urbanSTL

Dublin much better to connect to the rest of the EU post-Brexit. 

Air France will launch a direct flight from CDG to Raleigh-Durham, starting the 31st october. 3 flights/ week. 
Hope STL is next on the list as AF announced publicly they want to increase deeply their flights from Paris to US cities. 

CED92400 wrote: ↑

Jul 12, 2023

Air France will launch a direct flight from CDG to Raleigh-Durham, starting the 31st october. 3 flights/ week. 
Hope STL is next on the list as AF announced publicly they want to increase deeply their flights from Paris to US cities. 

They are taking over the route from delta, who currently flies it.

CDG is the worst airport in Europe, especially to connect in. I don't think I have ever met someone who has had a positive experience. Paris-Orly airport is what I would shoot for if there is any discussion about Paris, which I don't think there is. 

Preliminary numbers for Lufthansa to Frankfurt for June

inbound 91%
outbound 94.5% - missing the last outbound of the month
Total 92.5% 

Again these (from international trade administration that seem to be based on customs numbers) usually come in a point or two higher than what DOT puts out. Not sure why but it is a good gauge.

^Ironically CDG is the only airport in Europe where I've ever connected. Flown through there, LHR, Frankfurt, and Geneva but the rest were all O&D. The connection was thirty odd years ago on TWA, so it was a different world. That said, looking at a current map it is a big beast and it looks like JFK had a child with Atlanta Hartsfield and then fostered it out to Hong Kong to raise. Or maybe LAX. I suspect I've made connections at worse (O'Hare . . . cough cough.) But I can see why it might be a mess.

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jul 13, 2023

^Ironically CDG is the only airport in Europe where I've ever connected. Flown through there, LHR, Frankfurt, and Geneva but the rest were all O&D. The connection was thirty odd years ago on TWA, so it was a different world. That said, looking at a current map it is a big beast and it looks like JFK had a child with Atlanta Hartsfield and then fostered it out to Hong Kong to raise. Or maybe LAX. I suspect I've made connections at worse (O'Hare . . . cough cough.) But I can see why it might be a mess.

Architecturally, CDG makes the nerd in me very happy. We've connected there many times, but learned a very important lesson on our second attempt - there must be a two hour minimum connection time for us to even consider the possibility. Back in 2016 we connected there for a flight to Bordeaux that had a 90 minute connection time. Once through security we get to the border crossing only to find two agents working a full queue. We literally had to run to our next flight which was boarding once we got there. 

^Apparently the first commercial flight to land there was a TWA 747 out of JFK. So . . . I approve. It really is a quite lovely airport, if large and sprawling. (Product of the times, no doubt.) I really wish I'd taken more pictures when I'd flown TWA through CDG, JFK, and Dulles. I really had no idea what I was seeing at the time. Was already very much into architecture, and I already very much loved Lambert, but I wasn't really aware of JFK then. Or CDG particularly. I wish I'd taken more time to explore, but I was an 18 year old kid off on his first trek at the time. Thinking about castles and cathedrals and not airports.

One of the birds went maintenance broken upon landing and finally got fixed to go back. 

reednavy wrote: ↑

Jul 20, 2023

One of the birds went maintenance broken upon landing and finally got fixed to go back. 

This is correct. Blew a hydraulic line on landing. Guessing the flight in yesterday brought parts/repair people to fix the broken one

jshank83 wrote: ↑

Jul 21, 2023

A321XLR range is likely reduced with mods they had to make. A little disappointing some I thought might be in range aren’t. I thought it would end up having Germany in range.

Is 3800 nm the maximum range or an operational range? That is can we expect airlines to schedule 3800 nm flights for this plane or will they be shorter in practice to account for diversions and other externalities?

_nomad_ wrote: ↑

Jul 21, 2023

jshank83 wrote: ↑

Jul 21, 2023

A321XLR range is likely reduced with mods they had to make. A little disappointing some I thought might be in range aren’t. I thought it would end up having Germany in range.

