Any truth to the rumor...

[Travelpro72]

We are the MOST embarrassing airline in the industry. So we are going to fly an A330-200 half full and no cargo with fuel stops most likely? Who the F runs this place? Monkeys? To think that people would contemplate coming back to this shoe string one trick operation. I say the gov't should tell US....Thanks anyway.... MORONS.

 

[night-ice]

We are the MOST embarrassing airline in the industry. So we are going to fly an A330-200 half full and no cargo with fuel stops most likely? Who the F runs this place? Monkeys? To think that people would contemplate coming back to this shoe string one trick operation. I say the gov't should tell US....Thanks anyway.... MORONS.

Has DP officially announced this to the workgroups and to the DOT, or is this another rumor? I've not seen anything about it on the hub. So, even if the aircraft were to be the A330...half full and no cargo, with fuel stops likely...how hard would it be to make any money or just to break even? ( I tend to agree with EMBFA....DP may be working something in the background or waiting to see how the merger mania unfolds.)

 

[Travelpro72]

Hopefully something else will happen because we are quickly turning into the Titanic.... This ship is sinking. Even if the damn thing did make it and they made the jumbled numbers work it's still a shoe string, spit n' chewing gum operation. Can we just do ANYTHING right and not halfassed? They better keep the recalls coming cause one taste of crews doing a fuel stop over and back will surely make this baby go PRETTY junior. I'd be taking my nice little NCT (No contact) before I went on THAT journey.

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

Where did I ever say that every problem would have a preplanned solution. I merely pointed out the fact that on Etops flights, diversion airports are preplanned.
It always makes my day when a cactus guy calls me "dude."


You're right, I did know. But why the drama? How will the operation differ from those being flown as we speak by NW, UA, CO, DL and a host of European and Asian carriers? They don't seem to be wetting their pants over it.

d-cc, don't compliment yourself. The term I used was 'super dude," and it was intended as sarcasm. I am sure most readers saw it as such. Sorry I confused you on that.

I'm gonna let this one die a natural death, but before I do, it is important to reiterate my original point: using a two engined airplane and not a four engined airplane on the China route exposes all of our crews and passengers to the potential for more peril and certainly more inconvenience. The distance from PHL to PEK is 5977NM - no wind. The maximum range of the A330-200 is 6400NM. If the aircraft lands with 16,000# of fuel it will have consumed 94% of its takeoff FOB. Not much wiggle room for any crew after the wheels go in the well. Throw in a little wind and maybe one or two deviations for weather, and you'll be buying some of that fine Siberian Jet-A.....LOL.

By contrast, the A340-200 has an eight thousand mile range and could make up for its increased operating cost simply by filling the holds with some of that Chinese rubber dog dung we've all heard about. Heck d-cc, I suspect that at least half of the stuff you own was made in China. And it all had to get there to your place somehow.

You all have a good night now, ya hear?

NLC,

Over and out.

 

[WCT]

This airline is practically married to Airbus, and is spending millions on orders?? Why in the heck is it so hard to get a freakin A340 on the property? 🙄

 

[delta777]

This is probably a ridiculous idea, as this aircraft would stick out like a sore thumb against all LCC's Airbuses, but why not find some used MD-11's on the open market. LCC only needs a handful, and there's plenty of them parked and pickled. While the MD-11 certainly had quite a few shortcomings, at least initially, it did ultimately prove to be a fairly decent aircraft. The range is around (help me out if i'm wrong) 7100nm with around 250+ passengers plus cargo. More than enough for PHL-PEK. (5900)nm., and there are no ETOPS restrictions obviously. My guess is LCC could get a pretty damn good deal on 3-4 airframes. As has already been stated, the A350 is looking like a 2014 release date at best, so you'd be getting 6+ years of usage out of the MD-11 in the meantime.

