Revenge of the Dreamliner

Page 1 of 41234>
June 11th, 2016 at 10:15:43 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 822
Posts: 9885
http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/blog/seat2B/2016/06/revenge-of-the-dreamliner-how-boeings-787-is.html
Revenge of the Dreamliner: How Boeing's 787 is changing travel Jun 9, 2016.

The above article is basically a very upbeat story about the Dreamliner's success. The author states, I'm amazed at how quickly the Boeing 787 has shaken off its shaky start and become a mainstay of global aviation. The plane is literally remaking the world's route map. Boeing says the 787 has pioneered at least 100 routes between cities that have never before had nonstop links. It thinks there might eventually be 400 such routes.
July 30th, 2016 at 12:18:40 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 822
Posts: 9885
At 431 Dreamliners delivered

787 Model Summary (orders-delivered=unfilled) through June 2016
787-8 431- 306 = 125
787-9 571- 125 = 446
787-10 153- zero = 153
787 Total 1155- 431 = 724


United has
12 Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner
16 Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner

American has
17 Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner

Delta made the decision to go with Airbus A350 which they may regret as that program now appears rocky.

Dreamliners have been delivered up through line number #438 and they are being produced at a rate of roughly 12 per month.

Aeroméxico has nine Boeing 787-8 Dreamliners. The orders for the last 4 Boeing 787-9 Dreamliners are line numbers #483, #502, #507, #541. At this point they will probably retire their four 12 year old Boeing 777-200s. As the Boeing 767s have already been retired, they will be an all Dreamliner widebody fleet probably within a year.
July 30th, 2016 at 5:12:32 PM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 54
Posts: 6035
There is an advantage to a "unified" fleet. One set of parts, one set of technicians, one set of maintenance manuals, one set of time estimates for inspections and repairs, pilot interchangeability, one set of flight simulators, one program of simulations.

Plus it seems the Dreamliner widebody is a good plane so Aeromexico made the right choice.
July 30th, 2016 at 5:19:06 PM permalink
terapined
Member since: Aug 6, 2014
Threads: 44
Posts: 3927
Quote: Fleastiff
There is an advantage to a "unified" fleet. One set of parts, one set of technicians, one set of maintenance manuals, one set of time estimates for inspections and repairs, pilot interchangeability, one set of flight simulators, one program of simulations.


Yup
That's Southwest Airlines advantage
Boeing 737 is all they fly
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own - Grateful Dead "Eyes of the World"
July 30th, 2016 at 6:03:49 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 822
Posts: 9885
Quote: Fleastiff
There is an advantage to a "unified" fleet. One set of parts, one set of technicians, one set of maintenance manuals, one set of time estimates for inspections and repairs, pilot interchangeability, one set of flight simulators, one program of simulations.


Jetblue broke the model established by SWA.

Jet Blue Fleet Matrix
130 Airbus A320~10.9 Years
30 Airbus A321~1.5 Years
60 Embraer ERJ-190~6.6 Years <========================


Quote: Fleastiff
Plus it seems the Dreamliner widebody is a good plane so Aeromexico made the right choice.


AeroMexico has always been loyal to Boeing / McDonnel Douglas.

Fleet history with widebodies
6 McDonnell Douglas DC-10 HISTORIC
16 Boeing 767 HISTORIC
4 Boeing 777 ~12.6 Years (TO BE RETIRED SHORTLY)
9 Boeing 787 Dreamliner~2.1 Years with 4 upcoming this year
August 1st, 2016 at 6:44:59 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 345
Posts: 12534
Quote: Pacomartin
AeroMexico has always been loyal to Boeing / McDonnel Douglas.


Aeromexico doesn't contract aircraft suppliers, it marries them.

In the 70s, 80s and part of the 90s, they had an all McDonnell Douglass fleet, with the DC-9 as the workhorse. I don't think they allowed Boeing in, until after it acquired McD. Then they switched to the 737 workhorse and added 767 and 777 and now 787 for long haul. The Embraer regional jets they also use, are nominally owned and operated by their subsidiary Aeromexico Connect.

Mexicana, on the other hand, was always more eclectic. in the 80s they operated largely B-727s, but also a handful of DC-10s. In the 90s they went with Airbus, acquiring A-318s/319s/320s/321s to replace the 727, but they used B-767s for long haul and Fokkers for regional routes.

On other things, according to Wikipedia, Interjet has 10 A321neos on order. I wonder what they plan to use them for. Possibly longer flights than they currently operate? their longest routes are to Lima and Bogota. I wonder how much farther the A321neo, especially the LR variant, would let them go.

