Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Don't UA Fly DEN/HNL/MEL & BNE With 777's?  
User currently offlineAustralia1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5643 times:

Surely UA should look at flying HNL/MEL. Who want to fly LAX/SYD/MEL & QF is doing well with LAX/BNE 5 days a week.

Australians don't want to transit awful LAX & Queenslanders & Brisbaneites don't want to fly to SYD to get to USA !!!

UA have daily DEN/HNL/DEN service using a 777. They could continue the flight DEN/HNL onto MEL twice a week initally & same to BNE & then increase over time, without dropping any services to SYD.

SFO/SYD began if I rembmer correctly as 3/week then eventually increased to daily.

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineOnedude From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5640 times:

Agree with you but don't know if the economics stand up. AC tried HNL/MEL just before 9/11 but folded it after Ansett collapsed with no domestic feed to the service.

Cheers,
onedude


User currently offlineSFORunner From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5629 times:

Quoting Australia1 (Thread starter):
UA have daily DEN/HNL/DEN service using a 777. They could continue the flight DEN/HNL onto MEL twice a week initally & same to BNE

UA fly DEN - HNL using a 2-class 772 (non-ER) model that does not have the range to fly HNL - BNE (non-stop with sufficient yield, etc.) , much less HNL - MEL.

I recall a poster by the name of Simpilicity (from BNE as well) who was fond of asking similar questions. Perhaps he could chime in with his thoughts.


User currently offlineAustralia1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5601 times:

Quoting Onedude (Reply 1):
Agree with you but don't know if the economics stand up. AC tried HNL/MEL just before 9/11 but folded it after Ansett collapsed with no domestic feed to the service.

AC using a 763er which was weight restricted & the point of my topic, was not many Australians going to the U.S. want to terminate their journey or stopover at LAX or SFO in both directions, so if UA fly eg. MEL/HNL/DEN they could easily connect beyond DEN, without having to transit LAX or SFO. If they wanted to stop in LAX or SFO they could using existing services in 2 direction.

Quoting SFORunner (Reply 2):
UA fly DEN - HNL using a 2-class 772 (non-ER) model that does not have the range to fly HNL - BNE (non-stop with sufficient yield, etc.) , much less HNL - MEL.

Surely they have plenty of longer range 777's, eg. the ones that once flew LAX/AKL/LAX.

QF is doing very well yiled wise out of BNE to LAX 5 days/week, BUT pax hate LAX, as BNE flight goes into TBIT in LAX & to connect on AA eg. pax must go into LA proper, walk next door to terminal 4 & get in the non-security queue.

Was talking to black guy at non-security & he said they are paid to go slow. I asked what he meant & he said, if they worked faster or more effeciently, they would be sent home earlier & therefore earn less pay. Crazy !!! Turning people off going to the U.S. & with their deficit they need every torist they can get.


User currently offlineDJ748 From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 355 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5541 times:

I do recall UA have a code-share agreement with DJ so they would have some good feed into the BNE service if they do start it, particularly from CNS, CBR, ADL, TSV and possibly some other destinations. A HNL connection may be considered easier to some people compared to connecting through LAX where QF fly into.

UA would need a better product at a cheaper price than QF into BNE if they did serve it. If they use a 777, they would need to rid themselves of the
2-5-2 seating, example here: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0517905/M/
Unless of course they use a 747-400 where they have 3-4-3, example here: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0971981/M/ . Then you have the issue of QF having IFE compared the virtually non-existent IFE on the UA 744.

Could CO ever serve BNE? They currently do 4x weekly on GUM-CNS with good connections onto HNL/JFK and into Asia from there. A 757 from GUM to BNE would be useful with the CO base in GUM. Would be nice to see a regular 757 service into Australia at some point.


User currently offlineMonteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 28
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5527 times:

I am not sure if UA would have the rights to do so in any case.


It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
User currently offlineBicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5521 times:

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 3):
Surely they have plenty of longer range 777's, eg. the ones that once flew LAX/AKL/LAX.

United doesn't have aircraft sitting around doing nothing. They have no long range aircraft available. And they have no plans to purchase more until their financials improve for a few more quarters. They'd have to end a route to start another one with a 777 or any other aircraft in the fleet. Don't know where you got the idea that they can just start a route and throw a spare 777 on it.


