/PDX. YVR, or ANC
 
ostentatious
Topic Author
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:08 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:39 am

gregn21 wrote:
JAL will be starting NGO-LAX later this year. That should give us a a pretty good gauge of how sustainable the US - secondary Japan market really is. If LAX ends up supporting year round flights to both KIX and NGO I think Sapporo and CTS are both definitely possibilities- either year round on a 787-8 or summer seasonal on an A321XLR to avoid winter winds.


In terms of total passengers per year, NGO is only half of CTS (although Nagoya has higher population than Sapporo) and 40% of KIX, perhaps b/c Nagoya is too close to Tokyo and Shinkansen only takes 100 minutes between them? Delta is running non-stop DTW-NGO though (perhaps b/c of the car manufacturing industry).
 
chornedsnorkack
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:39 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:57 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Indeed it seems this aircraft's range unlocks those routes, but this is actually not true. This range would be in still air, but the air isn't still. Far from it. In the north Pacific you'd be flying against some of the strongest winds on the planet, which would greatly reduce the aircraft range. It's very doubtful if the plane would even make it non-stop. A fuel stop halfway would be required, which could be in Alaska or Hawaii.


With the nominal range of 4700 nm, what would be the practical range upwind?

YVR-NRT is 4061 nm, YVR-CTS 3726 nm. Is it feasible westbound?
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:23 pm

chornedsnorkack wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
Indeed it seems this aircraft's range unlocks those routes, but this is actually not true. This range would be in still air, but the air isn't still. Far from it. In the north Pacific you'd be flying against some of the strongest winds on the planet, which would greatly reduce the aircraft range. It's very doubtful if the plane would even make it non-stop. A fuel stop halfway would be required, which could be in Alaska or Hawaii.


With the nominal range of 4700 nm, what would be the practical range upwind?

YVR-NRT is 4061 nm, YVR-CTS 3726 nm. Is it feasible westbound?

The A321XLR should easily be able to fly 4000nm into the strongest headwinds. It should be able to do most routes up to 4300nm

From Hawaii the XLR could fly to Brisbane, all of Japan, New Zealand, South Korea and even as far as Sydney. Traveling east it could fly to Miami to as far as New York.

Seating density plays a big part.

The 206 seating capacity is higher density than most widebodies. If an airline put some lie flat beds on the A321XLR Hawaii to New York would be fairly easy.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:08 pm

ostentatious wrote:
gregn21 wrote:
JAL will be starting NGO-LAX later this year. That should give us a a pretty good gauge of how sustainable the US - secondary Japan market really is. If LAX ends up supporting year round flights to both KIX and NGO I think Sapporo and CTS are both definitely possibilities- either year round on a 787-8 or summer seasonal on an A321XLR to avoid winter winds.


In terms of total passengers per year, NGO is only half of CTS (although Nagoya has higher population than Sapporo) and 40% of KIX, perhaps b/c Nagoya is too close to Tokyo and Shinkansen only takes 100 minutes between them? Delta is running non-stop DTW-NGO though (perhaps b/c of the car manufacturing industry).


First, where does the JL NGO-LAX come from? Any source on that?

NGO pax number are relatively low precisely bc of its location. For CTS, half of its pax are flying to either HND (~9M) or NRT (~2M) anyway. Meanwhile, NGO has minimal amount of flight to/from Tokyo (far and away largest market), and no flight to/from Keihanshin (2nd largest market). Also, NGO itself is just not a big tourism destination for foreign tourists in the region (i.e. Tourists from S. Korea, Taiwan, HK, and mainland PRC), at least compare to FUK or CTS.

And yes, DTW-NGO is there bc of the automotive industry tie.

As for the OP - the demand is simply not there. The entire Hokkaido island has ~5.4M people, which means outbound traffic is already not that big. Inbound traffic would be mostly seasonal and mostly tourism.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2782
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:25 pm

Even Seattle to Sapporo-New Chitose is at the very edge of the range of the A321XLR with respect to range once headwinds are factored in. I can't see that working. You need a wide-body...and for 4-class markets, even a Dreamliner is too small.
 
