FQTV

Hallelujah!

On 01 March 2001 Continental plans to inaugurate daily non-stop 777 service between EWR and HKG.

August 6, 2000

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES ANNOUNCES DAILY NON-STOP SERVICE BETWEEN NEW YORK AND
HONG KONG

First-ever scheduled non-stop flight to be the longest operated by any U.S.
airline

NEW YORK, Aug. 6, 2000 - Continental Airlines (NYSE: CAL and CAL.A), the
world's sixth largest airline, today announced it will launch new daily
non-stop Boeing 777 service between New York and Hong Kong, effective March
1, 2001, subject to government approval. This will mark the first time any
airline has flown scheduled non-stop service between the two cities, saving
travelers three hours en route from New York. The new service will be the
longest non-stop flight operated by a U.S. airline and the longest
scheduled non-stop flight ever flown out of New York. The 7,337
nautical-mile trip is also the longest route operated with a B-777
aircraft.*

"Hong Kong is the largest market from New York that is currently without
scheduled non-stop service, and it is clear that most travelers prefer a
non-stop," said Continental Airlines' Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Gordon Bethune. "As New York's hometown airline, we're very pleased to link
two of the world's leading business centers."

Service will be operated with a 283-seat Boeing 777-200 aircraft, carrying
48 passengers in the BusinessFirst cabin and 235 in coach.

Continental flight 99 will depart Newark International Airport daily at
11:00 a.m., arriving at Hong Kong Chek Lap Kok International Airport at
4:30 p.m. the next day. Returning flight 98 will depart Hong Kong at 12:45
p.m., arriving in Newark at 3:25 p.m. the same day. The flight will be
approximately 16 hours 30 minutes outbound and 15 hours 40 minutes on the
return.

The new route has been conveniently timed to connect with an extensive
network of service throughout the U.S., Canada and Latin America.

A Long History in Asia

Although a newcomer to the trans-Pacific market from Hong Kong, Continental
Airlines is no stranger to Hong Kong or to Asia. Continental operates daily
non-stop B-777 flights between Tokyo and both New York and Houston. Its
Continental Micronesia subsidiary, based in Guam, has served the Pacific
region for more than 30 years. Continental has served Hong Kong from Guam
for more than 10 years and currently operates three weekly flights with a
B-737-800 aircraft. Additionally, Continental serves eight cities in Japan
(more than any other U.S. carrier), including Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka,
***uoka, Sendai, Sapporo, Niigata, and Okayama, as well as Taiwan, Korea,
the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia, Hawaii, Saipan, and the islands of
Micronesia.

Continental Airlines is the fifth largest airline in the U.S., offering
more than 2,300 departures daily to 138 domestic and 95 international
destinations. Operating major hubs in New York, Houston and Cleveland,
Continental (www.continental.com) serves more international cities than any
other U.S. carrier, including extensive service throughout the Americas,
Europe and Asia.

Continental is in the top quarter of FORTUNE magazine's "100 Best Companies
to Work for in America," and is ranked the nation's No. 1 airline in
customer satisfaction for long and short-haul flights by Frequent Flyer
Magazine and J.D. Power and Associates. Continental has received numerous
awards for its BusinessFirst premium cabin (Conde Nast Traveler, OAG,
Entrepreneur and SmartMoney magazines), OnePass frequent flyer program
(InsideFlyer's Freddie Awards) and overall operations and management (Air
Transport World's 1996 Airline of the Year).

*Source: OAG and The Boeing Company

[This message has been edited by FQTV (edited 08-07-2000).]

ozstamps

Who writes the press releases at CO I wonder?

"The new (7337 mile) service will be the
longest non-stop flight operated by a U.S. airline"

UA fly daily MEL-LAX-MEL which is 7920 miles EACH way, and takes 15.5 hours on the LAX-MEL run.

There is no doubt THAT is the world's longest daily scheduled flight! In miles anyway. Maybe CO think theirs will take LONGER??

ozstamps

I stand to be corrected here:

On the CO board someone posted:

"Actually, 7337 nautical miles is about 8443 (frequent flyer) miles".

So if that is correct, then CO do seem to hold the record longest flight. Good on them .. sounds like a great trip to be on. And I see above they say it is about 16.5 hours outwards. That's quite a flight.

Here is recent discussion on the PREVIOUSLY longest flights!

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/002356.html



[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited 08-07-2000).]

yonatan

Their comments that it is the longest non-stop by a US Airline and the longest non-stop served by a 777 would indicate that neither the planned route nor the U.A. LAX-MEL route is the longest flight around - i.e. there is another flight that is longer, served by a non-U.S. carrier, not using B777s.
Anyone have any idea which? (or am I reading too much into this?)
Yonatan

BeantownFlyer

If they could figure out how to build a 737 with that range, they'd probably try running it on this route too!

