HA: HNL - Europe?

Old Oct 30, 2014, 4:26 am
  #91  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,550
Originally Posted by DCF
In 1995, less than 5% of Australia-Europe passengers routed via a Middle Eastern transit point. Now it's around 35%.
Go back another 20 years; the percentage of Australia-Europe passengers that routed via a Middle Eastern transit point was again much higher. All Kangaroo Route airlines made multiple stops in Europe, Middle East and Asia on the way.


Qantas 1973 international route network

I can't see HNL ever becoming the type of global hub that has allowed the likes of EK, QR and ET to become the behemoths that they are today. For one thing, HNL doesn't enjoy any of the geographical advantages that the Gulf does.
irishguy28 is offline  
Old Nov 3, 2014, 12:58 am
  #92  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Programs: Enough to travel better
Posts: 2,020
No one said HNL would become a global hub similar to DXB/DWB. That's a different discussion from the OP.

What is possible is Norwegian Airlines developing a nonstop route from Norway to Hawaii. That airline now has fifth freedom flights from other European gateways to the US so for them, anything is possible.
tonywestsider is offline  
Old Nov 3, 2014, 3:39 am
  #93  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Netherlands
Programs: KL Platinum; A3 Gold
Posts: 28,550
All European airlines have fifth freedom rights from Europe to the USA - it's part of the EU-US open skies agreement (and yes, Norway is not an EU member, but apparently is allowed, as a European airline, to fly from the EU to the US in this manner, though the US does have problems with its Dublin-based subsidiary being allowed to fly to the US.).

And yes, of course I know that HNL would never become a global hub similar to DXB, AUH or DOH. It's not me that you need to tell!

Last edited by irishguy28; Nov 3, 2014 at 3:45 am
irishguy28 is offline  
Old Nov 28, 2014, 10:11 pm
  #94  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Traveling the World
Posts: 6,067
There is already a HNL-EWR flight on UA(unless it has been axed it was flown by CO). In my opinion I would rather stop over to break up the trip. If we flew to Hawaii it would make for an already long flight. Would they route over Russia to Hawaii or come in over San Francisco?
danielonn is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2014, 4:31 am
  #95  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: RBKC
Programs: AA EXP and Eurostar Carte Blanche
Posts: 3,846
Originally Posted by danielonn
There is already a HNL-EWR flight on UA (unless it has been axed it was flown by CO). In my opinion I would rather stop over to break up the trip. If we flew to Hawaii it would make for an already long flight. Would they route over Russia to Hawaii or come in over San Francisco?
There's also a nice JFK-HNL on HA. IIRC LHR-HNL would come in around 13-14 hours, perhaps routing over KEF and ANC, and which IMO would be preferable to a connection due to the massive time savings.
ExpatExp is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2014, 10:31 am
  #96  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: DL PM/1MM, BW DE (lifetime), HH DE, Marriott PE (lifetime), National Emerald Executive
Posts: 7,195
Originally Posted by danielonn
There is already a HNL-EWR flight on UA(unless it has been axed it was flown by CO). In my opinion I would rather stop over to break up the trip. If we flew to Hawaii it would make for an already long flight. Would they route over Russia to Hawaii or come in over San Francisco?
Depends from where. Shortest route, unless it's from somewhere far out and non-centralized like LHR, would be over 1/2 the Pacific and Eurasia, of course.

Norwegian Air was said to be considering OSL-HNL (as reported in various media) on 787 (should be about 12~14 hours flying time), but they have recently said that no immediate plans for that. Obviously any such flight from EU would take the shorter route and cross only 1/2 an ocean instead of two.
RealHJ is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2014, 2:31 pm
  #97  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
Originally Posted by danielonn
Would they route over Russia to Hawaii or come in over San Francisco?
They've flown a new delivery A330 to HA direct from the factory - it flew westbound from the factory via the polar route......
HNLbasedFlyer is offline  
Old Nov 29, 2014, 5:42 pm
  #98  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,187
Originally Posted by RealHJ
Depends from where. Shortest route, unless it's from somewhere far out and non-centralized like LHR, would be over 1/2 the Pacific and Eurasia, of course.

Norwegian Air was said to be considering OSL-HNL (as reported in various media) on 787 (should be about 12~14 hours flying time), but they have recently said that no immediate plans for that. Obviously any such flight from EU would take the shorter route and cross only 1/2 an ocean instead of two.
From Europe to HNL one would not fly over any part of Asia. It is a three ocean trip - the Atlantic (specifically the Norwegian Sea and the Greenland Sea, both parts of the Atlantic), the Arctic and the Pacific - except for departures from points in far south-western Europe for which it is a two-ocean trip (the Atlantic and the Pacific).

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=hnl-lhr.../osl/mad&DU=nm

My guess is that if DY was to fly OSL-HNL, they'd fly just a bit south of the great circle route depending upon WX and their ETOPS range, and if they wish to invest in the required cold-air gear for the crew (required in the case of an arctic landing). There are plenty of diversion airports along the way, but better on the North American side of the arctic (I've only included the principal ones with paved runways):

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=osl-hnl...ak,ome,dyr,adk

Flying over Russia would be geographically longer. Additionally, without a fuel stop, likely requires significant overflight taxes. More importantly, the ATC system is less developed on the Russian side and there are fewer diversion airports.

