Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="blue streak 1"] [quote user="Sam1"] The key point with respect to size of the airplane is the cost per seat mile and whether it can be recovered because of demand. If the cost for a B-767 and AB-330 is equal to or less than the cost per seat mile for a B-737-700, and the demand is there, then using the larger airplane becomes feasible. And the airlines turn the same tight margin that they turne with the smaller airplane. This is exactly what Qantas has done on the Melbourne to Sydney run, which is somewhat longer than Dallas to Houston but not by a great deal. [/quote] SAM1:  Unfortunately the seat mile cost of larger planes for short distances do not increase linearly but some what exponentially.  The landing ( takeoff ) fees are based on maximum take off weight.   The bigger  ( long distance ) aircraft carry a very large amount of fuel that will be burned off on long 10 Hour + trips.  Even B-737  (  5 hour  max stage length ) will not take off near max TO weight or B-777 (  16 - 18 hours ).  2.  Another problem of larger aircraft is their fuel requirements are much greater per seat while climbing  or on low altitude flight. 3. A problem that  Next Gen will not solve is landing and take off distance behind large aircraft.  B-757 aircraft require 5 mile separations.   A-340 B-777 and larger aircraft 7 mile separations. These separations needed for aircraft wake turbulence avoidance. small behind a small can reduce to 2-1/2 miles.  Capacity constrained airports such as HOU Hobby may want to limit large  aircraft. 4. Finally are Hobby runways even stressed for large aircraft ? [/quote] Use of a B-777 for relatively short flights probably is not feasible.  In looking back through my posts on this thread, I don't see where I suggested using Triple 7s between Dallas and Houston, or that Qantas is using them for domestic flights within Australia, especially between Melbourne and Sydney. If Qantas can use 767s and 330s between Melbourne and Sydney, why would it not be possible to use them between Dallas and Houston?  What operating rule says that they have to carry a full load of fuel if they are only going a short distance? Maybe using B-737-800s would be a better option. Or scheduling more flights. Or half a hundred other out of the box improvements that have not yet been thought about. A key point, unfortunately, has been lost.  Before investing $10 billion in a high speed railway between Dallas and Houston, could the existing air system be expanded to provide an equal or better service for the next several decades?  Air travel is the preferred mode of commercial transport between the two cities for most business people as well as many leisure travelers. Whether they would switch to a train is problematic. Air Force One lands at Love Field and Hobby.   As stated above, I believe there are better opportunities for rail, i.e. service for a broader population along the I-35 corridor, than a high speed railway between Dallas and Houston.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag