Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA 777 At SJC?  
User currently offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4245 times:

Driving to work today I thought I saw a UA777 about 6th plane back waiting for take off. Could be wrong as its kind of hard to drive by on the Freeway and watch the runway. But I also notice a B777 listed today flight 938 at 3:55 for ORD. Is this a weather related / repositioning type of deal?

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoston92 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4229 times:

The largest UA a/c out of SJC this morning was a 757 - ORD:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1106



"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
User currently offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4189 times:

Quoting Boston92 (Reply 1):
The largest UA a/c out of SJC this morning was a 757 - ORD:


Thanks, probably just wishful thinking on my part. The 757 was probably closer to the Highway than I thought. It sure looked a lot bigger than the 737's and A319 lined up. STill not sure of the 3:55 flight though.


User currently offlineJetblue From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 393 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4167 times:

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Thread starter):
Driving to work today I thought I saw a UA777

Maybe they're giving the SJC-NRT route a try...hehe. Big grin

jetBlue



We know for you it's not just a seat on a flight to a place. It's a seat on a flight to your life.
User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2496 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4071 times:

Is SJC big enough to accomodate a 777?! Wow, imagine the vectoring and spacing in/out of the airspace to make room for that guy!

(I suppose anything is possible considering AA flew MD-11s on their NRT route)


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 offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4063 times:

AA also flew the 777 on the route.

NS


User currently offlineBirdbrainz From United States of America, joined May 2005, 458 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3768 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 4):
Is SJC big enough to accomodate a 777?

It's more than big enough. SJC's runways are 11000 ft long. There are two problems with UA sending a 777 to SJC:

1. They don't have the correct baggage/cargo unloaders there. Ground crew training might also be an issue.

2. Their ramp space is small, although one of their gates might be big enough.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2496 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3710 times:

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 6):
It's more than big enough. SJC's runways are 11000 ft long. There are two problems with UA sending a 777 to SJC:

1. They don't have the correct baggage/cargo unloaders there. Ground crew training might also be an issue.

2. Their ramp space is small, although one of their gates might be big enough.

Ah yes, thanks for the refresher. I've only flown into/out of SJC once and that was at least ten years ago. I remember the terminal being quite cramped. I must've been thinking of SNA's runway.

Thanks,
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 offlineBoston92 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3666 times:

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 6):
It's more than big enough



Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 6):
Their ramp space is small

You just contradicted yourself: When 777fan said SJC was too small for a 777, I think that includes all aspects of the airport and not just the runways. SBA has seen a 747 land on its 6000 ft runway; that does NOT mean SBA can handle an a/c as large as the 747.



"Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?"
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3630 times:

SJC has handled multiple AA 777 services in the past on a scheduled basis.

The previous poster was indicating that UA's ramp space may be insufficient for United to handle a 777 service.

Such a statement doesn't speak to the airport's capabilities, but United's.

NS


User currently offlineTonyban From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 343 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

UAL uses terminal C at SJC which has no walkway jetties. Passengers must still board and disembark via stairs at terminal C. The newer terminal A has jetties but is not used UAL. I don't believe termical C has the capacity for a 777. Just my opinion.

User currently offlineBirdbrainz From United States of America, joined May 2005, 458 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3414 times:

Quoting Boston92 (Reply 8):
You just contradicted yourself: When 777fan said SJC was too small for a 777, I think that includes all aspects of the airport and not just the runways. SBA has seen a 747 land on its 6000 ft runway; that does NOT mean SBA can handle an a/c as large as the 747.

I apologize for what seems like a contradiction, but when the original post was speaking about vectoring and spacing, the reference was clearly in regards to the airport's capabilities, not the ramp space. As Gigneil said, SJC is easily able to handle it, but UA's terminal and ground handling equipment can't.

Btw, isn't SBA an alternate to LAX for certain flights?



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
User currently offlineArcrftLvr From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 826 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3342 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 4):
Is SJC big enough to accomodate a 777?! Wow, imagine the vectoring and spacing in/out of the airspace to make room for that guy!

Yes, AA uses a 777 on the SJC-NRT route...


User currently offlineLegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2071 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3313 times:

Quoting ArcrftLvr (Reply 12):
Yes, AA uses a 777 on the SJC-NRT route...

