Yet another aviation thread.

January 26th, 2016 at 8:46:46 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Quote: Nareed
also, Korean Airlines (Korean Air??) packs under 500 passengers, if memory serves, on their A380. Partly this is due to the presence of a duty-free shop in the back of economy on the lower deck. I've seen pictures. It turns out Korean makes a great deal of money from duty-free sales onboard.


Korean Air @ 407 seats is only slightly under Singapore Airlines one of four configurations @409 seats.

Air France @ 516 seats is configuration they fly to Mexico City. I think they have successfully completed 6 flights. The return is at 10:40 PM to Paris. In March they will begin daily flights on the A380.

She is taxiing at this moment to return to Paris.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/AFR439


Charles de Gaulle/Roissy (LFPG / CDG) Lic. Benito Juarez Int'l (MMMX / MEX)
28-Jan-2016 A388 01:30PM CET 06:40PM CST Scheduled
26-Jan-2016 A388/Q 01:30PM CET 08:06PM CST 13:36
23-Jan-2016 A388/Q 01:30PM CET 06:51PM CST 12:21
21-Jan-2016 A388/Q 03:00PM CET 07:38PM CST 11:38
19-Jan-2016 A388/Q 01:30PM CET 06:33PM CST 12:03
16-Jan-2016 A388/Q 01:30PM CET 07:00PM CST 12:30
14-Jan-2016 A388/Q 01:30PM CET 07:03PM CST 12:33
January 27th, 2016 at 7:00:25 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 301
Posts: 9766
Quote: Pacomartin
Allegiant doesn't let you take the dog out either.


That is really hard on the dog.

The last dog I had, M, could be alone for some hours without problems. When being near family but not with them, she did suffer. Put her in a stressful environment like a plane, with noise, pressure changes, turbulence, dry air, etc., and have her near you but not with you, she'd go nuts.

I've never traveled with a pet, though. The farthest I recall driving mine was to a park about 5 km away, and to the vet a somewhat longer distance.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
January 27th, 2016 at 8:04:23 AM permalink
DRich
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 18
Posts: 597
Quote: Pacomartin
Allegiant does not offer the option of packing a heavier sedated dog as cargo.



I believe I read that only one American carrier still permits shipping animals in the hold. The article I read was a few months ago when the second to last carrier, Delta I think, decided they would no longer take animals other than service animals.
January 27th, 2016 at 9:34:02 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 301
Posts: 9766
Back on sort of topic, assuming the aisle in a narrow body is as wide as a seat, the mid-haul travel now common in these planes could be greatly improved by making the aisle as wide as 1.5 seats.

This does mean widening the fuselage as well, which means adding a great deal of area volume and weight, I'm familiar with the cube law. Here let's focus on the square law.

The added area would allow for faster boarding and de-boarding. You could squeeze past passenger making use of the overhead bins. You could squeeze past the service carts, too. And at the back and front by the galleys, there's be a bit more room for hanging around.

I see this as very important because these planes are undertaking ever longer flights. Designing the next-next generation, which ought to be crazy efficient, with a better passenger experience, will allow them to undertake even longer routes, say of 6-8 hours easily.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
January 27th, 2016 at 10:32:37 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Quote: Nareed
Back on sort of topic, assuming the aisle in a narrow body is as wide as a seat, the mid-haul travel now common in these planes could be greatly improved by making the aisle as wide as 1.5 seats.


Now you are talking about the British Air configuration of only 24 seats that flies from JFK to London City airport.


London City Airport is 3 miles from the Canary Wharf business district and 12 minutes by Docklands Light Rail (DLR).There are no steps on the DLR.
DLR Station
00:00 London City Airport
00:02 Pontoon Dock
00:03 West Silvertown
00:06 Canning Town
00:08 East India
00:10 Blackwall
00:12 Poplar

While that configuration is a banker's express and is fairly expensive, you should be able to have a 3-2 configuration with a wide aisle and with a lot of leg room that will make crossing the Atlantic much more comfortable in a smaller plane.

4370 statute miles
2987 statute miles Boston to Dubli (Boston is the American city with the highest percentage of Irish ancestry)
4389 statute miles Atlanta to Paris (Delta and Air France are Skyteam partners)
4421 statute miles Miami to Madrid (Iberia
January 27th, 2016 at 3:00:20 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 301
Posts: 9766
Quote: Pacomartin
Now you are talking about the British Air configuration of only 24 seats that flies from JFK to London City airport.


I'm thinking of a new type. Call it the 797 or the A390. The idea is just a wider aisle. If we occupied the full width with seats, within reason, instead of 7 for the current 737 and A320, you'd have 7.5

You'd add weight to the basic configuration, but you'd make it possible for longer flights where passengers could move around the cabin.

