I found this on you tube, this is pretty cool......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASHEiPjMrwo
Dan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASHEiPjMrwo
Dan
America West 747 commercial
- Thread starter InternationalDan
- Start date
Dont call me Shirley
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,270
- 306
How long the the 747 last? I remember HP 747s providing lift for the first Iraq war, I don't think they saw much service after that. While 747 venture was not successful, it must have been an exciting thing indeed at HP, which was only seven years old at the time
While I knew the planes came from KLM, I did not know that one of was KL's first 747, PH-BUA. Here is its fate at Kingman, AZ:
While I knew the planes came from KLM, I did not know that one of was KL's first 747, PH-BUA. Here is its fate at Kingman, AZ:
Attachments
notquiteUS
Member
Isn't this an obvious hint that (in the future) US will operate some 748s
Jester
Veteran
America West's foray into trans-pacific B747 flights arguably must have been one of the dumbest management ideas in the airline industry, especially as the company never operated a wide body aircraft before and all the international experience was limited to Mexico and Canada!
How much O&D traffic was there from Japan to PHX? Probably not all that much.
Was there a lack of air service from Japan to larger markets in SFO and LAX? Plenty of service.
Why was Nagoya (NGO) choosen over Narita (NRT)? Was not a matter of choice, but a failure to secure landing rights into NRT, so being too late to cancel plans, NGO was the alternative.
What was the appeal for a business traveler to make a stop in Hawaii before continuing on to a secondary airport of choice as NGO? Absolutely nothing.
What was the financial impact of four, fuel guzzling B747-200s, flying near empty during a recession and the first Gulf War? Pushed the company bankruptcy.
For those who understandably complain about the Tempe boys, the West people have not forgotten both Ed Beauvais and Mike Conway who made that decision along with other brilliant management decisions as in an attempt to open an east coast hub in CMH right in the middle of DL's CVG, CO's CLE, US's PIT, and arguably UA's ORD and NW's DTW, should realize that things could be worse.
So Recalls Jester.
How much O&D traffic was there from Japan to PHX? Probably not all that much.
Was there a lack of air service from Japan to larger markets in SFO and LAX? Plenty of service.
Why was Nagoya (NGO) choosen over Narita (NRT)? Was not a matter of choice, but a failure to secure landing rights into NRT, so being too late to cancel plans, NGO was the alternative.
What was the appeal for a business traveler to make a stop in Hawaii before continuing on to a secondary airport of choice as NGO? Absolutely nothing.
What was the financial impact of four, fuel guzzling B747-200s, flying near empty during a recession and the first Gulf War? Pushed the company bankruptcy.
For those who understandably complain about the Tempe boys, the West people have not forgotten both Ed Beauvais and Mike Conway who made that decision along with other brilliant management decisions as in an attempt to open an east coast hub in CMH right in the middle of DL's CVG, CO's CLE, US's PIT, and arguably UA's ORD and NW's DTW, should realize that things could be worse.
So Recalls Jester.
HPearlyretiree
Veteran
- Nov 6, 2002
- 1,880
- 1,614
The machines were pretty old, had lots of cycles. But, the three class service was great. I non rev'ed several HNL trips in business in the upper deck and did one trip up front in F. Of course, the most fun was going PHX-LAS on a 747, not much time to serve the passengers. After all 4 planes were gone, we wet leased ATA with their wonderful old L1011's which was fun as well. We also had NW fly LAS-HNL on a DC-10 for us. I remember flying on a nearly empty flight from LAS on the 747, leaving at 0100, and landing around 0500, great way to travel.
The plan was Tokyo, then SYD, but CO got SYD (and then dropped it). The flights from PHX/LAS to HNL were nearly always full. NGO could be empty or full, depended on season. The route was sold to NW.
Ill advised aircraft, but we could have got stuck with the MD11.
