A330 Takes To The Pacific

[JFK777]

I applaud NW's unique use of the A330-200. If NW can only sell 200 seats from the west coast to NRT then it the right bird. My concerns are two; A330's can't overfly Japan & Fly to Asia from MSP and DTW. NW's reliance on the NRT hub for so much of its Asia strategy disturbs me.

NW's competition, principally UA, achieves a balance with using NRT as a hub and flies point to point from the USA to the Asian destination. Look at SIA with its new A340-500. All I saying is with feed at te DTW hub, Nonstop to every city served through NRT should occur from DTW. The strategy should be nonstop from DTW to NRT, KIX, ICN, SIN,HKG, BKK, & PVG. The NRT hub would also remain as it currently functions. This two pronged approach is what the expanding market desires and there are limits to what can go through NRT. Overflying NRT doesn't subject NW schedule to the limits imposed by the Japanesse. DTW should serve as many international cities as Continental serves from Newark on all continents. Yes I do mean Sao Paulo here we come.

 

[Bigsky]

If NW can only sell 200 seats from the west coast to NRT then it the right bird. My concerns are two; A330's can't overfly Japan & Fly to Asia from MSP and DTW. NW's reliance on the NRT hub for so much of its Asia strategy disturbs me.

Now for some serious remedial ECON. It's not about filling seats at any cost. You could theoritcally fill a B747 up daily from Fargo to NRT if you drop the fares low enough. Makiing money in the airline business is about yields and NW's yields are about 10% higher than the industry average. BTW where did you come up with the 200 seats from the west coast to NRT? LAX, SFO and SEA alone add up to around a 1000 seats from the west coast to NRT daily

NW's competition, principally UA, achieves a balance with using NRT as a hub and flies point to point from the USA to the Asian destination.

.

I think that UA has shown us every example of what not to do in almost every market. Example: Flying B777s only half full to Asia with the SARS epidemic in full swing.

The strategy should be nonstop from DTW to NRT, KIX, ICN, SIN,HKG, BKK, & PVG. The NRT hub would also remain as it currently functions. This two pronged approach is what the expanding market desires and there are limits to what can go through NRT.

DTW did have several of these routes with B747-400. That was pre 9/11. In this environment you have to quickly adapt. Unlike UA, NW choose to discontinue some of the DTW Asia non-stops and use NRT as a hub. To match the poor demand in Asia, NW placed six A320s in NRT. Since that time, the equipment has been upgraded to six B757's flying throughout Asia while based in NRT. As the Asian economy rebounds, you can expect to see many of the DTW to Asia non-stops return.

DTW should serve as many international cities as Continental serves from Newark on all continents. Yes I do mean Sao Paulo here we come.

Why? Our codeshare partners already fly to South America. Not from DTW but from EWR, ATL and IAH. NW relys more on the codesharing than UA and AA. I think it's a smart move. Instead of trying to be everything and everywhere for everyone, NW focuses on being a great airline and is the preferred US carrier in the Paciific.

cheers

bigsky

 

[C54Capt]

bigsky,

I would have to agree with you on many of your points. I will go out of my way to fly NW to the Pacific, so having the 330 launch from the west coast is a great deal. NW, IMO, is the only US carrier that has the "class" to compete with the asian carriers in this market. Keep up the great service guys...can't wait til you get the 7E7 on line.

 

[JFK777]

C54CAPT,

NW is the only Us carrier that has the "class" to compete with the Asian carriers in this market.

If I 'm flying to Asia from one of the traditional gateways, LAX, SFO or JFK I have a multitude of options; NW, UA, AA, Cathay, SIA and lesser ones. If Japan IS NOT my destination, is NW an attractive an option? I would rather fly Cathay or SIA nonstop to HKG or SIN arriving at a hub closer to my destination on newer airplanes. We are living in a nonstop world.

British Airways is a perfect example. Until 1990 if you flew BA from LHR to Asia you stopped in India or Alaska. Even to South Africa there was a stop in Kenya. Today BA flies to every destination it flies to nonstop except Australia.

 

[pk45cu]

The problem for NW from the west coast is that they don't have local market strength to justify flying to points other than their NRT hub. UA has a hub at SFO and a strong presence in LAX, and hence can afford to fly key west coast to Asia non-stops bypassing NRT.

The B772ER can go farther than the A332 and carry 50 more pax. It's a great plane, but all that NW needs is a smaller plane that can make it to NRT. No need to fly in a plane with 4 hours of fuel left.