There hasn't been a new clean-slate narrow body design from the majors since the 80s.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
January 28th, 2016 at 7:50:29 AM permalink
DRich
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 18
Posts: 597
Nareed, I think you are just an aberration. The majority of consumers would choose to be uncomfortable for a four hour flight as opposed to paying an extra $20.
January 28th, 2016 at 8:11:29 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 301
Posts: 9766
Quote: DRich
Nareed, I think you are just an aberration. The majority of consumers would choose to be uncomfortable for a four hour flight as opposed to paying an extra $20.


I know I am.

But I'm in good company.

I first heard of the twin aisle narrow body a few months ago, when reading about the Boeing 7J7. Just recently I found late last decade Boeing was thinking of a New Small Plane to replace the 737, and the favored idea was a twin aisle narrow body modeled on the 787.

Alas, they wound up copying Airbus and re-engining (not a real word) an existing design with some modifications. In other words, the 737-MAX, which BTW should have its first flight tomorrow.

Do you know the 737 basic design is over 50 years old?

But here's my concern:

Narrow bodies are used to ferry more people for longer distances than before. We're getting to where an A321neo or a 737-MAX9 could ferry 200 people for six hours. This is 757 territory, without the room afforded by the 757, not to mention ever less legroom and pitch.

As Paco notes, an A318 is used for transatlantic flights in an all-business class configuration. That's nice. But the same trip in an all-economy setup with 200 people, or a two-class setup with, oh, 180 passengers, takes on nightmarish connotations for all of us in the "back" of the plane (the "back" is everything that's not first or business class, even "premium" economy).
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
January 28th, 2016 at 5:48:01 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 636
Posts: 7249
Quote: Nareed
As Paco notes, an A318 is used for transatlantic flights in an all-business class configuration. That's nice. But the same trip in an all-economy setup with 200 people, or a two-class setup with, oh, 180 passengers, takes on nightmarish connotations for all of us in the "back" of the plane (the "back" is everything that's not first or business class, even "premium" economy).



Southwest begins its first regularly schedule nonstop transcontinental flights with service between BWI and LAX September 15, 2002. They used the same plane that they had been using for almost 5 years, a Boeing 737-700 configured with 24 rows, 6 across (less 1 seat by exit row), and a 31" pitch by 17" wide seat. They are still flying all 475 of that model today with the oldest being just over 18 years old (one was retired after it was damaged beyond repair on 22. Jul 2013 at LGA when landed nose gear first, causing it to collapse under strain).

At the time there some considerable skepticism that Southwest would be able to compete in the transcontinental market with the same plane configurations. It took until 2012 when Southwest introduced some B737-800s with an extra 1"-2" of pitch (same width) plus 32 more seats. I assume the B737-800 is now the preferred airframe for transcontinental flights. But the bottom line is that they were very successful for those ten years before the new plane.

Now you could argue that the nonstop saved you 130 miles, and the 90 minutes to land and take off in Southwest's home airport of Dallas (DAL) so you it was probably less painful. Southwest is going to be the launch customer of the Boeing 737 MAX 8 in 2017 that should be able to fly from BWI to Dublin.

2450 miles Baltimore Washington Intl Arpt, Baltimore, MD (BWI) to Dallas, TX (DAL) to Los Angeles Intl, Los Angeles, CA (LAX)
2320 miles Baltimore Washington Intl Arpt, Baltimore, MD (BWI) to Los Angeles Intl, Los Angeles, CA (LAX)
2447 miles Baltimore Washington Intl Arpt, Baltimore, MD (BWI) to Oakland (OAK) is still the longest daily Southwest flight .
3350 miles Baltimore Washington Intl Arpt, Baltimore, MD (BWI) to Dublin Arpt, Dublin, IE (DUB)

So far Southwest has given no indication that they intend to compete in the transatlantic market, but even if they did , I am willing to bet they won't do anything more elaborate than removing one row (6 seats) to give customers an extra 1" of pitch as a concession to the longer distance. I doubt they would remove 29-30 seats to give more width and a more useful aisle.
January 28th, 2016 at 6:24:27 PM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 301
Posts: 9766
Quote: Pacomartin
At the time there some considerable skepticism that Southwest would be able to compete in the transcontinental market with the same plane configurations.


I believe at the time the "legacy" carriers still used wide bodies and the 757 as the main work horses for transcontinental travel. Using a 737 would have seemed at least quixotic.


Quote:
So far Southwest has given no indication that they intend to compete in the transatlantic market, but even if they did , I am willing to bet they won't do anything more elaborate than removing one row (6 seats) to give customers an extra 1" of pitch as a concession to the longer distance. I doubt they would remove 29-30 seats to give more width and a more useful aisle.


Yes, I agree that's what they'd do (if they do that much).

And that's why we need to make narrow bodies with a bit more room built-in.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.