MUC Flyer

I predict this longest flight thing will be short lived. Cathay has already done a test JFK HKG run (just a few miles farther than EWR HKG) with a 744 so regular service can't be far behind. And they should be able to haul more pax and much more cargo than CO's 777, it's debatable whether JFK or EWR attracts more business pax (also, I'd think AA will code share on this route to make it even more appealing).

Maybe UA will get involved here? They already do NRT from JFK, why not HKG?

transborder

CX flys from JFK to HKG with a stopover in YVR. My understanding is that once the polar route can be utilized the stop in YVR will become history as the refueling stop will not be necessary. Air Canada is in the process of testing the route with a A340 from YYZ while the respective governments work out bilateral details. From YYZ both AC and CX serve HKG with stops in either YVR (AC) or Anchorage (CX)

Freebird

Yipeee! 16.5 hours (plus applicable delays on the ground) in coach. Can you say blood clots?

Yes, it saves 3 hours BUT:

* two engine aircraft over the pacific = very few available runways in case of an emergency (one engine quitting) compared to flying to Europe;

* strong headwinds on this route into HKG sometimes add even more time;

* a four engine plane (does CO have any?) would be faster and save even more time;

* 16.5 hours of non-existing service in coach but let's be honest here this must be a very tiring route for the flight attendants.

All in all, I don't know what we are supposed to cheer about here when airlines start using longer routes with smaller aircraft.

Wiirachay

I'd like to see CO offer connecting service from NRT or HKG to MNL, BKK, and SIN.

I'd be happy to hop on their flights any time . . . as long as I'm in BusinessFirst . . . on someone else's money.

If doomed to coach, I'd rather have the journey broken up with a stopover in SFO/LAX/SEA or NRT. Nothing sure beats walking around in an airport after a long, cramped flight in coach.

With regards to using a B777, I think that's great. I personally think it's better than the B747 because it feels roomier w/ 3-3-3 seating in coach. And I think the cruising speed is near the B747.

Seems like CO has been a fan of B777. Long-rang medium capacity. I like their mentality of using medium capacity jets to fly non-stop to int'l destinations as opposed to the int'l hub/spoke system that UA and NW uses.

- Pat

ozstamps

Gordon Bethune being ex big shot at Boeing and going to CO was the reason for the big buy up on Boeing as I recall, especially the plunge into 777s.

I wish CO would take that EWR-HKG down HKG-SYD to bring back a decent CO service into Aust. Was a top tier flyer for 4 years straight with CO until they pulled the plug on their service about 5 years ago. In those days if you did it for 5 years straight they gave you "Lifetime Elite".

Darn.

motnot

Pat,

You say you like CO doing long range with medium capacity jets (specifically, the 777). While not necessarily a bad idea, it seems CO is trying to save money by undersizing routes. Witness doing medium range (transcons) with small capacity jets (specifically, the 737).

A solid consensus about the merits of this:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum20/HTML/001150.html

chalf

I think the 777 on any route is great (better than a 747), and the more non-stops the better. More options for rerouting in case of delays.... As for Freebird's remarks, while I don't have any stats, I don't feel any more safe on a 2 engine a/c vs 4 engine. If the engineers have done thier jobs, flying on 1 of 2 vs 3 of 4 engines shouldn't make much difference--either way, the plane is heading for the nearest suitable runway. And I don't think that a 4-engine is any faster, and is probably less economical.

However, I agree that 16 hours on one a/c is a long time both pax and crew. Given the option, at least in coach I might prefer to have a stopover in YVR/LAX/PDX/etc.

ozstamps

Due to geography every flight I take to/from USA is either 14.5 to 15.5 hours direct whether from SYD or MEL.

Over the years I guess I've done it 50-60 times. You DO get used to them, believe me, but they are never easy.

The joys of upgraded C/J/F on a 747 upstairs using points or Certs or whatever is I must admit the only way I can bear to face them these days.

At least you nearly always can get a 7 or 8 hour sleep in, on decent seats, and that really makes the difference. From ORD to IAD or LAX I really do not get fussed, but for these mega flights an u/g is worth EVERY point you spend IMHO!

UA flies to SYD daily from LAX or SFO very late evening.

Get on board, get a meal and hour or so later, have a few drinks, watch a movie = 3/4 hours out and then 8 hours sleep after a couple Temezapan, then you are getting roused for breakfast.

As the planes land before or at Dawn there is no sunlight at any time coming in, so very easy (for me anyway) to sleep, especially as your body was on sleep mode when you left already.

Wait til the A3XX comes on line ... NY-Aust-Europe all possible on non-stops!

seawolf

Freebird,

I'm not so sure if the CO route is going to be even over the Pacific. Given it is a non-stop, there's probably no point taking a longer route over the Pacific when a polar route is shorter.

ozstamps

I recall reading Canada and Russia were opening up their airspace to Polar flyovers soon to allow a lot more of these flights to happen?

Flew on Qantas last week and their in-flight magazine had a piece saying a third of their Aust-Europe flights will now fly over China, not the middle east. Seems like a lot of routes will change around soon?