SFOThinker
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:13 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:58 pm

The geographical logic for a transpacific route from Sapporo is obvious, since connections in Narita or Haneda involve so much backtracking. But Hokkaido is not very rich. Even as a northern hub for a Japanese carrier, there isn't that much potential, as northeast Japan (Tohoku) is not that populous or wealthy. Sendai is the biggest and richest city there, but it is relatively close to Tokyo, so the backtracking is not a big issue.
I'd love to see Sapporo nonstops to the US. I've overflown the area many times coming in from the US. But I just don't see it working commercially
 
raylee67
Posts: 678
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:01 pm

LAX-CTS and SFO-CTS are probably beyond the capabilities of XLR given you need reserve fuel and the westbound headwind. YVR-CTS may be possible.

I think there is a market, at least a seasonal market, for North America-CTS. May be Air Canada will be in a unique position to offer YVR-CTS. It would be the only North America-CTS one-stop service that does not require significant backtracking so would be quite attractive. If the airline only needs 150 pax to break even, it may not be that difficult to do 3 or 4 flights a week.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 351 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
chornedsnorkack
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 6:39 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:49 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
chornedsnorkack wrote:
With the nominal range of 4700 nm, what would be the practical range upwind?

YVR-NRT is 4061 nm, YVR-CTS 3726 nm. Is it feasible westbound?

The A321XLR should easily be able to fly 4000nm into the strongest headwinds. It should be able to do most routes up to 4300nm

From Hawaii the XLR could fly to Brisbane, all of Japan, New Zealand, South Korea and even as far as Sydney. Traveling east it could fly to Miami to as far as New York.

Seating density plays a big part.

The 206 seating capacity is higher density than most widebodies. If an airline put some lie flat beds on the A321XLR Hawaii to New York would be fairly easy.


The standard 206 seats is quoted as
[email protected]´´
[email protected]´´
Rearranging it gives
4 rows of [email protected]´´, total 144´´
32 rows of [email protected]´´, total 960´´
total 1104´´ plus the necessary galleys, toilets and cross aisles.
Now, the BA A318 is [email protected]´´
meaning 8 rows of [email protected]´´, total 584´´
Fit those 32 flat seats into an A321XLR, and this would leave over 520´´. Such as 16 rows of [email protected]´´ (32F,96Y making 128 total), or less if some space is left for a J class between F and Y.
How much range would an A321XLR have with 100 passengers and the weight of 32 flat seats and some J seats?
 
PacificWest
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:06 pm

The XLR could make it to Tokyo from SEA and PDX... but SFO and LAX are a no-go.

SEA NRT - 4,144 nm
PDX NRT - 4,191 nm
SFO NRT - 4,453 nm
LAX NRT - 4,737 nm
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 2:47 am

chornedsnorkack wrote:
How much range would an A321XLR have with 100 passengers and the weight of 32 flat seats and some J seats?

That would put the range comfortably above 5000nm brochure range.

It could fly Los Angeles to Japan 4700nm fairly easily with 3 class widebody sized seating..
 
YYZORD
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:26 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:12 pm

I can see AC doing YVR-CTS and DL doing SEA-CTS.
 
c933103
Posts: 3793
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 4:25 pm

SFOThinker wrote:
The geographical logic for a transpacific route from Sapporo is obvious, since connections in Narita or Haneda involve so much backtracking. But Hokkaido is not very rich. Even as a northern hub for a Japanese carrier, there isn't that much potential, as northeast Japan (Tohoku) is not that populous or wealthy. Sendai is the biggest and richest city there, but it is relatively close to Tokyo, so the backtracking is not a big issue.
I'd love to see Sapporo nonstops to the US. I've overflown the area many times coming in from the US. But I just don't see it working commercially

I think it would work better if you see Hokkaido as a tourist destination rather than where people fly into and out of it mainly to do business. Of course there are both but I think the tourism factor is more important when planning routes to/from Hokkaido and that's also how they're getting a route to Australia soon. They will need more promotion at America to achieve this but the potential is there.
Say NO to Hong Kong police's cooperation with criminal organizations like triad.
 
