Any truth to the rumor...

[night-ice]

The only problem with LH's numbers, which have been published for several years, is that they really do not have unquestionable credibility unless the 332 and 343 are advertised as having been tested with identical missions, such as departure/arrival airport, route, loads, etc.. I would speculate, for example, that the 332 would outperform the 343 on any short climb out required, relatively short distance route (< about 3000nm). PHL-PEK is obviously not one of those. My feeling is that if US attempts to pull this off with the 332, their credibility as a potential world class carrier will essentially be eliminated - assuming the DOT, under pressure from airlines which competed for and subsequently challenged the route award, don't cancel the Authority. I wrote to Parker and the Washington office yesterday and suggested a public clarification of his current plan because of it's potential negative impact on the already distressed Stock price.

What are the other carriers who where awarded the China route flying? 777, 747? With an award this huge, I would think Tempe would put on the biggest dog and pony show you've ever seen. It would be really hard to compete using a 330 with a fuel stop while the competetion is using larger, more modern aircraft. Has ETOPS Blackberried his sources and asked if there is any merit to this ugly rumor?

 

[dariencc]

These China flights will be conducted overhead some of the most inhospitable real estate on the planet.

Oh, the humanity! We don't feel pressured on 180 min. North Atlantic ETOPS. It can be kind of inhospitable, too, and it's over water, not real estate. <_<

It is that unplanned diversion that will be problematic - and will put continual pressure on the crews.

Are you kidding? (EDITED BY MODERATOR) Our crews will monitor the fuel status and make appropriate decisions. I hope you don't mind if we put aside the pressure long enough to take our nap.

And I venture that an A330 would make considerably more diversions than an A340.

Actually, we have very few unplanned diversions on our transatlantic operation, although the number has increased since the Tempe maintenance philosophy kicked in. I know that your Hawaii operation is a bit operationally challenged.

There is a huge difference between having four engines, verses two.

Hence the "T" in ETOPS. :huh:

No, no "deer in the headlights" here. But unfortunately, there's a bit of "head in the sand" there.

COMMENT DELETED BY MODERATOR

MOD NOTE-What part of no personal name calling/attacks/insults DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?

 

[USA320Pilot]

US Airways announced at the recent Manager's meeting that the company has decided to use the A330-200 for China service on an interim basis until the A350 arrives. The company decided it was best to not have a couple of different aircraft in the inventory for a relatively short period of time.

According to East MEC Chairman Jack Stephan ALPA and the company are scheduled to begin discussions next week on the 2 two-man crew requirement and onboard crew rest facility requirements.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

Oh, the humanity! We don't feel pressured on 180 min. North Atlantic ETOPS. It can be kind of inhospitable, too, and it's over water, not real estate. <_<


Are you kidding? (EDITED BY MODERATOR) Our crews will monitor the fuel status and make appropriate decisions. I hope you don't mind if we put aside the pressure long enough to take our nap.


Actually, we have very few unplanned diversions on our transatlantic operation, although the number has increased since the Tempe maintenance philosophy kicked in. I know that your Hawaii operation is a bit operationally challenged.


Hence the "T" in ETOPS. :huh:


COMMENT DELETED BY MODERATOR

MOD NOTE-What part of no personal name calling/attacks/insults DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND?

Uh oh, Dariencc - you resorted to personal attacks when logic would have been a better tack. What's it feel like receiving the moderator's attention?

Anyhow, my comments during this 330/340 thread were all regarding the RELATIVE merits of the two different types on the China route. I don't know why you couldn't see that.

If you choose to believe that the 330 is a better aircraft for that route, more power to you. But the real facts of operating an aircraft to the limits of its range, and with only two engines turning do place the crews into a much more "heads up" environment.

I've been over a few ponds in the 747. We mostly had to be concerned with our crew meals and making sure our bums didn't go numb. You loose an engine? No big deal. However, it is a whole different deal if a motor goes quiet on the 330. The first question is: where do we go now? Second question is: What's the identifier for Magadan, Russia?

You see, my friend, its all relative.

 

[beachboy]

The DOT should revoke the route authority plain and simple. You can't operate the flight with a full load and cargo, shame on you. It was advertised to the DOT as an 340 and a nonstop flight. What arrogance and self deprecation.

 

[sharktooth]

Uh oh, Dariencc - you resorted to personal attacks when logic would have been a better tack.

Logic rarely works when responding to pure FUD and personal attacks like your "head in sand" comment.

If you choose to believe that the 330 is a better aircraft for that route, more power to you. But the real facts of operating an aircraft to the limits of its range, and with only two engines turning do place the crews into a much more "heads up" environment.

About hostile environments. North Atlantic water gives an unprotected individual just a few minutes life, if that. Going over is at night. Not much flat ground to land on between PHL and Europe.

How about flying a three engine 747 to Narita and back? Nursing that engine was pretty silly. What if the aircraft had lost another? Your company is (in)famous for that piece of aeronautical negligence. One could almost term it, malicious.