 

[NWA/AMT]

British Airways is a perfect example. Until 1990 if you flew BA from LHR to Asia you stopped in India or Alaska. Even to South Africa there was a stop in Kenya. Today BA flies to every destination it flies to nonstop except Australia.

Actually that was more a result of the range limitations of the equipment in use at the time than any route philosophy. The 747-400 allowed many airlines to end their 'technical' or fuel stops required by the first-generation widebodies.

Many of us at NWA have been saying for years that we need to get ETOPS aircraft operating over the Pacific or face the fate of Pan Am and TWA over the Atlantic in the 1980s. Those airlines found themselves operating 747-100s to Europe as their competitors, AA, BA and UA, for instance, were operating 767s and delivering greater frequency with lower costs per seat mile.

Faced with the same sort of competition in the Pacific, NWA has begun to adapt to the situation. Many of us would have preferred to see the 777 but NWA made their choice for solid economic reasons. Having the NRT hub allowed them to make different choices than their competitors have, but knowing NWA I am certain they looked at the cost issue from every angle we can possibly come up with (and many we can't).

Just as the US 'legacy carriers' are not abandoning their domestic hubs to chase point-to-point routes with the LCCs, NWA should not abandon the NRT hub. Certainly NWA loses some passengers to airlines flying point-to-point, and, as has been pointed out, itself flies point-to-point when the economic situation allows it, but the fact is that both economically and operationally the NRT hub works.

 

[JFK777]

pk45cu,

The reason the technical stops STOPPEd was the USSR. With Russia opening up its airspace the 747-200 in use at the time could reach NRT, HKG, SIN, BKK Etc nonstop. While the 744 certainly helped with higher loads and greater range.

The 744 really opened up the Pacific much more. Qantas could finally have 3 or nonstops from Sydney to LAX daily.

 

[NWA/AMT]

The route adjustments allowed by the collapse of the USSR would have little effect on a BA flight to Johannesburg, nor on many of the other routes that formerly required technical stops. Opening up technical stop cities in the former Soviet republics has also changed flight patterns, witness KLM shifting from ANC to cities like Tashkent for their technical stops Eastbound.

The 744 filled a gap that had been imperfectly filled by the 747-SP, imperfectly because it traded payload for range. The -400 allowed direct flights at full loads between cities that had not previously had such service and will serve NWA well for many years to come in both feeder and direct operations.

 

[Just Plane Crazy]

Just Plane Crazy,

"No the A330 is not a 777. The A330-200 can carry more passenger on a longer route then the 777-200."

That statement is ridiculous, anyone with knowlwedge of the 777-200ER knows it can fly further with more passengers the any A330. There some airline like AA(237) that have fewer passenger then typical on the 777 but most are closer to 275. Singapore Airlines has a pre 9/11 flight from Las Vegas to Hong Kong( 15 hours) NONSTOP, I would like to see an A330 do that. West Coast to NRT flights are at the limits of the A330-200, the 777-200ER still has 4 hours of flying left in its fuel tanks. Think of all those flights British Airways has from LHR to the Far East.
Could Continental fly from Newark to HKG nonstop as its does with an A330-200? No, but its pride and joy the GE 90 powered 777-200ER does it 15.5 hours over Siberia.

It is French irony to me why Air France has such a large 777-200ER fleet? Is it because it it flies further with more pax the the A340-300/A330-200 also in Af's fleet? Most AF flight to Asia are 777. It clear AF likes the 777, BA, SIA, UA, AA & KLM do too. The 777 is the clear choice for 12 to 14 hour flights by 2 engine airplanes, the A330 is good for 8 hours flights as the the A340-500 is good for 18 hours flights.

How many other airlines will use the A330 across the pacific? Few, but many are using 777's.

First of all, SQ went to LAS with a B747-400 and not with a B777.

And if you would have looked closely to what I wrote, I compared a B777-200 (not an 200ER) to an A330-200.

Further more, it is nice that you have listed all the airlines that fly B777-200ER. Lets also list all the airlines that fly the A330/340 - AF, LH, SQ, TG, CX, NW, US, AC, AU, and Philippine, Garuda, Korean, Emirates, TAM, etc. etc. etc. Don’t start to compare apples with oranges. And for flights of 12 hours, LTU takes the A330 from DUS to LAX (aprox 12 hours).

