Super cheap way to get to Europe

August 9th, 2016 at 8:29:30 PM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 48
Posts: 4308
Quote: Pacomartin
Obviously the mix is that which maximizes revenue and also is most likely to guarantee no cash flow problems. Most attempts at all business class have resulted in irregular flows of cash.
Strange. I thought 'business class' was the most profitable ticket to sell due largely to last minute purchases. I don't think it is as important to maximize revenue as to avoid flying negative flights. Fuel costs are the most sensitive factor.
August 9th, 2016 at 8:35:11 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 44
Posts: 4980
The cheapest way for me is to drive up to Montreal or Quebec City.
August 10th, 2016 at 6:43:40 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 312
Posts: 10510
Quote: Pacomartin
One would think that trains combined with fixed wing aircraft would be the cure-all, but Europe has now developed a high cost train system, and the low cost traveler has moved to the air.


You'd think rail would remain cheaper as it uses up less fuel and can pack lots more people in. I wonder what they've done wrong? Ok, there's a much bigger capital cost, but it gets spread out over decades.

Quote:
I am becoming increasingly convinced that "lighter than air" transport for up to 500 miles may be more effective than trains.


It might work if you can get lighter-than-air craft a great deal faster than they are. As it is, I think high-speed trains got them beat.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
August 10th, 2016 at 8:39:47 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 677
Posts: 7743
Quote: Nareed
It might work if you can get lighter-than-air craft a great deal faster than they are. As it is, I think high-speed trains got them beat.


http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120921-lighter-than-air-craft-rises

This BBC article cites 120 miles/hr for prototype.

The High Speed Ground Transportation Act of 1965 started a U.S. Government effort to develop a high speed train for Northeast Corridor service. The Metroliner service finally started on January 16, 1969. Top speed was 120 mph for the first couple of years and 100-110 mph during the 1970s.

Japan opened the world's first high-speed rail line, between Tokyo and Osaka, in time for the 1964 Olympics. The 320 mile Hikari run from Tokyo to Osaka took four hours in 1964; this was shortened to 3 hours 10 minutes in 1965. Now days they travel at speeds up to 185 miles per hour.

Italy is credited with Europe's first high-speed line, opening between between Rome and Florence in 1978. Common speeds for commuter trains are 150 miles per hour or more.

I am not suggest that LTA can exceed speeds of trains, and in fact will probably never exceed that of HSR in the 1970's. But LTA craft are faster than most automobile traffic, and they have no traffic jams. Vertical take off means that you can have ports in convenient places around the municipality

Here is traffic from the airport three miles from my house.
Top Destination Airports May 2015 - April 2016
31,000 Philadelphia, PA:PHL- 55 miles
36,000 Detroit, MI:DTW- 425 miles
49,000 Charlotte, NC:CLT - 481 miles
33,000 Chicago, IL:ORD- 654 miles
67,000 Atlanta, GA:ATL - 692 miles
52,000 Sanford, FL:SFB - 882 miles (full size narrow body planes)
Newark [Newark Liberty Intl], NJ: EWR - 67 miles (replaced with bus operated by United Airlines three times per day) 90 minutes each way

Because Newark is so crowded, they have replaced plane service with bus service three times per day. But Philadelphia airport still has 4-5 small planes per day flying the 55 miles. But Philadelphia is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to upgrade their runways. It is a severe strain on the major airports to have these short flights with tiny airplanes. Bus service covers the 67 air miles in 90 minutes (i.e. average of 45 mph).
August 10th, 2016 at 10:41:55 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 312
Posts: 10510
Quote: Pacomartin
I am not suggest that LTA can exceed speeds of trains, and in fact will probably never exceed that of HSR in the 1970's. But LTA craft are faster than most automobile traffic, and they have no traffic jams. Vertical take off means that you can have ports in convenient places around the municipality


They don't require runways, which is a plus. But they take up a lot of room, which is a problem. You could operate a few, say three at a time, from the middle of a busy metro area. But if you want dozens at a time, you'll need something more like an airport. A large open space at any rate.

