Potential New Routes

[zethya]

Can PHL handle a A380? Terminal wise?

.
Nope. However, if they extend A-West South - which was a plan awhile back, a potential 380 gate could be designed. I think the major problem would be a double decker loading bridge and enough gate separation to accommodate the wing span. In the past both BA and LH have used 747s into PHL, but the 380s wingspan is about 50 Feet Wider. Not certain if the runway would need reinforcement. 9R/27L is already 200 Feet wide, so width is no problem and it's being extended to 12,000 feet - even though that's not really a 380 requirement - even at MTOW.
On topic - one fairly certain route starting next year will be PHL-DOH on QR. Otherwise, we'll just have to wait and see how Parker establishes the JFK-PHL relationship to really determine where international traffic flows. PDEW may be secondary in guessing PHL route potential, since historically it has increased dramatically once non-stop service is established and it's even more likely to do so within the NYC-PHL megalopolis. Bet we'll see subtle signs of the futures for PHL, CLT and PHX fairly soon.
PIT-CDG service is no longer subsidized.

 

[BuffaloJoe]

.

I didn't think so. So PHL-LHR should see 777-300's AA and BA metal I would presume, if not a couple BA 747's.

 

[zethya]

I didn't think so. So PHL-LHR should see 777-300's AA and BA metal I would presume, if not a couple BA 747's.

IMO, I wouldn't count on BA or AA using the -300 at PHL. I believe BA currently only has 4 (active+order) and AA 20 (active+order) - although I haven't paid attention to more recent activity. The -300 is an "F" heavy aircraft, which likely requires significant premium international O&D/flight to justify it's use. More than likely AA and BA will principally use the 777-200, 787 and A350-800/900 at PHL. However, don't fret, QR has stated they plan to use the 777-300ER for PHL-DOH service. What actually materializes with them next year, is anyone's guess.

 

[WorldTraveler]

The 333 is a good aircraft for PHL int'l. You don't need a 15 hr plane to fly 9-10 hour routes and the 333 carries almost as many pax as the 773 at much lower costs.

 

[zethya]

The 333 is a good aircraft for PHL int'l. You don't need a 15 hr plane to fly 9-10 hour routes and the 333 carries almost as many pax as the 773 at much lower costs.

FYI - The existing US 333s have a maximum range of less than 4000nm at full MTOW and there are none on active order. As an example, they could never be used for PHL-NRT, or PHL-GRU. The 332 is the only viable aircraft for those and similar routes. If PHL-NRT was economically feasible with a 332, US would already be flying it. IMO, you need to use "IMO" a bit, instead of always speaking in absolutes, when you don't have definitive data directly relevant to AA, US or the new AA, to back up your claims.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Given that PHL-NRT and PHL-GRU don't even exist right now, speaking about existing routes is the most relevant comparison. PHL-NRT isn't a 9 or 10 hour flight anyway. And US' 333s can do 9 or 10 hour flights with the possible exception of GRU because of the altitude and runway length combinations.

Even if new routes to GRU and NRT are started, they won't be started with 773s but likely 772s.

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

FYI - The existing US 333s have a maximum range of less than 4000nm at full MTOW and there are none on active order.

Not sure where you got that 4000 (4600 sm) number, zethya.

PHL-TLV is 5772 statute miles.

http://www.gcmap.com/dist?P=phl-tlv&DU=mi&DM=&SG=&SU=mph

That is the max range for the -300 (in a 300 seat configuration), per the Airbus website. http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/a330-300/

The -200 can fly 7500 nautical miles (246 seats). http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/a330-200/specifications/

 

[USFlyer]

FYI - The existing US 333s have a maximum range of less than 4000nm at full MTOW and there are none on active order. As an example, they could never be used for PHL-NRT, or PHL-GRU. The 332 is the only viable aircraft for those and similar routes. If PHL-NRT was economically feasible with a 332, US would already be flying it.

Possibly. However, it could be that there are other, more profitable routes to fly from PHL with the 332. Just because a route could be profitable doesn't mean you necessarily fly it. You have to factor in how best to utilize the fleet you have available, where you maximize the profit per flight, per aircraft, per cabin, etc.

 

[dash8roa]

The 333 is a good aircraft for PHL int'l. You don't need a 15 hr plane to fly 9-10 hour routes and the 333 carries almost as many pax as the 773 at much lower costs.

On the wings site, it carries the warning about FCO-PHL and FCO-CLT being weight restricted and has more restrictions on who can use the service than other destinations. These 333-300's were early models and unless they have received the latest upgrades, they seem to have short legs. FCO to the states is not a real long flight whereas the 777-300R has longer legs.

 

[FWAAA]

I didn't think so. So PHL-LHR should see 777-300's AA and BA metal I would presume, if not a couple BA 747's.

I don't see PHL-LHR getting any 77Ws soon, as there are only 20 total (delivered plus orders), AA will have 16 77Ws by end of 2014 and four more by end of 2016. They've got 8 F Suites, 52 J (just like the Envoy Suites) and more than 240 Y.

