The future of Long Haul - Opinions?.

[Butch 3,456]

Hi,

This is my fave sub forum, it yields the best information and has actively saved me money by heeding the advice from Goldpanner and others. I think we're all planespotters to some degree. Personally I'm fascinated by the level of engineering that goes into them.

 

As we've all been flying for a good number of years, I expect we've all seen the changes to Long Haul developing. I think it would be interested to have a discussion on where we see it developing from where we are to say in another 10 years.

 

The introduction of the 777-333 I think made a major impact on the way airlines operate, not as much as the advent of the 747 but still ,quite considerable. The long range, lightweight, efficient and advances in technology probably improved the profit margins for many operators and for some the 777 might have been the saving grace.

 

However, in the coming years I think we'll see an increase in passenger capacity at the sacrifice of comfort (EVA increasing their 777 fleet to 10 abreast in econ for example). More composite materials and structural improvements to airframes will see fuel burn decrease and tech improvements might see lighter materials being used in the plane, again saving fuel and increasing margins.

 

I even , honestly believe that it will come a time where pax are given discounts for being under their allowance in baggage over the default allowance (maybe when you buy the ticket for example you can opt for 20kg instead of 30). We might see the removal of meal services, or like BA have done, replace some items for cheaper alternatives.

 

Even perhaps the removal of IFE and instead pople offered to hire an Ipad for the journey with internet and pre programmed entetainment, removing the heavy IFE screens and boxes.

 

Lastly, a few questions:

 

Will direct services long haul remain at a relative premium?.

 

What will we see in the next generation of Airliners?.

 

Do you agree with my meandering thoughts above?.

 

Cheers

Butch

 

 

[too_mutt 10]

I think there might come a time when they ask seriously heavy pax to pay a surcharge.

The future is that of increasing non-stop flights as ranges increase with planes like the A350-900.

[nkped 1,208]

I have been seeing some of those changes/innovations with Alaska Airlines for several years. Their fleet is all 737s, but Alaska, despite the name, is not a regional carrier and they have transcontinental routes and flights to Hawaii so they do have 5 to 6 hour flights.

 

With 737s, they never had IFE but they do have tablets with preloaded movies for a fee. Also, with the advent of power outlets in every seat along with the ubiquity of tablets and even smart phones, a major share of passengers can bring their own entertainment.

 

For some years now, if you want to eat in economy on an Alaska flight, you pay for it with the flight attendant. Obviously, an 11 hour trans-Pacific flight is a bit different. However, the main reason I eat the meals on long-haul flights, is to kill a few minutes. By the time I eat 3 or 4 meals in 15 hours, whether I'm going to get to Pattaya before nature takes its due course can be a concern. It might be better if I just had the fruit and cheese plate.

 

I remember being told that you can't really overweight a modern passenger aircraft, but you could over-cube one by taking up all the space in the cargo hold. Whether the differences in weight in what passengers bring with them in body weight and/or luggage makes an appreciable difference in fuel consumption, is beyond my expertise. Of course, that doesn't keep the airlines from charging more if you go over your 20kg or whatever.

[js007 795]

Long haul? Back when Thai Air had the nonstop flights between the USA and Bangkok, I took those a few times. Once between JFK and BKK, and a few times, I think, between LAX and BKK. The were scheduled to be 17.5 hours, but the flights sonetimes went quicker. All things considered, I can take it it leave it. I don't mind a short stop in Tokyo and then on to Bangkok.

[Bullfrog 2,224]

I think there might come a time when they ask seriously heavy pax to pay a surcharge.

 

I think all passengers and luggage should be weighed and a surcharge added if over 140kg total..

 

Also, I have vague memories of flying economy and using the toilets down some stairs in what would be the cargo area..... I guess it didn't catch on for financial reasons... but perhaps in the future somebody may try it again....

[short 215]

The price of fuel killed the A340. Due have to admit I miss the quiet cabin and soft landings.

 

 

Obviously you can't put passengers in the cargo area during take off and landing for safety reasons. That is a crumple zone. But what if you put bunks in them three high? I would like to know how much revenue comes from cargo on a 16 hour long haul 777-300.

