Will it be the A340-300, 500 or 600

[BoeingBoy]

Would another approval be required to place a larger aircraft on that route?

Lord knows I'm not anywhere near an expert on such matters, but I would assume not. I think it's just a matter of giving the info asked for by the DOT - aircraft, delivery schedule if not already available, seating configuration, schedules, etc.

However, if they wanted to use a different capacity/airplane in case it would enhance the chances of the application being approved they'd obviously need to do it before the DOT makes a decision.

What amuses me most is the list of cities "behind" the PHL that they say will have "convenient non-stop to non-stop service" to China. 10-12 of them require some out of the way routing with the worst being MSP & ORD - why would someone from either go to PHL and connect instead of taking a flight from those cities or connecting somewhere a lot more convenient.

Jim

 

[PBI2FLL]

Wow! You must have secret information.

What evidence convinced you that the -600 is too large an aircraft for US Airways? Do you work in US marketing? Do you know potential loads and cargo for the segments?

What if one could get a -600 for the same price as a -500, which one would you buy, and why or why not?

No, I don't have any secret information. The A345 has much more range than the 346 and is more practical in size. Singapore uses the A345 for the SIN-EWR-SIN run, currently the longest scheduled NON-stop flights...approx 18:30. Thai also flys NON-stop BKK-LAX with the A345.

Both the -500 and -600 also have larger, higher thrust, more fuel efficient 777 size engines.

Every watch an A343 take off? It drags ass....very under powered. It's engines are commonly nicknamed "blow dryers".

For the record, I am no expert, this is strictly my opinion.

 

[FWAAA]

Both the -500 and -600 also have larger, higher thrust, more fuel efficient 777 size engines.

Hang on there - don't get carried away: The -500s and -600s most certainly do not have "777 size engines." B)

They have larger engines than the underpowered -300s, but they're a long way from 80k-90k of thrust (777 size).

 

[PBI2FLL]

Hang on there - don't get carried away: The -500s and -600s most certainly do not have "777 size engines." B)

They have larger engines than the underpowered -300s, but they're a long way from 80k-90k of thrust (777 size).

😀 Yea, I know, I got a little carried away...but I was trying to make a comparison for the non-plane afficianados.

 

[FWAAA]

😀 Yea, I know, I got a little carried away...but I was trying to make a comparison for the non-plane afficianados.

No worries - four 80k fans would make a RR757 takeoff seem lame.

 

[PHX PHLyer]

You gave the only statistic that matters - US is proposing the least capacity, except for AMR @ 245 seats in 3-class configuration and Maxjet @ 96 seats in all-business class configuration. Presumably, if US thought a bigger airplane was needed it would have been in the application.......

Jim

You're statement is a little misleading. I would say that the capacity that US is putting out there is fully in line with the other capacity being offered.

2007 Frequency:
Delta at 268 seats in a 777-200ER with "minimal" cargo westbound and 17,000lbs of cargo eastbound (then later moving to a 276 seat 777-200LR)

Northwest at 403 seats in a 747-400

2008 Frequency:
United with a 258 seat 777-200ER

2009 Frequency:
American with a 242 seat 777-200ER

Continental with a 283 seat 777-200ER

Delta with a 268 seat 777-200ER, with 9,000lbs of cargo westbound and 20,000lbs eastbound (moving later to a 276 seat 777-200LR)

Northwest with a 403 seat 747-400

United with a 347 seat 747-400

US Airways with a 269 seat A340-300 (Cargo: summer months 22,500lbs of cargo westbound and 17,200lbs of cargo eastbound. Winter months 23,200lbs of cargo westbound and 20,000lbs eastbound)


So during the year that US is bidding, they will offer more capacity than American, initially 1 more seat than Delta, then later 7 seats less than Delta, and 14 seats less than Continental, but then a big gap lower than NW and UA. But since there are 4 slots in 2009 up for grabs, even if capacity was an issue to the DOT, slots given to UA and NW based on capacity would still leave 2 slots to carriers who are basically all offering the same amount of capacity.

EDIT TO ADD:

Also note that the A340-300 will offer the same exact seating configuration as the old A330-300 seat chart. It will have the Envoy Sleeper section, the same amount of regular Envoy seats, and the same Economy seats. And the A340-300 is the same exact length and width as the A330-300. So that means that US will be offering the most room in economy, with the old 33-34" pitch in economy. AA offers 32" in economy. CO offers 31" in economy. DL 31-33" in economy. NW 31-32" in economy. UA 31" in economy (they have E+ with 34-36"...but you pay more for it.

