Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
N62NA
Topic Author
Posts: 4496
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:15 pm

One of the hopes (or at least the marketing spin by Boeing) was that the 787 would open up more point to point flying. Thus far it has not, mainly being used on the same missions flown by 767s and 777s where a hub is on one or both ends.

Any thoughts on whether this will continue, or if the 787 will be a "game changer" and we will see it used on point to point missions?
 
User avatar
usair330
Posts: 705
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2002 12:48 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:32 pm

An airline will use there plane where they feel fit. For example before opening up a new point to point market they will retire an older plane or free up a 777 to a higher capacity route that has the demand for more seats. At the end of the day its all business.
 
waly777
Posts: 761
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:11 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:33 pm

You should probably revisit what point to point meant exactly. It's often mistaken to be spoke to spoke, when in reality it is a hub to spoke model which bypasses what would traditionally have been a hub to hub to spoke, particularly on the long haul segments.

E.g the BOS & SAN to Tokyo, or LHR to CTU & AUS, quite a few of Norwegian's routes.

I'm sure there is a long list I cannot currently remember, however there has been a significantly noticeable increase in similar flights since the 787. The a330 of course did start quite a few of these.
The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
 
phillyramp270
Posts: 312
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 4:06 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:34 pm

Didn't it take awhile for airlines to figure out that the 757 is capable aircraft for some very unique TATL routes? My best guess on the lag of point to point flying is that Airlines still have so few 787s.. AA for example, crew training, certificates and route authorizations, logistics of parts and maintenance equipment, etc.... It's gonna take awhile until Airlines retire all of their 767s
Barack Obama is not a foreign born, brown skinned, anti-war socialist who gives away healthcare. You're thinking of Jesu
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:39 pm

P2P in the sense that it's already opening up new nonstop routes that before might not have made as much financial sense with a 763 or 332.
Spread hope like fire.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:43 pm

Quoting SunsetLimited (Reply 4):
P2P in the sense that it's already opening up new nonstop routes that before might not have made as much financial sense with a 763 or 332.

That's not P2P.

P2P would mean an airline like BA operating MAN, EDI or GLA to a destination, if it's from LHR, it's a hub to spoke route. AUS is a new route made viable by the 787, but it's not P2P.
 
rta
Posts: 1414
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:01 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:44 pm

To a certain extent, I think it is heading towards, if not already being used for, point to point travel. I think if a larger plane was used, like an A380, you wouldn't have routes BOS-NRT or DEN-NRT. You'd have BOS/DEN-LAX-NRT or something like that. Even though many of this routes originate/end at a hub, I think a lot of these routes wouldn't exist with a plane larger than the 787. I think point to point is described best this way. Moreover, I think it is important to make note of the new routes this plane has opened up.

Certainly if the 787 wasn't used for point to point (opposed to megahubs), the A380 sales wouldn't be doing so poorly.
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:45 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 5):
That's not P2P.

P2P would mean an airline like BA operating MAN, EDI or GLA to a destination, if it's from LHR, it's a hub to spoke route. AUS is a new route made viable by the 787, but it's not P2P.

I realize that, but in the hub and spoke system, true P2P are probably not going to happen with a widebody. There's limited P2P on regional sized aircraft in the U.S.
Spread hope like fire.
 
ist2014
Posts: 426
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:43 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:50 pm

788 would be a great bird for TK, new routes or increasing frequency (US or S.America routes) and Africa expansion as well
But insttead of ordering it, they are collercting second hnd 332s
They need around 20 (replacement of 340 and 332)
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:52 pm

Quoting SunsetLimited (Reply 7):
I realize that, but in the hub and spoke system, true P2P are probably not going to happen with a widebody. There's limited P2P on regional sized aircraft in the U.S.

Low Cost Airlines such as Norwegian are P2P. They fly from LGW, OSL, ARN and CPH, but only OSL is their true 'hub', so a route like LGW-LAX is P2P. But most of the 787's customers are Flag Carriers/Hub airlines at present. That will change in the future, but until then.

[Edited 2015-05-10 07:53:36]
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 2:57 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 9):
LGW-LAX is P2P.

I think calling London - Los Angeles a point-to-point route might be stretching it a bit...
 
