Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > American Airlines | AAdvantage
Reload this Page >

LUS: The ugly truth about LUS ("West" 757) First Class service to Hawaii

LUS: The ugly truth about LUS ("West" 757) First Class service to Hawaii

Old Jan 19, 2006, 8:18 am
  #46  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, CAN
Posts: 5,813
Originally Posted by HPDTW
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!
You would have to inform CO that they need to schedule a 777 EWR-HNL and not the 764 they've scheduled since day 1 on the route. You would NEVER see a CO 777 on a flight to HNL nor an A330. Suggest reading more on all of the informative airline websites and passing on your thoughts. I'm not being insensitive here, your post is not sensible and you should empower yourself with knowledge if you love the airline business.
CO 777s (like US 330s) are for high-yield business routes i.e., NOT Hawaii. UAs 777s (high density) are the perfect solution.
CloudsBelow is offline  
Old Jan 19, 2006, 8:38 am
  #47  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, CAN
Posts: 5,813
Originally Posted by Ken in Phx
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
People, Hawaii (and LAS and FLA, and PHX) are predominantly LEISURE destinations. US has the worst fleet selection for flights to Hawaii of any carrier. The 75s cannot do it, the 330s have too much F. The only option is the 762s which are deployed on 2nd tier Europe routes. Hawaii was a dumb decision by US and they're getting what they deserve here. Anyone who books US Airways to Hawaii from here out is gambling and sometime the dice doesn't roll your way. UAs 777s, 763s, AAs 763s, 752s, COs 764s, NWs 753s and DC 10s are far more reliable options.

I wish US luck (had great service with them yesterday, BTW) but when you make stupid decisions re: route startups, you will pay the price down the line.
CloudsBelow is offline  
Old Jan 19, 2006, 10:45 am
  #48  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Formerly BUF but now PHL
Programs: AA Platinum Pro
Posts: 327
Once you land in Hawaii it all you forget about the service...

Hey Everyone,

You all have very valid points about the lousy US F service to Hawaii. I dont blame you guys at all...however I must admit that Hawaii is maybe one of few destinations where you could ride in Y,the cargo hold,or be strapped to the wing with one of those awesome wafer-thin blue US blankets and an Oxygen mask and still forget about the experience once you land and settle into HNL.

In 2004 I somehow (very likely by the will of God) was able to book 2 Y award tix (wanted F but told it is impossible..do they not issure F awards to Hawaii?) to HNL on UA for my honeymoon on exactly the dates we needed..only a few months in advance.

As for the flying really crammed us into crappy seats, gave us pretty lousy service and repeatedly laughed in our faces when we asked for any special honeymoon favors (couldnt even get E+ as a US3). I was kinda frustrated with them and the travel experience but wow once we got there I COMPLETELY forgot about the airtravel!!!

As I said before your points are absolutely valid and US should shoot for a quality product...but I think they are banking on the fact that for most people Hawaii is such an awsome experience that they figure they can skimp on F completely and get away with it

Just my take...take care God Bless and happy frequent flying
Buffaloflyer is offline  
Old Jan 19, 2006, 11:42 pm
  #49  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 130
Sorry for the bad experience, sounds horrible. I'm going to OGG in April and am very excited about it. Of course for me it's free so I could care less how comfortable the seats are.

The weight problem is being resolved. Yes it is just a matter of filing different paperwork and from what I read in our employee newsletter, they are doing that as we speak. The flight does not take weight restrictions all the time, I've seen it go out completely full many times. Yes the cargo does make a lot of money, but still having to bump many passengers is not good.