I've been over a few ponds in the 747. We mostly had to be concerned with our crew meals and making sure our bums didn't go numb. You loose an engine? No big deal. However, it is a whole different deal if a motor goes quiet on the 330. The first question is: where do we go now? Second question is: What's the identifier for Magadan, Russia?

You don't have much ETOPs experience that you would ask that question, do you? Madagan, pretty city (summer). History is pretty gruesome. Have you been there?

 

[back2CLT]

Editted

I agree that if they really plan to use a A330 they should have the route stripped....someone needs to save them the embaracement....and this has nothing to do with ETOPS. It's about pride, and commitment to doing what you say you are going to do, basic concepts that seem to be lacking from the top down.

This should be a really simple concept....you go out, pay whatever it takes to get A340's...you fly them for 5 years, and then you either use them on other routes when the A350 shows up, or you sell them. It's not like they are worthless aircraft that can't be operated profitably (see Lufthansa). Sure, this could cost them $10s of millions of dollars, but how much are they going to lose when they launch a China route with a shiny new toy, and the market has flat out rejected them......The A359 will make a good Charlotte to Phoenix shuttle.

 

[rvolkcpa]

Editted

I agree that if they really plan to use a A330 they should have the route stripped....someone needs to save them the embaracement....and this has nothing to do with ETOPS. It's about pride, and commitment to doing what you say you are going to do, basic concepts that seem to be lacking from the top down.

This should be a really simple concept....you go out, pay whatever it takes to get A340's...you fly them for 5 years, and then you either use them on other routes when the A350 shows up, or you sell them. It's not like they are worthless aircraft that can't be operated profitably (see Lufthansa). Sure, this could cost them $10s of millions of dollars, but how much are they going to lose when they launch a China route with a shiny new toy, and the market has flat out rejected them......The A359 will make a good Charlotte to Phoenix shuttle.

The "Consolidated Reply of US Airways Docket OST-2007-28567" has a lot of comments about the A340-300 on pages 6-8.

III.A US Airways Will Have Sufficient A340-300 Aircraft To Begin Philadelphia-Beijing Service on March 25, 2009.

As its application clearly states, US Airways will operate daily Philadelphia-Beijing nonstop service with 269-seat A340-300 and it will begin service on March 25, 2009 or any other date selected by the Department...

... US Airways currently is engaged in serious discussions with a large and well-known international aircraft lessor with which US Airways has a longstanding relationship. This lessor has at least two A340-300 aircraft available for delivery to US Airways well before March 2009...

I agree that if US now tries to downgrade the aircraft to the A330-200, the DOT should revoke the route authority.

 

[EMBFA]

So is this true about the A330-200 being used or what? How embarrassing.

Much as I despise outsourcing, I'd almost rather some sort of wet lease do the service than see US do it half-ass and fuel stop our way across the planet.

It would be dumb to go ahead and add the 340 if there's a merger on the horizon... maybe there's something up besides the usual small time incompetence.

 

[night-ice]

The "Consolidated Reply of US Airways Docket OST-2007-28567" has a lot of comments about the A340-300 on pages 6-8.

III.A US Airways Will Have Sufficient A340-300 Aircraft To Begin Philadelphia-Beijing Service on March 25, 2009.

As its application clearly states, US Airways will operate daily Philadelphia-Beijing nonstop service with 269-seat A340-300 and it will begin service on March 25, 2009 or any other date selected by the Department...

... US Airways currently is engaged in serious discussions with a large and well-known international aircraft lessor with which US Airways has a longstanding relationship. This lessor has at least two A340-300 aircraft available for delivery to US Airways well before March 2009...

I agree that if US now tries to downgrade the aircraft to the A330-200, the DOT should revoke the route authority.

Who's to say that when/if the 350's become available, US will use them? I can't believe this route looks like it is slipping right out of US' hands...what a shame...considering US really needs to serve destinations to the Asian / Pacific Rim..
Is there 'any' current, modern airline serving Asia from the states that flies the 330?

 

[night-ice]

So is this true about the A330-200 being used or what? How embarrassing.

Much as I despise outsourcing, I'd almost rather some sort of wet lease do the service than see US do it half-ass and fuel stop our way across the planet.

It would be dumb to go ahead and add the 340 if there's a merger on the horizon... maybe there's something up besides the usual small time incompetence.

Agreed....but, with whom?! :unsure:

 

[back2CLT]

I would guess the NW uses the 330 between Seattle and Seoul or NRT on occasion, but that's just a guess.....Hainan wants to fly Beijing-Seattle on the 330.....still, there is a big difference between Seattle and Philly (at least from the public's perception).

 

[EMBFA]

Northwest flies the 200 from the west coast to Tokyo, I believe SFO, SEA, and PDX. They also fly them from MSP to HNL.

 

[BoeingBoy]

still, there is a big difference between Seattle and Philly (at least from the public's perception).

As well as in fact - about 1,300 nm difference, in fact.

Jim

 

[night-ice]

Northwest flies the 200 from the west coast to Tokyo, I believe SFO, SEA, and PDX. They also fly them from MSP to HNL.

What's the mileage difference between the longest of these city pairs in contrast to what US is trying on the same aircraft from PHL to China?