How's this for some crosswinds...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mao2i8I2bSY

 

[WCT]

This is probably a ridiculous idea, as this aircraft would stick out like a sore thumb against all LCC's Airbuses, but why not find some used MD-11's on the open market. LCC only needs a handful, and there's plenty of them parked and pickled. While the MD-11 certainly had quite a few shortcomings, at least initially, it did ultimately prove to be a fairly decent aircraft. The range is around (help me out if i'm wrong) 7100nm with around 250+ passengers plus cargo. More than enough for PHL-PEK. (5900)nm., and there are no ETOPS restrictions obviously. My guess is LCC could get a pretty damn good deal on 3-4 airframes. As has already been stated, the A350 is looking like a 2014 release date at best, so you'd be getting 6+ years of usage out of the MD-11 in the meantime.

How's this for some crosswinds...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mao2i8I2bSY

Great idea. But unfortunetly we have fools running this place. They can't comprehend anything but Airbus, rather a real airliner! If we would of gone with Boeing in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess. 🙄

 

[wopr21]

Yes, I was being sarcastic. Imagine that. Please, you expect this place to do anything right? Let them fall on thier face. The only way they learn and I would say that is a stretch.

Thats what I thought.. my apologies. It will take them a lot longer than we have on the earth to figure things out.

wopr21

 

[SegmentKing]

well, the KLM MD-11s are already in a cramped 3 x 4 x 3 seating... so there is NO possible way they can make it any worse... this plane is already PIMPED!

Note: Most MD-11/DC-10 aircraft have only *9* seats across in the main cabin...

 

[700UW]

Aircraft Category: Commerical Jet Aircraft
Aircraft: A340
Aircraft Type: -313
Manufacturer: Airbus
Model: A340
Engines: CFM56-5C4
Available: October 2008
MSN: 146
MTOW: 260,000 kg
Year: 1996
Stage: 3
Availability: Sale
Comments: Owned by Safran; lease to Iberia expires in October 2008; 42J/218Y configuration

 

[AstroLounge]

This is probably a ridiculous idea, as this aircraft would stick out like a sore thumb against all LCC's Airbuses, but why not find some used MD-11's on the open market. LCC only needs a handful, and there's plenty of them parked and pickled. While the MD-11 certainly had quite a few shortcomings, at least initially, it did ultimately prove to be a fairly decent aircraft. The range is around (help me out if i'm wrong) 7100nm with around 250+ passengers plus cargo. More than enough for PHL-PEK. (5900)nm., and there are no ETOPS restrictions obviously. My guess is LCC could get a pretty damn good deal on 3-4 airframes. As has already been stated, the A350 is looking like a 2014 release date at best, so you'd be getting 6+ years of usage out of the MD-11 in the meantime.

How's this for some crosswinds...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mao2i8I2bSY

I really liked the MD11 when I flew on one several years ago. "IF" they were indeed available, I highly doubt they would consider adding an airplane that is fairly old and out of production. If memory serves me, both AA and Delta had them in their fleets before they sold them off to other airlines, so maybe their were operational issues for this a/c. (It always struck me as a very powerful airplane and the #2 engine was a very unique design). Adding an airplane like this seems like a better choice than gambling on an A330 with so many operational handicaps.

 

[john john]

Igambling on an A330 with so many operational handicaps.

OK CLP we have 13 children 212 passengers can we take one more passenger
This going to be fun NOT

 

[legacy-to-LCC]

does anybody have senator arlen specter's e-mail address? i'd like to send the link to this thread to him... 😱

 

[700UW]

www.senate.gov

 

[USstew23]

Aircraft Category: Commerical Jet Aircraft
Aircraft: A340
Aircraft Type: -313
Manufacturer: Airbus
Model: A340
Engines: CFM56-5C4
Available: October 2008
MSN: 146
MTOW: 260,000 kg
Year: 1996
Stage: 3
Availability: Sale
Comments: Owned by Safran; lease to Iberia expires in October 2008; 42J/218Y configuration

Now there you go being logical and we all know that won't work around here!!! If they truly had a head on their shoulders and wanted to get real they would already have the proper aircraft lined up. They either don't care or they have something else in the pipes. No matter how much it would set the company back I think it would go a long way if they would just do this one right (properly). As cozy as they are with Airbus I'm sure that they could get some smoking deal on capable interim aircraft.

Then again maybe they want to merge it and get rid of it so bad that they are purposely screwing things up so that it's cheaper to sell and the government would be more inclined to let the merger thing go down.