 

I don't think ala-cart in economy is practical on a long (16 hr) haul.

[nkped 1,208]

I would like to know how much revenue comes from cargo on a 16 hour long haul 777-300.

 

Eva used to fly some 747 freight/passenger combinations. Got one of those rattle traps from Seattle to Taipei about ten years ago. Probably the most uncomfortable flight I've ever been on including a couple of trips from Hawaii to Korea on military transports.

[ichy2 429]

http://www.refinery29.com/2017/06/161661/viva-colombia-airline-standing-room-flights

 

http://www.cnn.com/travel/article/standing-cabin-plane-study/index.html

Edited July 3, 2017 by ichy2

[jacko 8,815]

It does seem that economy is getting to be more 'economical'... and conversely Biz getting better. I guess since most of the money being made on a flight comes from the premium cabins that is natural. I just did a Biz hop from Bangkok to UK on A380 equipment and it far exceeds some of the flights I took during my working career. It may sound snobby but you don't even see the economy passengers, except when you get off and they are trying to push through to disembark with the premium cabins (Held at bay like braying livestock). So increasing discomfort in economy is likely to be accompanied by improving comfort at the front. I hope the prices can stay the same.

Edited July 3, 2017 by jacko

[Goldpanner 399]

Life would have been so much better and faster if the US hadnt fucked up the whole Concorde thing for nothing but jealousy. If Concorde had been allowed to land at all US airports, more would have been built, there would have been more development and then bigger Concorde's. But the USA couldnt make a supersonic passenger jet themselves so they made sure no one else would beat them.

The USA's actions in respect to Concorde held back aircraft design and development for decades and they should be ashamed of themselves. They are still seething over the Airbus A380 and developing nothing new. Even the Dreamliner is nothing but an old design with new materials and I wont even fly on one of the junkpiles after seeing the video I posted a few months back.

 

However, the UK government have to also take some blame by clamming up on the developers of the supersonic scram jet which would have allowed trips from UK to Oz in a couple of hours. Its only recently they have been allowed to open up developpment and sell patents to the US.

 

Personally I loved the old 707. It was a comfortable old bus and the food was always good. It was also the plane that brought cheap travel to the world before the 747

 

And in opposition to Jacko's comments I think Economy, on most long haul airlines is getting better and better. Of course you dont see the Economy passengers, fool, because they are behind the snob class.

I dont fly either snob or snot class even though I can afford it, much preferring Economy simply for the money saved. There's no way a semi recline bed, metal knives and forks and grovelling waitresses can be justified by a £1000 and £2000 hike in the price. OK if you only fly rarely then I supposes its a treat to be treated like you actually are somebody but its not for me.

I do agree that some scum airlines like BA and Eva are taking out Exit seats to squeeze more punters in and I wont fly them, but seats and leg room in most A380s now arent bad at all and with a sleeping pill, I sleep from an hor or so after take-off to an hour or so before landing. I also suspect that BA's removal of the wing Exit doors and putting in extra seats is simply a desperation act to try and keep their failing airlines going. They were once the best, now they dont even rate half way down the list and are one above Ryanair (who are scum).

[Butch 3,456]

Economy class is the least profitable and most popular class there is, so it makes commercial sense to reduce costs and increase revenue within that area. In some cases the service is improving , but not all.

 

The issue is Goldpanner that if perhaps BA et al don't increase capacity within that area of the cabin, fares might increase, same goes for EVA who are far from being a "scum" airline, just check out Skytrax giving them 8/10. If you refuse to fly airlines with whose business model you don't agree with then the list will get ever smaller.

 

We sometimes fly business to Manila or wherever , and 3 biz tickets don't come cheap on Cathay but I can also afford it and it doesn't have any impact on my holiday costings at all, I certainly don't look at flying econ as a saving in that case.

 

As for weight savings, I read ages ago that by reducing the size of cutlery and other items on a fleet of Aircraft, the airline managed to save XX amount of dollars on fuel over a year.

[Goldpanner 399]

I didnt mean to class Eva in with BA scum but I still think its despicable for them to cram more seats in. I wont fly with them. Then again I never have so no change there.

