Yet another aviation thread.

February 19th, 2018 at 9:47:00 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: Nareed
i don't think Boeing's customers will even look at the specs if there is no composite fuselage. I know I wouldn't.


It seems as if it is necessary. But we should keep in mind that they haven't made a firm decision.

Quote: Akbar Al Baker, CEO of Qatar Airways

regarding the NMA:
I've already told Boeing that if they fine-tune the 787-8, it could be a perfect midsize aircraft. They don't need to reinvent the wheel. They don't need to invest $8-10 billion to develop a new aircraft. And as soon as they do, then Airbus will jump on the bandwagon and there will be an unnecessary pissing match between the two manufacturers.


I have expressed a similar sentiment.

Also the A330neo-800 is not selling at all. And it is in many ways a new midsize aircraft.



With a range of 7,500 nautical miles, the A330-800neo typically will seat 257 passengers in three classes of service, while offering capacity for up to 406 travellers in a high-density configuration.
February 19th, 2018 at 10:32:38 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: Pacomartin
It seems as if it is necessary. But we should keep in mind that they haven't made a firm decision.


I bet there's a pitch for stretching the 737 to meet the specs ;)

Quote:
Also the A330neo-800 is not selling at all. And it is in many ways a new midsize aircraft.


Think of the trend to downsize widebodies, and of replacements for the 757 and 767 in transcontinental and the shorter transatlantic routes, and the A300-800neo is too large.

Yes, we want to cram as many passengers as possible into the plane, but if that were the only goal, then the A380 would be selling to the exception of all else.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
February 27th, 2018 at 1:44:44 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Today I booked airline tickets for someone in the office, Mexico City to Monterrey round trip, for next Friday.

Veteran travelers know that travel on Friday can be pricey. Well, the trip out on Interjet goes for a bit under $100. The return on Interjet will forever remain a mystery because there were no return flights available at any price until 11 pm. So we booked the return on Aeromexico. But that ticket was about 3 times as expensive. So this person elected to pay even more for Clase Premier (about equivalent to US domestic first class), or around $340.

I swear I've never paid as much for a round trip coach ticket to Vegas.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
February 27th, 2018 at 3:04:49 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Mexico City (> 3500 nautical miles)
3550 SCL Chile
3984 EZE (Aerolíneas Argentinas Sky Team partner)
4009 GRU Brazil
4135 GIG (2014-2015)
4815 LHR
4903 MAD (Air Europa Líneas Aéreas Sky Team partner)
4975 CDG (Air France Sky Team partner)
4979 AMS (KLM Sky Team partner)
6087 NRT
6542 ICN (Korean Air Sky Team partner)
6975 PVG (China Eastern Airlines Sky Team partner)


It's not clear if Aeromexico is going to be interested in the new Boeing NMA (797) aircraft. The maximum still air range of the B797 should be about 5200-5400 nautical miles, but considering headwinds and the smaller size of the aircraft Aeromexico may be happy with the Dreamliners.

Quote: Nareed
So we booked the return on Aeromexico. But that ticket was about 3 times as expensive. So this person elected to pay even more for Clase Premier (about equivalent to US domestic first class), or around $340.


MEX MTY = 384 nm

I see that Aeromexico serves about 26 domestic destinations outside of Mexico City. They could probably connect all domestic destinations with Aeromexico Connect and the Embraer aircraft. I can't see what the point is in flying the airline domestically except to connect to an international flight.

Aeroméxico has 54 B737 700/800 and have 59 B737 Max 8/9 on order with plans to purchase more.
Aeroméxico Connect has 59 Embraer E-170/190 with 76/99 seats
February 28th, 2018 at 9:49:29 AM permalink
DRich
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 51
Posts: 4943
Quote: Nareed
Today I booked airline tickets for someone in the office, Mexico City to Monterrey round trip, for next Friday.

Veteran travelers know that travel on Friday can be pricey. Well, the trip out on Interjet goes for a bit under $100. The return on Interjet will forever remain a mystery because there were no return flights available at any price until 11 pm. So we booked the return on Aeromexico. But that ticket was about 3 times as expensive. So this person elected to pay even more for Clase Premier (about equivalent to US domestic first class), or around $340.

I swear I've never paid as much for a round trip coach ticket to Vegas.


I have been flying a lot between Las Vegas and Reno. It is about a one hour flight on Southwest Airlines and averages about $500 round trip. Southwest has killed all the competition on that route and is the only airline with direct flights daily. There use to be multiple airlines and competition was cut throat. I remember paying $29 each way.
At my age a Life In Prison sentence is not much of a detrrent.
February 28th, 2018 at 10:00:07 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: Pacomartin
I see that Aeromexico serves about 26 domestic destinations outside of Mexico City. They could probably connect all domestic destinations with Aeromexico Connect and the Embraer aircraft. I can't see what the point is in flying the airline domestically except to connect to an international flight.


It's a different business model. In the US, the major airlines contract with regional airlines for regional flights. Aeromexico owns the regional airline, Aeromexico Connect, as a subsidiary. Mexicana did the same, for a while, with Mexicana Link. The remaining Mexican airlines are all LCC or ULCC and either fly one type (with variants), or own the regional jets, much like Southwest and Jet Blue respectively.