The Mythbusters did a test measuring the total time driving and flying between two relatively nearby cities (I think SFO LAX). As I recall, they arrived to a specific spot in the destination city around the same time. A one time test proves nothing, but it would be interesting to compare train and air travel in the eastern seaboard long term, with delays and all. I suppose foul weather affects trains, too, but less so than planes.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
August 10th, 2016 at 12:17:09 PM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 48
Posts: 4308
Lighter than air is interesting for heavy lifting, disaster monitoring, etc.

Sure its nice to have an in-city heliport with nice quiet blimps but its not that much of an advantage to a traveler.

Trains are limited by tracks and signal systems, planes are limited only at landing time or when under ATC.

Airports with long runways are expensive and usually in the outer suburbs.
Airports with short runways are in-city but will have noise restrictions and runway length restrictions.

Small electric executive planes operated by various Uber and Fleet Floating firms are the way of the future.
August 11th, 2016 at 4:26:32 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 677
Posts: 7743
Quote: Nareed
Funny how we go from travel tips about cheap fares to thumb-sucking posts regarding the future of commercial aviation :)


It looks like you were right about the CS100 (the smaller passenger plane from Bombardier with nominal 108 seats). Odyssey Airlines is going to operate an all-business class (40 seat) configuration from London City Airport to New York and Toronto, and other European destinations starting in 2017.

CS100 orders
75 Delta Air Lines (option for 50 more)
15 Lufthansa
10 Gulf Air
10 Odyssey Airlines (British)
5 PrivatAir (Swiss)
5 Braathens Leasing Ltd. (Swedish)
3 Lease Corporation International (Ireland)
123 total

The CS300 with 130 seats that is expecting it's first delivery later this year, has 235 orders.
August 11th, 2016 at 4:39:48 AM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 677
Posts: 7743
Quote: Fleastiff
Small electric executive planes operated by various Uber and Fleet Floating firms are the way of the future.

You are not the only person who believes this statement.

I am looking at an old Allegiant Airline ticket that costs 9 cents per mile. Even with the 32% add on fees for luggage, trip insurance, and to use a credit card the price is 12 cents per mile.

A taxi is normally $2.25 per mile, and even if you have three people that is over 70 cents per mile. No matter what you expect for future advances in Uber executive electric planes, it will still cost more than an automobile.

While electric flying taxis may be an executive style transportation choice, they will never be a form of mass transit.

August 11th, 2016 at 5:24:29 AM permalink
Fleastiff
Member since: Oct 27, 2012
Threads: 48
Posts: 4308
One can not fly a private plane into Tokyo until there is proof of a parking space being available. Not all such airports are that extreme but aircraft parking is related to cost of operation. If one is allowed to engage in Fleet Floating planes do not automatically make any return trip or continuation flight. insufficient passengers for a profitable flight, don't fly. Cheap crew accommodations wherever they are. Once a sufficient number of passengers are available, fly it profitably. Load factor is always high, planes and pilots respond to local demands as needed: conventions, whims, weather, etc. Many corporations will buy standby fares such as the agreement the State of Florida has: Technicians, accountants, scientists, police evidence, etc. No matter who is flying, the state has a guaranteed low fare and the air taxi service will probably be able to sell the additional seats that are available.
August 11th, 2016 at 7:13:46 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 312
Posts: 10510
Quote: Pacomartin
It looks like you were right about the CS100 (the smaller passenger plane from Bombardier with nominal 108 seats). Odyssey Airlines is going to operate an all-business class (40 seat) configuration from London City Airport to New York and Toronto, and other European destinations starting in 2017.


Thank you. But my prediction was for Jet Blue to do that with an A320/1 in an all-Mint configuration.


Quote:
The CS300 with 130 seats that is expecting it's first delivery later this year, has 235 orders.


While reading this post, I wondered a bit what Interjet will do when they need to replace their Sukhoi regional jets. Then I realized I didn't wonder about what they'll replace the A320s with. Naturally with other A320s, either ceo or neo.

The narrow body market is pretty much limited to a type of A320 family or a type of 737 family. Perhaps the neo and MAX are different enough from the ceo and NG respectively that there are four types of planes, of varying sizes, but the pickings seem meager.

On regionals you have more manufacturers (Bombardier, Embraer, Sukhoi, COMAC, Mitsubishi, ATR), offering more types of planes.

No wonder more innovation is happening in the regional market.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.