CLT-FCO Non-stop?

[BoeingBoy]

Could someone please explain this logic???

Remember that you're talking about the FAA where logic is hard to find...

Jim

 

[gaucho99]

It is great that we are expanding our international presence. I'm still waiting for Buenos Aires...

Me too. I'm not sure what is holding us back here. Do we need to wait for slots to come available for Argentina? I had heard we already have authority to fly there, we just have not started. Maybe it's a lack of wide bodies.

 

[Travelpro72]

Twice That is such a FANTASTIC way of describing the situation. I absolutely LOVE, LOVE, LOVE it. BRAVO! ! ! !

 

[ebwgs]

I've gone through CLT and PHL customs and immigration and never had a problem with either one. Everyone talks about how bad it is in CLT but I haven't experienced those so-called "nebulous" horror stories of dealing with Barney Fife or whatever it is that people are saying about CLT. It's all the same to me.

Consider yourself lucky!

 

[Travelpro72]

Ok I did a trip last week that had an island turn from CLT. Ummmmm can we say I encountered the worst of the worst in immigration. She was baffled at how I was able to bring liquids through security. :blink: I was one lucky flight attendant that day and stepped up JUST as the red light came on for my "random" search. My bags were torn apart (literally thrown all over the table) and inspected by what had to be THE stupidest woman I have ever encountered in customs OR immigration. I mean MY Lord. I said, "You do realize that as a uniformed f/a I can carry liquids through". She said, "Well we can't so I don't know how YOU could". I looked at her like, "Are you new"? Meanwhile f/a's use the universal door in CLT. :blink: WOW! ! ! The more int'l flights they add in CLT they best do something about their customs and immigration facility while they wait for a new int'l terminal.

 

[Whatnow?]

Let me ask you this in a scenario............

I come on duty at midnight (for ALL purposes except for paying me perdium). If I try to pick up a trip on day number 7 I am told NO!!!!! You have been on duty for 6 days!!! OK!!!

Now...... Betty Sue with her 40 plus years signs in for her International trip at 5:00 pm. I have been ON DUTY NOW FOR 17 hours and she just checked in........

Now her flight is delayed due to a mechanical and/or returns to the gate..... WOW!!!! All of a sudden she is now illegal because she has been on duty too long!!!! Following me?

They call me out!!! WHY??????? I HAVE BEEN ON DUTY 17 HOURS BEFORE SHE EVER CHECKED IN!!!!!!!!!
Why am I still legal when I have been on duty since midnight (17 hours earlier) and she only came on at 5????

Could someone please explain this logic??? And don't try the "but you aren't actually working".... If that were true, why can't I pick up a trip on day 7 when I NEVER worked the 6 prior that I was on duty!!!

That baffles me.....especially in your scenario when say it's a TLV flight that has been re-crewed with reserves at midnight or 1AM now having to fly a 12 hour blocked flight....how is this possibly legal???

 

[VAflyGal]

That baffles me.....especially in your scenario when say it's a TLV flight that has been re-crewed with reserves at midnight or 1AM now having to fly a 12 hour blocked flight....how is this possibly legal???

1-800-255-1111. That's the FAA safety hotline. Go ahead. Call it. Then call it again, because *surprise* they won't call you back. Keep calling. Keep leaving messages. You can be anonymous. Squeaky wheels get the oil. This 24 hour rsv system is BS and until some safety crisis ensues, no one's gonna listen to us unless we keep on keepin' on with the fatigue reports and phone calls and letters to the FAA.

I'm going through CLT customs tomorrow. I will let you know how it goes. It's gone both ways for me in CLT.

 

[FutureUScapt]

Congratulations for the new service, guys. I don't know why US has not built up the CLT International service more before now. One of the reasons that our (AA) RDU-LHR service is so popular (and profitable) is because people have discovered the ease of clearing customs and immigration in an East Coast airport other than BOS, JFK, PHL, ATL, or MIA.

AA's RDU-LHR is profitable because pharmaceutical companies agree to pay for a certain number of seats in the premium cabin (more or less, a revenue guarantee).

I restate what I said when RIO was announced. I suspect US is preparing CLT for a merger with, or spin off to someone - like maybe AA. Of course it may also be for the purpose of US retaining CLT and downsizing PHL for a merger with UA. The latter speculation is based on the fact that in order for CLT-Europe to work, it requires significant connecting traffic - that is the US domestic network. IMO, it just seems financially illogical in this economic climate for US to maintain 2 international hubs less than 400 nm apart. Of course, IAD-CLT is even closer, but UA supposidly wants/needs a Southwest hub to better compete with ATL. I note that there are no announcements (or substantial rumors) regarding any additional services from PHL. I'm even more suspicious of this move since it was announced with a 333 and not as seasonal, which makes it difficult (for me) to accept that it is a "relief" for the PHL-FCO flight. FCO from PHL and NYC, with substancial Rome O&D, typically struggle during winter with this route. Now if they announced PHL-NRT with the higher MTOW 332s (potential 2010 deliveries), I might change my opinion.

I agree that it is a little odd that was announced as year-round; I disagree that it has the profound implications that you suggest. The "Intl downsizing" of PHL, while disappointing, is nothing major and I would expect to see MXP, and possibly ARN return at some point. What we're beginning to see is a change in US' transatlantic strategy from one that saw great seasonal fluctuations (more so than ANY other non-charter transatlantic carrier) to one that sees less changes from high to low season. While some seasonality is good as it allows planes to be deployed towards where the traffic is, too much seasonality begins to wreak havoc on network planning (typically because there aren't as many options in the N. American winter). Additionally, it's hard to win over corporate contracts when you're only flying to places on a seasonal basis.

