Yet another aviation thread.

Quote: Nareed

.. deregulation was entirely an American thing.

Jimmy Carter deregulated the US airlines on October 24, 1978. Southwest Airlines commenced operations on June 18, 1971. Deregulation allowed airlines to compete with the automobile for intercity trips.

Quote: Early History Mexican Airlines

The first well established Mexican airline, Compañía Mexicana de Aviación (Mexicana), started operations as early as 1924 and was joined by Aeronaves de México (Aeroméxico) in 1934. These two airlines hoovered up all competition, with Aeroméxico coming under increasing government ownership from 1952. This effective duopoly was only changed when in 1982 the Government also took control of Mexicana creating a monopoly; although both carriers retained their own separate identities.

By 1988 the two large airlines held about 90% of the market share with only a few small operators, like Aero California and Aerocaribe, providing alternatives. Chronic mismanagement led Aeroméxico into bankruptcy in April 1988 although the carrier was privatised and reborn as Aerovías de México, S.A. de C.V. later in the year. The new Aeroméxico was profitable again by 1990.

From what I can gather there was hardly any domestic operations in Mexico in 1978.

Quote: Pacomartin

From what I can gather there was hardly any domestic operations in Mexico in 1978.

I'm trying to decipher what that's supposed to mean.

By 1978, Aeromexico was the government's airline, and mexicana the private one. There wasn't any other competition that I know of. But both operated extensive domestic networks. In fact, the duopoly was the only means of domestic air travel.

Quote: Nareed

I'm trying to decipher what that's supposed to mean.

In the USA the Civil Aeronautics Board set fares and interstate routes for all US airlines.

i meant in Mexico there was so little competition as there were only tiny airlines outside of the duopoly that there was no one to regulate.

Quote: Pacomartin

i meant in Mexico there was so little competition as there were only tiny airlines outside of the duopoly that there was no one to regulate.

There was the duopoly, and there were foreign airlines.

The "big" news of the week:

1) Singapore has returned the first of its A380s to the lessor, and plans to return more. apparently there are no takers for used VLAs, and the planes might be broken up for parts.

2) Hi-fly, a wet-lessor (leases planes along with crews to operate them), announced it will acquire two used A380s, presumably some of Singapore's discards. So you may want to check assumptions on point 1).

3) Qantas has dared Boeing and Airbus to come up with a plane that can handle Sydney-London non-stop. The estimated block time would be 20 hours. Currently the block time, with one stop to refuel, is 24 hours.

It seems to me passengers in first and business class might want a shorter flight, while those in economy (including premium economy) might be driven to mayhem after 20 hours cooped up in an airplane.

4) Delta appears to be planning to use the C-Series airplane as a kind of short-haul 787. That is, for thin longish routes. So it won't be a regional jet, and I assume it will go on the mainline fleet (but who knows these days). I expect increased demand for the type if Delta makes a pile of cash with this strategy (and a short life for the type, and for Bombardier, if it doesn't).

AFAIK Airbus only began developing the four engine jet with the A340 (first flight 25 October 1991), which was not much earlier than the first flight of the Boeing 777 (June 12, 1994). The peak number of deliveries of the B747 was 70 planes in 1990. So it is interesting that Boeing began to move towards twin engines while Airbus began to move to four engine aircraft at about the same time.

The two ultra long range aircraft developed around the year 2000 were the A340-500 (34 sold) and the B777-200LR (59 sold)

The Boeing 777-200LR current record distances ares
9,507 miles Delhi to San Francisco Air India unofficial record since it is not a great circle distance, but takes advantage of tail winds one direction only
9,025 miles Auckland to Doha on Qatar Airways
------
9,535 miles Newark to Singapore onSingapore Airlines is the now discontinued record great circle distance on the A340-500
9,009 miles Perth to London on Qantas Airlines is being planned for 2018 on a Dreamling B787-9

Quote: Nareed

Qantas has dared Boeing and Airbus to come up with a plane that can handle Sydney-London non-stop. The estimated block time would be 20 hours. Currently the block time, with one stop to refuel, is 24 hours.

That is an interesting comment, because it is unlikely that Airbus and Boeing are going to make the mistake of developing an Ultra Long Range Aircraft that sells in such small numbers like the two previous attempts. The only way to guarantee sales is to give the plane the capacity to fly from Sydney to JFK, ORD, London, Frankfurt and Paris. Sydney is the only one of the 50 largest airports in the world in the Southern Hemisphere, although Singapore is very close to the equator.