 

[PHX PHLyer]

Lord knows I'm not anywhere near an expert on such matters, but I would assume not. I think it's just a matter of giving the info asked for by the DOT - aircraft, delivery schedule if not already available, seating configuration, schedules, etc.

However, if they wanted to use a different capacity/airplane in case it would enhance the chances of the application being approved they'd obviously need to do it before the DOT makes a decision.

What amuses me most is the list of cities "behind" the PHL that they say will have "convenient non-stop to non-stop service" to China. 10-12 of them require some out of the way routing with the worst being MSP & ORD - why would someone from either go to PHL and connect instead of taking a flight from those cities or connecting somewhere a lot more convenient.

Jim

Yes, ORD has its own flights which doesn't make it necessarily a convenient routing, but the PHL-PEK flight flies a polar routing basically going due north from PHL, so a basically due eastern routing from a place like ORD or MSP isn't very out of line.

If you want to see something amusing, check out Delta's application where they show all of the cities that they will connect to China out of ATL. They literally give every flight that they fly nonstop out of Atlanta. They claim that the cities of SMF, OAK, TUS, SEA, PDX, SNA, etc, etc, will benefit. All of those cities would require an overnight stay to connect to the 10:00am ATL flight. At least US only gave the cities that could connect on a flight that morning. What's even funnier about DL's application is claiming that they will be taking connecting traffic to China (remember the direct north polar routing) from cities like BOS, PHL, SYR, BDL, etc, etc,. You have got to be kidding me with that. Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina I will give you....but New England is taking it a little far don't you think?!

http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf101/476679_web.pdf

 

[BoeingBoy]

You're statement is a little misleading.

I didn't intend to imply that US was proposing to offer drastically less capacity that the other applicants, and I apologize if it came across that way.

I was replying to the request for statistics to back up the claim that the A340-5/600 were "too big" for US by pointing out that US was 1 - specifying capacity at the low end of the range being proposed and 2 - that if US thought more capacity was warranted they could have certainly proposed using a bigger airplane like the A340-5/600. Ergo, US management must currently believe that the A340-300 is the right size equipment (of what's available with the range) while the A340-5/600 are too big.

Jim

 

[EMBFA]

The cheap bastards will probably still cheap out on crew bunks and give us the last row of seats that don't recline like on our current 'international' fleet.

 

[PA18]

What amuses me most is the list of cities "behind" the PHL that they say will have "convenient non-stop to non-stop service" to China. 10-12 of them require some out of the way routing with the worst being MSP & ORD - why would someone from either go to PHL and connect instead of taking a flight from those cities or connecting somewhere a lot more convenient.

Jim

This is assuming that passengers will actually make their connection in PHL.

What the DOT needs to look at, when reviewing this application, is the high number of mis-connects in PHL on a daily basis.

It's hard enough for a passenger to make a connecting flight to Florida out of PHL, let alone China.

If I were going from the East Coast to China, I would go to ORD or MSP or ATL to connect. I wouldn't go anywhere near PHL.

 

[john john]

As long as SHARES allows passengers to check-in at kiosk and skycaps and the flights have been posted late and will misconnect they will board at the outlying stations with possible making the connection if now they will be book on the next flight. SHARES allows misconnect to check-in and go. The ticket counters system allows curbside and kiosk to check-in all misconnect and precede to the gate and board

 

[usfan]

http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Air_Canad...Airbus_A340.php[/url]
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/US_Airway...Airbus_A330.php

EDIT TO ADD:

Also note that the A340-300 will offer the same exact seating configuration as the old A330-300 seat chart. It will have the Envoy Sleeper section, the same amount of regular Envoy seats, and the same Economy seats. And the A340-300 is the same exact length and width as the A330-300. So that means that US will be offering the most room in economy, with the old 33-34" pitch in economy. AA offers 32" in economy. CO offers 31" in economy. DL 31-33" in economy. NW 31-32" in economy. UA 31" in economy (they have E+ with 34-36"...but you pay more for it.

Also wanted to add that US A330-300 has a seat pitch of 31" not 34" like it used to be before they took out some Envoy seats and added Economy ...... :down:

 

[john john]

Also wanted to add that US A330-300 has a seat pitch of 31" not 34" like it used to be before they took out some Envoy seats and added Economy ...... :down:

What about the last 5 rows of coach?

 

[AstroLounge]

The cheap bastards will probably still cheap out on crew bunks and give us the last row of seats that don't recline like on our current 'international' fleet.

Those "B's" as you stated will give you a sleeping bag, ALONG with your rice mat and two pillows. Can't have tired stewardesses being pissy/surly and angry during multiple TEA Services onboard the Super Grande, spacious A340 Emperor Class to Asia. BEIJING COMING, chopsticks have been ordered! 😛