777 Over the Pole!

[777_Driver]

08 Aug 2000 Shipping Times
Continental to fly NY-HK non-stop
Mr Grizzle: Continental's senior vice-president of corporate development said flights using Boeing 777 aircraft will begin in March next year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[HOUSTON] Continental Airlines Inc, the No 5 US carrier, plans to begin the first non-stop flights between New York and Hongkong, cutting three hours off the trip.

Beginning March 1 next year, a Boeing 777 will leave Newark International Airport on 16-1/2-hour Flight 99 at 11 am and will arrive at Hongkong Chek Lap Kok International Airport at 4.30 pm local time the next day. The 15-hour, 40-minute, return Flight 98 will leave Hongkong at 12.45 pm and arrive in the New York area at 3.25 pm the same day.

Hongkong is the biggest market without direct service with New York, Continental chairman and chief executive Gordon Bethune said in a statement. He said that customers prefer non-stop flights. The airline added a second non-stop flight between Newark and Tel Aviv in June, also using a 283-seat Boeing 777.

The company will use its 16 Boeing 777-224-ER planes for the 8,438-mile flight, Continental spokeswoman Sarah Anthony said. The route will be the longest non-stop service by any US carrier and the longest from the New York area. The airline needs permission from countries such as China, Russia and Mongolia to fly in their airspace on the New York-Hongkong route, Ms Anthony said. -- Bloomberg


Shame CX cant see the potential of these great planes - seems they are not politically correct here! http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

[H721]

New York Newark is a bit off-track but this New Jersey airport is still close to New York City.

The CO B777 will sit in Hong Kong for 8 hours - her well earned rest after such long duty I guess.

------------------
Not much of an engineer

[AvionX]

At least Continental is using the full potential/capabilities of the B777!

[BUSDRVR]

That is 207 minute ETOPS and enough polar radiation to fry the big balls of the pilots that far from an adequate ( sorry, suitable airfield)

CX has already countered the proposal to look at the route with a 340

[Captain Krono]

As Boeing said to CX thre years ago : All you need is the 777 family.

I would suggest 777, 767-400ER and 747-400X

[Thrust]

Parts of the route would be uncomfortable enough to have to fly on 3 engines! It's a good job that the front end pax hardly ever look out the windows and count engines .... wouldn't know the difference anyway.

[Wahfu]

Hate to be a party pooper but just rue the day when one of those twin engine beasties has to make an emergency landing somewhere in the Arctic!

Pax (and crew) survival could be a wee problem; dollars to a brick the route would be dropped before you could say "Jack Robinson" Think I'd rather take my chances bobbing around in a raft in the Pacific!

[mole]

CO have been flying NYC to NRT with a 777 for quite some time now. How different will this new routing be with regard to proximity of "suitable" airfields? I'm not familiar with that part of the world. From the accountants point of view this has to be the right A/C for the route. A much higher payload than the 340 which CX is currently considering. As someone else has said do the pax know (or even care) how many engines are on the wing? Ticket price will be the deciding factor, together with convenience of schedule. CX may have misjudged the potential of this route and will now lose out by not having announced a service before CO did. Still what's new? These days we tend to follow rather than lead.

[fcit]

Mole,
as for the NRT leg there isn't such a major difference reference the alternate airfields. I guess with a little bit of luck you would be able to stay within 180min ETOPS.
On the Canadian side we look at airfield like Thule AB and some airports up in Northern Canada. Since economics will probably lead CO via Polar 2, looking at Northern Norway/Sweden might offer some airfields there to (there was even talk to expand some airport in Sweden to serve this specific purpose).
In addition, the Russians are working really hard to get their airports up to speed. Looking at the Russian AIP reveals a new aerodrome in northern Russia every AIRAC cicle or so. All the trip reports (AA already tried the 777) reavealed that com was O.K.. After all the Russians are looking at big $$$, in case this effort is going to start.

Cheers
fcit

Personally, I'd be happier going that way, than flying the SOPAC routes to Oz or NZ (at least there is some solid mass to land on in case something goes wrong!)

[beeforchicken]

We have really missed the boat on this subject. AA 777 here recently preparing to take over. Last week spoke to some UA 777 pilots getting etops approval and lining up ready to pounce.(in Taipei) and now CO! Either we are about to announce something or .........you know the story.

[SOLO]

United has local based Cabin Crew. All are 777 qualified... You do the maths.

[CCA]

United will follow in Continental Airlines' footsteps when it inaugurates
daily nonstop service between New York and Hong Kong next April 1. The
service will be operated with 747-400s from JFK while Continental will fly
777-200s from its Newark hub. UA says its flights will be the longest
nonstop passenger service by a US airline, surpassing CO's by 2 mi.--7,339
nm to 7,337 nm.

[Thrust]

At the recent commercial brief the idiots up front said they have done the math and Continental will not make any money on the route. They can't see the 777 optionlasting for long.

Perhaps they envisage an a/c change when the correct airframe comes into the picture. Also mentioned was the ETOPS approval had not yet been granted that they require to fly the route. I see that a NOTAM is now out that prevents UHPP from being used as an on-route airfield. Obviously the Russians will need to come to the party to allow their airfields to be used for ETOPS planning.

As far as providing an alternative to the high yield pax that may choose Continental over CX we seem to have that in hand. Twice daily at least 3 times per week to New York with at least 3 flights direct via the polar radiation route. A340...no ETOPS required.

What's the problem?