You comment about increasing capacityorface rising rising prices wontt work as theres simply too much competition on the UK/EU to Orient routes.

If your hypothesis was right then why have BA joined the cheapie market? something they swore they would never do. 10 year back when Thai were selling uk-BKK for £450 BA were over £650, Now? BA are the cheapest Non stop London-BKK airline at under £500.

I will never fly BA anywhere ever again. I've flown them 3 times now and every time was a catastrophy,

The last flight to BKK on their atrocious 777 cost them 600 Euros in compensation to me, plus an overnight stay in a hotel plusfood and transfers. That is substantially more than I even paid for the ticket in the first place and I encouraged everyone to claim from BA. The CAA isnt worth a bean as they have no powers and wont even respond to complaints about BA other than brusque brush offs.

 

I always hear about economy being the least profitable. Personally and these days I think thats a fallacy propogated on airlines and expenses of the 80's.

If it was true nowadays, why have some airlines completely removed Business class or severely reduced them to get more economy seats in ?

On the Thai A380 I flew last October from LHR to BKK there was NO business class whatsoever on the lower deck but on the A380 earlier in the year the forward half of the plane was Business and that was mostly empty when I did a walk through. !

If you price economy punters out of long haul, the airlines will go bust. Work out the economics.

 

Yes I can see airlines going for paid food via ticket prices and I personally see no need for 30KG baggage allowance for any regular tourist though my daughter needs about 50KG just for her makeup!. My baggage is never over 8 or 9 Kg and thats with a Pilots case that weighs 3Kg.

 

Maybe they could create giant gliders to be towed behind the A380's and why cant they build more Antonov An-225's and put seats in? 1000 passengers maybe?? theres a thought.

I can see the return of giant airships too. a 2 or 3 week flight to Australia travelling ever so slowly, though it would be a giant bullseye in the sky for terrorists.

 

I know my next trip to Thailand will be my last, and to be honest I'm still not even 50% sure I'm going to go. Bangkok and Pattaya hold no surprises or excitment for me now, Many of my friends are either dead or moved away and the only real reason for going was to transit through to Phnom Penh to see someone.

There are sufficent Thai girls down south here if I get an urgent need to shag one other than my wife.

 

and now the space bar onmy laptophasjust packedup. Oh Bollocksim going backto bed

Edited July 3, 2017 by Goldpanner

[Butch 3,456]

Prices on the U.K. / Asia seems to be seasonal, but back in the 80's there wasn't the demand that there is today. I do believe that there will be an increase in costs , but it might well come through greedy govt taxes than actual fare increases. As you say, prices now compared to 10 years ago are comparable or cheaper, however all airlines seek to increase revenue and they will do that one or more ways, increase capacity or increase base fares, reduce weight to save fuel or reduce the overall cost of service to themselves.

 

As for BA entering the budget market, well they obviously realised their business plan was flawed trying to corner one area of the market and needed to change. When they're faced with Airlines like Cathay offering the same route for similar cost, it's a no brainer and BA will never be able to up their game to that of Cathay, so it's easier to drop their game to the level of Garuda instead and prices accordingly. Like yourself I've no love for BA whatsoever. They are a national embarrassment and a disgrace to the whole industry, their behaviour towards Freddie Laker should have made peope realise that!.

 

As for your point about biz / econ, I can't really follow your logic here GP. You ask me why the airlines are removing biz class seats and replacing with economy to prove a point I made earlier?. I said it is the least profitable, which it is per PAX. Econ pax will never be priced out of long haul because like putting the price of petrol up by 10p, people will still buy it as it is now a necessity for many and not a luxury. The airlines know that, but they're not stupid either which is why they inflate prices at school holiday periods and peak seasons. People still pay the price despite it being 30% higher.

 

The answer is also simple: Not everyone can afford to fly biz. Although the biz classes and premium economy offer a higher profit margin, they don't actually make more money or profit for the airline due to the fact the ratio of biz to econ seats is so much smaller. Like supermarkets making £10 on a bottle of champagne as opposed to 2p baked beans. There will always be a demand for all classes of seating.

