Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA Clipping Int'l Wings  
User currently offlineKlwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1977 posts, RR: 3
Posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1446 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Did anyone else notice that UA stopped service to LIM? It's seems that except in Australia, and Asia, London Heathrow and Buenos Aires, and maybe Brazil, UA's international network is very lackluster. Their commercials claim they fly to more places than anyone else in the world. Can they really make this statement?? In most of Europe and Latin America UA is not that strong.

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offline777x From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1136 times:

While it's true that UA has trimmed some International routes from it's system, AFAIK it has added more new ones, recently UA announced new services such as

LAX - MEL (Non stop - was LAX - AKL - MEL)
LAX - Paris
SFO - Seoul
SFO - Shanghai
SFO - Beijing
SFO - Frankfurt

As a member of star alliance, UA relies on LH to cover europe well


User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1122 times:

United's not really an airline that adds destinations (that's left up to the Star partners), but rather to add new ways to get to those destinations (ie: SFO-PEK, SFO-PVG nonstop). It's kinda sad, really. It would be very nice to see UA operate to the 20-some destinations in Europe that CO does, and open up another Pacific hub, close to the action, where 757/767's could be used for flights (such as GUM).

Now that I'm depressed about UA's route system, I'll go and have some food...

FLY777UAL


User currently offlineVirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1105 times:

United isn't strong internationaly as the Pan AM (god bless it's soul) was. Pan Am would be all over the world. Everywhere you go you would see the famous globe logo with Pan Am written on it's world famous 747's. That era is now long gone but will not be forgotten. The airlines today should thank both Pan Am an TWA for getting their prized international routes. It just saddens me that United no longer flies to India anymore as of March last year.


"FUIMUS"
User currently offlineKlwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1088 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

CO plans on adding adding more destinations to Europe over the next couple years. I doubt highly that UA will follow their lead in Europe. I doubt UA will also add a hub in GUM. CO already has a stronghold there. That would be like UA adding a hub in IAH. I just said earlier that it seems as if with the exception of the southern cone of South America, UA has given up on Latin America and given it to AA and CO (and DL to a lesser extent). I mean no Lima, Quito, Bogota, Panama City, Managua, or Santa Cruz or La Paz in Bolivia. In Europe no UA to Rome, Dublin, Tel Aviv, Glasgow, Madrid, Lisbon and so on.

User currently offlineBigtidi From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 43 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1078 times:

Just a little note. As of early next year CO will serve more international destinations than any other US carrier.

User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1072 times:

I don't doubt any of that Europe/GUM expansion will happen--I KNOW it won't. Just saying that it would be interesting to see...

FLY777UAL


User currently offlineTullamarine From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1427 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1045 times:

Welcome to the new world of alliances.

These days airlines are loath to add new routes except where the financials are outstanding. They prefer to use codeshares or interlining to alliance partners. UA will argue, for better or worse, that their alliance with Varig gives them huge coverage of South America, just as they could argue that TG and SQ give them huge coverage through Asia.

If airlines were run by plane spotters it would be much different, but airlines are run by accountants.


User currently offlineDIA77 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 704 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1053 times:

I agree with Tullamarine. UA is not going to start flying to Pago Pago or Rabat like the Pan Am of the 1960's. UA focuses on the routes that are going to make it money. There is no glamor in losing money on exotic routes. We all wish HP was still flying their 747's to Nagoya but everything comes down to $$$.

User currently offlineUA744Flagship From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1033 times:

You must look at UA's route structure from a financial perspective; after all, it is a PUBLIC company whose priority one is profit and not so much glamour. To this extent, I have seen and heard articles many times that have praised UA for the variety of its route structure. Stock analysts love UA's route system and feels it is the best "all-around" -- just look at its UA hubs (prior to the dubbing of LAX). SFO, DEN, ORD, and IAD are stretagically located at the same latitude and are distanced pretty closely to each other. This advantageous route structure allows UA to offer the most comprehensive connections for most people in the country.. to anywhere.

User currently offlineORD From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1378 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1016 times:

Although United does not serve as many cities in Europe as other U.S. carriers do, United is a close second to Delta to Europe in terms of revenue passenger miles (which is how airline size is typically measured). Larger than American and larger than Continental.

User currently offlineKlwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 990 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

UA does have a good route structure, definitely not perfect though. If I wanted to fly from New York to Guatemala City, I'd have to go to LAX first (and the LAX-Guatemala City flight used to be an over night flight, don't know now though). Not real convenient. It would be easier on any other carrier. Also about the part where financial consideration is god, there are other considerations as well. I can't imagine how UA would make money on LAX-DFW, LAX-IAH and LAX-ATL flights. Compared to the competition on those routes, UA is a microscopic player. Usually airlines like to big big players in the markets they serve. And even with serving fewer cities in Europe, I doubt they'll hold onto that second place position in Europe that long. Once they go to LHR and FRA from all it's' hubs, what will they do then? For example I've heard CO will add as many as 10 more European cities over the next few years. It just seems as if UA is contented letting their partners do a lot of international flying (except to Asia). If I wanted to go to Aruba, Rome, Cancun, Bogota, Panama City, Quito, Lima, Tel Aviv, Dublin, Glasgow, Moscow, Istanbul, Lisbon or Cairo; UA and its' partners would not be the most convenient way of going.

User currently offlineUnitedchicago From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 101 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (14 years 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 967 times:

You guys are forgetting that United owns the Pacific. They do fly to more places in the world than anyone else. That's fact.

User currently offlineKlwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 1977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (14 years 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 945 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

One post above says that CO and COexp will soon go to more cities than UA. The post directly above says it's indisputable that UA goes to more places in the world than any other carrier. Who's right???? UA is strong in the Pacific and in Europe (in terms of RPMs). But aren't they third in Latin America?

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
UA New Int'l Routes: Where Are The Ac Coming From? posted Fri Jan 19 2007 16:54:58 by Skycruiser
UA 737's Clip Wings At DEN posted Tue May 17 2005 21:53:05 by DLKAPA
Rumor UA Flying Int'l Out Of PHL? posted Tue Mar 16 2004 02:02:51 by TonyBurr
Senators Debate Clipping Pilots' Wings At Age 60 posted Tue Mar 13 2001 19:29:37 by Watewate
UA Survey - Charging For Food On Int'l Flights posted Mon Aug 4 2008 07:50:51 by LDIkaros
When Will UA Have A New Y Class For Int'l Service? posted Mon Apr 21 2008 10:48:56 by YYZflyboy
UA Int' 767 With New Seats Etc...Any Info, Pics? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 06:00:34 by UAL777UK
UA 737 At SFO Int'l A Gates On Sundays? posted Mon Oct 1 2007 02:20:17 by Flyswim
UA Domestic First Vs. UA Int'l Business posted Sat Feb 10 2007 23:14:17 by Boston92
UA First Seat On 767-300 Int..The Replacement? posted Mon Aug 28 2006 19:42:17 by UAL777UK