Noise
Posts: 2447
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 1999 7:38 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:00 pm

God help us if flying 10 hours on a narrow body is the way of the future.
 
ostentatious
Topic Author
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:08 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 11:55 pm

PacificWest wrote:
The XLR could make it to Tokyo from SEA and PDX... but SFO and LAX are a no-go.

SEA NRT - 4,144 nm
PDX NRT - 4,191 nm
SFO NRT - 4,453 nm
LAX NRT - 4,737 nm


NRT probably deserves a wide-body, since it's already a highly popular O&D. For CTS, A321XLR makes much more sense than a wide-body.

CTS SEA 3,814 nm
CTS PDX 3,870 nm
CTS SFO 4,167 nm
CTS LAX 4,457 nm

SEA/PDX/SFO should all work, but PDX might be too small a market and it's not a major hub. LAX is a stretch but with low-density layout (say 120 seats) it should work (10-11 hours though, but again with low-density layout passenger experience should be fine).

As a potential hub, CTS has good connection with the rest of east & southeast Asia as well, and it's obviously better positioned than NRT/HND/NGO/KIX, and has much better headroom than NRT/HND.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21481
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:24 am

Eastbound, maybe. But westbound is going to require a fuel stop at ANC. This is a 788 route. But where is the demand for a 788 from SFO to CTS going to come from?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
AngMoh
Posts: 972
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:37 am

I can not see it work. CTS is a winter destination and during that period winds are brutal. I have had ground speeds of below 350mph (over 200mph headwinds) on a 77W on SFO-ICN.

Also CTS is a tourist destination so that is high density Y with no J demand. A low density XLR makes no sense.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 742 743 744 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
User avatar
PolarRoute
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:56 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:45 am

hiflyeras wrote:
Turnhouse1 wrote:
Just a minor (but much more general than this thread) point, if you're referring to an obscure airport i.e. it's not LHR/JFK could people please just mention the city in the title. It's not you specifically, but it happens so often.


Thank you...I like to think I'm pretty savvy when it comes to airport codes but this one threw me.


I think it's just matter of familiarity. If you live in the region, you're more likely to know what city a specific code refers to.

I don't know majority of the codes mentioned when discussing regional US airports. But I could immediately recognize CTS.

While having city name on the title instead of a code would be nice, but I don't think that's all necessary.
 
PacificWest
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:23 am

ostentatious wrote:
PacificWest wrote:
The XLR could make it to Tokyo from SEA and PDX... but SFO and LAX are a no-go.

SEA NRT - 4,144 nm
PDX NRT - 4,191 nm
SFO NRT - 4,453 nm
LAX NRT - 4,737 nm


NRT probably deserves a wide-body, since it's already a highly popular O&D. For CTS, A321XLR makes much more sense than a wide-body.

CTS SEA 3,814 nm
CTS PDX 3,870 nm
CTS SFO 4,167 nm
CTS LAX 4,457 nm

SEA/PDX/SFO should all work, but PDX might be too small a market and it's not a major hub. LAX is a stretch but with low-density layout (say 120 seats) it should work (10-11 hours though, but again with low-density layout passenger experience should be fine).

As a potential hub, CTS has good connection with the rest of east & southeast Asia as well, and it's obviously better positioned than NRT/HND/NGO/KIX, and has much better headroom than NRT/HND.


DL does PDX-NRT and PDX-AMS year-round on a 767 -- but you're correct that PDX-CTS wouldn't make much sense.

PDX seems like the kind of market that the A321XLR is tailor-made for. Right now, only Delta has been able to make year-round wide-bodies to Europe and Asia work. Others do it seasonal only. A couple, such as Lufthansa, have tried and failed to go year-round without success.

These are all hubs that (on paper) the XLR could potentially work on... the biggest stretches being CDG and ICN.

