2013 Westbound TATL 757 "Short Stops"
Jan 21, 2013, 5:57 pm
#61
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
As for TXL - this is the route they switch back and forth between a 757 and a 767, IIRC (and did a Gander stop just this week). If there wasn't such a deficit of widebodies at the moment, maybe it would be a 67 year round.
Jan 21, 2013, 6:01 pm
#62
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Virtuoso Travel Agent, Commercial Pilot
Posts: 2,117
Jan 21, 2013, 6:01 pm
#63
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NYC
Programs: AA EXP, UA Platinum, Alaksa MVP 75K, Air Berlin Gold, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC
Posts: 2,389
Yup - am flying EWR-TXL next month. When I booked the flight back in October it was listed as a 767-400 which surprised me since I didn't think TXL had that sort of demand. It's since been switched to a non-BF configured 767-200 (pmCO) which will make me feel less miserable about not being in a SWU upgradeable fare class to begin with.
Jan 21, 2013, 6:06 pm
#64
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Yup - am flying EWR-TXL next month. When I booked the flight back in October it was listed as a 767-400 which surprised me since I didn't think TXL had that sort of demand. It's since been switched to a non-BF configured 767-200 (pmCO) which will make me feel less miserable about not being in a SWU upgradeable fare class to begin with.
Jan 21, 2013, 7:52 pm
#65
Join Date: May 2007
Location: variously: PVG, SFO, LHR
Programs: AA ExPlat, UA 1MM Gold, Hyatt Glob, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat, HH Gold
Posts: 1,678
edit: heh, harder than it used to be to check through EOS given AA's new craptastic website that I am trying to make work
Last edited by andrewwm; Jan 21, 2013 at 8:00 pm
Jan 21, 2013, 8:25 pm
#66
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
Jan 21, 2013, 9:03 pm
#67
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: OMA
Programs: UA
Posts: 322
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...200Z/KJFK/LFPG
Jan 21, 2013, 9:11 pm
#68
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
They pretty clearly are sending a 757 year round at this point.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...200Z/KJFK/LFPG
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...200Z/KJFK/LFPG
Anyway, back on topic of 757s on near-4K mile routes.
Jan 21, 2013, 9:31 pm
#69
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Orygun
Posts: 462
The 757 was originally intended as a 727 replacement and that's how Boeing marketed it. The performance ended up being far superior than a 727 with a range of 4,500 NM.
Continental deserves credit for pioneering the 757 in TATL flights to avoid a connection to smaller markets in Europe. However, they deserve a big
for poaching sUA birds and putting the 757s on sUA routes that ended up getting COdbaUA a lot of bad press because of the technical stops.
Also, I think it might be inaccurate to say that CO put all their eggs in the 787 basket. Their order for the then 7E7 in 2004 also included top-off orders for 777-200ERs and over the couple of years following they added to that 777 top off order for a couple more frames. It's safe though to say that their widebody fleet was lacking up until the merger.
Continental deserves credit for pioneering the 757 in TATL flights to avoid a connection to smaller markets in Europe. However, they deserve a big
for poaching sUA birds and putting the 757s on sUA routes that ended up getting COdbaUA a lot of bad press because of the technical stops.Also, I think it might be inaccurate to say that CO put all their eggs in the 787 basket. Their order for the then 7E7 in 2004 also included top-off orders for 777-200ERs and over the couple of years following they added to that 777 top off order for a couple more frames. It's safe though to say that their widebody fleet was lacking up until the merger.
Jan 21, 2013, 9:32 pm
#70
Join Date: May 2007
Location: variously: PVG, SFO, LHR
Programs: AA ExPlat, UA 1MM Gold, Hyatt Glob, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat, HH Gold
Posts: 1,678
I didn't check last summer, so maybe there were a few days/weeks in peak tourist season where a 763 was subbed, but 120/121 was one of the first route AA put their reconfigured biz class 757s on and it hasn't changed since.
So I guess horror of horrors that UA puts a 757 on an objectively less busy O&D city pair (IAD-CDG) but AA has one on the second busiest/yielding TATL city pair (JFK-CDG) and peachy keen. Got it.
Jan 21, 2013, 9:36 pm
#71
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: IAD
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Rewards - LTPP
Posts: 4,240
United used to have the IAD-CDG contract. DL has it now.
What many people don't understand is that it is very easy for government travelers to select a non-contract carrier, as long as 1) the other flight selected is a US flag carrier flight and 2) the non contract carrier offers a DG fare that matches the contract fare.
For example, If I was flying to CDG next month, the current YCA fare is 1325 on DL, and the penalty fare is 868. UA offers the same YCA fare, and a slightly lower penalty fare, and I'm allowed to select the United flight.
Last year when UA still had the contract but was flying the 757s, many government travelers opted for the DL flights. On the rare instance where auditors questioned why we didn't choose the UA contract flight, all we had to do is mention the Gander fuel stop, and the inquiry ended.
What many people don't understand is that it is very easy for government travelers to select a non-contract carrier, as long as 1) the other flight selected is a US flag carrier flight and 2) the non contract carrier offers a DG fare that matches the contract fare.
For example, If I was flying to CDG next month, the current YCA fare is 1325 on DL, and the penalty fare is 868. UA offers the same YCA fare, and a slightly lower penalty fare, and I'm allowed to select the United flight.
