Thread: UA rarely flies 747 on long haul flights to South America. Why?
+
Submit Report
Results 1 to 12 of 12
-
11-07-12 22:23 #12
Posts: 713Originally Posted by Daddy Rulz [View Original Post]
-
11-07-12 22:17 #11
Posts: 713Originally Posted by Chicago Guy [View Original Post]
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Luf...eing_747_8.php
-
11-07-12 18:38 #10
Posts: 2808Yeah it's got to go
Originally Posted by Gato Hunter [View Original Post]
-
11-07-12 18:31 #9
Posts: 1009747 will fade away over the next 15 years the 777 and 787 are just much cheaper to operate. BA still flys LHR SEA prolly my last flight on a 47 was last year.
-
11-07-12 18:19 #8
Posts: 2808Good read
Originally Posted by Chicago Guy [View Original Post]
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo....main/1822789/
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Daddy Rulz For This Post:
-
11-07-12 17:57 #7
Posts: 36Turbulence
By the way: Have I just been unlucky so far, or is it the norm that flights over the equator encounter severe turbulence?
-
11-07-12 17:54 #6
Posts: 577UA and 747s
Originally Posted by Chicago Guy [View Original Post]
I speculate that UA will retire all of the 747s at some point. Not only are they very fuel inefficient with the four engines vs. Two, they also require twice as much engine maintenance. Continental, whose management now controls United Continental Holdings, had not flown a 747 for quite a few years, and I expect them to retire the 747s that came with the UA merger as quick as is economically feasible. Four engines really guzzle the gas, and high jet fuel prices seem to be a permanent reality.
The 747 has been around since the Viet Nam war, in some version. There was a time when safety considerations required four engines if one was going to fly over water, so all of the intercontinental jets had four engines. This all changed when two engine jets became certified for over-the-ocean flights.
Tres3
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Tres3 For This Post:
-
11-07-12 17:48 #5
Posts: 36Originally Posted by Daddy Rulz [View Original Post]
UA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_k8oTrfj3s
Lufthansa: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFfT9waAjjE
-
11-07-12 17:26 #4
Posts: 2808Originally Posted by Chicago Guy [View Original Post]
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Daddy Rulz For This Post:
-
11-07-12 16:58 #3
Posts: 36Originally Posted by Daddy Rulz [View Original Post]
I've always wondered which people (executives?) choose to fly on the upper deck of the Boeing 747. According to Lufthansa. Com, a first class ticket between Frankfurt and Ezeiza is a whooping 15k dollars.
Members of the European Parliament perhaps?
-
11-02-12 20:10 #2
Posts: 2808Loads, labor, and fuel
Originally Posted by Chicago Guy [View Original Post]
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Daddy Rulz For This Post:
-
11-02-12 18:51 #1
Posts: 36UA rarely flies 747 on long haul flights to South America. Why?
Lufthansa flies B747's on routes such as Frankfurt to Newark and Frankfurt to Ezeiza.
UA operates B767 on both the Houston to Ezeiza route and the Newark to Ezeiza route.
Why is it that UA rarely flies 747 on long haul flights to Europe and South America?