--EUROPE--
PDX LHR - 4,270 nm
PDX HEL - 4,267 nm
PDX CPH - 4,336 nm
PDX CDG - 4,458 nm

--ASIA--
PDX NRT - 4,191 nm
PDX ICN - 4,596 nm
 
User avatar
mercure1
Posts: 4363
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 5:13 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:30 am

ESAD/Normal air distance during Winter months is ~4300nm for SEA-CTS (YVR is about 100nm shorter) including a 3% airway allowance.
XLR doable under optimal conditions.
mercure f-wtcc
 
AirStairs
Posts: 398
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 6:47 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:48 am

RJMAZ wrote:
chornedsnorkack wrote:
How much range would an A321XLR have with 100 passengers and the weight of 32 flat seats and some J seats?

That would put the range comfortably above 5000nm brochure range.

It could fly Los Angeles to Japan 4700nm fairly easily with 3 class widebody sized seating..


If you're only looking at headcount, yeah, but lie-flat seats add a ton of weight and are unlikely to give you a significant net gain in this scenario.
 
Swadian
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:42 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
That's honestly true. I believe CTS used to have flights to HNL on Hawaiian Airlines. That might've been on an A330 though, which could've been too much capacity.


No doubt it was on an A330 or at least a wide body. Until the A321XLR came around, narrow bodies had insufficient range for these routes.

Of course the A321XLR could open up a whole lot of destinations from Hawaii that would have been too small before. A lot of secondary Japan and South Korea and some coastal China could be linked to Hawaii from where you could connect to about halfway the USA and Canada and a large part of Mexico. I'd say this plane would really open up Hawaii as a hub for the Pacific.


Untrue. JL used to fly HND-SFO JL1/2 and HND-YVR JL11/12, both with DC-8s. JL61/62 HND-HNL-LAX also started with a DC-8. Here's the Timetable from 1968: http://www.timetableimages.com/ttimages/jl/jl6812/.

Do agree that the A321XLR would be a great boon for HA to compete with the encroaching WN and AS threats.
John Wang, Founder and President of Inland Streamliner.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:04 am

AirStairs wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
chornedsnorkack wrote:
How much range would an A321XLR have with 100 passengers and the weight of 32 flat seats and some J seats?

That would put the range comfortably above 5000nm brochure range.

It could fly Los Angeles to Japan 4700nm fairly easily with 3 class widebody sized seating..


If you're only looking at headcount, yeah, but lie-flat seats add a ton of weight and are unlikely to give you a significant net gain in this scenario.

The lie flat beds are much lighter than you think.

200 passengers 2 class with recliners up front would weigh a smidge over 20T including seats.

100 passengers in 3 class with lie flat beds upfront would weigh a smidge over 15T including seats. Still a big saving.

With the 4700nm figure this is with 206 passengers. The A321XLR is not at maximum fuel load the optional ACT is only partially filled. So the aircraft can still trade payload for additional fuel to put range up to 5000nm with 18T of payload. This would work out to be about 140-150 passengers in 3 class.

The reason for this extra ACT is because airlines that fit 220 seats or more will not fit the ACT as the aircraft will hit MTOW before ACT can even be filled. The extra ACT will be for airlines that operate 2 class or 3 class cabins.

The A321XLR numbers are:
36,390 litres in the wing and new centre tank. 29.1T
3,121 litres in optional ACT.
39,511 litres max fuel load = 31.6T

The A321LR max fuel load was only 32,853 litres = 26.2T

Max payload without the ACT in the XLR
101T minus 50.5T minus 29.1T = 21.4T of payload.
101T minus 51T minus 31.6T = 18.4T of payload

My estimates is the 4700nm range figure is with 20-21T of payload so the ACT would only be 10-20% filled. That leaves nearly 45 minutes of fuel or 300nm of extra range. So 5000nm with 140-150 passengers is accurate.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3150
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:34 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Hawaii is too far south to be a Pacific hub except for routes to Australia or New Zealand.


US-HNL-south pacific.
Japan/China-HNL-Mex
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12323
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:20 am

Turnhouse1 wrote:
Just a minor (but much more general than this thread) point, if you're referring to an obscure airport i.e. it's not LHR/JFK could people please just mention the city in the title. It's not you specifically, but it happens so often.