I'm hoping they will remodel the interiors of the 757 cabins to make them more modern like the Airbus. However I have no idea what the plans are for that. They did say remodeling would be done as it was needed....it sure is needed on those planes! I flew FC a couple of times on the 757 and found the seats just fine....except for when I was trying to sleep and my pillow kept falling in between the seat and the wall....that was a pain.
Joeypete is offline  
Old Jan 20, 2006, 1:23 am
  #50  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ketchikan, Alaska
Programs: GSA City-Pair; emeritus AS MVPG/UA 1K/US Plat, etc.
Posts: 2,635
Is there a chance you could link us to the About US employee newsletter? Just Plane News used to do it all the time, but the latest issue hasn't been seen up there
FCYTravis is offline  
Old Jan 20, 2006, 12:50 pm
  #51  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,449
Originally Posted by FCYTravis
Is there a chance you could link us to the About US employee newsletter? Just Plane News used to do it all the time, but the latest issue hasn't been seen up there

According to the justplanenews.com website they had some server issues, and are working to fix them. They also apologized for not sending out the newsletter and updates via email. All will be fixed, so no worries mate!
kinglobjaw is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 9:35 am
  #52  
Moderator: American AAdvantage & Marriott Bonvoy
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: PHX
Programs: American ExPlat; Marriott/SPG Lifetime Plat; Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 8,114
This issue made the Arizona Republic today

Article on the front of the business section of today's Arizona Republic (with a photo and lead-in near the top of page one of the paper):

Hawaii travelers bumped
Extra fuel makes planes too heavy

Dawn Gilbertson
The Arizona Republic

US Airways has gotten off to a less than stellar start with its new service to Hawaii, bumping dozens of passengers off flights and rerouting countless others because its planes were too heavy for takeoff.

The problem, blamed on winter headwinds and the extra fuel they cause planes to guzzle, costs the Tempe carrier on many fronts: compensation for bumped passengers, lost revenue to other airlines for rebooked flights, potential flight delays and, important on a new route, passenger goodwill.

David Seymour, the airline's vice president of operations control and planning, confirmed the weight issues and said the company is working on them but said the problems haven't been widespread. . .(more here)
AZ Travels the World is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 9:37 am
  #53  
Moderator: American AAdvantage & Marriott Bonvoy
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: PHX
Programs: American ExPlat; Marriott/SPG Lifetime Plat; Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 8,114
This issue covered in today's Arizona Republic

Article on the front of the business section of today's Arizona Republic (with a photo and lead-in near the top of page one of the paper):

Hawaii travelers bumped
Extra fuel makes planes too heavy

Dawn Gilbertson
The Arizona Republic

US Airways has gotten off to a less than stellar start with its new service to Hawaii, bumping dozens of passengers off flights and rerouting countless others because its planes were too heavy for takeoff.

The problem, blamed on winter headwinds and the extra fuel they cause planes to guzzle, costs the Tempe carrier on many fronts: compensation for bumped passengers, lost revenue to other airlines for rebooked flights, potential flight delays and, important on a new route, passenger goodwill.

David Seymour, the airline's vice president of operations control and planning, confirmed the weight issues and said the company is working on them but said the problems haven't been widespread. . .(more here)
AZ Travels the World is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 11:49 am
  #54  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, CAN
Posts: 5,813
Originally Posted by AZ Travels the World
Article on the front of the business section of today's Arizona Republic (with a photo and lead-in near the top of page one of the paper):
From the article :

"The number of involuntarily bumped passengers totaled 57 of about 11,100 passengers, he said. He said the most on a single flight was 12 and that happened once. "This isn't an everyday occurrence," spokesman Phil Gee said."

Doesn't that contradict your experience? If his numbers are correct, it's not that big of a deal. If your numbers are right, people would be insane to book w/ US.
Either way, 757 with highest MTOW is the best plane to Hawaii from an operator's POV. Not having the paperwork in place prior to route starup is inexcusable.
CloudsBelow is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 11:56 am
  #55  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: BOS, Latin America
Programs: AA Plat
Posts: 712
Originally Posted by HPDTW
This is why IF i still lived in PHX, I would fly CO PHX EWR - EWR HNL on 777.
You're out of your mind. You'd backtrack to EWR from PHX to fly to HNL?? If you're in the mood for backtracking, you should probably take CO's Houston-HNL flight. I think that has BusinessFirst service.
Ceasy is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 12:11 pm
  #56  
Moderator: American AAdvantage & Marriott Bonvoy
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: PHX
Programs: American ExPlat; Marriott/SPG Lifetime Plat; Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 8,114
Originally Posted by CloudsBelow
From the article :

"The number of involuntarily bumped passengers totaled 57 of about 11,100 passengers, he said. He said the most on a single flight was 12 and that happened once. "This isn't an everyday occurrence," spokesman Phil Gee said."

