A380 unveiling, 1/18/05, Live.

AJC schrieb:

This is in contrast with flights from Europe to North America where there is
often empty seats. Last September coming back to London from Chicago the
United flight was half full


This is why so many Americans are so sceptical of the market for the
380. They mostly see small aircraft, empty flights, airlines in
financial problems. Go to airports in Europe, Asia and you see 744s
lined up, and as you say get on the flights and they are packed.
Traffic on the Europe-Asia-Aus/NZ routes is booming, within Europe
there is steady growth, while it is declining on the North Atlantic.

There is a growth Germany - Russia, I guess linked to migration.
However, flights I used were 15 - 65 % full. Well, I tend to book cheap
flights.

Of course no 747 but 319, 320, 737, 310, 154.

10/11 flights per day FRA - MOW (each direction), 3/4 operators.
Number of flights steadily increasing.

Regards, ULF

"Frank F. Matthews" schrieb:

Cities like New York/Boston, LA/San Francisco, and Houston/Dallas are
more likely to support increased frequency than larger size if it can be
done economically.

Won't be easy to increase frequency at New York. Just my guess.

Regards, ULF

"Ulf Kutzner" wrote in message
-
There is a growth Germany - Russia, I guess linked to migration.
However, flights I used were 15 - 65 % full. Well, I tend to book cheap
flights.

Of course no 747 but 319, 320, 737, 310, 154.

10/11 flights per day FRA - MOW (each direction), 3/4 operators.
Number of flights steadily increasing.


Plain stupid. When you have cities that far you wil only need a morning
flight (that will allow you to get the afternoon/late afternoon at the
"other end" and an evening/late afternoon fligt that will bring you back
late in the day.

The rest is nonsense.

Nik.

"Nik" wrote in message
...

"Ulf Kutzner" wrote in message
-
There is a growth Germany - Russia, I guess linked to migration.
However, flights I used were 15 - 65 % full. Well, I tend to book cheap
flights.

Of course no 747 but 319, 320, 737, 310, 154.

10/11 flights per day FRA - MOW (each direction), 3/4 operators.
Number of flights steadily increasing.


Plain stupid. When you have cities that far you wil only need a morning
flight (that will allow you to get the afternoon/late afternoon at the
"other end" and an evening/late afternoon fligt that will bring you back
late in the day.

1) not every one fits into your mould. Some will want a very early
departure which enables them to arrive in time to make a useful
onward connection. Others will want a mid evening return that
allows them to spend as much time at the destination but
still get home without have to resort to a taxi.

2) as many flights as can be filled are necessary - this isn't a
route for which other modes make sense

3) A plane on the ground is very expensive. It's often better
to make a marginal journey even if only partially full.


The rest is nonsense.

It's called competition.

tim

On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:47:09 -0800, AES wrote some
stuff about " 380 fuel usage", to which I would like to add the following:

I think frequent flyer loyalty was seriously eroded also when the
airlines changed over from having more or less open availability for
award travel, except for certain blackout periods that were stated in
advance, and instead began limiting the number of FF award seats on any
flight to such low levels that cashing in FF miles for award travel
became, if not nearly impossible, at least an almost always unpleasant
and unrewarding hassle.

That would be "USA based Airlines". Just yesterday I cashed a bunch of miles
for a long flight out of Thailand on Thai Airways. This is for the evening
flight of 12 April. 13 April all the way to 18 April is the main National
Holiday in Thailand (Thai New Year) when the whole country has a holiday.

It's the equivalent of getting an award ticket Los Angeles to Paris on 23 or
24 December.

Cheers,
Chanchao

Nik schrieb:

There is a growth Germany - Russia, I guess linked to migration.
However, flights I used were 15 - 65 % full. Well, I tend to book cheap
flights.

Of course no 747 but 319, 320, 737, 310, 154.

10/11 flights per day FRA - MOW (each direction), 3/4 operators.
Number of flights steadily increasing.


Plain stupid. When you have cities that far you wil only need a morning
flight (that will allow you to get the afternoon/late afternoon at the
"other end" and an evening/late afternoon fligt that will bring you back
late in the day.

The rest is nonsense.

SU provides morning connections in Moscow with an overnight flight.

MOW - FRA allows you a morning flight arriving 1,5 hours after
departure time, if measured in local time.

Regards, ULF

- rta

Ulf Kutzner schrieb:

There is a growth Germany - Russia, I guess linked to migration.
However, flights I used were 15 - 65 % full. Well, I tend to book cheap
flights.

Of course no 747 but 319, 320, 737, 310, 154.

10/11 flights per day FRA - MOW (each direction), 3/4 operators.
Number of flights steadily increasing.

Just to add: 321, AB6.

Regards, ULF

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:09:23 +0100, Thomas Borchert
wrote in
::

Lee,

Suppose the 7E7 is wildly popular. It's light weight, efficient
engines, 3 day assembly time and very low maintainence cost makes all
competing metal aircraft (A300/A310/A330/B757/B767) obsolete.


Don't forget the A350, Airbus's answer to the 7E7


It would appear that sales for Boeing's 7E7 Dreamliner are heating up:


BOEING CO. will sign deals worth up to $7.5 billion to sell 60 of
its 7E7 Dreamliner aircraft to six Chinese airlines on Friday, a
source familiar with the transactions said. The source, citing
U.S. government and company officials, said the aircraft were
being purchased by CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES CO. LTD., CHINA
EASTERN AIRLINES CORP LTD, Air China, Shanghai Airlines Co.
Ltd., Hainan Airlines Co. Ltd. and Xiamen Airlines. Boeing, in
a statement, said it would sign preliminary agreements during a
ceremony at the U.S. Commerce Department attended by the Chinese
ambassador to the United States, Yang Jiechi, and the president
of the China Avaition Supply Co., Li Hai.
(Reuters 04:37 PM ET 01/27/2005)

Mo

http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=248&a=104...a&s=rb050 127

----------------------------------------------------------------

Larry Dighera wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:09:23 +0100, Thomas Borchert
wrote in
::


Lee,


Suppose the 7E7 is wildly popular. It's light weight, efficient
engines, 3 day assembly time and very low maintainence cost makes all
competing metal aircraft (A300/A310/A330/B757/B767) obsolete.


Don't forget the A350, Airbus's answer to the 7E7



It would appear that sales for Boeing's 7E7 Dreamliner are heating up:


BOEING CO. will sign deals worth up to $7.5 billion to sell 60 of
its 7E7 Dreamliner aircraft to six Chinese airlines on Friday, a
source familiar with the transactions said. The source, citing
U.S. government and company officials, said the aircraft were
being purchased by CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES CO. LTD., CHINA
EASTERN AIRLINES CORP LTD, Air China, Shanghai Airlines Co.
Ltd., Hainan Airlines Co. Ltd. and Xiamen Airlines. Boeing, in
a statement, said it would sign preliminary agreements during a
ceremony at the U.S. Commerce Department attended by the Chinese
ambassador to the United States, Yang Jiechi, and the president
of the China Avaition Supply Co., Li Hai.
(Reuters 04:37 PM ET 01/27/2005)

Mo

http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=248&a=104...a&s=rb050 127




I thought it was now the 787.

"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in
:

I thought it was now the 787.


It is, but WTF does it matter?

Sorry, you hit a sore spot with me. Nothing personal, Frank.

Zillions of posts here and on other aviation fora about the significance of
the model number of an airplane, and they are all a waste of time and
energy, as far as I'm concerned...

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet...

Somehow people seem to get a near-orgasmic joy because an aircraft has a
certain number. I just don't get it.

--lw--