Or.... why not use it to learn new codes, instead of expecting people to cater to you. It takes 5seconds to Google, and you get something out of it.


Noise wrote:
God help us if flying 10 hours on a narrow body is the way of the future.

It was the way of the past as well, unless you somehow think that 707s and DC8s were widebodies.

The actual occurrence isn't anywhere near as "bad" as an overwhelming percentage of the commentators here (most of whom I suspect have never done it), imagine it to be.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:18 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:

And yes, DTW-NGO is there bc of the automotive industry tie.



I've always found that claim pretty hard to believe. This is one of those A.net things that people say all the time but no one has ever actually been able to substantiate. I've certainly never seen anything to show that that's the case on anything more than an occasional happenstance basis.

DTW-NGO exists for the same reason HNL-NGO does. Largely because DL has made a major push to connect PAX onward to Asian cities through their domestic hubs in an effort to draw down their NRT presence (especially considering NGO is only a 100 minute train ride from TYO). There've been a lot of reasons for DL to include DTW-NGO, but the automotive industry was never a hugely relevant factor, beyond occasion. Which makes sense when you realize that the only auto mfr actually headquartered in NGO (and with any mfr sites in the region) hasn't had a measurable connection to GM or Formal JV since 2010. And that was for the NUMMI plant. In CA.

I wouldn't be legitimately surprised to see that the annual averages are at least 10-12 PDEW for that reason. But the odds that they're able to even half fill an A332, daily, enough to make it worthwhile, with primarily auto industry types seems dubious. A few trade shows throughout the year are one thing. Enough for a daily 332? No.

Auto OEM parts suppliers are even more globalized than that still.

What isn't ridiculous is the idea that they (DL) get a lot of feed from anything east of the Mississippi that doesn't want to connect through HND or NRT. That, I can totally see. And if you're making the point that Toyota (again, the only mfr headquartered anywhere near NGO) will send people through DTW onward to their midwestern centers, I can totally see that. But that could just as easily aggregate through DFW. Or MSP. Or ORD, etc...

I think this will become more obvious as NGO gets more US destinations (besides just the two now).


Not trying to pick on you or anything; it's just a claim people make all the time here. As though it's supposed to be comparable to LAX-NYC entertainment or something...


LAX772LR wrote:
Turnhouse1 wrote:
Just a minor (but much more general than this thread) point, if you're referring to an obscure airport i.e. it's not LHR/JFK could people please just mention the city in the title. It's not you specifically, but it happens so often.

Or.... why not use it to learn new codes, instead of expecting people to cater to you. It takes 5seconds to Google, and you get something out of it.


I totally have to agree with the people bringing this one up. I happen to know what CTS is. But I can't count how many times someone has posted something along the lines of "checkout what happened en route ATL-BFE today!", like we're supposed to know what the hell that's all about.

I get that we used to have that mouse-over thing (no hints there, tech support) that would show what the city or aircraft or airline code meant. And I get that google is a thing*. But how is it any less of a cater for someone to have to look that up because the OP is too damned lazy to type out some extra letters? That's not hard either...



LAX772LR wrote:
Noise wrote:
God help us if flying 10 hours on a narrow body is the way of the future.

It was the way of the past as well, unless you somehow think that 707s and DC8s were widebodies.

The actual occurrence isn't anywhere near as "bad" as an overwhelming percentage of the commentators here (most of whom I suspect have never done it), imagine it to be.


Lol. Most Corporate Jets are Narrow Bodies too. Don't see anyone complaining about that!



* - I find that GCMapper is better than actual Google for that purpose. If I absolutely must research someone else's laziness for them (unlikely as I normally simply wouldn't read further on if an OP can't care enough to post it right), at least GCM will show me where a place is, straight away. So there's that, I guess...
"Ya Can't Win, Rocky! There's no Oxygen on Mars!"
"Yeah? That means there's no Oxygen for him Neither..."
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:02 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
zakuivcustom wrote:

And yes, DTW-NGO is there bc of the automotive industry tie.