29erUSA187
Posts: 1277
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:34 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 3:19 pm

Ive noticed this, but you have to understand, most airlines do not operate wide bodies from outside their hubs. But look at the plus side. It has opened a lot of "Point to Hub" routes that are long and thin such as SAN-NRT, BOS-NRT, SJC-NRT, LHR-AUS, LHR-CTU, WAW-ORD, FLL-ARN, etc etc etc. It has also allowed airlines to infiltrate already existing routes at an economic advantage. LAX-MEL, AKL-PER, AMS-CTU etc etc etc
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3232
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 3:24 pm

BOS-PVG on HU is clearly point-to-point.
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN

2019: CX BOS-HKG, WE HKG-HKT, CA HKT-PEK-EWR, B6 EWR-BOS
 
User avatar
GE9X
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 12:13 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 3:25 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 5):
AUS is a new route made viable by the 787,

AUS is a new route made viable by the rapid growth of Austin. Nothing to do with the 787.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 3:27 pm

Quoting FlyingAY (Reply 10):
I think calling London - Los Angeles a point-to-point route might be stretching it a bit...

Gatwick is a point airport. 5% of the traffic connects. And also, it's Norwegian. They don't transfer at LGW. I know London is big, but that doesn't make LGW, STN or any London Airport a hub airport.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 4:28 pm

Quoting N62NA (Thread starter):

One of the hopes (or at least the marketing spin by Boeing) was that the 787 would open up more point to point flying. Thus far it has not, mainly being used on the same missions flown by 767s and 777s where a hub is on one or both ends.

Do you have any data to back up this claim that the 787 has not opened up "more point to point flying". Anything?
 
skybird77
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:15 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 5:03 pm

Quoting ist2014 (Reply 8):

Agreed. The 787 (in my opinion) would have been the perfect aircraft to start the IST-MIA route (then up gauge to the 77W if needed).
 
factsonly
Posts: 3056
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 5:13 pm

Perhaps these B787 operators could be considered mostly P2P:

Jetairfly, Arke, Norwegian and Thomson


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Airwim
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wim Callaert


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Erik Linge
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Robert Noel

 
Eagleboy
Posts: 1829
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:29 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 5:23 pm

Quoting factsonly (Reply 17):
Jetairfly, Arke,..... and Thomson

Well you could almost call these the same airline......well different parts of the same umbrellas airliner perhaps
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 11217
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 5:26 pm

Quoting waly777 (Reply 2):
You should probably revisit what point to point meant exactly. It's often mistaken to be spoke to spoke, when in reality it is a hub to spoke model which bypasses what would traditionally have been a hub to hub to spoke, particularly on the long haul segments.

  
People here on A.net have a tendency to take the term point-to-point a little too literally. What both Airbus and Boeing mean are flights that bypass traditional hubs that are en route. They don't necessarily mean that the flight can't originate from a hub.

Here is a Boeing document from 2005 in which the point-to-point route they highlight is ORD-PEK, versus ORD-NRT(the typical Asian gateway from the US)-PEK.

Here is a document that contains a slide from Airbus (3rd page) where such point-to-point routes as SFO-MIA,SEA-NYC are highlighted versus shuffling everything to just one large hub (DEN in this example). In Hub to Hub the intercontinental flights would primarily be between these megahubs.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 6:05 pm

Quoting polot (Reply 19):
People here on A.net have a tendency to take the term point-to-point a little too literally. What both Airbus and Boeing mean are flights that bypass traditional hubs that are en route. They don't necessarily mean that the flight can't originate from a hub.

To me, point to point with a wide body, is not so much going to small centers, but opening up the definition of a hub. Instead of just using LHR, FRA and AMS as hubs, places like Manchester, Dublin, Munich and other significant cities have become viable as hubs.

And from the traditional hubs, a lot more spokes are added to the hub.