As to GIG, it makes much more sense for it to be flown from CLT instead of PHL. Neither CLT nor PHL has an appreciable amount of O&D to support the flight, but CLT is a much better connecting point than PHL for S. America. Using CLT as a hub, US can probably pick up traffic headed to MCO or LAX (2 of the top 5 markets to GIG), but from PHL, the routing becomes noticeably more circuitous. While not a perfect example, DL/NW is using the same philosophy in regards to transpacific flights -- ATL is their "International Gateway," but DTW is able to offer more seamless/less circuitous connections.


[quote post='719016' date='Dec 4 2009, 12:25 PM']Maybe DUB will be next. I would love to have CLT-MAD! That would be great, not that I would be able to hold it but still...It is great that we are expanding our international presence. I'm still waiting for Buenos Aires...[/quote]

I don't know if I would hold my breath for EZE now that 8 A332s have been deferred. If US is able to win 7 more Brazilian frequencies so that they can fly CLT-GRU alongside CLT-GIG, then that will account for 8 out of 10 B767s. Assuming that one will be routed on a domestic/Caribbean routing as a spare, that leaves just one more free B767. EZE would require more than one plane, though the last B767 could be used on a CLT-MAD routing.

IMO, I would look for CLT-MAD, CLT-DUB, and possibly CLT-LIM in the future as the latter 2 can be flown with B757s.

 

[InternationalShannon]

Me and NoelNotRoss read that today in the paper while waiting at the urgent care to find out why my snot is radioactive looking. Guess who wants to XFER back to the Queen City now!! HA HA!!

Pretty soon I'll really be the Rome-ing Gnome!!!

Ciao!!!

 

[etops1]

MO, I would look for CLT-MAD, CLT-DUB, and possibly CLT-LIM in the future as the latter 2 can be flown with B757s.


BINGO!!

 

[nycbusdriver]

If US is able to win 7 more Brazilian frequencies so that they can fly CLT-GRU alongside CLT-GIG, then that will account for 8 out of 10 B767s.

?

'splain, please. (Show your work.)

 

[zethya]

...........
I agree that it is a little odd that was announced as year-round; I disagree that it has the profound implications that you suggest. The "Intl downsizing" of PHL, while disappointing, is nothing major and I would expect to see MXP, and possibly ARN return at some point. What we're beginning to see is a change in US' transatlantic strategy from one that saw great seasonal fluctuations (more so than ANY other non-charter transatlantic carrier) to one that sees less changes from high to low season. While some seasonality is good as it allows planes to be deployed towards where the traffic is, too much seasonality begins to wreak havoc on network planning (typically because there aren't as many options in the N. American winter). Additionally, it's hard to win over corporate contracts when you're only flying to places on a seasonal basis.

As to GIG, it makes much more sense for it to be flown from CLT instead of PHL. Neither CLT nor PHL has an appreciable amount of O&D to support the flight, but CLT is a much better connecting point than PHL for S. America. Using CLT as a hub, US can probably pick up traffic headed to MCO or LAX (2 of the top 5 markets to GIG), but from PHL, the routing becomes noticeably more circuitous. While not a perfect example, DL/NW is using the same philosophy in regards to transpacific flights -- ATL is their "International Gateway," but DTW is able to offer more seamless/less circuitous connections.............

Although I understand and appreciate your general points, I am unconvinced it supports the buildup at CLT versus PHL. I stand by my suspicion that the specifics associated with the buildup of CLT, coupled with the LGA/DCA DL deal is to prepare for a merger and/or segmented acquisition.

Regarding Brazil and CLT/PHL, I disagree with your position. Even though PHL has approximately 8 PDEWs to Rio versus CLT's 2, CLT is geographically in the middle of nowhere when compared to the NE metroplex. PHL is within mass transit and 1.5 hour's driving distance from the largest concentration of Brazilian Americans in the U.S.. The potential to attract O&D from the NYC/NJ metro area, based on offering lower fares than the competition out of JFK seems be reason enough to offer a PHL-Brazil non-stop. IMO, CLT-Brazil is going to likely result in 99% connecting (low Yield) traffic and has little potential to improve in that respect over time - unless US significantly increases its fares. I will say that CLT-Brazil has a better shot of working with the reduced range US 767-200 than PHL-Brazil, which would likely require a 332. Even though CLT-Brazil is near the end of the US 767 range envelope and only about 100nm closer than PHL-Brazil, CLT has better potential than PHL for short takeoff queueing times (less on ground fuel burn) and therefore less likely to require weight restrictions. Parker was wise in applying for PHL-CLT-GIG/GRU, rather than CLT-GIG as it will permit changing the route to PHL-GIG/GRU in the future if CLT doesn't perform - and US is still intact.

I really don't understand your point about MCO/LAX. Why would anyone normally flying between Brazil and Orlando or LAX do so via CLT, instead of MIA or ATL - other than for much cheaper fares? I speculate the CLT flight will live or die (after January/February), primarily based on stealing acceptable numbers of Southern based passengers from DL/ATL.

 

[cltflyer1]

This is yet another major anoucement for US at Clt. On other news Cdg will be year round but will at least right now be on a 762 during the winter.

 

[nycbusdriver]

This is yet another major anoucement for US at Clt. On other news Cdg will be year round but will at least right now be on a 762 during the winter.

Where did you see that CLT-CDG will be year round? When will it restart?

 

[cltflyer1]

it restarts on march 27 and its in the schedule for next november on the website as flight 786 operated by a 767.