I've always found that claim pretty hard to believe. This is one of those A.net things that people say all the time but no one has ever actually been able to substantiate. I've certainly never seen anything to show that that's the case on anything more than an occasional happenstance basis.

DTW-NGO exists for the same reason HNL-NGO does. Largely because DL has made a major push to connect PAX onward to Asian cities through their domestic hubs in an effort to draw down their NRT presence (especially considering NGO is only a 100 minute train ride from TYO). There've been a lot of reasons for DL to include DTW-NGO, but the automotive industry was never a hugely relevant factor, beyond occasion. Which makes sense when you realize that the only auto mfr actually headquartered in NGO (and with any mfr sites in the region) hasn't had a measurable connection to GM or Formal JV since 2010. And that was for the NUMMI plant. In CA.

I wouldn't be legitimately surprised to see that the annual averages are at least 10-12 PDEW for that reason. But the odds that they're able to even half fill an A332, daily, enough to make it worthwhile, with primarily auto industry types seems dubious. A few trade shows throughout the year are one thing. Enough for a daily 332? No.

Auto OEM parts suppliers are even more globalized than that still.

What isn't ridiculous is the idea that they (DL) get a lot of feed from anything east of the Mississippi that doesn't want to connect through HND or NRT. That, I can totally see. And if you're making the point that Toyota (again, the only mfr headquartered anywhere near NGO) will send people through DTW onward to their midwestern centers, I can totally see that. But that could just as easily aggregate through DFW. Or MSP. Or ORD, etc...

I think this will become more obvious as NGO gets more US destinations (besides just the two now).


Not trying to pick on you or anything; it's just a claim people make all the time here. As though it's supposed to be comparable to LAX-NYC entertainment or something...


LAX772LR wrote:
Turnhouse1 wrote:
Just a minor (but much more general than this thread) point, if you're referring to an obscure airport i.e. it's not LHR/JFK could people please just mention the city in the title. It's not you specifically, but it happens so often.

Or.... why not use it to learn new codes, instead of expecting people to cater to you. It takes 5seconds to Google, and you get something out of it.


I totally have to agree with the people bringing this one up. I happen to know what CTS is. But I can't count how many times someone has posted something along the lines of "checkout what happened en route ATL-BFE today!", like we're supposed to know what the hell that's all about.

I get that we used to have that mouse-over thing (no hints there, tech support) that would show what the city or aircraft or airline code meant. And I get that google is a thing*. But how is it any less of a cater for someone to have to look that up because the OP is too damned lazy to type out some extra letters? That's not hard either...



LAX772LR wrote:
Noise wrote:
God help us if flying 10 hours on a narrow body is the way of the future.

It was the way of the past as well, unless you somehow think that 707s and DC8s were widebodies.

The actual occurrence isn't anywhere near as "bad" as an overwhelming percentage of the commentators here (most of whom I suspect have never done it), imagine it to be.


Lol. Most Corporate Jets are Narrow Bodies too. Don't see anyone complaining about that!



* - I find that GCMapper is better than actual Google for that purpose. If I absolutely must research someone else's laziness for them (unlikely as I normally simply wouldn't read further on if an OP can't care enough to post it right), at least GCM will show me where a place is, straight away. So there's that, I guess...


The thing is, why no DTW-KIX then? And why DTW-NGO instead of SEA-NGO? Automotive industry may not be everything, but you can't argue that it doesn't play a factor into why DTW-NGO is still around after pretty much every single secondary Japanese routes were cut.

BTW, Honda may not be HQ around Nagoya, but they have a huge presence around Nagoya also with a plant in Suzuka (Next to Suzuka Circuit, if you're into automotive racing, which BTW is own by Honda) for passenger vehicles, and Hamamatsu (Although its presence there is greatly reduced even though Hamamatsu is where Honda was founded). For smaller company, Suzuki also do their manufacturing near Hamamatsu. To say Toyota is the only automotive company with a presence around Nagoya is not true at all.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!
 