User currently offlineAustralia1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5467 times:

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 6):
United doesn't have aircraft sitting around doing nothing. They have no long range aircraft available. And they have no plans to purchase more until their financials improve for a few more quarters. They'd have to end a route to start another one with a 777 or any other aircraft in the fleet. Don't know where you got the idea that they can just start a route and throw a spare 777 on it.

No but they could probably switch a longer range 777 onto this route, or switch with various aircraft such as a 763er, possibly?


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5450 times:

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 3):
the point of my topic, was not many Australians going to the U.S. want to terminate their journey or stopover at LAX or SFO in both directions,

Yes they do - LAX is the biggest N. A. O&D market to from Oz

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 3):
Surely they have plenty of longer range 777's, eg. the ones that once flew LAX/AKL/LAX

They are out making money elsewhere! For it to be worth while for UA to send them to Oz, they would have to make MORE money then where they are now, frankly very unlikely.

Australia1, in gereral terms, there are not enough pax, willing to pay high enough fares for UA to do as you suggest. Don't forget US airlines have the ability to serve other, more profitable routes, QF & NZ don't, so they are willing to provide services in the SW Pacific that no US carrier in their right mind would, because the US can make mor money elsewhere.

QF & NZ supply those services that they think they can find sufficient pax willing to pay enough money so they make enough profit that they provide the service. You can bet this is a lower number than any US carrier would be satisfied with.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2502 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 5381 times:

Quoting SFORunner (Reply 2):
UA fly DEN - HNL using a 2-class 772 (non-ER) model that does not have the range to fly HNL - BNE (non-stop with sufficient yield, etc.) , much less HNL - MEL.

IIRC, the 777 use on the HNL-DEN route is seasonal; they often use a 763.

The HNL transit to Australia is a great idea as it would no doubt be more appealing to Aussies traveling to the States but seeing as how they already codeshare with AC on the HNL-SYD route, it's kind of a moot point. If they were to do it, I wouldn't be surprised to see a 763 on a HNL-SYD/MEL route; it's what AC uses and would save the 777s for higher capacity routes.

Think of the connection points from HNL: SFO, LAX, ORD, DEN.


777fan



DC-8 61/63/71 DC-9-30/50 MD-80/82/83 DC-10-10/30 MD-11 717 721/2 732/3/4/5/G/8/9 741/2/4 752 762/3 777 A306/319/20/33 AT
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8154 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 5353 times:

This is not an economical proposal. UA's 772ER fleet is currently being utilized for the high yield missions in Asia and Europe that are best suited to it. As others have stated, there's no evidence to suggest that UA would be able to generate sufficient revenue on a BNE or MEL tag from HNL to supersede that already provided by existing service.

As mentioned, UA already dedicates two 777s to KIX and NRT service from HNL but the remaining 777s serving HNL from SFO and ORD are strictly 2-class birds for domestic service. It would be quite a challenge from a fleet planning point of view to retask from this current arrangement.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinePenguinflies From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 988 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5198 times:

I'm surprised from a marketing standpoint that UA doesn't codeshare on the DEN-HNL (ua metal) HNL-SYD (AC metal) and do the connection that way.

User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2092 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5103 times:

Quoting Penguinflies (Reply 11):
I'm surprised from a marketing standpoint that UA doesn't codeshare on the DEN-HNL (ua metal) HNL-SYD (AC metal) and do the connection that way.

AC probably does not have the rights to pick up US passengers at HNL. There are a lot of restrictions flying to OZ.

Even if UA could get the rights HNL or DEN to MEL or BNE it would probably not be worth taking a 772 off another route. Those markets are puny compared to SFO or LAX.


User currently offlineHa763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3660 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5051 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Penguinflies (Reply 11):
I'm surprised from a marketing standpoint that UA doesn't codeshare on the DEN-HNL (ua metal) HNL-SYD (AC metal) and do the connection that way.

Wouldn't really work since the DEN flight arrives around 4:30pm and the SYD flight leaves at 11:45pm. That's a 7 hour layover. BTW, UA does code share on AC's HNL-SYD flight, it's UA8489.

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 12):
AC probably does not have the rights to pick up US passengers at HNL.