 

As costs increase, I think the econ pax will feel the pinch in some ways but perhaps enjoy some benefit in others. As planes become quieter, faster and more advanced, it might come at a cost of reduced legroom, worse food, less allowance and less personal space.

Edited July 3, 2017 by Butch

[ttk 236]

The passengers on flights with no IFE systems would be in for a rude awakening if the US ever does ban electronics larger than cellphones.

 

As for long non-stops, I can see it being a bit more convenient for passengers not to connect in

A hub, but the airlines would have to see a market for daily flights to that market. The hub system was setup to enable airlines to fly full planes by consolidating pasengers from many depature points onto one flight to the destination. With more non-stops, many passengers would by SOL. I fly Delta and had to always connect in Tokyo to get to BKK. They now have only 4 US departures ( SEA, PDX, DET and ATL I think) to Tokyo and have dropped BKK completely. The market does not support flying more non-stops from USA. Anyone flying from a LAX, SFO, ORD, IAD..... are forced to fky to a delarture city. If non-stops from more cities are started, it is likely to be a few times a week and not daily.

[jacko 8,815]

The passengers on flights with no IFE systems would be in for a rude awakening if the US ever does ban electronics larger than cellphones.

 

As for long non-stops, I can see it being a bit more convenient for passengers not to connect in

A hub, but the airlines would have to see a market for daily flights to that market. The hub system was setup to enable airlines to fly full planes by consolidating pasengers from many depature points onto one flight to the destination. With more non-stops, many passengers would by SOL. I fly Delta and had to always connect in Tokyo to get to BKK. They now have only 4 US departures ( SEA, PDX, DET and ATL I think) to Tokyo and have dropped BKK completely. The market does not support flying more non-stops from USA. Anyone flying from a LAX, SFO, ORD, IAD..... are forced to fky to a delarture city. If non-stops from more cities are started, it is likely to be a few times a week and not daily.

The USA has lifted that ban on flights from Abu Dhabi......

 

 

On the Thai A380 I flew last October from LHR to BKK there was NO business class whatsoever on the lower deck but on the A380 earlier in the year the forward half of the plane was Business and that was mostly empty when I did a walk through. !

The A380's I have flown on have also been all economy in the basement, I actually thought that was the usual configuration-- but I see Singapore do it different with 4 classes. ...Upstairs on Emirates was First at the front, Biz, and the bar at the back of Biz.... I have come across another configuration with no First, and that has a pleb area at the front upstairs too. Qatar had a smaller upstairs Biz and packed a few in the back end. The Biz Class Bangkok to Doha was pretty full, but only about 60% from Doha to clogs and tripe land.

Edited July 3, 2017 by jacko

[PigBoy#1 28]

The passengers on flights with no IFE systems would be in for a rude awakening if the US ever does ban electronics larger than cellphones.

 

As for long non-stops, I can see it being a bit more convenient for passengers not to connect in

A hub, but the airlines would have to see a market for daily flights to that market. The hub system was setup to enable airlines to fly full planes by consolidating pasengers from many depature points onto one flight to the destination. With more non-stops, many passengers would by SOL. I fly Delta and had to always connect in Tokyo to get to BKK. They now have only 4 US departures ( SEA, PDX, DET and ATL I think) to Tokyo and have dropped BKK completely. The market does not support flying more non-stops from USA. Anyone flying from a LAX, SFO, ORD, IAD..... are forced to fky to a delarture city. If non-stops from more cities are started, it is likely to be a few times a week and not daily.

 

 

They fly non-stop out of MSP as well.

[ttk 236]

They fly non-stop out of MSP as well.

They fly to HND from there. I was only looking at flights to NRT when they still had the NRT-BKK flight. No way would I fly into Haneda and depart from Narita. Moot point now since they have stopped Bangkok flights.

