Boring airliners?

ShawnD2112 wrote:
Boeing reckon people will buy more point-to-point tickets, which won't
support larger airplanes but would be commercially viable with smaller and
more cost-efficient aircraft. It could finally open up that long-ignored
Columbus OH - London route that's been languishing unexploited for so long!

FYI... here in Columbus Ohio we discussed that issue 15 year ago.
It is an ATC problem getting the aircraft up to altitude Columbus to
Europe and getting them down Europe to Columbus. The flight paths
interfer with with Clevland, New York and Detroit operations.

"john smith" wrote

FYI... here in Columbus Ohio we discussed that issue 15 year ago.
It is an ATC problem getting the aircraft up to altitude Columbus to
Europe and getting them down Europe to Columbus. The flight paths
interfer with with Clevland, New York and Detroit operations.

THAT sounds more like an excuse than a reason. Someone with the mojo
doesn't want it to happen, is more like the real problem.
--
Jim in NC

"john smith" wrote in message news:7Tfce.14750

FYI... here in Columbus Ohio we discussed that issue 15 year ago.
It is an ATC problem getting the aircraft up to altitude Columbus to
Europe and getting them down Europe to Columbus. The flight paths interfer
with with Clevland, New York and Detroit operations.

I think that with a strong probability of full airplanes making those climbs
and descents, arrival and departure paths could have been worked out.

More like there aren't enough people near Columbus who want to go to London
and, more importantly, not enough people in London want to go to Columbus.
Only one Buckeye fan over here, you see. :-)

Shawn
"john smith" wrote in message
...
ShawnD2112 wrote:
Boeing reckon people will buy more point-to-point tickets, which won't
support larger airplanes but would be commercially viable with smaller
and more cost-efficient aircraft. It could finally open up that
long-ignored Columbus OH - London route that's been languishing
unexploited for so long!

FYI... here in Columbus Ohio we discussed that issue 15 year ago.
It is an ATC problem getting the aircraft up to altitude Columbus to
Europe and getting them down Europe to Columbus. The flight paths interfer
with with Clevland, New York and Detroit operations.

In article , ShawnD2112 wrote:
It's going to be interesting to see what a true Open Skies agreement will do
to this development in the industry. I think one or the other maker will
have a fleet of commercial dinosaurs on it's hands in about 10-15 years, but
it'll be anybody's guess at this point which one it'll be.

I don't think it's an 'either-or' game. The 7E7 and A380, at least as
far as I can see, are different tools for different jobs. The A380 will
do well where you need LOTS of capacities and you have the normal
constraints on building new runways. The 7E7 will do well on the routes
where you simply can't fill anything bigger, and may open up new routes
that were previously uneconomical. I expect both will succeed - one may
end up more profitable than the other, but I doubt either will flop
because they both have their place right now.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dylan,

If you followed the airline industry, you'd realize that the 787 fills a
different market segment than the 777 does. The 787 is not an
intercontinental machine, its a regional machine, and will serve as a
replacement for the 757/767 models. Once the 787 is done, Boeing will
replace the 737 with a plane that utilizes the same technology as the 787.
Its going to be all about efficiency with the cost of fuel going up.

Dean Wilkinson
Former Boeing 777 engineer, maybe soon to be back at Boeing on the 787

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
Now the A380 is surely a marvel of modern engineering, as is the Boeing
7E7 (787? Dreamliner?).

But fundamentally...it's yet another tube with wings with two or four
engines on pylons below the wings. I'm really disappointed that Boeing
dropped the Sonic Cruiser, a much more interesting proposition.

I'm also wonder what the point of the 7E7 is - surely the
midsize longhaul jet market is already adequately served by the 777?
Could they just not make incremental improvements to the 777 in the same
way they've done with the 737 for years?

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

In article , Dean Wilkinson wrote:
If you followed the airline industry, you'd realize that the 787 fills a
different market segment than the 777 does. The 787 is not an
intercontinental machine, its a regional machine, and will serve as a
replacement for the 757/767 models.

.... in which case why the planet of hell are all the pundits discussing
the A380 and 7E7 as head-on competitors? If that is the case their roles
are completely orthoganol.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Dylan Smith wrote:

... in which case why the planet of hell are all the pundits discussing
the A380 and 7E7 as head-on competitors?

I didn't know they were. The articles I've read all pit the A380 against the 747.

If that is the case their roles are completely orthoganol.

Agree.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 14:22:41 -0000, Dylan Smith
wrote:

... in which case why the planet of hell are all the pundits discussing
the A380 and 7E7 as head-on competitors? If that is the case their roles
are completely orthoganol.

Yes, it's the A350 that's the would-be 787 Killer. (I wish you would
stop calling it an E. That was a very stupid, and happily very
temporary, move on Boeing's part.)

The 380 competes with the 747, which must make Boeing very nervous.
Crikey, the poor old 747 is a third of a century old.

Given the success of the 787, one wonders whether the A350 will ever
get off the ground. Perhaps planes have gotten so expensive now that
Airbus will concentrate on building busses, and Boeing on building
streamliners.



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

Although they are intended for different markets, they are competitors
in that each company has spent so much on development that they have
literally 'bet the company' on the success or failure of the A380 and
the 787.

Each manufacturer believes that every Airline sale of the newest models
will also include many of their other aircraft -- ones that have already
been amortized and are making a profit.

- John Ousterhout -


Dylan Smith wrote:
... in which case why the planet of hell are all the pundits discussing
the A380 and 7E7 as head-on competitors? If that is the case their roles
are completely orthoganol.