AC does have 5th freedom rights out of HNL. It's one of the 2 or 3 U.S. destinations specified in the Canada-Australia bilateral.


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5048 times:

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 12):
Quoting Penguinflies (Reply 11):
I'm surprised from a marketing standpoint that UA doesn't codeshare on the DEN-HNL (ua metal) HNL-SYD (AC metal) and do the connection that way.


AC probably does not have the rights to pick up US passengers at HNL

Yes they do!

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 12):
There are a lot of restrictions flying to OZ.

No there is not

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 12):
Even if UA could get the rights HNL or DEN to MEL or BNE

They have them

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 12):
it would probably not be worth taking a 772 off another route. Those markets are puny compared to SFO or LAX.

Agreed, very puny

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineAustralia1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4896 times:

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 14):
Quoting AADC10 (Reply 12):
it would probably not be worth taking a 772 off another route. Those markets are puny compared to SFO or LAX.

Agreed, very puny

Gemuser

I disagree !!! I think you would find that if pax could avoid SYD & LAX, they would RUSH services that avoid both.

I would suggest that maybe UA could drop 3 SYD/LAX/SYD a week (UA826/827) leaving a daily service, thereby freeing up a 744. Then, there would be suitable aircraft for a HNL/MEL & HNL/BNE service.

AC's SYD/HNL/SYD is a daily 763ER most of year, except around Xmas when upgraded to a A343, so very little capacity to give to UA, even if timings did coincide at HNL with UA to DEN.


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4853 times:

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 15):
I disagree !!! I think you would find that if pax could avoid SYD & LAX, they would RUSH services that avoid both.

Agreed, BUT how many??? I strongly suggest it is too small a number to be viable

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 15):
I would suggest that maybe UA could drop 3 SYD/LAX/SYD a week (UA826/827) leaving a daily service, thereby freeing up a 744. Then, there would be suitable aircraft for a HNL/MEL & HNL/BNE service.

UA826/7 only operate in peak times, which just happen to be off peak times in the northern hemisphere, so the B744 are not avialable most of the year, they are busy elsewhere.

Are you SURE your name is not Simplicity??? You are really starting to sound like him!

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineAustralia1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4842 times:

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 16):
Quoting Australia1 (Reply 15):
I would suggest that maybe UA could drop 3 SYD/LAX/SYD a week (UA826/827) leaving a daily service, thereby freeing up a 744. Then, there would be suitable aircraft for a HNL/MEL & HNL/BNE service.

UA826/7 only operate in peak times, which just happen to be off peak times in the northern hemisphere, so the B744 are not avialable most of the year, they are busy elsewhere.

a simple solution ... UA could switch these flights 826/827 from LAX/SYD to HNL/MEL & HNL/BNE or better still DEN/HNL/MEL & BNE, which would free up the aircraft that was to operate DEN/HNL/DEN whether it be a 777 or 767. I think 826/7 operate 3 times/week in peak season (Australia) which would be enough to begin with.

UA would still have both daily SYD/LAX & SYD/SFO with MEL/SYD connection. They would pick up some traffic from QF, form thos pax would don't want to fly thru LAX & aren't terminating there. Similarly, they would pick up some traffic from QF out of BNE, PLUS for DEC-JAN, many people look for other options rather than fly to USA as LAX is hated that much !!!

Who is simplicity?


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4810 times:

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 17):
Who is simplicity?

Sorry, Simpilicity then

Interesting response when you click on his profile:

Username:tSimpilicity
This user chose to end his or her First Class Membership. We are holding his/her username though in case he or she choose to come back. Activating this username is as simple as clicking here!

Are you sure thats not you???

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4807 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 9):
IIRC, the 777 use on the HNL-DEN route is seasonal; they often use a 763.

The HNL transit to Australia is a great idea as it would no doubt be more appealing to Aussies traveling to the States but seeing as how they already codeshare with AC on the HNL-SYD route, it's kind of a moot point. If they were to do it, I wouldn't be surprised to see a 763 on a HNL-SYD/MEL route; it's what AC uses and would save the 777s for higher capacity routes.

Think of the connection points from HNL: SFO, LAX, ORD, DEN.