I think the effects of the 787 are more evolutionary than revolutionary. The previous generation of wide body twins had already begun the process.
What the...?
 
vv701
Posts: 5895
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 6:37 pm

Quoting N62NA (Thread starter):
One of the hopes (or at least the marketing spin by Boeing) was that the 787 would open up more point to point flying

Scroll down to the world map here:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/mar...m-market/network-and-hub-analysis/

and you will see what new and planned routes Boeing considers meets its point-to-point criteria
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6411
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 7:40 pm

Do we have to rehash this fallacy again? Once again, the 787 is opening up many new routes that didn't exist before:

SAN-NRT, SJC-NRT, SJC-PEK, AUS-LHR, SFO-WUH/CAN.....and on and on.
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8317
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 7:58 pm

Whilst the 787, and A350, will open many new P 2 P routes, they are essentially 767 and A330 replacement so they will be found plying more traditional routes than new ones.
111 732 733 734 735 736 73G 738 739,7M8 BBJ 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 764 772 77L 773 77W L15 D10 D30 D40 AB3 AB6 312 313 318 319 320 20N 321 21N 332 333 342 343 345 346 359 351 388 CS1 CS3 I86 154 SSJ CRJ CR7 CR9 CRK 145 170 175 220
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 8:28 pm

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 23):
Whilst the 787, and A350, will open many new P 2 P routes, they are essentially 767 and A330 replacement so they will be found plying more traditional routes than new ones.

I'd rephrase that and say the "787 and A350 will initially be 767 and A330 replacements".

Once the airlines have established the A350 and 787 into their fleets, they will probably become a little more creative and venture out into more point to point flying.

Even with the A350 and 787 in fleet, it would be a big ask for airlines to fundamentally change their route structures overnight.
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4514
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 8:49 pm

Quoting polot (Reply 19):
People here on A.net have a tendency to take the term point-to-point a little too literally. What both Airbus and Boeing mean are flights that bypass traditional hubs that are en route. They don't necessarily mean that the flight can't originate from a hub.

How about members of A.net continually saying that any airline with a lot of flights at an airport makes it a hub?
 
Joost
Posts: 1877
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:27 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 9:01 pm

Quoting polot (Reply 19):
People here on A.net have a tendency to take the term point-to-point a little too literally.

  

Quoting SunsetLimited (Reply 4):
P2P in the sense that it's already opening up new nonstop routes that before might not have made as much financial sense with a 763 or 332.

It's a bit of an evolution of the two aircraft you mentioned.

The 763ER allowed for many new routes, bypassing the 747, L1011 and DC-10 hub-to-hub flying for 10-hour routes, like many TATL routes. The 332 did a similar thing for 12-hour routes, opening new connections from Europe to SE Asia and S. America, and TPAC flying.

Now the 787 offers the smallest possible aircraft to viable operate 13/14-hour routes and finds it's niche here. Next to that, it's a nice 763 and 772-replacement.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3172
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 10:04 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 9):
but only OSL is their true 'hub

CPH is their long haul hub.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22026
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 10:14 pm

Quoting travelhound (Reply 24):
I'd rephrase that and say the "787 and A350 will initially be 767 and A330 replacements".

Hardly. Initially, they seem to be opening up new routes that were never before served. SFO-CTU, SAN-NRT, SJC-NRT, etc. This is not to say that there is zero replacement. The first commercial 787 route replaced a 767.

As the 767 and older A330s are retired, the 787, A350, and A330NEO (a true A330 replacement) will then replace existing fleets.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 10:50 pm

25% of all new routes that were launched since 2011 have been launched with the 787. I think we will see this trend continue as more operators introduce the model and while existing operators have enough of them to develop flexibility.

tortugamon
 
LN-KGL
Posts: 822
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 6:40 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Sun May 10, 2015 11:39 pm

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 27):
CPH is their long haul hub.

Norwegian Air Shuttle have a number of hubs where transfer is offered, but only at four (five seasonally) of them transfer is offered between the long haul and short haul network. CPH is one of these hubs, but by far the largest is OSL. If you live in Tromsø (Northern Norway) Norwegian can offer you a one stop return tickets between TOS and LAX with transfer at OSL. If you live in Los Angeles and want to travel to Bergen on the west coast of Norway, Norwegian have tickets for you with transfer at LGW, OSL or CPH dependent on day. Norwegian is the only airline or alliance that can offer a one stop ticket from TOS to LAX. For LAX-BGO there are number of other airlines than Norwegian that can offer a one stop like LH via FRA, KL via AMS or BA via LHR, but then we will end up comparing service levels, travel times and prices. At the three Norwegian hubs ARN, CPH and OSL there is a special offer for Americans in New York City and Thais in Bangkok, and it is to fly one stop between JFK and BKK. These flights take around 22 hours both eastbound and westbound. Not that many airlines can compete on travel time.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 21206
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 12:14 am