AA has 47 772s that will be reconfigured with about 45 J (like the Envoy Suites) plus about 215 Y. AA also has 58 763s that will be reconfigured with about 28 J (again, like the Envoy Suites) plus about 180 Y.

AA has up to 20 787-8s that begin delivery late in 2014 plus 787-9s that begin delivery a couple years later.

The First Class equipped 77Ws will fly routes where there is First Class demand, and my guess is that does not include PHL or CLT, given how long it's been since US sold international F from those cities.

If PHL gets new long-haul routes to Asia in the next couple of years, then as WT said, those will be flown by 772s. New routes to Europe will likely be flown by US A332s (currently being delivered) or AA 763s. AA's 763s should be able to replace remaining US 762s, leaving the remaining A332 deliveries as growth aircraft.

AA's 763s could even fly PHL-TLV or JFK-TLV; AC uses 763s between YYZ and TLV.

Looks to me like PHL-TLV is flown with an A332, not an A333.

 

[zethya]

Not sure where you got that 4000 (4600 sm) number, zethya.

PHL-TLV is 5772 statute miles.

http://www.gcmap.com/dist?P=phl-tlv&DU=mi&DM=&SG=&SU=mph

That is the max range for the -300 (in a 300 seat configuration), per the Airbus website. http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/a330-300/

The -200 can fly 7500 nautical miles (246 seats). http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a330family/a330-200/specifications/

I never indicated there was a range restriction on the 332, or that it had any problems with PHL-TLV. As I and maybe others have explained several times in the past, the US333 is an underpowered/MTOW restricted, early version of the aircraft. For example, PHL-FCO periodically requires weight restrictions West Bound under less than ideal conditions. The US 333 would never make PHL-TLV with an economically viable configuration.

 

[zethya]

Given that PHL-NRT and PHL-GRU don't even exist right now, speaking about existing routes is the most relevant comparison. PHL-NRT isn't a 9 or 10 hour flight anyway. And US' 333s can do 9 or 10 hour flights with the possible exception of GRU because of the altitude and runway length combinations.



Even if new routes to GRU and NRT are started, they won't be started with 773s but likely 772s.

Who ever implied the 773 would be used on a speculated PHL-NRT or PHL-GRU route ??

 

[zethya]

I don't see PHL-LHR getting any 77Ws soon, as there are only 20 total (delivered plus orders), AA will have 16 77Ws by end of 2014 and four more by end of 2016. They've got 8 F Suites, 52 J (just like the Envoy Suites) and more than 240 Y.

AA has 47 772s that will be reconfigured with about 45 J (like the Envoy Suites) plus about 215 Y. AA also has 58 763s that will be reconfigured with about 28 J (again, like the Envoy Suites) plus about 180 Y.

AA has up to 20 787-8s that begin delivery late in 2014 plus 787-9s that begin delivery a couple years later.

The First Class equipped 77Ws will fly routes where there is First Class demand, and my guess is that does not include PHL or CLT, given how long it's been since US sold international F from those cities.

If PHL gets new long-haul routes to Asia in the next couple of years, then as WT said, those will be flown by 772s. New routes to Europe will likely be flown by US A332s (currently being delivered) or AA 763s. AA's 763s should be able to replace remaining US 762s, leaving the remaining A332 deliveries as growth aircraft.

AA's 763s could even fly PHL-TLV or JFK-TLV; AC uses 763s between YYZ and TLV.

Looks to me like PHL-TLV is flown with an A332, not an A333.

Your predictions, as usual, assume that the New AA will be = to the Old AA.

Just because the old US (post Parker) did not offer PHL-LHR (or other international city pairs) First Class configurations, doesn't mean it's not viable, or that it won't be started. BA has provided 100% O&D First Class PHL-LHR configurations for many years - with the implication that it's successful. US Air, prior to Parker, provided what was rated at the time, one of the top First Class Trans-Atlantic services from PHL. Also, in predicting PHL versus JFK routes and aircraft types to Europe and Asia, Cargo revenue is an important factor, which may favor PHL and larger aircraft types - for logistical and scheduling reasons.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Who ever implied the 773 would be used on a speculated PHL-NRT or PHL-GRU route ??

you did in your post above......
since practically every other route except TLV that US operates from PHL can technically be done on the 333, I am struggling to understand why the 773 (an aircraft capable of operating 14 hour + flights) would be used from PHL unless there are new routes added... and new routes would be started with the 772.
The only reason to add the 773 which has only a few route seats than the 333 is because of first class which is apparently your objective....

Your predictions, as usual, assume that the New AA will be = to the Old AA.

Just because the old US (post Parker) did not offer PHL-LHR (or other international city pairs) First Class configurations, doesn't mean it's not viable, or that it won't be started. BA has provided 100% O&D First Class PHL-LHR configurations for many years - with the implication that it's successful. US Air, prior to Parker, provided what was rated at the time, one of the top First Class Trans-Atlantic services from PHL. Also, in predicting PHL versus JFK routes and aircraft types to Europe and Asia, Cargo revenue is an important factor, which may favor PHL and larger aircraft types - for logistical and scheduling reasons.