Quoting Australia1 (Reply 15):
I disagree !!! I think you would find that if pax could avoid SYD & LAX, they would RUSH services that avoid both

I'm not sure it is worht UA flying HNL-SYD as it will be over served once JQ coms on the route. As for avoiding LAX, pax could alsready get the SYD-SFO flight.

Quoting Gemuser (Reply 18):
Sorry, Simpilicity then

Well Spotted!


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8154 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4788 times:

This is really becoming idiotic. How many times must the same counterpoint be restated??


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4784 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 20):
This is really becoming idiotic.

What do you mean "becoming"?

If Australia1 realy is Simpilicity, then you aint seen anything yet, there is a long way to go to the bottom!

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineAustralia1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4763 times:

Quoting ANstar (Reply 19):
Quoting Australia1 (Reply 15):
I disagree !!! I think you would find that if pax could avoid SYD & LAX, they would RUSH services that avoid both

I'm not sure it is worht UA flying HNL-SYD as it will be over served once JQ coms on the route. As for avoiding LAX, pax could alsready get the SYD-SFO flight.

Both LAX & SFO are very congested. I didn't suggest UA should fly HNL/SYD, when the problem is SYD. No one except Sydneysiders want to fly out of SYD internationally. Chnaging terminals at SYD from dom to int ( & v.v.) is a major pain in the arse, as well as being very time consuming, which is what you don't want when have a 13 or 14 hour flight ahead of you !!!

SYD is hardly the centre of the universe !!!


User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4746 times:

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 22):
SYD is hardly the centre of the universe !!!

I don't think anyone in this thread said it was?


User currently offlineMymiles2go From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 207 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4674 times:

Quoting Australia1 (Reply 22):
Both LAX & SFO are very congested

Not really true.

That said - what does your solution provide? Earlier you said it would be routed SFO/LAX-HNL-BNE/MEL - at the end of the day that's still aircraft that would be visting SFO/LAX (if you base it on your incorrect arguement that LAX and SFO are too busy).

Nonethless, why on earth would UA take aircraft off of other well performing routes to do a very niche route. There are a lot of other routes that UA would likely prefer to do before this - i.e. - ORD/IAD-DEL, DEN-NRT, etc...

The reality is they simply don't have spare longhaul aircraft, I'm not clear why that's not sinking in yet on this thread.


25 N1120A : Yes they do have the range, but why in the world would United use an uncompetitive domestic product? This guy probably is Simplicity.
26 Post contains images SFORunner : Are you sure that the 772 (non-ER) has the range (with "viable" load - yeah, a somewhat subjective term)? It's not uncommon for UA's ORD - HNL (772A)
27 Australia1 : Sorry I don't think I said using LAX or SFO. My point is, QF thinks just about everyone likes to fly out of SYD. By avoiding SYD & LAX & SFO, MEL & B
28 6thfreedom : AC did not suspend MEL flights becuase of Ansett or profitability. The service was launched Nov 2001, after S11, when there was a major downturn in tr
29 Gemuser : How do you know this? Even if its true don't you think that it may be because its cheaper to consolidate traffic via your biggest port, that way you
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...
Why Don't UA Fly LAX/BNE Or SFO/BNE? posted Fri Jan 13 2006 00:28:57 by Simpilicity
Why Don't QF Fly BNE/OOM With Q400's? posted Fri May 19 2006 13:00:19 by Simpilicity
Why Don`t Ryanair Fly To Tallinn-Ulemiste/ Estonia posted Tue Oct 3 2006 19:24:15 by Sukhoi
Why Don't Airlines Fly Regional Routes Themselves? posted Wed Jun 7 2006 22:32:31 by N353SK
Why Don't 747's Fly Into MSY? posted Fri May 21 2004 20:32:40 by Quantasflyer
Why Dont UA Fly To LGW posted Sun Jan 18 2004 18:13:45 by Ryder10uk
Why Doesn't UA Fly To The Mexican Resort Areas? posted Mon Jan 12 2004 23:55:55 by ElectraBob
Why Don't UA's 747-400's Have PTV's In Y? posted Wed Aug 13 2003 07:17:00 by AirVB
Why No UA CLT-DEN Flights? posted Thu May 30 2002 22:52:37 by B764
Why Did UA Axe ORD-HNL Non-stops? posted Mon Oct 22 2001 06:16:59 by Tango-Bravo