Last edited by Indelaware; Nov 29, 2014 at 6:12 pm
Indelaware is offline  
Old Nov 30, 2014, 1:20 am
  #99  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: DL PM/1MM, BW DE (lifetime), HH DE, Marriott PE (lifetime), National Emerald Executive
Posts: 7,195
Originally Posted by Indelaware
From Europe to HNL one would not fly over any part of Asia. It is a three ocean trip - the Atlantic (specifically the Norwegian Sea and the Greenland Sea, both parts of the Atlantic), the Arctic and the Pacific - except for departures from points in far south-western Europe for which it is a two-ocean trip (the Atlantic and the Pacific).

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=hnl-lhr.../osl/mad&DU=nm

My guess is that if DY was to fly OSL-HNL, they'd fly just a bit south of the great circle route depending upon WX and their ETOPS range, and if they wish to invest in the required cold-air gear for the crew (required in the case of an arctic landing). There are plenty of diversion airports along the way, but better on the North American side of the arctic (I've only included the principal ones with paved runways):

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=osl-hnl...ak,ome,dyr,adk

Flying over Russia would be geographically longer. Additionally, without a fuel stop, likely requires significant overflight taxes. More importantly, the ATC system is less developed on the Russian side and there are fewer diversion airports.
Thank You for the insight. This is very informative and reminds me (and others here) to really consider the shortest route in geographic terms and not confine thinking to the typical globe or map view (as this would be really flying over the arctic for the shortest route, as you've shown here, which is hard to fathom if one looks at the typical map view of the world).
RealHJ is offline  
Old Nov 30, 2014, 1:51 pm
  #100  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,187
Originally Posted by RealHJ
Thank You for the insight. This is very informative and reminds me (and others here) to really consider the shortest route in geographic terms and not confine thinking to the typical globe or map view (as this would be really flying over the arctic for the shortest route, as you've shown here, which is hard to fathom if one looks at the typical map view of the world).
Well actually, one can confine oneself to thinking in terms of a typical globe. It is when we think of the Earth as flat that we arrive at misunderstandings or when we assume that the globe has a top and a bottom rather than simply a north and south which are based on rotation and magnetic direction and that neither north nor south nor east nor west is the top - for there is no top, except the edge of the atmosphere.

Many, however, are all too soon to think that the shortest air route is the shortest straight line between two point. Often the shortest route deviates based on wind. The straight line is only shortest when there is no wind.
Indelaware is offline  
Old Dec 4, 2014, 3:26 pm
  #101  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: DL PM/1MM, BW DE (lifetime), HH DE, Marriott PE (lifetime), National Emerald Executive
Posts: 7,195
Originally Posted by Indelaware
Well actually, one can confine oneself to thinking in terms of a typical globe. It is when we think of the Earth as flat that we arrive at misunderstandings or when we assume that the globe has a top and a bottom rather than simply a north and south which are based on rotation and magnetic direction and that neither north nor south nor east nor west is the top - for there is no top, except the edge of the atmosphere.

Many, however, are all too soon to think that the shortest air route is the shortest straight line between two point. Often the shortest route deviates based on wind. The straight line is only shortest when there is no wind.
What I meant was that even when looking at the globe most still tend to "flatten it out" and think of it as a 2D map likely mentally (with "edges" that are "the end of the world"), thus perpetuating the "straight line" and having it be a straight line as it fits on a conventional map.

Anyhow, this is a bit OT here, but as you are clearly in the know, you likely know the answer to this: I've always wondered what's the reason why travelling eastward is noticeably quicker than travelling westward. (For example, based on DL schedules: HNL-ATL is 8:38 while ATL-HNL is 10:15, and KIX-HNL is 6:57 while HNL-KIX is 9:51, just to use two examples.) Obviously travelling east one is going against the rotation of the earth. But, the atmosphere does not stay suspended while the earth rotates and instead moves along with it, does it not? So is it then that there are always prevailing winds going towards the east / from the west (due to rotation of a solid object (earth) vs. air of atmosphere?)? The difference in scheduled, and actual, flying times going east vs. west is stark, and I've always wondered why is it so exactly and haven't been able to find clear answers online...so what a better place to ask than FT? (Again, sorry I know it's a bit OT here, but I would think that I'm not alone in satisfying this intellectual curiosity.)
RealHJ is offline  
Old Dec 4, 2014, 5:09 pm
  #102  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Hawai'i Nei
Programs: Au: UA, Marriott, Hilton; GE
Posts: 7,096
Originally Posted by RealHJ
I've always wondered what's the reason why travelling eastward is noticeably quicker than travelling westward.
There are prevailing winds that blow from the West. So, travelling East, one has a tailwind, and travelling West, one has a headwind.
747FC is offline  
Old Dec 4, 2014, 6:24 pm
  #103  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
Originally Posted by RealHJ

Anyhow, this is a bit OT here, but as you are clearly in the know, you likely know the answer to this: I've always wondered what's the reason why travelling eastward is noticeably quicker than travelling westward. (For example, based on DL schedules: HNL-ATL is 8:38 while ATL-HNL is 10:15, and KIX-HNL is 6:57 while HNL-KIX is 9:51, just to use two examples.) Obviously travelling east one is going against the rotation of the earth. But, the atmosphere does not stay suspended while the earth rotates and instead moves along with it, does it not? So is it then that there are always prevailing winds going towards the east / from the west (due to rotation of a solid object (earth) vs. air of atmosphere?)? The difference in scheduled, and actual, flying times going east vs. west is stark, and I've always wondered why is it so exactly and haven't been able to find clear answers online...so what a better place to ask than FT? (Again, sorry I know it's a bit OT here, but I would think that I'm not alone in satisfying this intellectual curiosity.)
Everything you need to know about prevailing winds....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevailing_winds
HNLbasedFlyer 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.