Yet another aviation thread.

April 3rd, 2017 at 12:18:02 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 661
Posts: 7567
Quote: Nareed
It gets tricky when the subsonic takes, say 3:30 hours and supersonic might take a bit under two hours. Would you pay double for that?


No, of course not. Time is not that valuable. But economics doesn't work that way.

Delta has 116 of these MD88 delivered between 1987 and 1993. Would you pay double or triple or quintuple to have a wider seat and more leg room and better food for a 3:30 flight on the same old jet? I could think of a lot more things I would rather do with an extra $800 that would last longer than 3.5 hours.



Similarly, I wouldn't pay thousands extra to fly to downtown London. You might splurge on a taxi instead of the subway or the train to navigate the 20 some miles.
April 3rd, 2017 at 3:33:28 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 303
Posts: 10218
Quote: Pacomartin
No, of course not. Time is not that valuable. But economics doesn't work that way.

Delta has 116 of these MD88 delivered between 1987 and 1993. Would you pay double or triple or quintuple to have a wider seat and more leg room and better food for a 3:30 flight on the same old jet? I could think of a lot more things I would rather do with an extra $800 that would last longer than 3.5 hours.


I've said before I find it almost contemptible to pay extra for premium class on a short trip (around under 2 hours). Yet either 1) some people do it or 2) their status in the frequent flier program let them have those seats for free (free meaning without using up miles or points).

Personally I might pay extra for a better flight. But usually there are other aspects involved (checked bags and such). But I'm quite confident I can make it through a 4 hour flight without food or drink if I can have a meal at the airport.

Now, for some people their time might be that valuable. perhaps a 2-hor vs 3.5-hour flight also means not waking up earlier, or actually arriving in time for an appointment or meeting. Such things also count.

And some people will pay extra for "better" just because they can.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
April 4th, 2017 at 7:47:01 PM permalink
Aussie
Member since: May 10, 2016
Threads: 2
Posts: 208
Quote: Nareed
But I imagine this causes problems, when clueless tourists returning home don't pre-clear and are then not allowed to board...



Sorry only getting back to this now and we're about a page on. :S

It's impossible NOT to pre clear. You simply can't get to the gate without preclearing. What happens (in YYZ at least and I would assume all other preclearance ports) is you go through security specifically for US-bound flights. You then go to the CBP immigration check (same as any on US soil). Once through there you are in a sterile environment at gates which are only used for flights to US. There is no way to enter this area short of illegally breaking into the maze of areas off limits to the public and somehow avoiding detection.
April 4th, 2017 at 8:22:03 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 661
Posts: 7567
But we've talked about this before. If I want a last minute flight leaves tomorrow to London from Newark Airport and return after 30 hours in London. I would expect high prices because I am leaving at the last minute.

$2,971 British Airways economy class)
$14,248 Same flights business class

Heathrow (London) - Newark Liberty International (NJ) (New York)
Departs 18:20 05 Apr Arrives 06:15 06 Apr Flight BA0184
Departs 16:55 06 Apr Arrives 19:45 06 Apr Flight BA0189

So we are talking about an extra $11K for 14 hours on the airplane. But just think what you could purchase for $11K in the 30 hours in London. The finest hotel room, excellent wines, fantastic dining and you would still be hard pressed to spend $11K.

Quote: Nareed
I've said before I find it almost contemptible to pay extra for premium class on a short trip (around under 2 hours).

And some people will pay extra for "better" just because they can.


Well this flight to London is not short, but the premium is not worth it to most people (or most Chief Financial Officers of a company)

That's why you can't say for certain if a short supersonic trip would necessarily be a failure. As you said some people will take it "just because they can". But in particular if they had a fast boarding procedure on the ground.
April 4th, 2017 at 8:26:59 PM permalink
Aussie
Member since: May 10, 2016
Threads: 2
Posts: 208
Having flown that route myself I would say that on an overnight flight from NYC to London I would want to go business if possible simply because of the sleep factor. Probably only if I was using a miles redemption though as I'm loathe to pay more cash than necessary. Day time flight coming the other way I would be happy to go economy. 6-7hrs in the day is bearable.
April 4th, 2017 at 9:29:08 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 303
Posts: 10218
Quote: Pacomartin
So we are talking about an extra $11K for 14 hours on the airplane. But just think what you could purchase for $11K in the 30 hours in London. The finest hotel room, excellent wines, fantastic dining and you would still be hard pressed to spend $11K.


