Blerg wrote:

Interesting, thank you. I guess their Star Alliance membership and probably more flights between the two cities will be the deciding factor when people look to book flights.

IMO LH Group should try a US domestic first product. UA is copying LH's premium economy, LH is copying the new Polaris product and the bland UA livery. So they're clearly talking to each other when it comes to look and feel. I don't think that EW type products alone work well for LH in the long run.

The market in the US clearly shows that there's a wider mix of available flying experiences that can be monetized with the right market strategy. The US3 now have lots of transcon and hub to hub routes with wide bodies and or flat beds. For example, my SFO-LAX flight on Tuesday had a UA 752 with flat beds for a one hour flight. You should have seen the faces of people who turned right. I bet you $5 that they'll think more closely about buying domestic first tickets if that's the new gold standard for busier / hub routes.

BA (I know, I know) has shown that flat beds can be put on A321s as a subfleet. Why can't LH or someone in the group do this on flagship routes? Perhaps then they wouldn't always have to do things on price alone.

ua900 wrote:

Blerg wrote:

Interesting, thank you. I guess their Star Alliance membership and probably more flights between the two cities will be the deciding factor when people look to book flights.

IMO LH Group should try a US domestic first product. UA is copying LH's premium economy, LH is copying the new Polaris product and the bland UA livery. So they're clearly talking to each other when it comes to look and feel. I don't think that EW type products alone work well for LH in the long run.

The market in the US clearly shows that there's a wider mix of available flying experiences that can be monetized with the right market strategy. The US3 now have lots of transcon and hub to hub routes with wide bodies and or flat beds. For example, my SFO-LAX flight on Tuesday had a UA 752 with flat beds for a one hour flight. You should have seen the faces of people who turned right. I bet you $5 that they'll think more closely about buying domestic first tickets if that's the new gold standard for busier / hub routes.

BA (I know, I know) has shown that flat beds can be put on A321s as a subfleet. Why can't LH or someone in the group do this on flagship routes? Perhaps then they wouldn't always have to do things on price alone.

Could it be that the A321 was never the adequate replacement for the A300-600 fleet? I know the A321 has 200+ seats but if they had a plane similar to the A300 then they could have easily placed a different premium product while offering a great number of economy class seats.
Lufthansa operates a lot of night flights to the Middle East, I am sure this is a market where they could easily sell those flat beds you are talking about.

It is so huge that you almost always get a remote stand while you can see plenty of empty gates, that's even landing on time

upperdeckfan wrote:

It is so huge that you almost always get a remote stand while you can see plenty of empty gates, that's even landing on time

haha, some Airlines only have remote stands (Ryanair, Moldavia, Ukraine ect) and I have the Feeling trunarround times or remote stands are indeed faster.

The huge no. of remote stands is part of the concept of FRA airport.Wether you get a gate position or remote stand depends on how much the airline is willing to pay.
Even if there are 40 empty gates,if the airline doesn`t pay what Fraport wants for the gate position they do get a remote stand.
In the past i`ve seen even B777 or A330 on a remote stand and the pax being brought to and from the terminal by busses.
Thats FRA and thats by far the most annoying part in FRA.

I also think it has to do with the time of the day. Usually when you arrive in the morning all airbridges are occupied by widebody flights to North America. However, if you arrive in the afternoon that's when you usually get an airbridge. Recently I landed at FRA at around 15.00 and we parked at the new terminal (Z gates) despite flying on an A319. The whole terminal had maybe one widebody parked.

Lufthansa is much weaker in Asia compared to the Americas. There is a lot more competition to the east.

devron wrote:

upperdeckfan wrote:

It is so huge that you almost always get a remote stand while you can see plenty of empty gates, that's even landing on time

haha, some Airlines only have remote stands (Ryanair, Moldavia, Ukraine ect) and I have the Feeling trunarround times or remote stands are indeed faster.

I expected LH to pay to use jet bridges, especially in their main hub where connecting traffic thru their network is huge. It's not the case

Blerg wrote:

Could it be that the A321 was never the adequate replacement for the A300-600 fleet? I know the A321 has 200+ seats but if they had a plane similar to the A300 then they could have easily placed a different premium product while offering a great number of economy class seats.
Lufthansa operates a lot of night flights to the Middle East, I am sure this is a market where they could easily sell those flat beds you are talking about.

I think width-wise that two old A 300 business recliners would fit where they put 3 economy seats today. You'd need to take out 2-3 rows depending on the plane to increase the pitch from 30 inches (that's business class??) to 38 inches or whatever. Plenty comfortable for TLV or AMM flights. Similar to what Turkish is doing with their narrow bodies, which were also economy seats with a blocked middle seat previously but are now US style domestic first seats.

That complaint about too many remote stands Comes up every so and so many weeks. I prefer a remote stand at the far western tarmac ovewr a gate stand in the A30s and upwards. The bus takes you swiftly to the Exit in the A terminal, much better than Walking that distance.

Another indication how huge FRA is, there have been 97 days last year with more than 200K passengers. That means FRA is over capacity almost a third of the year. And that moron of Mayor still holds up the building permit to go ahead with buiding the "G" Pier for LCC

PanHAM wrote:

That complaint about too many remote stands Comes up every so and so many weeks. I prefer a remote stand at the far western tarmac ovewr a gate stand in the A30s and upwards. The bus takes you swiftly to the Exit in the A terminal, much better than Walking that distance.

There are always ways to make a point

If you are not connecting, deboarding a narrowbody, it's not raining, you are phisically fit to come down the stairs and your probable gate stand is A30+ then is better to get a remote stand but only if it is on the far western tarmac....point gotten!!!

PanHAM wrote:

That complaint about too many remote stands Comes up every so and so many weeks. I prefer a remote stand at the far western tarmac ovewr a gate stand in the A30s and upwards. The bus takes you swiftly to the Exit in the A terminal, much better than Walking that distance.

Another indication how huge FRA is, there have been 97 days last year with more than 200K passengers. That means FRA is over capacity almost a third of the year. And that moron of Mayor still holds up the building permit to go ahead with buiding the "G" Pier for LCC

Unfortunately that's not a lot of use when you have to get through passport control and to the far end of the B gates for your connecting flight.

Any remote stand in any weather condition is better than A42. FRA is a "grown" Airport, not a greefield site. There are no green field site available anywhere in the Region that could accomoate a MUC solution. T3, in the three building stages, will improve the conditions.

Far better chances improving the customer experience, changes at the security checks are over due