Light Years
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2002
- Messages
- 2,878
- Reaction score
- 0
Is Northwest eventually looking at the A340s as a 747 replacement?
(big Red) A-330's
- Thread starter NewHampshire Black Bears
- Start date
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 10,153
- Reaction score
- 681
Kev3188,Kev3188 said:
OK, lets due some quick math here.
AFTER the concessions, topped out FSC's(not crew chiefs/leads) were reduced to $19.68, plus(at the most $.30 per hour for longivity) = $19.98 per hour.
Now on 5/1/04, add +1.5% of $19.68 = $.30. + $19.68 = $19.98.
Add back the $.30 longivity(which MAY have been reduced, or eliminated, or grandfathered as of 5/1/03), would equal out at the VERY most to $20.28.
Either way, it becomes a HARD sell for Andersen to cut ESE wages, at all.
(Unfortunately there are hypothetically other ways to "shrink the pay check" via changes in "bennies")
On real good thing in your contract is(if I'm sayin' this correctly) is that if there is a reduction of flights at a station, which results in a reduction of force, ALL the PART timers go BEFORE any Full Timers.
NO SO, AT AA !!!!!!!!
NH/BB's
Kev3188
Veteran
Light Years said:
Kev3188
Veteran
NewHampshire Black Bears said:
I'm happy for NW to be thrilled with its new A330's, Europe is though fairly new it NW international system. Those routes started to Scandanavia, Ireland and Scotland, destinations no longer served by NW once it got to London, Paris , Frankfurt and Amsterdam. I'm concerned about Japan with the 747-400 now being 15 years old and no one seems to know when when its replacement will arrive or on what form.
Asia has long been NW backyard internationally, always flying to the first rate destinations like Tokyo and Hong Kong. NW Asia fleet is dated and in need of new metal. Is NW willng to make the investment to stay competitive? NW should also look at overflying Japan. 777LR would make beautiful planes in NW RED. KLM, Air France, CAL & Delta have 777, all Skyteam memebers.
Asia has long been NW backyard internationally, always flying to the first rate destinations like Tokyo and Hong Kong. NW Asia fleet is dated and in need of new metal. Is NW willng to make the investment to stay competitive? NW should also look at overflying Japan. 777LR would make beautiful planes in NW RED. KLM, Air France, CAL & Delta have 777, all Skyteam memebers.
There's nothing inherently wrong with 744s. They're far better aircraft than the DC-10s for the Asian market, and if the demand supports it they're also far better than the 777.
Of course, overflying NRT would permit the use of 777s as 744 replacements for Asian destinations. But would the increased cost of more metal over the Pacific be met with equivalent increased revenue? And is there enough demand to support this?
Of course, overflying NRT would permit the use of 777s as 744 replacements for Asian destinations. But would the increased cost of more metal over the Pacific be met with equivalent increased revenue? And is there enough demand to support this?
MWeiss,
I idea of using DC-10's across the Pacific in the year 2004 is disturbing. The Dc-10 was never a big Pacific airliner, Air New Zealand used it and Singapore Airlines used it to San Francisco on its inaugaural trip via Hong kong, Guam nad Honolulu in 1977. Garuda Indonesia used some from LAX to Bali. By the time most of the now big Asian airlines started flying the Pacific in the 1970 and early 1980's 747 were already the airplane of choice. Cathay didn't go to Vancouver until 1980, China Air(Taiwan), Malaysia, Thai, Korean Air and ANA have only been at the long Pacific crossing 15-25 years. 744 are great palnes but NW overeliance on the NRT hub is what distrubs me. They should fly from DTW nonstop to every city in the Pacific Rim. DC-10 are even gone from passenger fleet in South America, Varig quit using them for passenger service along time ago. NW should be embarrassed at using Dc-10 from SFO to NRT.
I idea of using DC-10's across the Pacific in the year 2004 is disturbing. The Dc-10 was never a big Pacific airliner, Air New Zealand used it and Singapore Airlines used it to San Francisco on its inaugaural trip via Hong kong, Guam nad Honolulu in 1977. Garuda Indonesia used some from LAX to Bali. By the time most of the now big Asian airlines started flying the Pacific in the 1970 and early 1980's 747 were already the airplane of choice. Cathay didn't go to Vancouver until 1980, China Air(Taiwan), Malaysia, Thai, Korean Air and ANA have only been at the long Pacific crossing 15-25 years. 744 are great palnes but NW overeliance on the NRT hub is what distrubs me. They should fly from DTW nonstop to every city in the Pacific Rim. DC-10 are even gone from passenger fleet in South America, Varig quit using them for passenger service along time ago. NW should be embarrassed at using Dc-10 from SFO to NRT.
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 10,153
- Reaction score
- 681
2 questions.
What commercial a/c TODAY can fly the farthest on a "tank of gas"(miles) ??
What are the distance's between JFK and DTW, and the FURTHEST asian destination that "Big Red"(NW) fly's into. ????("Not" necessarily present N/S flts.)
Thanx,
NH/BB's
What commercial a/c TODAY can fly the farthest on a "tank of gas"(miles) ??
What are the distance's between JFK and DTW, and the FURTHEST asian destination that "Big Red"(NW) fly's into. ????("Not" necessarily present N/S flts.)
