Longer jet would help counter Airbus plans. Will Continental go for the 787-10?

The 787-10 can be a 772 series replacer. If an airline has no need for planes larger than the 772, then having a combo of 787-8s for thinner routes, and -10s (and maybe -9s) for denser ones, would be very efficient for an airline.

Considering they just bought 2 new 777s (coming in March?), and the 764s (holding about 250ish) a few years ago, I don't really see them going for more aircraft that hold more passengers... on the contrary, they are using the 752s to expand.

The 787-10's range will also be reduced compared to the -9 ... it will only carry more passengers. So if CO is searching for new, super-far away markets (like SE Asia from EWR, wouldn't that be nice?!), the -10 won't be the best bet for CO if it can't completely fill the A/C. And we know that CO likes to run its plane at capacity. Now, if they simply want to replace the 777's with more dense A/C for shorter routes that are super high yield, like EWR-TLV, it makes you wonder... but I don't see them phasing out the 777 anytime soon considering they just bought new ones!

Remember that CO now only has 44 long-haul widebodies with two more coming this Spring. The 20 787-8s on order are increasing that number by over 40%. I think it'll be a while before they order more, especially if they're keeping the 762.

Per A.net, looks like CO has 20 Options on the 787-8 as well. If CO exercised all its options, it could effectively double its widebody fleet (or increase its long-haul fleet by a third if you count 757-200s). CO could even retire the 762s (which it has given hints it would like to do), and still maintain massive international growth.

MUC, MUC, MUC!

Sorry...I couldn't help myself...

Larry has said that the 787 will be for Asia what the 757 was to Europe. It can fly long, thinner routes. I would expect the 787-10 to replace/supplement 777's. It can fly as far as the 777. The 789 will open up additional medium-heavy markets in Asia. They can use the 787-10 for very heavy routes (IAH-LON, EWR-TLV).

CO flew this route, EWR-MUC, with a DC-10 - and discontinued it. They also discontinued the EWR-DUS route.

They now have EWR-TXL, EWR-CGN, EWR-HAM, along with the standard EWR-FRA route. CGN is not doing that well. I do not see CO bringing back EWR-MUC anytime soon. Maybe the dynamics have changed - but I see Eastern Europe first.

Can the 757 make it to MUC? It is only 70 miles further than TXL, so I'd like to think so, but I also know that most of the Germany 757 routes are running very close to the edge of where they can.

Pretty much everything in Eastern Europe would require 76x or 777 for the range. The 757 just can't make it. The only way to do that would be to pull a/c off of routes like BRU, and that just got the 777 upgrade, so it is losing its 767, but not for a 757.

Maybe they'll just do it with a scheduled stop in Goose Bay

Where will it hub--this new fan of flights to Asia? Will EWR have enough space? I love the strategy, I just wonder from which location it will be implemented. It has to be EWR.

The only difference is that MUC (30 million pax a year and is still the fastest growing airport in Germany) is one of European bigger airports with real international traffic. And compared to MUC, TXL, CGN and HAM are jokes. None of the last three mentioned airports are taking any traffic from MUC-EWR.
On the other hand, there are a lot of people in MUC who are looking for really really good service in all three service classes including a real First Class(MUC has one existing EWR flight with a Business Class only flight) and I am sorry to say that but CO would loose that competition against LH. All LH planes out of MUC are equipped with the newest available LH seats, etc, they have real lounges, etc. So my guess is, MUC would do better for CO than CGN, HAM or TXL but it's ajust a question of time until LH will start a three class flight from their HUB in MUC to EWR and then CO will be in trouble.

Thank you! I don't understand why speculations about new routes/etc in the USA-based arline forums often ignore foreign comptetition. MUC is LH's second hub! Why would anyone think that it would be so easy to just stick another flight in there out of the NYC area? For connections wih what ST flights?

And, as supermasterphil said, CO can't honestly compete with LH in quality/comfort, etc. CO is great, compared to US airlines, but c'mon!

I'm not bashing, just trying to be realistic.

"Larry has said that the 787 will be for Asia what the 757 was to Europe"

???? I seem to remeber Larry saying that they had not decided yet on where the 787 would fly. A big issue was the fact that Asia routes would require 2 planes for each route, given the extensive layovers. I got the distinct impression that a lot of these birds would do Europe and some Asia.

The topic of this thread is "where will CO be applying the new 787". So the 757 issue and needing 767 is not applicable to this discussion. The 787 will go wherever CO wants to go.