Last year when UA still had the contract but was flying the 757s, many government travelers opted for the DL flights. On the rare instance where auditors questioned why we didn't choose the UA contract flight, all we had to do is mention the Gander fuel stop, and the inquiry ended.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...bu7exGKj8AwkEA
"It is important to note that choosing the Discounted Government (“DG”) fare, also called the “me too” fare, is not permitted by the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR). Federal travelers cannot choose a DG fare, even if it is lower than a CPP fare unless there the CPP carrier is full or no CPP carrier exists in the area you are traveling to."
Picking a lowest available, on the other hand, is permitted, though agency rules govern the use of lowest available vs. refundable.
Jan 21, 2013, 9:58 pm
#72
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Why would anyone pay Full F on CO? A Platinum gets an F seat with a M fare. A Silver gets an F seat with a B fare. Why the heck would anyone pay for F on CO if they're an Elite frequent flyer?
In addition to all the service, reliability, and operational problems that came with the 3/3 system downgrade, I'm sure the Y/B/M-Up policy eroded their F/C revenue as well, at least domestically. And a handful of TOD upgrades is not going to recover it.
But CO might be okay with that (see mindset issue above). People complained for years that they could not buy an F seat on SFO/LAX-EWR sometimes 1-2 weeks out or more. Not that an upgrade wasn't available, but it was F0. CO always claimed the complexity and costs of running a subfleet of larger F planes outweighed the benefits of the extra revenue. Now keep in mind, as you pointed out earlier, that CO did not have the type of F revenue that UA did, and that may have changed in the merged entity, but the legacy CO mindset may still be present in the organization when these decisions are being made. After all a lot of business decisions are based on assumptions and weights, and it's very easy to get those wrong.
As they got more elites, they went to the Y/B/M preference, and still had a very narrow price spread between F and Y (DL does this now on many routes). Its just a different model. I don't think it "eroded" CO's Full Price FC sales as they did not have any. Those folks were flying from JFK/LGA.
Where I think they went wrong is in not really understanding the different markets UA was in, the different type of fliers, and what it took to retain them. Some guy who paid $1200 RT (F) rather than $900 RT (Y) to fly LAX/SFO-EWR has a different set of expectations from someone who pays $2600 to fly it in C (or Domestic F to EWR on PMUA)
I don't doubt that passengers hate unscheduled stop, but honestly what do you expect people to answer on that poll? There's no mention of possible offsetting benefits in the question like the qualifiers "if it lowered the ticket price" or "allowed the airline to serve an otherwise unprofitable route".
And on some of these routes others fly them or you can connect. its about UA, not about doing some public service of providing cheaper flights to the public.One of the most fascinating aspects of the story is that Boeing stopped making the 757 in 2004 and its use as an ETOPS TATL a/c really took off after that.
Since then, as was discussed earlier in this thread, Boeing has not made any product truly capable of replacing the 752...
Since then, as was discussed earlier in this thread, Boeing has not made any product truly capable of replacing the 752...
Because it (and the 762/2) was a leap in fuel efficiency/capacity, and it had no direct narrow body competitor, Boeing was able to have it do everything.
Today, airlines don't want to pay for that, and with fuel costs so key, caring arround the extra fuel/weight for more capacity makes little sense, which is why the 737/320/321 have less capacity.
Jan 21, 2013, 10:33 pm
#73
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago USA
Programs: *A Junkie, SQ PPS, Skywards Gold, 2 Million Mile Flyer;*wood LT Plat, BA MM
Posts: 1,762
Part of the problem is that the 757-300 was never meant to be a TATL bird. It's range is shorter than that of the 707-320B (3400 nautical miles vs 3800). For reference point, EWR-CDG is 3200 nautical miles. Piece of cake for the 707 but tough for the 753, especially westwards. The 727-200 Advanced that was occasionally and not successfully used in TATL routes had a 3500 nautical mile range.
If there is enough market, and it seems to be, someone should develop a single aisle TATL bird with range well in the 4000s.
*The range of the 752 is close to 4000 btw and the potential 753 replacements 737 Max 9 and A321neo have only 3600 nm range.
If there is enough market, and it seems to be, someone should develop a single aisle TATL bird with range well in the 4000s.
*The range of the 752 is close to 4000 btw and the potential 753 replacements 737 Max 9 and A321neo have only 3600 nm range.
Jan 21, 2013, 10:37 pm
#74
Join Date: May 2007
Location: variously: PVG, SFO, LHR
Programs: AA ExPlat, UA 1MM Gold, Hyatt Glob, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat, HH Gold
Posts: 1,678
Cimber, among a few others: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ad.main/54285/
The Cimber and Royal flights had fuel stops in KEF, but private charters and cargo flights apparently did it non-stop.
Remember that PrivatAir has 737 TATL flights and that the 727-200 has about the same range as the 737NGs.
The Cimber and Royal flights had fuel stops in KEF, but private charters and cargo flights apparently did it non-stop.
Remember that PrivatAir has 737 TATL flights and that the 727-200 has about the same range as the 737NGs.
Jan 22, 2013, 5:00 am
#75
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
2. A big difference when you ONLY fly 757s on a busy route (giving consumers no choice, and forcing them to look elsewhere, as what happened to UA apparently) vs. the ability to take a widebody on a route if you so choose
Helps if you look at the full story.