The 787 has certainly opened routes. SAN-NRT for example would never have happened with any other aircraft. But if one end is typically a hub?    If you go through the old 787 vs. A380 threads, you'll find out that was what I was predicting. I noted the A380 and 787 would complement where the A380 allowed extra capacity on "trunk routes" and the 787 would be used for lower gauge routes.

Quoting SunsetLimited (Reply 4):
P2P in the sense that it's already opening up new nonstop routes that before might not have made as much financial sense with a 763 or 332.

   It isn't just replacing planes, it has expanded the market more than would have happened without the 787.

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 5):
P2P would mean an airline like BA operating MAN, EDI or GLA to a destination, if it's from LHR, it's a hub to spoke route. AUS is a new route made viable by the 787, but it's not P2P.

Literal... yes. Most long haul requires connections. That is why the limiting of hub growth that is happening in many areas makes no sense. Pure local O&D is too seasonal. It is best to 'smooth' out the traffic flows with a reasonable amount of connections.

Quoting polot (Reply 19):
People here on A.net have a tendency to take the term point-to-point a little too literally.

Agreed.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 29):
25% of all new routes that were launched since 2011 have been launched with the 787.

Interesting tidbit. I believe we'll see some with the A350 once it is in the fleet in quantity, but the 787 will remain an ideal 'starter widebody.'

Lightsaber
3 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3659
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 12:20 am

Quoting FlyingAY (Reply 10):

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 9):
LGW-LAX is P2P.

I think calling London - Los Angeles a point-to-point route might be stretching it a bit...

The definition given here was P2P was non hub to non hub city for an airline. If the airline does not have a hub in LA or London then it is P2P. Where do you get thats a stretch. Because other airlines that have hub fly it too. get real.
 
neutronstar73
Posts: 796
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:57 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 12:41 am

If people on here are thinking that Boeing's marketing has "failed" because airlines are flying from their "hubs" to new destinations are not P2P, I guess what they are (incorrectly) expecting is a 787 flying from VGT to RNM, or something.

Don't take P2P to literally. I always understood it to mean that you can bypass a hub on one end or the aircraft will allow you to fly economically to destinations that wouldn't support it before the 787.

Last I checked, I don't think JAL was flying from Narita to San Diego before the 787.
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 1:29 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 28):
Hardly. Initially, they seem to be opening up new routes that were never before served. SFO-CTU, SAN-NRT, SJC-NRT, etc. This is not to say that there is zero replacement. The first commercial 787 route replaced a 767.

..but I'd suggest for the airlines flying the 787, this is the exception rather than the rule!

I don't have an issue with airlines using the 787 to open up new long and thin routes and yes I agree the 787 is a very good aircraft to do this, but I just can't see established airlines making wholesale structural route changes as a result of the 787 entering into their fleets.

The 787 will open up new routes, but for the established airlines it will probably be a slowly, slowly approach!

[Edited 2015-05-10 18:30:36]
 
Aither
Posts: 1303
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 1:59 am

I don’t know what a “point to point” route is: on almost all international routes you have a mix of passengers flying point to point and connecting ones. Only a large markets you can find flights that can be filled essentially by point to point demand (Eg. LHR-JFK) but then the 787 is too small.

It’s hard to notice if the 787 is really changing the network of airlines. We see the 787 is opening new routes, just like many new widebody before. Is it more or less than before – difficult to say, but low fuel price and improved economic conditions have always been the main drivers for stopping (re)opening a route. It’s also a fleet allocation decision: airlines anticipate badly which route they will open and therefore often have to wait the delivery of new aircraft – whatever the type - to open these routes. That’s why each time you have the start of the delivery of a new type of aircraft in a fleet you can see many being used to open routes.
Never trust the obvious
 
User avatar
N62NA
Topic Author
Posts: 4496
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 2:09 am

neutronstar73, not singling you out, your post just happened to be closest to the bottom of the list and was easy to quote, but my comments go for the others too who have stated similar things as you have in this topic.