AA used a 777 on the SJC-NRT route... past tense.



John@SFO
User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2496 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3297 times:

Quoting ArcrftLvr (Reply 12):
Yes, AA uses a 777 on the SJC-NRT route...



Quoting Legacyins (Reply 13):
AA used a 777 on the SJC-NRT route... past tense.

That's what I thought. I remember seeing the venerable MD-11 while at SJC (ten years or so ago); it looked really out of place at an airport that size. The attempt to cater to the techie crowd was a valiant one but I'm guessing that most simply opted to head over to SFO...actually, maybe they just made a conference call or VTC.


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 offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3250 times:

Good thing my RR rating is zero, otherwise it would probably have gone down for thinking I might have seen a UA777 at SJC. Chalk it up to an optical illusion, coupled with hopefullness.  embarrassed 

But if you are interested you can see a AA777 parked at SJC from Google Earth (provided they have not updated the satellite photo). You'll also notice a parking area which could accomadate a couple of more between Terminal C and A. If you don't have google earth its a cool program thats free and you can see airports just by typing in the airport code for destination (It's really a must for a-net nuts.)


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 16, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3197 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 7):
Ah yes, thanks for the refresher. I've only flown into/out of SJC once and that was at least ten years ago.

I flew into SJC less than 2 hours ago.... Smile

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 9):
SJC has handled multiple AA 777 services in the past on a scheduled basis.

SJC-NRT, SJC-TPE were two routes flown..IIRC..SJC-CDG was with a 777 (70% sure only, so but don't quote me on that, as it could have been a 767)



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineLegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2071 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 16):
SJC-CDG was with a 777 (70% sure only, so but don't quote me on that, as it could have been a 767)

It was with a 767-300



John@SFO
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 18, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3142 times:

Quoting Legacyins (Reply 17):
It was with a 767-300

Thanks for the clarification.. checkmark ....looks like the other 30% wins out.. Smile



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4782 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3080 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ArcrftLvr (Reply 12):
Yes, AA uses a 777 on the SJC-NRT route...

AA used a 777 on the route daily from the late 1990s until this past fall. The route was discontinued in October of this year.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineAirlineBrat From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 652 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3062 times:

UA used to fly DC-10's into SJC. I flew on the 10's from SJC-HNL and HNL-SJC back in September 1980.


I'm leavin on a jet plane. Don't know when I'll be back again....
User currently offline777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2496 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3050 times:

Quoting AirlineBrat (Reply 20):
UA used to fly DC-10's into SJC. I flew on the 10's from SJC-HNL and HNL-SJC back in September 1980.

Wow - that's old school. I didn't even know they operated that route at any point. You would think they would've been content with SFO-HNL; I guess they needed to appeal to those that didn't feel like crossing the bridge to fly out of SFO.


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 offlineSJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3009 times:

Quoting 777fan (Reply 21):
Wow - that's old school. I didn't even know they operated that route at any point. You would think they would've been content with SFO-HNL; I guess they needed to appeal to those that didn't feel like crossing the bridge to fly out of SFO.

You don't need to cross a bridge to get to SFO. It appeals to the people that don't won't to drive an additional 45 min - 60 min or longer to get to SFO. For example, I can ask my wife to drop me off at SJC, but if I ask her to drop me off as SFO she'll ask me to drop dead. HA has a daily 767 service to Hawaii from SJC. I flew American to OGG a while back, but AA dropped a lot of flights since the "hub" idea at SJC never worked out. I blame it on WN, it was hard for AA to compete. They should rename the place from Norm Mineta San Jose International to Southwest San Jose Domestic Airport.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 23, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3006 times:

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 22):
They should rename the place from Norm Mineta San Jose International to Southwest San Jose Domestic Airport.

..While I agree SJC has a 4:1 lead over AA/AE @ SJC....AA/AE is still the 2nd largest carrier there...and at least AA management believe that SJC has "stabilised"...

SJC is the "child that could've been" with AA...AA always try to do something with it but besides the "dot.com" days, the critical mass has never been there....such a shame, as its 50x more convenient than SFO....not to mention, there are almost never any delays (unlike SFO today)...



