Originally Posted by
PLeblond
ETOPS regulations have trade-offs. One cannot get both optimal range and ETOPS 180 ratings simultaneously.
To my knowledge, the Virgin A320 and the UA A321 require blocking out 12-18 seats each, especially in certain wind conditions. I'm pretty sure it cannot operate YVR-OGG without significant passenger reduction.
Bottom line, if AC wants to operate this route on a narrow-body, they need 757s... or wait for the 737-8/737-9.
I don't agree that is the bottom line. From the horses mouth, Virgin doesn't seat block. I provided a quote stating such and so far all I see against it is speculation. I haven't heard of confirmed AA seat blocking either.
Originally Posted by
canadiancow
But with YVR-CUN, you're always within 400 miles of land, if not less.
The same is not true for YVR-OGG.
Does that not play a part in this?
If the aircraft loses an engine at exactly the halfway point, it needs to be able to make it back. Can it, on YVR-OGG?
It sure would, but at only 310nm longer than YYT-LHR, which is also over water for a huge portion, I doubt it makes much difference between the two routes. AC never struggles to LHR using circa-1998 A319s, I don't see a 319 breaking a sweat to Hawaii. Especially newer build ones. Rouge only has 16 more seats, no big deal, and no heavy AVOD system.
Originally Posted by
CloudsBelow
That's asking too much of a Rouge-configured, current build A321
Don't know much about AC's Hawaii ops but I'd guess they'd rather keep the Rouge 767s on the Hawaii sectors with day of week restrictions where needed.
Yeah it could be a stretch. But Thomas Cook runs 221 seat A321s on 7h05m flights Tromsų to Gran Canaria, 2773nm. YVR-OGG is only 2322nm. Sure no ETOPS fuel there, but 21 extra passengers and 450nm tells me YVR-OGG could be possible.