NW made a decision based on economics and Airbus was the better fit for them. And you should compare the B747-200 that NW is currently using to the A330. For NW it will be a better choice to operate the A330 instead of the B747-200 over the pacific. You have to look at what the airline wants to achieve. NW is not talking about ultra long flights and if, they most probably would take an A340 and not a B777.

 

[JFK777]

Just Plane Crazy,

SQ went Vegas with A 777ER powered by Rolls Trent at 92,000 pounds of thrust per engine.

When you wrote the 777-200 I thought you might make such a distinction, Since the 777-200ER is more common I used it to compare. There were few 777-200 built, they were referred to as the "A" model when the 777 started being delivered in 1995. UA had to what for the "B" IGW to fly from the west coast to Europe and Asia. Today 777-200 are like the original 767-200, a poor cousin to the later derivatives.

The discussion on this board is transpacific long haul, I'm well aware of the distinguished list flying A330/A340. NW is still the only one flying any two engine Airbus aircaft across the Pacific. I know some 8 & 9 hour A330 flights do happen in Asia with Qantas and Cathay from Australia to HKG and others.

Some airines like TAM and AF fly the A330-200 from Brazil to Paris with great success. Others like US, Aer Lingus, NW, LH and AC fly the north atlantic but I'm strictly talking North Pacific.

If you are the owner of the "World Transport Press" that use to be at the Miami International Airport's Sw corner I find some of your positions Interesting because I think I have met you in person at the Miami and Newark shows and you seem very different in person.

 

[North by Northwest]

"If I 'm flying to Asia from one of the traditional gateways, LAX, SFO or JFK I have a multitude of options; NW, UA, AA, Cathay, SIA and lesser ones. If Japan IS NOT my destination, is NW an attractive an option? I would rather fly Cathay or SIA nonstop to HKG or SIN arriving at a hub closer to my destination on newer airplanes. We are living in a nonstop world. " JFK777, you don't seem to realize that NWA's ASIAN route system has an ACE that is superior to all those airlines when it comes to making money in the Pacific. Northwest's maximizes it's Tokyo Hub because of it's Fifth Freedom rights and the possession of the most take off and landing slots of ANY carrier outside of JAL. The yield from O/D traffic from the world's second largest economy(Japan) dwarfs point to point Asian traffic form the US. I think it is great that you like to fly non-stop...so do I. However, that does not have any baring on the business operation of an airline that has been successful in the Pacific for almost 60 years. Furthermore, the A330-200 is more than able to compete (no center seat in coach, magnificent WBC product) with a 777 accross the Pacific from the US West Coast to the Pacific. In due time you will once again see non-stop service to select points in Asia from NWA, but it will never over take the Tokyo Hub.

 

[JFK777]

North by NW,

I appreciate your true facts about the NRT hub. I think NW is handicapping itself by limiting its Asia operation to the size of the NRT hub. Could you imagine if when UA bought Pan Am's LHR routes in 1991 they said all service to Europe will be through LHR. UA's service beyond London would be severely limited.

 

[JetClipper]

North by NW,

I appreciate your true facts about the NRT hub. I think NW is handicapping itself by limiting its Asia operation to the size of the NRT hub. Could you imagine if when UA bought Pan Am's LHR routes in 1991 they said all service to Europe will be through LHR. UA's service beyond London would be severely limited.

I think it's important to remember that NWA has tried nonstops to other Asian destinations over the years with varying levels of success. I believe the current strategy to maximize the NRT hub was more of a reaction to the SARS- and Iraq War-related drop in international traffic than a desire to force all Asia traffic through Tokyo. SARS had considerably less effect on traffic to/from Japan, so the decision to eliminate NRT "overflies" was actually very shrewd.

That being said, I believe if NWA can acquire an aircraft that can carry the "right" load of passengers nonstop from DTW to other Asian destinations (e.g. 7E7), you will see more of these routes in the future.

 

[North by Northwest]

Based purely on economics, the 7E7 would be a killer machine for Northwest. There will be a replacement for the 74-200's and the 777300 was never ruled out. But that said...if the 7E7 is within reach (time wise) bingo!

 

[Just Plane Crazy]

If you are the owner of the "World Transport Press" that use to be at the Miami International Airport's Sw corner I find some of your positions Interesting because I think I have met you in person at the Miami and Newark shows and you seem very different in person.

Sorry, its not me.