Sound analogousThe machines were pretty old, had lots of cycles. But, the three class service was great. I non rev'ed several HNL trips in business in the upper deck and did one trip up front in F. Of course, the most fun was going PHX-LAS on a 747, not much time to serve the passengers. After all 4 planes were gone, we wet leased ATA with their wonderful old L1011's which was fun as well. We also had NW fly LAS-HNL on a DC-10 for us. I remember flying on a nearly empty flight from LAS on the 747, leaving at 0100, and landing around 0500, great way to travel.
The plan was Tokyo, then SYD, but CO got SYD (and then dropped it). The flights from PHX/LAS to HNL were nearly always full. NGO could be empty or full, depended on season. The route was sold to NW.
Ill advised aircraft, but we could have got stuck with the MD11.
The Tokyo bid was a huge embarrassment. The proposal had all the flight times to coincide with connections at HNL and ultimately, PHX. However, the arrival and departures were right in the middle of curfew times for NRT. CO was awarded the slot.The machines were pretty old, had lots of cycles. But, the three class service was great. I non rev'ed several HNL trips in business in the upper deck and did one trip up front in F. Of course, the most fun was going PHX-LAS on a 747, not much time to serve the passengers. After all 4 planes were gone, we wet leased ATA with their wonderful old L1011's which was fun as well. We also had NW fly LAS-HNL on a DC-10 for us. I remember flying on a nearly empty flight from LAS on the 747, leaving at 0100, and landing around 0500, great way to travel.
The plan was Tokyo, then SYD, but CO got SYD (and then dropped it). The flights from PHX/LAS to HNL were nearly always full. NGO could be empty or full, depended on season. The route was sold to NW.
Ill advised aircraft, but we could have got stuck with the MD11.
Dont call me Shirley
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,270
- 306
HPearlyretiree
Veteran
- Nov 6, 2002
- 1,880
- 1,614
I know that one of them went and Haj charters for a while. When we had only one left, I got stuck in HNL after the gear doors wouldn't close, I got out the next day on Phillipine Airlines to LAX (and was able to round up some non rev's and get them home), but the plane was MX for 4 days. The planes were crap, but the service was great (at least the initial service, before they shrunk business class).
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
ChockJockey
Veteran
- Dec 18, 2008
- 1,393
- 1,350
I can only guess at the boiling multitude of underlying issues that fuel your many posts and creepy obsession with US Airways management.
Yep they did it to the east as well HP style
HPearlyretiree
Veteran
- Nov 6, 2002
- 1,880
- 1,614
StewGuy86
Senior
Probably right up there with Business Select at US back in the 90s.
Dont call me Shirley
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,270
- 306
The idea of Business Select was a fine one; for several reasons it did not work.
The idea behind it was to give full fare and /or elite FF level customers a better main cabin travel product. It recognized the sillyness of giving the same service level and seat comfort to the Kettles paying $49 as to the VFFs paying $499. European carriers have had the concept for years, with some phasing out the F/C cabin on short/medium flights in favor of an enhanced "business coach". Some carriers simply have a movable cabin divder or curtain. The Kettles sit behind it and get no free meal and booze, in front of the curtain the food is better and booze free. Some do have better seat pitch near the front. I think BA has (or had) seats that are changable from three to two across. A couple (don't remember which) simply block the center seat in the front. A good idea and has worked there.
But Business Select at US was indeed a flop, even if concept worked for the likes of LH and BA. It's been like 15 years, but IIRC a big problem was inconsistency across fleet types.; it was offered only the 737-200, I think. It didn't help that the flexible seats kept breaking, either. Yup, it would cost a lot more money to have made it fleet wide, but the availbility of B/S (there is an abbreviation for ya!) would not have varied by aircraft type and caused confusion.
As I remember, the marketing was less than successful.
I'm sure someone with a better memory can remember some of the other issues.
After it was withdrawn, USAir did respond to greater customer demand for a better product for road warrior by increasing the size of the F/C cabin fleetwide. Eight to twelve on the 733/734, four to eight on DC-9 and F100, 16 to 24 on the 757. Wow, making the F/C cabin bigger, rather than smaller. What a concept.
It's funny that WN now uses the "Business Select" name for its priorty boarding. Wonder if they had to pay US for rights to the name?
