LUS: The ugly truth about LUS ("West" 757) First Class service to Hawaii
Jan 11, 2006, 6:59 pm
#31
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 37,000 Feet in a Seat Next to You
Programs: U*S Chairman 2008 (2006 = 248,000 Actual Miles on HP) Hilton HHonors Diamond CO OnePass Platinum
Posts: 112
This is why IF i still lived in PHX, I would fly CO PHX EWR - EWR HNL on 777. Lets hope U*S moves East Planes (I wish A330) to Hawaii.
If U*S doesn't get their act together on these trans pac flights, they will abandon them just like the 2004 - 2005 Trans Con Flights.
Lets hope not.... But the ball is in THEIR court!
If U*S doesn't get their act together on these trans pac flights, they will abandon them just like the 2004 - 2005 Trans Con Flights.
Lets hope not.... But the ball is in THEIR court!
Jan 11, 2006, 9:45 pm
#33
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, AA Executive Platinum
Posts: 1,932
That sounds horrible. Were there many empty seats? I'm curious as to whether they were telling the truth about being weight restricted, or if they're overbooking to unconscionable levels. What a lousy start to a vacation.
Jan 11, 2006, 9:49 pm
#34
Join Date: May 2002
Programs: WN F9 HA UA AA IHG HH MR
Posts: 3,305
Originally Posted by JY4D
PHX-HNL is only about 2900 miles - so there's no real reason why a 757 can't do the run with a full load.
Jan 11, 2006, 9:56 pm
#35
Moderator: American AAdvantage & Marriott Bonvoy
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: PHX
Programs: American ExPlat; Marriott/SPG Lifetime Plat; Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 8,116
Originally Posted by HPDTW
This is why IF i still lived in PHX, I would fly CO PHX EWR - EWR HNL on 777. . .
Jan 11, 2006, 10:03 pm
#36
Moderator: American AAdvantage & Marriott Bonvoy
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: PHX
Programs: American ExPlat; Marriott/SPG Lifetime Plat; Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 8,116
Originally Posted by murphy
That sounds horrible. Were there many empty seats? I'm curious as to whether they were telling the truth about being weight restricted, or if they're overbooking to unconscionable levels. What a lousy start to a vacation.
Seriously, there were plenty of empty seats by the time we were in the air -- this was not an overbooking issue.
Jan 11, 2006, 10:17 pm
#37
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: DCA
Programs: AA Executive Platinum
Posts: 2,085
Originally Posted by flyboy7974
just wondering then how the ata flights have been working this route for so long, and they operate an all coach 197pax seating, meaning, more seats = more pax = more baggage = more weight. i know that the ata a/c dont have the added weight in the galleys with the ovens, but still, they have been flying phx-hnl for how long. somebody help
Jan 12, 2006, 1:51 am
#39
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
CO uses the 757-200 to fly EWR-Berlin which is 3980 miles -vs- PHX-HNL- 2917 miles. CO had some problems but they may have resolved the range issues. For example, CO has winglets that improve performance. Also, the engine may make a difference. The Rolls-Royce engine generally has better performance than the PW engines on the 757. Do the US Airways 757 have better range or are they the same as the AW planes?
Jan 12, 2006, 9:58 am
#41
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 37,000 Feet in a Seat Next to You
Programs: U*S Chairman 2008 (2006 = 248,000 Actual Miles on HP) Hilton HHonors Diamond CO OnePass Platinum
Posts: 112
Originally Posted by AZ Travels the World
Now there's a routing for you -- only on FT would someone consider that a good thing.
Sad part is...... The "CO" route VS U*S route would probably get you on the beach faster 80% of the Time. Due to U*S poor equipment on these routes!
Jan 12, 2006, 10:48 am
#42
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Programs: AA EXP, AS MVP 75k, HH Diamond, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Gold, National Executive Elite
Posts: 443
I hate to say it, but the service in First and the seats on the 757 are why I was never excited about this new addition. I have always thought it was a bad idea and would prefer to just stick with HA or NW (I fly to LIH each year first going through SEA). I can't stand the seats in the 757's and actually flew to TPA the other day and drove to Orlando where I needed to be so that I wouldn't have to fly in a 757, even in first.
I am very shocked and dissapointed about the whole state of the airline right now and this is just another one of those moves that adds to my feelings.
I am very shocked and dissapointed about the whole state of the airline right now and this is just another one of those moves that adds to my feelings.
Jan 12, 2006, 3:33 pm
#43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi [+MKK4 EBBER R577 EDSEL R577 ELKEY EXERT]
Posts: 15,826
Originally Posted by GotCalcio4
Doesn't ATA use 753's on most of the Hawaii routes, though? Or are they 752's?
Jan 15, 2006, 7:49 pm
#44
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: TLV now - formerly LAS
Programs: King of Rental Cars, BA Gold, Virgin Gold, AA MM Gold, A3 Gold, SK Gold, Hotel SuperElite
Posts: 7,357
Thanks for the post. I considered HP LAS-PHX-HNL-KOA on Jan 1 but went the UA route with a F upgrade certificate. Boy am I glad that I did so. I am sure that US will get it right eventually, but in the meanwhile UA 767 (UA 757 aren't as nice as their 767s) to HI is the way to go.
Jan 18, 2006, 11:29 pm
#45
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 920
Spoke w/ a AWA rep on the phone and she seemed to think that it would take considerable time to get anotehr type of plane on this route due to the overwater items needed to fly this place. Said that it took 12-18 mos for AWA to get the 752's ready for the Hawaii flight? Is US Airbus not fitted for this type of overwater travel?
If not seems at least a year away. I dont know much about this so it seemed plausible to me. Anyone else have a better thought to add?
Ken in Phx
If not seems at least a year away. I dont know much about this so it seemed plausible to me. Anyone else have a better thought to add?
Ken in Phx