Doesn't that contradict your experience? If his numbers are correct, it's not that big of a deal. If your numbers are right, people would be insane to book w/ US.
Definitely. I laughed out loud when I read that. The pilot announced on my flight that 50 passengers were being re-accommodated on that day alone. The check-in agent said that it had happened almost every day the flight had been running (a little over 2 weeks at that point). The agent also said that reservations had been trying to contact people in advance to reschedule them but that given varying weather conditions they never had much of a feel for what the situation would be on a given day.

I think the line they're drawing here is the number that are "involuntarily bumped," which means they could not or would not accept a re-routing, so their re-accommodation was "involuntary." Those who accept a re-routing when the airline calls them in advance, very likely presented as though they don't really have a choice in the matter given the situation, or at the ticket counter on the day of departure in exchange for some compensation would not be counted in that number. They probably don't even know how many people, in total, have been inconvenienced but clearly it is way more than 57.
AZ Travels the World is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 12:28 pm
  #57  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, CAN
Posts: 5,813
Originally Posted by AZ Travels the World
Definitely. I laughed out loud when I read that. The pilot announced on my flight that 50 passengers were being re-accommodated on that day alone. The check-in agent said that it had happened almost every day the flight had been running (a little over 2 weeks at that point). The agent also said that reservations had been trying to contact people in advance to reschedule them but that given varying weather conditions they never had much of a feel for what the situation would be on a given day.

I think the line they're drawing here is the number that are "involuntarily bumped," which means they could not or would not accept a re-routing, so their re-accommodation was "involuntary." Those who accept a re-routing when the airline calls them in advance, very likely presented as though they don't really have a choice in the matter given the situation, or at the ticket counter on the day of departure in exchange for some compensation would not be counted in that number. They probably don't even know how many people, in total, have been inconvenienced but clearly it is way more than 57.
F#%king spin doctors!
I really wish you'd write the paper and expose this "politician-type" bullsh!t. This double-talk is pathetic. You know how refreshing it is to hear an exec step up and say "We screwed up here, bigtime!" Bad move US! You should have got all the paperwork in place, cleaned up the old 757s, and started OGG, KOA, and HNL just prior to US Thanksgiving 2006!!!
CloudsBelow is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 12:31 pm
  #58  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
The 57 mentioned in the article were the involuntary bumped pax. Who didn't voluntarily give up their seats and had to be IDBd. No doubt many others accepted the alternate transportation and vouchers (hence, VDB).

I wouldn't look at the number 57 as the true measure of incompetence here.
FWAAA is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 12:39 pm
  #59  
 
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 Ceasy
You're out of your mind. You'd backtrack to EWR from PHX to fly to HNL?? If you're in the mood for backtracking, you should probably take CO's Houston-HNL flight. I think that has BusinessFirst service.

I willing to bet you on this...

We both leave PHX to HNL.....

You can fly HP Nonstop

I will fly CO VIA EWR......

I will be on the beach faster than you. (80% of the time) due to poor equipment on this route.
HPDTW is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2006, 1:46 pm
  #60  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Programs: AA Gold,DL Gold
Posts: 858
Also from the article:

The airline has encountered headwinds of as many as 68 knots over the Pacific, vs. a more normal range of 40 to 45 knots.

The more permanent solution involves Boeing. US Airways has filed paperwork with the company to request an upgrade for the three 757s to the maximum weight limit of 250,000 pounds. It doesn't involve work on the planes, Seymour said, but is still costly.



It really came out to bad luck more than insufficient planning. Either way when Boeing certifies the 757 for the heavier weight than these problems will be a thing of the past.
flyingcat is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.