From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Terrell D. Drinkard) Organization: Boeing Date: 31 Mar 93 01:14:47 PST References: 1 2 3 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1993.270@ohare.Chicago.COM> spagiola@FRI-nxt-Pagiola.Stanford.EDU (Stefano Pagiola) writes: >Karl Swartz writes >> >a 757 is still a narrow body, and a narrow body configuration for >> >long haul operations will simply irritate airline passengers! Not if they are configured appropriately. A three-class, international flag carrier configuration is about 155 seats. Pretty cush all things considered. >> The 757 already operates some pretty long routes, including trans- >> Atlantic charters and U.S. to Hawaii. In choosing to operate the >> 757 on the latter routes, United noted that most of the traffic >> would be vacation travellers who were more interested in low >> fares than in comfort -- United's DC-8s served well on these >> routes until quite recently. UAL retired their DC-8s December of '91, if memory serves. >Yes, the 757 has some pretty long routes, and few people are happy >about that. The latest issue of Frequent Flyer (the magazine that >comes with the pocket OAG) had a long article complaining about the >use of 757s on long routes. >757s might work on routes like mainland-Hawaii where, as you note, >people place price over comfort, but I suspect that on most routes >widebodies would have a competitive edge. Widebodies like the 767 do have a competitive edge in terms of passenger preference, but not in operating economics. Twin-engined, single-aisle aircraft will be seen more and more on these longer routes simply because they offer less risk to the carrier - in financial terms if nothing else. And given the current economic conditions, financial considerations outweigh just about any other consideration. -- Terry email@example.com "Anyone who thinks they can hold the company responsible for what I say has more lawyers than sense."