I agree that what US did in the past with first class doesn't mean there won't be first class in the future. But given that AA continues to reduce the number of aircraft with int'l first class, there will be intense competition for those aircraft. Doesn't mean it won't happen but it isn't a given. Also, the JV with BA does allow FC to be sold without committing AA or US aircraft.

It's probably going to take time for more merger information about how the networks will work together in reality... there will have to be rebalancing of the hubs and routes based on the combined network.

 

[FWAAA]

Your predictions, as usual, assume that the New AA will be = to the Old AA.

Just because the old US (post Parker) did not offer PHL-LHR (or other international city pairs) First Class configurations, doesn't mean it's not viable, or that it won't be started. BA has provided 100% O&D First Class PHL-LHR configurations for many years - with the implication that it's successful. US Air, prior to Parker, provided what was rated at the time, one of the top First Class Trans-Atlantic services from PHL. Also, in predicting PHL versus JFK routes and aircraft types to Europe and Asia, Cargo revenue is an important factor, which may favor PHL and larger aircraft types - for logistical and scheduling reasons.

Nobody would be happier than me to see Parker buck the industry-wide trend and embrace the viability of international first class. I enjoy redeeming miles for Z class (AA's fare code for First Class award seats) and it's pretty sweet to buy a discounted I or D fare and upgrade to First with an SWU (AA's top tier systemwide upgrades). So if I'm wrong and you're right - I'll be very happy!

But let's get realistic for a minute. As we both pointed out, it's been a long time since US offered international F. Even AA removed it from all 58 763s a decade ago (used to be 10 F lie-flat seats on every international 763 - Hawaii birds excluded) in favor of two generations now of crappy J, the most recent one being slanted.. Last year, Horton announced that AA's 47 772s would lose their 16 F suites when they join the DL, CO, NW and US crowd of 2-class international long-haul planes. Inexplicably, AA retained F (although only 8 seats) on its planned fleet of just 20 773s. As AA currently flies 15 or 16 daily flights to London, those 20 planes would barely cover those routes. So far, we've seen the 773s on some LHR and GRU flights. Rumour has long been that AA still sells some F to GRU and EZE. So the planned fleet of 20 773s won't cover all the LHR + the GRU plus the EZE flights.

I think we can agree that the trend isn't positive for those who long for 3-class First Class. Yes, BA has flown F to PHL, and most AA metal to LHR currently has F (all but two daily flights are 772s with F, just two are 763s with crappy slanted J). Look at the OW airlines that are reducing F: QF is keeping it on just its A380s, IIRC. JAL didn't install it on its 787s. On CX, it's been reduced to just six seats. LAN ditched F years ago. I think that BA is shrinking F and won't be installing it on all its long-haul planes.

If Parker takes over in a few weeks and announces that the 772s will keep 8 F suites, the 763s will get several F seats (perhaps 6, like at UA), and that the US fleet of A330s will get their F suites re-installed, then I'll be ecstatic. If he announces that AA's 787s will also get 8 F suites, that will be fantastic news.

But the pessimist in me says that he's much more likely to announce that the 773s don't really need F and instead he'll keep it on just the JFK-LAX/SFO transcons. And that's not because I hate Doug Parker or think he's a lying worthless drunkard snake (although I do think those things about him) - the reason I see him eliminating the remaining 160 F suites (from the 20 planned 77Ws) is that he and the other number-crunchers honestly believe that AA won't sell enough of the F seats to pay for themselves. More of the same decision-making that eliminated F from the 58 AA 763s for the past 10 years even though UA kept F on its 763s. And more of the same decision-making that calls for the elimination of F from AA's 47 772s in favor of "up to 45" lie-flat suites (like the current Envoy suites).

Interntional F is an endangered species, and PHL-LHR is a very short flight compared to many of AA's transoceanic flights, like every flight to China or TYO or Deep South America or even LAX-LHR (which has the 77W for now).

And it really does boil down to this: If US needed some First Class suites for PHL/CLT long-haul flights, Parker has the number of the seat manufacturers and could have picked up the phone. That he did not do so tells me what he thinks (and the other number-crunchers thought) about the prospect of selling sufficient amounts of it from PHL or CLT.

I don't have the data, but perhaps it's possible that US has spilling all the potential F buyers in PHL and CLT (and in WAS) to UA and its 3-class international F partners. Remember that since US was never invited to join the UA/LH/AC immunized joint venture across the Atlantic, US didn't get to share in any of those profits. So if all the PHL and CLT and WAS F customers were buying from other Star Alliance members, and if they can be convinced to buy their international F on new AA, then perhaps I'm being too pessimistic and maybe Parker will announce a huge expansion in AA's international F seat inventory. We'll see.