New high capacity airplanes

Quote: boymimbo

Long flights going on now:

UA1020 IAH - ANC (Houston, Anchorage) - B753, 5,323km
AA121 CDG - JFK (Paris - New York) - B752, 5,840km
UA68 EWR - ARN (Newark - Stockholm) - B752, 6,314km

All these flights suck!

Why would you fly a narrow body from JFK to CDG (two of the busiest international hubs in the world)?

Newark to Stockholm I understand, since you probably don't have enough people to fill a widebody every day.

Quote: Pacomartin

Why would you fly a narrow body from JFK to CDG (two of the busiest international hubs in the world)?

Newark to Stockholm I understand, since you probably don't have enough people to fill a widebody every day.

It's not my decision. US airlines make stupid decisions all of the time.

Quote: boymimbo

It's not my decision. US airlines make stupid decisions all of the time.

I mean "you" in the generic sense. I suppose that if US airlines are flying 4000 seats per day to Paris (each way), it makes sense to have a few narrow body flights just to fine tune the load. But it gets to be a huge strain on the airports as they are carrying the same number of people in smaller planes.

There may come a day when airline executives forbid widebody domestic flights (except to Hawaii). Bottom line is that it limits your liability if a plane crashes. As it is now, only 1 in 3 international flyer (on a domestic airline) flies in a widebody.

I read the airline industry will double in the
next 25 years worldwide. Double. Greyhound
of the skies.. My son is getting in now, he still
has 20 years to get to the top of the pay grade,
which is over 200k.

Quote: Evenbob

I read the airline industry will double in the next 25 years worldwide. Double.

The US Airline business doubled in the 23 years from the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 to September 11 2001. But growth has been cyclical to non-existent since then. But international growth as people get used to flying is exponential.

Widbodies are only carrying about 36% of the international passengers and 3% of the domestic passengers. Of course leading the way in the ultra squeeze narrow body jet is the 218 seat A321-200 narrow body jet for the Ultra low class Spirit Airlines.

Quote: Pacomartin

The US Airline business doubled in the 23 years from the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 to September 11 2001. But growth has been cyclical to non-existent since then. But international growth as people get used to flying is exponential.

Widbodies are only carrying about 36% of the international passengers and 3% of the domestic passengers. Of course leading the way in the ultra squeeze narrow body jet is the 218 seat A321-200 narrow body jet for the Ultra low class Spirit Airlines.

We're just getting back to pre-9-11 levels of traffic over the last year or three. Just prior to 9-11, operations were projected to have doubled by now from those numbers, which is what spurred the design and creation of the A380 and B787 super-wide-bodies, along with billions of dollars of infrastructure commitments to runway and airport modernization that have since stagnated. It's pretty amazing to look back and see how one catastrophic event has changed an industry so completely, not just domestically, but internationally.

Quote: beachbumbabs

It's pretty amazing to look back and see how one catastrophic event has changed an industry so completely, not just domestically, but internationally.

Airships may be better than high speed rail for moving people from Anaheim to Las Vegas.

Quote: Pacomartin

Widbodies are only carrying about 36% of the international passengers and 3% of the domestic passengers. Of course leading the way in the ultra squeeze narrow body jet is the 218 seat A321-200 narrow body jet for the Ultra low class Spirit Airlines.

I meant to specify 36% of the international passengers carried on national passenger lines. Widebodies are almost uniformly flown by international airlines to the USA (except for flights from within North American continent.

Quote: Pacomartin

Airships may be better than high speed rail for moving people from Anaheim to Las Vegas.

Airships are done for, outside some specialty uses. Every project to develop passenger airships as failed. Likewise rails. Rail makes no sense in America, except for closely packed places like the East Coast.

Quote: Nareed

Airships are done for, outside some specialty uses. Every project to develop passenger airships as failed.

I realize that no one has done it yet. But it would be nice if it could pick up a container with 150 people, move to a nearby city at 200 mph, and drop one container, and winch another one up.



No runways, no building rail up steep slopes, no earthquake issues, no property procurement.

I don't see why it has to be dropped. Just
drop it off on an elevated platform.