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineBirdbrainz From United States of America, joined May 2005, 458 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2958 times:

Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 22):
They should rename the place from Norm Mineta San Jose International to Southwest San Jose Domestic Airport.

I always liked SJC, except for the world's most claustrophobic terminal (Terminal A). Terminal C was sweet, and got the job done with minimal fuss.

I argued with my dad (A UA 727 captain who flew out of SJC a lot) about SJC. He said SJC was too surrounded by development, and would never amount to much. He compared it to "La Garbage" (LGA).

Damn, I hate it when he's right.  cry 

PS. I know extremely little about LGA, and don't have an opinion about it.



A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
25 Jacobin777 : During the "dot.com" days, SJC did have quite a daily flight schdule...at least MX comes here..and from what SJC management have said, they are close
26 Birdbrainz : That would be super! Back when I lived out there, I preferred SJC big time, though SFO's new int'l terminal is sweet. I still fly into SJC when I vis
27 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Yah..I am "cautiously optimistic" about some trans-aqua flights... SJC is 50x times easier to deal with than SJC....especially now that I only live 1
28 777fan : I know that but the alternative (navigating down and then over to the 101) is crazy. No doubt, SJC is a convenient alternative to some destinations,
29 Post contains images Jacobin777 : I prefer the 280....
30 777fan : I would just bridge it if I had to. Then again, I'd rather live on the SF side of the Bay to begin with. 777fan
31 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Actually I only live 10-15 minutes away from SJC anyway..no bridges for me.. That being said, when I lived in SFO and flew out of SJC, I would take t
32 Hawaiian717 : 777fan, I think you're confusing SJC with OAK. The most direct route from OAK to SFO would involve crossing a bridge, but from SJC to SFO it's just u
33 777fan : In this case, I was talking about driving from the east bay (~Hayward) over to SFO without transitting any of the bridges. In that case, it'd be a pa
34 Hawaiian717 : I much preferred to fly MRY-SFO and then connect to wherever I was going than drive it. Time-wise it's pretty much a wash, and there were times I prob
35 777fan : I think I ended up splitting my outbound flights between MRY and SFO, simply because I began flying UA on a regular basis. I despised the EMB-120 (co
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 777 At AFW posted Sat Mar 19 2005 18:41:23 by AA7771stClass
UA 777 At CAK & Preparation For It posted Tue Aug 10 2004 01:42:00 by CVG777
Jetway Hits UA 777 At LAX - Damage Seen posted Sat Jul 17 2004 06:08:08 by QANTAS747-438
UA 777 At STL Today posted Sat Jul 10 2004 03:38:38 by Pilotpip
UA 777 At FRA Late Tues Evening? posted Thu Jun 24 2004 19:46:39 by Star_world
UA 777 At ABQ Yesterday. posted Sun Jun 30 2002 22:45:14 by ABQ757
Why So Many UA 757's At SJC Today? posted Sat Jun 8 2002 08:59:13 by SJCguy
UA 777 At AFW posted Sat Mar 19 2005 18:41:23 by AA7771stClass
AA 777 At SJC Today posted Tue Aug 1 2000 08:15:14 by C172sb
UA 777 At CAK & Preparation For It posted Tue Aug 10 2004 01:42:00 by CVG777
UA 777 at Kai Tak? posted Tue Mar 2 1999 02:30:36 by flyf15
Jetway Hits UA 777 At LAX - Damage Seen posted Sat Jul 17 2004 06:08:08 by QANTAS747-438
UA 777 Parked At HNL posted Fri Oct 6 2006 03:47:23 by FL370
UA 777 At STL Today posted Sat Jul 10 2004 03:38:38 by Pilotpip
UA 777 At FRA Late Tues Evening? posted Thu Jun 24 2004 19:46:39 by Star_world
UA 777 At ABQ Yesterday. posted Sun Jun 30 2002 22:45:14 by ABQ757
Why So Many UA 757's At SJC Today? posted Sat Jun 8 2002 08:59:13 by SJCguy
AA 777 At SJC Today posted Tue Aug 1 2000 08:15:14 by C172sb
UA 777 at Kai Tak? posted Tue Mar 2 1999 02:30:36 by flyf15
UA 777 Parked At HNL posted Fri Oct 6 2006 03:47:23 by FL370