Is 3800 nm the maximum range or an operational range? That is can we expect airlines to schedule 3800 nm flights for this plane or will they be shorter in practice to account for diversions and other externalities?

3800 is the “practical range”. Listed would be 4500

^Honestly it doesn't bother me too much. I've taken some longerish flights on single aisles from Shanghai and Hong Kong to Ho Chi Minh City and they're not really pleasant experiences when the plane is it all full. I suppose it increases the likelihood of sevenish hour direct flights, but I'm not sure that's a flight I'd be willing to take, especially not on a discount carrier. Maybe if the 321 XLR is big enough to have a real three class seating structure, but . . . is it? I'm done with back of the plane on anything more than maybe three hours at most, and genuine front of the plane would still probably be too much of a stretch on longer flights. (Probably.)

Agreed. I love the potential destinations that the A321XLR offers, but I’m not really interested in getting there in a single aisle plane. 

I flew back via Lufthansa from Frankfurt Germany direct to STL the week before last and can say that their premium economy seats were decently comfortable and had enough leg room I thought. (I am around 6'2").  The only thing was the flight was close to 10 hours long (9 hrs and 50 min) so... that was the only somewhat downside.. but it was worth it to be directly dropped off in STL when we landed.  

^Ten hours I can absolutely live with, so long as the seat is more or less acceptable. I don't fly all that often, but when I do it's usually TransPac, and the long leg is usually around thirteen or fourteen hours, depending on routing. My previous Europe flights were all shorter, but none of them were non-stop from St. Louis. (Though my first was at a time when there were a number of such via TWA.) My bad. Ten sounds right. Just not thinking straight. And yeah, ten in a small single aisle sounds rather miserable. Especially if that's a two class single aisle.

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jul 23, 2023

^Honestly it doesn't bother me too much. I've taken some longerish flights on single aisles from Shanghai and Hong Kong to Ho Chi Minh City and they're not really pleasant experiences when the plane is it all full. I suppose it increases the likelihood of sevenish hour direct flights, but I'm not sure that's a flight I'd be willing to take, especially not on a discount carrier. Maybe if the 321 XLR is big enough to have a real three class seating structure, but . . . is it? I'm done with back of the plane on anything more than maybe three hours at most, and genuine front of the plane would still probably be too much of a stretch on longer flights. (Probably.)

Aer Lingus wise I assume they would use the same layout as the A321LR.
16 lay flat business
168 economy (some are extra leg room)
184 total

I've done plenty of TATL in single-aisle (usually 757 or 321 from the East Coast) and it's fine. TransPac is a different matter though as those flights tend to be twice as long.

^^Yeah, that sounds like a two class layout. When I was younger, poorer, and more desperate I was willing to do back of the plane. And I expect the day will come when I'll spring for front of the plane. But extra legroom alone doesn't make what I'm thinking of as a true three class layout. I'm also looking for a wider seat. No matter how much legroom you have 3+3 is pretty pinched in that middle seat. Not really a fan of 3+4+3 for much the same reason. Just walking to the rear restrooms on an AA 787  or DL A350 made me wonder what the heck is up that modern seating densities are even legal. It's hard to walk down the aisle comfortably. I don't remember it being that bad ten years ago. (I certainly don't remember it being that bad thirty years ago, but to be fair, I was thinner when you get that far back.) Honestly, I'd be glad to see some competition come in, even if it's not for me. But man, I'd really love to see another legacy carrier join the club.

I’m shocked he could take a drone up that high that close to an airport and within a restricted drone flight zone (due to a flight path). The drone software had to be hacked for this unless there was a glitch because I know that if I’m in an authorization zone, or near an airport, my drone has a height limit that prevents getting nowhere near any plane. This one’s puzzling to me and this one guy is the reason why those who use our drones wisely are punished by federal regulations.