Thanx,
NH/BB's
NewHampshire Black Bears
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 10,153
- Reaction score
- 681
I'm NOT asking for the air miles from JFK to DTW.NewHampshire Black Bears said:
(Hope I did'nt confuse anyone)
Thanx,
NH/BB's
Kev3188
Veteran
NH/BB--
No idea on A/C with the "biggest" tank, but JFK-NRT is advertised at 6,773 miles, and DTW-NRT is 6,400.
No idea on A/C with the "biggest" tank, but JFK-NRT is advertised at 6,773 miles, and DTW-NRT is 6,400.
Kev3188
Veteran
mweiss said:
North by Northwest
Veteran
Northwest's delivery schedule for the A330-300/200: 5 -300's are presently in service, 2- 200's were just delivered. NWA will take delivery of a total of 10 A330's in 2004, 3-300's/ 7-200's. On that note, a total of 24 A330's will be delivered to Northwest thru 2008. All A330's have PTV in Main Cabin (Mashusita). All Trans-Atlantic points will be served via A330's, London, Paris, Amsterdam, Rome, Frankfort... AMS-BOM, and perhaps Madrid. The A330 fits NWA's operation from DTW/MSP/MEM like a glove, far better than a 777, as it has superior economics vs. the 777 from our hubs to points in Europe. As Northwest has been serving Europe for 25 years ( the same as UAL, AA, DAL) we are anything but a "newcomer" to Europe. Furthermore, the age of NWA's Fleet excluding the DC-9's is 9.5 years. The average age of Northwest's 747-400 fleet is 10.1 hardly "old" by any standards. As for the comment "Northwest should be ashamed to fly DC-10's accross the Pacific". The DC-10-30's were some of the last 10's built in the mid-late 80's, not even middle age in airliner years. On that note. Northwest does not, nor has it ever, purchased new aircraft "just because they are new". That is one of the reasons that we are in a far better position financially than some carriers. Additionally, there were (prior to 9/11) and are still in place, plans to serve Hong Kong, Seoul, PEK, Sao Paolo non-stop from Detroit when the time is right. Our fleet/ business strategy has been well executed, clever enough to ensure that the "Red Tail" will be among the surviving down the road. The A330 is a magnificent aircraft.JFK777 said:
I disagree that NW should be embarrassed to fly DC-10s, as long as the interiors don't look outdated. Outfit a DC-10 with PTV, vacuum lavs, and enough overhead space and people will be perfectly happy to fly on them.
I think NW's approach of the "don't laugh, it's paid for" fleet has both benefits and costs. The benefit, of course, is getting metal on the cheap. The costs come in higher maintenance and fuel costs, the latter of which is becoming a serious Achilles heel to NW.
I think NW's approach of the "don't laugh, it's paid for" fleet has both benefits and costs. The benefit, of course, is getting metal on the cheap. The costs come in higher maintenance and fuel costs, the latter of which is becoming a serious Achilles heel to NW.
Kev3188
Veteran
Sao Paolo? Hadn't heard that one. That would definitely be a nice addition to the network! As far as the DC-10's go, I have to again say it makes no sense to be flying them across the Pacific; they're just too weight restricted to move anything significant on. They're also a MTX headache, despite being "not even middle age," and are much less efficient than other aircraft flying these routes (3 man crew, higher fuel burn, etc.) The interiors I've seen have been so-so at best. Things in that department definitely be looking up when the A330 replaces it on the west coast. I think the inflight entertainment system(s) will be a real help in making us more competitve. Do UA or AA have IFE systems in coach? If so, how do they compare to NW's?
North by Northwest,
You're right most US airlimes are new to Europe since TWA and Pan AM are no longer around. When AA, UA & Delta purchased landing rights from TWA and Pan Am they inherited employees with decades of knowledge. A330 fit Europe like a glove, I"M TALKING ASIA. A330 CAN"T fly from LAX to HKG, they can hardly can hardly fly from LAX to NRT.
Asia needs a new bird is the whole point of my converstaion. Flying from DTW-NGO/KIX is not my idea of over flying NRT. NONSTOP from DTW to SIN, BKK, HKG, TPE, PVG, PEK & ICN. DC-10 are dinosaurs, Any airplane flying a "FLAGSHIP" route more then 15 years old should be history. Qantas doesn't fly 15 years aircraft from Sydney to LAX or LHR. Singapore airlines doesn't fly pre 1990 airplanes from LAX to NRT, a route NW competes on. THat is my point.
You're right most US airlimes are new to Europe since TWA and Pan AM are no longer around. When AA, UA & Delta purchased landing rights from TWA and Pan Am they inherited employees with decades of knowledge. A330 fit Europe like a glove, I"M TALKING ASIA. A330 CAN"T fly from LAX to HKG, they can hardly can hardly fly from LAX to NRT.
Asia needs a new bird is the whole point of my converstaion. Flying from DTW-NGO/KIX is not my idea of over flying NRT. NONSTOP from DTW to SIN, BKK, HKG, TPE, PVG, PEK & ICN. DC-10 are dinosaurs, Any airplane flying a "FLAGSHIP" route more then 15 years old should be history. Qantas doesn't fly 15 years aircraft from Sydney to LAX or LHR. Singapore airlines doesn't fly pre 1990 airplanes from LAX to NRT, a route NW competes on. THat is my point.