Aeromexico just launched a route from El Bajío to Detroit,. It will be in a tiny regional Embraer jet operated by AM Connect. That's not like Delta contracting the route to Mesa or whoever, but like Jet Blue assigning a regional jet to the route.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER
March 1st, 2018 at 7:35:46 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569


Aeromexico's route map is confusing. For instance Villahermosa shows feeder route to Mexico City, but it also indicates two point to point routes to Veracruz and Merida. But wikipedia indicates that those point to point routes are flown by Aeromar.


United Airlines has 5 major domestic hubs and 2 minor ones
Chicago–O'Hare
Denver
Houston–Intercontinental
Newark
San Francisco

Minor hubs
Los Angeles
Washington–Dulles

Every domestic flight on mainline United flies to or from a hub (with the exception of a focus city in Cleveland that United is tryiing to jettison).

If it wasn't for the pilot's union, United would probably farm out the entire domestic network to regional airlines flying United Express logo. They would simply concentrate on international flights. But contract with pilots not only restricts the planes to 76 seats and the Maximum Take-Off Weight (MTOW) limit (86,000lb) , but it also restricts the number of planes

United Air Lines restriction on regional fleet size
(max 50 seats) Up to a number equal to 90% of the UAL single aisle fleet
(max 70 seats ) Up to 255 70band 76 seatbaircraft
(max 76 seats ) Not to exceed 153 76 seat aircraft

The Bombardier’s CRJ900 (84,500 lb ) and Embraer’s E-175 E1 (85,517 lb) fit under the scope clause and prevents manufacturers from selling many larger planes.

Next negotiation round will be 2019 (United Airlines) and 2020 (American and Delta Airlines). By now, most observers expect the present limits to stay beyond 2020.


Aeromexico Connect has Embraer jets with 76 and 99 seats. But even if Aeromexico were to give it's 16 oldest and smallest Boeing 737-700s (11.3-14.4 year old) with 124 seats to Aeromexico Connect and let them fly the routes, it is not clear if their costs would go down.
March 1st, 2018 at 10:33:03 AM permalink
boymimbo
Member since: Mar 25, 2013
Threads: 5
Posts: 732
Quote: Pacomartin
United schedule
9:10am to 11:30am (11h 20m) Paris to San Francisco Roissy-Charles de Gaulle (CDG) to San Francisco Intl. (SFO) United 984

So the problem is not with the CDG-SFO (11:20) primary flight, it is with the final SFO-LAS segment.
They seem to have put you on the THIRD flight which is 7:04 after your arrival

San Francisco to Las Vegas San Francisco Intl. (SFO) to McCarran Intl. (LAS)
(1) 12:50pm to 2:29pm (69 min)
(2) 4:30pm to 6:08pm (69 min)
(3) 6:24pm to 8:03pm (69 min)

So there is a possibility of you flying at a reasonable layover time without changing airlines and risking a security kerfuffle. Maybe they will put you on a list if there is a cancellation. Normally 80 minutes is plenty of time to do a transfer. You should be able to get on the 12:50

San Francisco (SFO)
60 minutes Minimum check-in times for nonstop international flights with or without checked baggage (minutes before departure time)
45 minutes Minimum check-in times for flights within the U.S. with checked baggage (minutes before departure time)
30 minutes Minimum check-in times for flights within the U.S. with carry-on baggage only (minutes before departure time)

Personally I wouldn't risk flagging DHS by scheduling a Southwest or Frontier flight. If you get pulled into security it could cost you way more than 7 hours. I was pulled into security in Sicily, and it took forever to get free. I would try to get a change in your return flight before you leave, or just wait until you land in SFO, put United on speed dial and try to get moved to one of the two earlier flights.

The difference compared to what? A Chicago or Newark layover? Or a hypothetical nonstop to Las Vegas.


You could easily collect your luggage and get same day confirmed at a kiosk/agent for $75 if <Gold, free for Gold and above.
March 1st, 2018 at 10:51:59 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569


Here is a shocking conjecture. Boeing uses the same fuselage for the NMA New midsize aircraft as for the NSA or New Small aircraft. The NMA would have only 4 abreast seating.
That would mean 56 to 67 rows in the NMA.
March 1st, 2018 at 1:37:04 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 346
Posts: 12545
Quote: Pacomartin
Here is a shocking conjecture. Boeing uses the same fuselage for the NMA New midsize aircraft as for the NSA or New Small aircraft. The NMA would have only 4 abreast seating.
That would mean 56 to 67 rows in the NMA.


This seems so very wrong, I can't take it seriously. I'd like to know what the source is.

See, 4 abreast, and in particular de 1-2-1 direct-aisle access for all, is how first class and business class are configured in wide body aircraft. In narrow bodies you get 2-2 for business, and 1-1 for first (if it's "true"or international business and first with lie-flat beds).

Point is Boeing can build an NMA with that configuration in mind and make it 62 rows long, but the airlines will pack it 3-3 in 65 rows in economy, as they have done and will continue to do.

A wider aisle in a narrow body would be nice, if the airlines can keep from gobbling up the space for more seats. i don't think FAA rules would allow a 4-3 seating configuration in economy.
Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER