Read the forum code of contact
By: - 11th August 2006 at 15:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The rumour confirmed at last.
By: - 11th August 2006 at 15:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Woah! 738! :eek: Thats gonna be interesting!
By: - 11th August 2006 at 15:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
225 people on a 738... comfortable ;). (Of course I know its just a mistake.... ;)).
By: - 11th August 2006 at 17:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Surely thats what the second 757 will be for. I think the seating numbers are wrong.
By: - 11th August 2006 at 17:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I would expect a 767 with a 40-50 seat premium section.
By: - 11th August 2006 at 17:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Unless they mean a 74 7-8... :diablo:
Now that would be something!
By: - 11th August 2006 at 19:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Using my sourced knowledge I can confirm it is a 738 that they're launching with!
By: - 11th August 2006 at 19:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Using my sourced knowledge I can confirm it is a 738 that they're launching with!
Doesnt have big enough ETOPS rating and keeping to rule would mean tech stops surely? Iceland/Halifax?
By: - 11th August 2006 at 19:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
To ask a question I asked on another thread... Will the 739ER have suitable ETOPS rating for say a leg like GLA-BOS ?
By: - 11th August 2006 at 20:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
To ask a question I asked on another thread... Will the 739ER have suitable ETOPS rating for say a leg like GLA-BOS ?
ETOPS isn't a qualification type thing for each airfract type (although I think Boeing are now proudcing ETOPS ready aircraft?). Most modern twin engined jets can get some form of ETOPS if teh airline wants it. So if GSM want to fly GLA-BOS on a 738W then there won't be much of a problem in getting the aircraft certified, assuming its not already.
*I'm 99% certain on that but if theres something incorret then please feel free to point it out*
Gaz
By: - 12th August 2006 at 19:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Surely the 738 with winglets can make???
What's the range on them if not???
By: - 12th August 2006 at 20:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Whether or not a 737-800 will make it or not, the article says that the service will carry about 225 people, and as LBARULES has already pointed out - that's just not possible:D
Not even the charters could cram that many seats in :D
By: - 12th August 2006 at 20:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The 737-900ER would make it and carry 215 pax according to the boeing website.
By: - 12th August 2006 at 20:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The 737-900ER would make it and carry 215 pax according to the boeing website.
That's in an all Y class config, though - with no premium seats.
And bear in mind that the manufacturers will like to 'ham up' the range of the aircraft, i.e. quote the airframe's maximum possible range instead of the standard range with a full load + freight etc.
By: - 12th August 2006 at 20:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Okay Im not going to argue but it would be good if they did it with a 737
By: - 12th August 2006 at 21:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Whether or not a 737-800 will make it or not, the article says that the service will carry about 225 people, and as LBARULES has already pointed out - that's just not possible:DNot even the charters could cram that many seats in :D
Ah yes but a simple typo can turn 155 into 255... 155 would be more realistic. Whereas it would be a pretty big typo to turn what should have read B767-300 into B737-800. ;) However, knowing journalists when it comes to aviation stories I wouldn't be surprised if both seating capcity and aircraft type were wrong....!
By: - 12th August 2006 at 22:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah yes but a simple typo can turn 155 into 255... 155 would be more realistic. Whereas it would be a pretty big typo to turn what should have read B767-300 into B737-800. ;) However, knowing journalists when it comes to aviation stories I wouldn't be surprised if both seating capcity and aircraft type were wrong....!
:D :D Getting their facts right has never been a priority for many journalists!!
By: - 13th August 2006 at 11:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Using my sourced knowledge I can confirm it is a 738 that they're launching with!
And I can confirm that you are speaking a load of rubbish :D
The route is to be operated using a Boeing 767-300ER.
GSM will have 2 x 763s at GLA, and 1 at MAN.
By: - 13th August 2006 at 11:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And I can confirm that you are speaking a load of rubbish :D
The route is to be operated using a Boeing 767-300ER.
GSM will have 2 x 763s at GLA, and 1 at MAN.
767!? Why?? Somehow i don't see the need for one on the GLA-BOS route, 757 or 738 looks much more reasonable
They won't fill a daily 767, if there is on onward connections at BOS!
By: - 13th August 2006 at 11:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
767!? Why?? Somehow i don't see the need for one on the GLA-BOS route, 757 or 738 looks much more reasonableThey won't fill a daily 767, if there is on onward connections at BOS!
I think they will be relying on the fact that if the price is right then many people will decide to fly to the destination. Just look at FR, a lot of the places they fly to you will never have heard of, but as the price is low enough people fly there.
Again they are taking a risk in offering it daily, but the same goes for SFB (fair enough its a lot more popular for holiday makers than BOS) but they managed to achieve 87% loads on GLA-SFB-GLA in July which I think is quite remarkable.
So if they can get a partnership with say JetBlue then I think the route could be made to work. Especially if B6 do some good advertising at their end.
Gaz
Posts: 9,401
By: LBARULES - 11th August 2006 at 15:15
Taken off Pprune which in turn was taken from the Travel Trade Gazette..
Note the mistake ;).
Fantastic news for Glasgow! GSM really are going for the long haul market at the moment.