The ultra-long range A350-900ULR MTOW will be increased to 280 tonnes and its fuel capacity from 141,000 litres to 165,000 litres within existing fuel tanks to enable up to 19-hour flights, or up to about 9,700 nautical miles (17,960 km or 11,162 statute miles). The launch customer Singapore Airlines ordered seven aircraft, and will use these for non-stop flights from Singapore to New York and cities on the U.S. West Coast. Seating is reduced from 300 seats in Singapore Airlines standard A350 configuration to seat 170 mainly business class.

That should be able to fly from Sydney to London or Sydney to JFK. Sydney to London is 9,200 nautical miles and Sydney to JFK is 8660 nautical miles ( 9963 statute miles). So the A350-900 ULR should be able to make that distance even accounting for bad weather days. Qantas has not ordered any A350-900ULRs as of today. So the dare is really for Boeing to develop a competitor so that Qantas will have a choice.

My understanding is that Qantas want something that can make the trip with a full load. IE without having a configuration that significantly reduces pax numbers. Don't think that is possible currently although happy to stand corrected.

Quote: Aussie

My understanding is that Qantas want something that can make the trip with a full load. IE without having a configuration that significantly reduces pax numbers. Don't think that is possible currently although happy to stand corrected.

You are probably correct.

Normal seating on the A350-900 is from 253 to 343 depending on the airline.

42 Business 187 Economy 24 Premium Economy - Singapore Airlines : 253
46 Business 208 Economy 43 Economy Comfort - Finnair: 296
29 Business 231 Economy 45 Premium Economy -Vietnam Air: 305
48 Business 224 Economy 21 Premium Economy - Lufthansa V1 :293
36 Business 262 Economy 21 Premium Economy - Lufthansa V2 :319
30 Business 313 Economy - Ethiopian Airlines: 343

Singapore Airlines ordered seven A350-900 Ultra Long Range aircraft, and will use these for non-stop flights from Singapore to New York and cities on the U.S. West Coast. Seating is reduced to 170 seats mainly business class.

I am not sure how much of that reduction from 253 seats to 170 seats by Singapore Airlines is marketing, and how much is to reduce the load.

Qantas doesn't have as indulgent a configuration as Singapore Airlines
Airbus A330-200 (332) Domestic/Intl V1
Seats:28 Business 243 Economy
Airbus A330-200 (332) Intl V2
Seats:36 Business 199 Economy
Airbus A330-300 (333)
Seats:28 Business 269 Economy
Boeing 787-9 (789)
Seats:42 Business 166 Economy 28 Premium Economy

I'm sure there is a market for 20+ hrs non-stop flights but for me even in business or first it would be stretching it. I was lucky enough to be in Qantas first from MEL-LAX last year and by the end of it I was pretty keen to hop off. That was only 14hrs. I reckon after 20 I'd be just about pulling my hair out. I will be more than happy to transit in HK/Singapore/Dubai on the way to Europe and either HK/LAX/SFO/DFW if I'm ever headed to the east coast as an initial US destination.

Here is a recent discussion and poll on the subject on a frequent flyer forum I participate in:

http://www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au/community/qantas-frequent-flyer-program/would-you-book-20-hour-84638.html

Quote: Aussie

I'm sure there is a market for 20+ hrs non-stop flights

According to Wikipedia, Air India is already over 18 hours
18:10 - 18:45 Delhi - San Francisco on Air India (8 First 35 Business 195 Economy)
17:30 - 17:40 Doha - Auckland on Qatar Airways (0 First 42 Business 217 Economy)
16:50 - 17:10 Sydney - Dallas on Qantas (14 First 64 Business 371 Economy 35 Premium Economy)
16:25 - 17:25 San Francisco - Singapore on United Airlines (48 Polaris 116 Economy 88 Economy Plus)

Qantas claims that flying to Texas instead of California reduces transfer time and gives more options to the Midwest and East coast.

Personally, I have never flown a single segment over 6000 miles. The furthest I've flown in one segment is:
5920 miles Los Angeles Intl, Los Angeles, CA (LAX) to Zurich Airport, Zurich, CH (ZRH)

But as the flight from Sydney to Dallas seems to be a popular one at 17 hours, I can't much see that adding a few more hours is so much more painful that you would rather add the extra delay time of a stopover.