All true.

But there must be some people who make more than $11k in 30 hours, and thus it's worth paying the premium. And there are those who can simply afford it from time to time. And bucket list items, etc.

I wonder what the load factor was for the Concorde.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
April 5th, 2017 at 6:39:41 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 661
Posts: 7567
Quote: Nareed
I wonder what the load factor was for the Concorde.


The charter Concorde(25 July 2000) ran over debris on the runway during takeoff, blowing a tyre and puncturing a fuel tank, leading to fire and engine failure. As a charter every single seat was taken, so all 100 passengers, nine crew and four people were killed and one was critically injured (they hit a hotel).

British Airways announced 70% load factor after the accident, but the service was announced to be retired 83 weeks after 9-11.

The bottom line is that you can easily make more money flying passengers in luxury at subsonic speeds. Look at my example where a business seat sells for 4-5 times the price of an economy seat despite taking up about twice as much cabin space. At those ticket prices the cost of better food and alcohol is relatively insignificant.
April 5th, 2017 at 7:49:32 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 303
Posts: 10218
Quote: Pacomartin
The bottom line is that you can easily make more money flying passengers in luxury at subsonic speeds.


Yes. But what happens when Delta zips passengers from LAX to JFK in half the time United does?

Quote:
Look at my example where a business seat sells for 4-5 times the price of an economy seat despite taking up about twice as much cabin space. At those ticket prices the cost of better food and alcohol is relatively insignificant.


I don't know. Some airlines spend a lot of money on the ground to cater to business class passengers (and first class, too). I'm sure the bigger margins are in the premium seats, but I wonder how big they are.

Also, when you fail to sell much of the premium cabin, the fuel requirements don't drop much but revenue does. But such problems will persist in supersonic flight.

Now, imagine a 150 passenger narrow body plane with Mach 2.2+ and ultra-long haul capabilities. When it goes on a 9-hour flight from the West Coast to Asia or Australia, you'll be able to sell a premium cabin with fancy food and lie-flat beds. And if planes get bigger, with shower as well. Who could resist showering at 50,000 ft going twice the speed of sound? ;)

It's funny, really. Early on in commercial aviation, say by the early 30s, pretty much all service was first class, because flying was very expensive. So there was fancy food and drink, beds, etc. As the industry evolved, and planes got larger and cheaper to operate, they began to resemble a flying bus. Coach was born, and premium class travel was somewhat downgraded to a better seat and food.

By the late 90s the idea of beds came back, if in a different form (I wonder why no one thought of it sooner). And we're full circle.

Boom, if it ever flies, will begin with a one-class cabin with coach type seats. Within two decades, if SSTs develop, we'll come full circle again. Though maybe with changes. Who can tell. Today's flat beds are not like the beds in earliest Pan Am.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
April 6th, 2017 at 9:22:07 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 303
Posts: 10218
Quote: Aussie
There is no way to enter this area short of illegally breaking into the maze of areas off limits to the public and somehow avoiding detection.


Thanks.

In 2001, Clarke says things can be made fool-proof, but that one can never guard fully against malice. I think he underestimated the ingenuity of human stupidity.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
April 19th, 2017 at 5:04:46 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 303
Posts: 10218
Interjet received their first A320 neo. It arrived at Toluca to a traditional water cannon salute.

They missed out on publicity, though, as their the third airline to get a neo (Volaris and Viva got there first).

According to Airways News, it's one of four ordered, and it will come with individual seat-back screens. This is a first for the company, and, I can't help but think, a little late.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.