[Zeus 56]

Some things are already happening (for better or worse): Chinese carriers are undercutting the main US carriers (and probably affecting others - ie Thai etc). The decreased flights from Delta mentioned above are a prime casualty. Low cost international flights to west coast US cities from China carriers (Air China, China Southern, China Eastern, China Air, etc) offer fares that US carriers can't compete with and maintain profit margins. There are several reasons for this, but China is winning. I am a prime example of an affected consumer. I flew LAX-BKK on US carriers (typically Delta or United) for the first 15 times I went to BKK paying between $600 - $1000 RT, or using mileage points. However, my last two trips have been on Chinese carriers - Air China ($447 RT), and China Southern ($568 RT). The only disadvantage is that the primary language is not English. However all announcements are eventually translated to English ( it is just not first). I actually like their schedules better, and the price speaks for itself. I like it and am willing to let my $$$ do the talking and give the US carriers the finger :-)

 

Some things that are happening in the US, that hopefully never make it to international flights to BKK:

-Charging for baggage. All (except SW) domestic US flights charge $25+, but so far this does not apply to international flights. Probably to stay as competitive to every other carrier that doesn't charge for this.

- Discounting for not pre assigning seats. A new attempt to make US domestic travelers pay for pre-assigned seating. Delta does this, and others make you pay more for pre-assigned seating(the lowest fare class you cannot get a seat till the date of the flight).

- Some low cost carriers (Spirit, Frontier etc) charge for carryon and everything else they can in order to offer a rock bottom base price.

 

I know the US carriers will get creative on giving less for the lower fares. As a result they will lose business to other international carriers that provide better service and schedules.

 

Zeus

Edited July 3, 2017 by Zeus

[Bob Belzy 150]

I'll be watching with interest the implementation of the Perth-London direct QF B787 flights starting in a few months. Although they claim to be generous in legroom, they have only increased the economy spacing to the same as the Thai B787 spacing. After 6 hours I have a sore backside from the skimpy seat cushions and really had enough, but 17 hours or more? No doubt novelty will affect the patronage for a while, but will people want to repeat the experience?

[TheFiend 1,181]

Boeing predicted the future would be point to point but the international airlines at the moment seem happier flying spoke to hub and hub to hub.....

[Goldpanner 399]

 

As for your point about biz / econ, I can't really follow your logic here GP. You ask me why the airlines are removing biz class seats and replacing with economy to prove a point I made earlier?. I said it is the least profitable, which it is per PAX. Econ pax will never be priced out of long haul because like putting the price of petrol up by 10p, people will still buy it as it is now a necessity for many and not a luxury. The airlines know that, but they're not stupid either which is why they inflate prices at school holiday periods and peak seasons. People still pay the price despite it being 30% higher.

 

 

My point was, if Biz class pays so well why are aircraft taking on more economy and less Biz class? Biz/ first class and Economy are symbiotic, without each other they couldnt economically exist. Its economy that pays a lot of the fuel and biz where some of the profit is, but the future is more economy and less Biz and First

 

As for the London Perth Route? It will die a death. Perth is a teeny little place and I suspect the main attraction for running out to Oz is the Stopovers allowed in Bangkok, KL Singapore or Hong Kong. On its own I just cannot see the traffic for a direct flight. Keerist ! a 10+ Hours and an A380 does me in.

Its a good publicity stunt, but will be pulled very quietly in around 6 months I suspect

[Butch 3,456]

My point was, if Biz class pays so well why are aircraft taking on more economy and less Biz class? Biz/ first class and Economy are symbiotic, without each other they couldnt economically exist. Its economy that pays a lot of the fuel and biz where some of the profit is, but the future is more economy and less Biz and First

 

 

Erm...that's pretty much what I said in my first post, which I explained as to why in my second.

[Goldpanner 399]

Erm...that's pretty much what I said in my first post, which I explained as to why in my second.

 

Sorry I'm gettong old and thiskeyboardis pissingme off

[yselmike 393]

The airports all want to expand, bigger planes?

There are more airlines flying long haul than ever

they must know something.

The problem as I see it is a lot of destinations have already reached saturation level,Amsterdam,Venice has been sinking literally and metaphorically for years,even having built a new airport Bangkok struggles at times.

I would think prices have bottomed out its all down to the price of oil and the world and individual countries economy's,Brexit may cause troubles for the UK travellers or the they live in a land of milk and honey with lots of cake under prime minister Boris.

[too_mutt 10]

The way the economy seats seem to be shrinking, it is a sad state of affairs if the future is economy class.

The list of pax restrictions seems to get longer month by month.