There are quiet rumors going around that Jet Blue may be looking at JFK-LHR routes using the A321neo. I suppose Mint has much to do with it. They can offer a cheaper premium fare on transcontinental routes than the legacy airlines do, so it would make sense to offer that, as well as a cheaper coach fare, on transatlantic routes. Still, it's a 6+ hour flight. A long time to be cooped up inside a narrow body in coach.

The trend, it seems continues.
Donald Trump is a fucking liar
August 1st, 2016 at 9:37:32 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 822
Posts: 9885
Quote: Nareed
There are quiet rumors going around that Jet Blue may be looking at JFK-LHR routes using the A321neo. I suppose Mint has much to do with it. They can offer a cheaper premium fare on transcontinental routes than the legacy airlines do, so it would make sense to offer that, as well as a cheaper coach fare, on transatlantic routes. Still, it's a 6+ hour flight. A long time to be cooped up inside a narrow body in coach.


The fact that Jet Blue is considering TransAtlantic routes with the new A321neo is not really a quiet rumor.

I find it difficult to believe that Heathrow will welcome narrow bodies (other than those by British Airways or short flight to Ireland and Europe). They are extensively renovating the terminals, and they seem to want widebodies.

passengers per flight
142.9 Terminal 2 – Star Alliance (opened on 4 June 2014)
197.5 Terminal 3 – One World (Due to be demolished by 2019) Opened 1961
172.4 Terminal 4 – SkyTeam alliance (Opened in 1 April 1986)
153.4 Terminal 5 – British Airways (Opened 27 March 2008)

From Gatwick Norwegian Air Shuttle is flying Dreamliners to Boston, Fort Lauderdale, Las Vegas (begins 31 October 2016), Los Angeles, New York–JFK, Oakland, Orlando–International, San Juan
August 1st, 2016 at 11:03:02 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 345
Posts: 12534
Quote: Pacomartin
The fact that Jet Blue is considering TransAtlantic routes with the new A321neo is not really a quiet rumor.


It took me a while to pick it up :)

Quote:
I find it difficult to believe that Heathrow will welcome narrow bodies


Sure. I wouldn't even bet on Gatwick taking them. London City probably can't support an A321 for a long flight (I mean, for the famous banker's shuttle they require the far lighter A318!). That leaves the other one or two other airports in/around London. No idea whether any would do or be willing to take Jet Blue. Also no idea whether there's an airport close to London but nominally in another city.

Then, too, Jet Blue might up and choose some other destination for its transatlantic flights. The competition between NYC and London is fierce and the market is full. Maybe they'll go to an off-the-beaten-path place they think they can make money on.
Donald Trump is a fucking liar
August 1st, 2016 at 1:04:52 PM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 54
Posts: 6035
Quote: Nareed
The competition between NYC and London is fierce and the market is full. Maybe they'll go to an off-the-beaten-path place they think they can make money on.
Sure, but how many of their PASSENGERS will want to go to that off the beaten path the airline selects. The airport designator code is CPITMON. Sounds somewhat Scottish. SeePitMon. It stands for Cow Pasture In The Middle Of Nowhere. Perhaps those on the Bankers Special will switch and then take a nice long, but cheap shuttle by oxcart or something.
August 1st, 2016 at 4:22:10 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 822
Posts: 9885
Quote: Nareed
Sure. I wouldn't even bet on Gatwick taking them. London City probably can't support an A321 for a long flight (I mean, for the famous banker's shuttle they require the far lighter A318!). That leaves the other one or two other airports in/around London. No idea whether any would do or be willing to take Jet Blue. Also no idea whether there's an airport close to London but nominally in another city.


The A318 accommodates 107 passengers in a typical two-class cabin configuration or a maximum of 132. Fuel Capacity is 6,400 gallons. The plane couldn't come close to taking off with a full load of passengers from London City's 5000' runway. Even tiny John Wayne airport in Orange County CA has a 5700' runway.

The British Airway's "banker's shuttle" only can operate because it has only 32 lie flat seats, and on the East-West flight to JFK, it only takes off with enough fuel to get to Shannon Airport (391 miles) where it refuels to fly the 3000 miles to JFK.

In 1986 a United States border preclearance facility was opened at Shannon, eliminating the need to go through immigration on arrival in the United States. On one of the two flights to JFK they permit people to pass through US customs in Shannon airport so they don't have to be bothered in New York. The other flight arrives when the Customs office is closed.

So London City is out of possibility for a full size narrow body.

Airports that are considered London Area, but actually in other cities.
Stansted (30 miles | 10,000' runway|22.5 MAP) and Luton (29 miles | 7000' runway |12.2 MAP) are smaller airports with train service to London. Neither of them has trans-Atlantic service as of today.


LHR LCY 22 mi
LHR LTN 28 mi
LHR STN 41 mi
LCY SNN 391 mi
LHR DUB 280 mi
SNN JFK 3,081 mi
Page 1 of 41234>