User avatar
chunhimlai
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:03 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:09 pm

CTS is too seasonal
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:48 pm

zakuivcustom wrote:

The thing is, why no DTW-KIX then? And why DTW-NGO instead of SEA-NGO? Automotive industry may not be everything, but you can't argue that it doesn't play a factor into why DTW-NGO is still around after pretty much every single secondary Japanese routes were cut.

BTW, Honda may not be HQ around Nagoya, but they have a huge presence around Nagoya also with a plant in Suzuka (Next to Suzuka Circuit, if you're into automotive racing, which BTW is own by Honda) for passenger vehicles, and Hamamatsu (Although its presence there is greatly reduced even though Hamamatsu is where Honda was founded). For smaller company, Suzuki also do their manufacturing near Hamamatsu. To say Toyota is the only automotive company with a presence around Nagoya is not true at all.


I actually would not be astonished to see KIX gain more traction. As for DTW? DL already route KIX through SEA, so there's probably no need of that. If there develops a more pressing need for it east-of-Mississippi, then that's not a stretch. What's often left out of these discussions is that DTW is a great connector hub.

Honda might have been a thing, but again... Who would they be seeing in DTW? They have no ties to GM, a parts sharing agreement with Ford that rounds to nothing (since that's mainly Europe anyway), and all of their US mfr sites are further down midwest, in the south, or in Canada (The Alliston plant doesn't exactly look local to DTW).

As I said, I don't think it's nothing. But an A332 a day, based on... what? That's a lot of airplane --both range and capacity-- for a link that tenuous. If anything, the only real auto stuff would be east-of-Mississippi connections.

The last thing we should consider is this. NGO has two US destinations... for now. One of them is DTW which DL operates with a 332. The other is... HNL. Which DL shares with JL (763 for DL & a 789 for JL).
When faced with a choice of where to send their metal --er, plastic-- JL literally decided that Hawaiian tourism was more important than whatever DTW had to offer. I think that's no small indictment, considering JL not only has a higher quality product, but they're the Home Team. If there were automotive related business worth going after, I have no doubt they (along with NH) would be moving all kinds of Fujis to get at that. And they'd probably be winning.

All of that points to DTW being much more about connections than O&D...
"Ya Can't Win, Rocky! There's no Oxygen on Mars!"
"Yeah? That means there's no Oxygen for him Neither..."
 
c933103
Posts: 3793
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:10 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
DTW-NGO exists for the same reason HNL-NGO does. Largely because DL has made a major push to connect PAX onward to Asian cities through their domestic hubs in an effort to draw down their NRT presence (especially considering NGO is only a 100 minute train ride from TYO).

HNL-NGO exists to connect passengers to Asian cities via local hub? What are you smoking?
Nagoya airport only 100 minutes away from Tokyo? Getting to the Nagoya station from the airport would have already costed you half an hour

I wouldn't be legitimately surprised to see that the annual averages are at least 10-12 PDEW for that reason. But the odds that they're able to even half fill an A332, daily, enough to make it worthwhile, with primarily auto industry types seems dubious. A few trade shows throughout the year are one thing. Enough for a daily 332? No.

Who said "a reason why a route is being flown" mean that reason alone must be able to fill the entire plane?


What isn't ridiculous is the idea that they (DL) get a lot of feed from anything east of the Mississippi that doesn't want to connect through HND or NRT. That, I can totally see. And if you're making the point that Toyota (again, the only mfr headquartered anywhere near NGO) will send people through DTW onward to their midwestern centers, I can totally see that. But that could just as easily aggregate through DFW. Or MSP. Or ORD, etc...

If connection is the most important factor, then why aren't the flight terminating at west coast instead, where transfer flight to a wider geographical area can be offered without backtracking?

I think this will become more obvious as NGO gets more US destinations (besides just the two now).

The next two long haul flight from NGO to North America with interest being expressed are from NGO to LAX and SFO by AirAsia X, and there won't be any feed for them in the United States because of the low cost nature of the airlines.
Also, why you think NGO will get more US destination to prove your point when current situation have been maintained for years?