Quoting neutronstar73 (Reply 33):
Don't take P2P to literally.

It's not a particularly difficult concept. Non hub to non hub. Anything different than that and you're talking about something other than point-to-point.

Quoting neutronstar73 (Reply 33):
I always understood it to mean that you can bypass a hub on one end

That would be point (spoke) to hub or hub to point (spoke).

Under your definition then, for example, any UA flight from EWR to Europe (let's exclude the *A hubs) would be "point-to-point."
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 294
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 2:41 am

I have rarely seen a case in the real world where an aircraft is used exactly in the fashion that the manufacturer marketed it to be - Lockheed advertised the L-1011 as being useful on routes as short of 200 miles - no operator ever used the aircraft for that short a hop (except maybe PSA, and even then, it couldn't be done profitably.) Boeing said that the 757 was a 727 replacement for short-medium range flights and now operators now hurl them across the Atlantic, which is a route that Boeing never marketed the aircraft for or possibly even intended.

Airlines deploy their equipment in the manner that best meets the needs of the business and the route structure - not how the manufacturer says that the airplane should be used in a specific model.
My other car is an A320-200
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 3:01 am

This topic is one of those that is a.net tailor made. My wife likes to use the term "assininity" in referring to a conversation of this type.

Of course the 787 has opened up routes. Whether it meets one particular person's definition of point to point versus overhub flying is really just semantics. You cannot convince me that DEN-NRT or AUS-LHR would have been as easily launched with the available aircraft and $90 per barrel oil.

It seems like people who are paid to make these sorts of observations daily agree with the idea that the 787 has opened up new routes. As far as TRUE point to point flying, Boeing has no control over an airline's flight planning program. Sure, United "could" open up MIA to FRA, but why on earth would they? And of all available/capable aircraft out there, which one would pose the lowest risk in terms of cost per trip to put on the route?

We are talking about the first 2 years of an aircraft that will probably have a 40 plus year lifespan in fleets around the world from start to end of production and you want to say it hasn't lived up to point-to-point flying promise in a business environment that doesn't even promote that sort of thing? I'm cool with having the discussion, but parsing words over "new routes" versus "point to point" is ...as my wife would say, assininity.
 
NAV30
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:16 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 4:22 am

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 38):
We are talking about the first 2 years of an aircraft that will probably have a 40 plus year lifespan

Exactly, sidispatcher, in my view. The B787 'broke new ground,' the 'longer thinner route,' and the A350 will fill a similar role. Within a few years, it is likely that the 400-passenger 779X will play a prominent role in covering BOTH hub-to-hub and point-to-point. Worth noting that Boeing are going to great lengths with folding wingtips etc., it's pretty obvious that they want the B779X to be able to land at smaller airports as well as the major hubs.

As one who began his (mostly business) flight career in the 1960s, I can confirm that the common pattern in those days (especially when crossing the Atlantic, but frequently also travelling in Europe and what we used to call 'the Far East') was most often hub-to-hub on a four, then a single-aisle to the final destination. Nowadays, with a much broader choice of airlines AND aeroplanes, and the fact that twins are now 'acceptable' for long over-ocean trips, the twins are undeniably shaping to 'take over' completely within a very few years.........
 
Oykie
Posts: 1988
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 5:04 am

The term point 2 point is not having to connect, but rather fly nonstop all the way to your final destination. Large cities will have more nonstop flying than smaller cities. But it is still p2p when someone does not have to connect even from a hub. The 787 has opened up many new routes that eliminates the need to connect for the millions of people who usually lives nearby a HUB.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
CXfirst
Posts: 3022
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:13 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 5:11 am

Quoting waly777 (Reply 2):
It's often mistaken to be spoke to spoke, when in reality it is a hub to spoke model which bypasses what would traditionally have been a hub to hub to spoke, particularly on the long haul segments.

I agree with this.

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 5):
AUS is a new route made viable by the 787, but it's not P2P.

I would put this route into the category of route that the 787 was built for. Traditionally, to get from LON to AUS, one would fly LHR-DFW/IAH/JFK/EWR(or any other large US hub)-AUS.

