Originally Posted by
Bear96
You are just wrong about this. When I worked at UA there were definitely pilot schedules like IAD-LHR-LAX-LHR-IAD. Six days, no deadheading. IAD-based 777 pilots. I think at the time there was no LAX 777 base but UA decided a 777 was the best A/C for LAX-LHR.
What was the actual schedule like on that? I.e. what days were the flying days and what days were rest days?
Was it:
DAY 1: Depart IAD
DAY 2: Arrive LHR, rest remainder of the day
DAY 3: Fly LHR-LAX, overnight rest on arrival
DAY 4: Depart LAX
DAY 5: Arrive LHR, rest remainder of the day
DAY 6: Fly LHR-IAD, end of trip
I thought pilots (and even FAs) got longer rest periods than that following TATL flights (at least eastbound redeyes) but I admit to not being privy to pilot rest agreements beyond what is required by the FAA for crew rest.
Originally Posted by
pseudoswede
If there was remotely viable traffic to/from Europe, I think Hawaiian Airlines would've already tried. Plus, Hawaii is 11/12/13 hours behind Europe whereas most popular beach/tropical destinations (Canary Islands, Mediterranean, Caribbean, and SE Asia) have less of a jet lag issue.
Does HA have the equipment to operate to Europe if they even wanted to? HNL-LHR is over 7,200 miles. While within the "published" range of 13,450 km or ~8,350 miles for the A330-200 on Airbus's website, that's a long route once you begin to factor in passenger loads, cargo, reserve fuel, etc. It might be a more viable option (at least in terms of operational capability) once HA takes on their 787s but the economics and demand for the route are another matter, for the reasons you note in your post.