I totally have to agree with the people bringing this one up. I happen to know what CTS is. But I can't count how many times someone has posted something along the lines of "checkout what happened en route ATL-BFE today!", like we're supposed to know what the hell that's all about.

I get that we used to have that mouse-over thing (no hints there, tech support) that would show what the city or aircraft or airline code meant. And I get that google is a thing*. But how is it any less of a cater for someone to have to look that up because the OP is too damned lazy to type out some extra letters? That's not hard either...

If one don't know what is CTS, then can they be expected to have a general understanding on Sapporo and Hokkaido to carry on the discussion?
Say NO to Hong Kong police's cooperation with criminal organizations like triad.
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Would A321XLR open the door for non-stops between US west coast and CTS?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:48 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
I actually would not be astonished to see KIX gain more traction. As for DTW? DL already route KIX through SEA, so there's probably no need of that. If there develops a more pressing need for it east-of-Mississippi, then that's not a stretch. What's often left out of these discussions is that DTW is a great connector hub.


My whole point is, if automotive industry is NOT a factor, but rather, it's all about connection, then DL would have focus all the secondary Japan flight at a single hub. Nope, they pick SEA to restart the KIX flight, not DTW; meanwhile, they kept NGO at DTW, instead of moving that to SEA (Which DL is using as their "Pacific Gateway") anyway.

Yes, is automotive industry THE sole reason? Probably not. Does it dominates among the other reason (i.e. having a non-stop from NGO to US)? Yes. Keep in mind no other US carriers fly to NGO from mainland US, not even UA with their giant SFO hub.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
The last thing we should consider is this. NGO has two US destinations... for now. One of them is DTW which DL operates with a 332. The other is... HNL. Which DL shares with JL (763 for DL & a 789 for JL).
When faced with a choice of where to send their metal --er, plastic-- JL literally decided that Hawaiian tourism was more important than whatever DTW had to offer. I think that's no small indictment, considering JL not only has a higher quality product, but they're the Home Team. If there were automotive related business worth going after, I have no doubt they (along with NH) would be moving all kinds of Fujis to get at that. And they'd probably be winning.


When you consider that the only other flight on either JL or NH from an airport outside Tokyo to mainland US is JL's KIX-LAX, that tells you where JL/NH wants to focus their long-haul business on. Hack, JL and NH doesn't have a lot of international flights even in East Asia in general (JL has KIX-BKK/TPE/PVG along with LAX and HNL; out of NGO it's BKK/TPE/PVG/HNL along with TSN, with TSN being driven 100% by Tianjin FAW; NH has a few more mainland PRC flight out of KIX (to PEK/TAO/DLC/HGH) along with HKG and PVG, but no BKK/TPE; and out of NGO, only to PVG and HKG.

At the end of the day, JL and NH just ain't all that interested in international flying out of KIX or NGO anyway.

c933103 wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
DTW-NGO exists for the same reason HNL-NGO does. Largely because DL has made a major push to connect PAX onward to Asian cities through their domestic hubs in an effort to draw down their NRT presence (especially considering NGO is only a 100 minute train ride from TYO).


HNL-NGO exists to connect passengers to Asian cities via local hub? What are you smoking?
Nagoya airport only 100 minutes away from Tokyo? Getting to the Nagoya station from the airport would have already costed you half an hour


I'm a little bit confuse by the OP. I think he (or she) tried to say that DL fly to NGO so pax don't have to connect at TYO. Except that NRT-NGO and HND-NGO only exist on NH/JL, and is for connection only. AFAIK DL never flew that route (They did flew NRT-KIX [or was it NRT-ITM?]).

I also fail to see how it has to do with "drawing down NRT presence". DL will essentially move everything to HND, which, if anything, make it even quicker for somebody living in Nagoya to just fly out of Tokyo (~93 mins to Shinagawa follow by a 15-20 mins train ride) and hurting the chance of NGO getting more TPAC flights.
Free Hong Kong! Free China!

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

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