A380 was built for Hub to Hub (and then you would take narrowbody from hub to final destination). 787 has taken that away from this route. I do consider this P2P.

-CXfirst
 
BiggerJetsPlz
Posts: 438
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:34 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 5:35 am

787 opened up routes like NRT-SAN, and SFO-CTU

You didn't really think it would open up routes like SAN-CTU, did you? Maybe if they made a 737 sized aircraft with the range and economics, but there aren't enough travelers between smaller markets to fill a widebody daily.
 
Aither
Posts: 1303
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 5:56 am

Quoting BiggerJetsPlz (Reply 42):
787 opened up routes like NRT-SAN, and SFO-CTU

- (re)opened NRT-SAN

- Is it the 787 making SFO-CTU possible or is it just that the Chinese economy is getting bigger ? how much connecting traffic on that route ? 70%?

Quoting BiggerJetsPlz (Reply 42):
You didn't really think it would open up routes like SAN-CTU, did you? Maybe if they made a 737 sized aircraft with the range and economics, but there aren't enough travelers between smaller markets to fill a widebody daily.

Exactly


In the meantime, the widebody opening the most new routes right now is still the A330.
The fact is an established airline will not make a fleet decisions based on some -small by definition- potential new routes to be opened. If they have 787s in their fleet, they will use these aircraft to open the routes, if they have the A330s, they will use the A330s as a route opener.

[Edited 2015-05-10 23:02:41]
Never trust the obvious
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 15799
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 6:35 am

Quoting N62NA (Reply 36):
It's not a particularly difficult concept. Non hub to non hub. Anything different than that and you're talking about something other than point-to-point.

I think what you mean is actually that the 787 is opening up long, thin routes that would ordinarily have involved hub-to-hub-to-destination flying.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1528
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 6:43 am

I now fly to Asia out San Diego to Tokyo on JAL. Whereas I used to either drive to lax or connect from San Diego thru sfo or Seattle. The 788 and JAL enabled this. B4 this I flew like twice on JAL now I do 6 round trips a year. P to P is win win
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6411
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 6:58 am

Quoting Aither (Reply 44):
Quoting BiggerJetsPlz (Reply 42):
787 opened up routes like NRT-SAN, and SFO-CTU

- (re)opened NRT-SAN

SAN-NRT never existed prior to the 787, although JL used a 777 on it during the 787 grounding. I think you meant SJC-NRT, which was reopened by NH with the 787.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 7:35 am

I think this discussion is here is strange.

The point to point meaning is very clear no hub at either end, at least no hub of the airline flying that air plane that route.
In that regard a focus city is not a hub or we have a different discussion.

Declaring now hub to spoke traffic as P2P is a cop out to blur the lines.

If hub to spoke traffic is P2P than a big part or most of the A380s are used P2P.

If one continues in this form the P2P moniker is meaningless and it would be better to talk about trunk routes, many connections every day, normal routes, several connections a week, and thin routes.
 
BiggerJetsPlz
Posts: 438
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:34 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 7:37 am

Quoting Planeflyer (Reply 46):
I now fly to Asia out San Diego to Tokyo on JAL. Whereas I used to either drive to lax or connect from San Diego thru sfo or Seattle. The 788 and JAL enabled this. B4 this I flew like twice on JAL now I do 6 round trips a year. P to P is win win

To add, I just did this trip last week myself, and the 8 across Y in JA's 787 is heaven. It's practically like premium economy for no extra cost.
 
MAH4546
Posts: 26468
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 1:44 pm

RE: 787 - So Far It Is NOT Being Used Point-to-Point

Mon May 11, 2015 7:38 am

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 11):
It has opened a lot of "Point to Hub" routes that are long and thin such as SAN-NRT, BOS-NRT, SJC-NRT, LHR-AUS, LHR-CTU, WAW-ORD, FLL-ARN,

A lot of those markets aren't thin at all. ORD-WAW has been around for ages, not sure why it is grouped there. BOS/SANNRT were over 50,000 annual passengers before non-stops, and Miami to Stockholm had in excess of 70,000 annual passengers before non-stops.
a.

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