Sydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 1620 posts, RR: 6 Posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3739 times:
I did a search on here and on United.com and couldn't find a confirmation of the below. I am somewhat surprised that UAL's SFO hub isn't larger than this given that it is it's primary International hub on the West Coast. I have tried to incorporate only United and United Express operated flights. I make a total of 282 flights. I thought they were bigger than this? Can anyone confirm that I'm in the ballpark here or whether I've missed any destinations? These are based on May 22 departures.
International
FRA 1
HKG 1
ICN 1
KIX 1
LHR 2
MEX 1
NGO 1
NRT 2
PEK 1
PVG 1
PVR 1
SAL 1
SJD 1
SYD 1
TPE 1
AeroWesty From United States, joined Oct 2004, 15634 posts, RR: 66 Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3718 times:
Quoting Sydscott (Thread starter): I am somewhat surprised that UAL's SFO hub isn't larger than this given that it is it's primary International hub on the West Coast.
SFO isn't situated geographically to take more than connecting traffic to Asia in essentially one large midday bank, connect passengers up and down the west coast, to Hawaii, and some west coasters to the east, along with servicing the somewhat sizeable O&D market. If you're flying from Seattle to the east coast, for example, SFO is several hundred miles out of your way vs. DEN or ORD. Traffic between other western cities is large enough that some of it can overfly SFO, reducing the need for too large of a hub on the coast.
JayDub From United States, joined Dec 2006, 580 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3643 times:
SFO's ability to handle large volumes of arrivals, primarily due to lack of separation between parallel runways...well, it just doesn't exist. This puts a big limit on the airport's ability to handle much more than it already does, therefore hindering anyone's attempts at making SFO a large hub.
The airlines are lucky to get a 60 Average Arrival Rate out of SFO on an almost perfect day. More often than not...when there are low ceilings and/or patchy fog...that drops to a 30-45 AAR and the ground delay programs start. Without SOIA approaches, the AAR drops to even less than that. This is a big concern for many people when Virgin America* and WN start full operations out of SFO. SFO flow times can be bad enough right now without the extra volume...just imagine throwing 2 more carriers into the mix.
If SFO could manage a 60 rate all the time, it could be a pretty big hub for someone. Unfortunately, in it's current configuration, it just isn't going to happen.
* - How are we coming along on getting the IATA code in the system for Virgin America?
"Travel is only glamorous in retrospect." - Paul Theroux
Ramprat74 From United States, joined Dec 2003, 1214 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3570 times:
United operated around 250 mainline departures a day back in the late 90's. Most of the flights were Shuttle By United. Like others have posted, when low clouds hit, delays were very common. United has handed a lot of traffic over to UAX RJ's in recent years.
OH-LGA From United States, joined Oct 1999, 1347 posts, RR: 29 Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3168 times:
You neglected to add the second daily SFO-FRA flight which has been operating since late April, and there are 3x additional weekly SFO-HKG frequencies as well.
The June schedule change will shake things up a little bit, with SFO-PMD inaugurating with 2 daily CRJ200 roundtrips, and an additional COS frequency (OO) and an additional EUG frequency (OO) as well. BOI will see a 737-300 on the last flight of the evening, replacing a UAX CRJ200. Upon further investigation it looks from a glance that the 737 was pulled from SFO-BUR (replaced by a CRJ200), making it one 737 and one CRJ200 RON in BUR and the BOI 737-300 operating FFOD BOI-SFO as well.
Many markets are seeing capacity and equipment adjustments, with EUG seeing a capacity increase, while SMF and RNO see minor decreases (CRJ200 -> EMB-120 on certain flights). But, with the exception of the PMD addition to the route network, nothing major seems to be on the horizon for now at least.
Head in the clouds... yet feet planted firmly on the ground.
AS739X From United States, joined Apr 2003, 4386 posts, RR: 30 Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3086 times:
If I am not mistaken SFO will be losing the 3 additional weekly HKG once LAX-HKG begins. I'd think it would have stayed if UA had the a/c available.
On top of the amount of flights SFO can handle in low weather situations and the geographical position is United has limited gates space at SFO. During the mornings they overflow some international flights to the A concourse. If I am not mistaken there are on 4 domestic gates that can handle the 747/777.
I wonder if United would consider a few early am departure's to Asia if they had the a/c availability.
ASSFO
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
Sydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 1620 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2851 times:
So I'm seeing one additional FRA + two new PMD + 1 COS + 1 EUG - 1 PIT = 286.
Quoting SFOFlyer (Reply 6): Without doing any real searching, you are missing the Saturday only flight SFO-CUN. I am sure that there are more Saturday only flights out there
I didn't count the Saturday only flights because I figured that they were replacing a mainline domestic service for the most part and, therefore, wouldn't overly effect the number of departures for the day. If anything I'd have though weekend
departures would be slightly lower than weekdays.
Quoting OH-LGA (Reply 4): and there are 3x additional weekly SFO-HKG frequencies as well.
I didn't count those 3 because I figured that they were disappearing when the LAX-HKG flight takes effect.
LAXspotter From India, joined Jan 2007, 3650 posts, RR: 7 Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2472 times:
According to flightaware.com SFO operations currently average around 52-55 ops/hr at peak hr. I talked recently to a man who designed the Garulhos Airport in Sao Paulo and he noted how San Francisco is stuck with this problem, essentially SFO has two runways at one time.
QUESTION: Can SFO operate with the 28R for Arrivals, 28L for departures and and Runways 1L or 1R for departures all at the same time? That would seem to be an efficient way of running the airport, then again I have no knowledge about runway ops.
I guess the only option for SFO, is doing something in the likes of Osaka-Kansai, building on the bay, but the environmentalists will be up in arms with that thought.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
UAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 2249 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2400 times:
Quoting AS739X (Reply 5): If I am not mistaken SFO will be losing the 3 additional weekly HKG once LAX-HKG begins. I'd think it would have stayed if UA had the a/c available.
For sure. Same old problem, we now seem to be getting at UA...distinct lack of metal.
Technically it does operate this was. The normal departures are 1L/R and arrivals 28L/R. When there are a heavies departing to Asia/Hawaii and Europe, they MOSTLY depart 28L/R. But to cut SFO down to 28R arrivals only is the problem. In low vis, this is what happens. Add in a good amount of heavies with added separation and you can really reduce arrival rates. Your friend at Sao Paulo is right that SFO is stuck with the problems unless the airport can get past the NIMBYs and add an additional runway in the bay as you said, which I am in favor of of course. I'd love to see a bridge type of runway, which would reduce the environmental impact.
ASSFO
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
Jacobin777 From United States, joined Sep 2004, 13323 posts, RR: 68 Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2122 times:
Quoting LAXspotter (Reply 13): QUESTION: Can SFO operate with the 28R for Arrivals, 28L for departures and and Runways 1L or 1R for departures all at the same time? That would seem to be an efficient way of running the airport, then again I have no knowledge about runway ops.
Quoting AS739X (Reply 15):
Technically it does operate this was. The normal departures are 1L/R and arrivals 28L/R.
...most of it depends on the time of day......most departures in the morning are from 1R/1L....I've seen many heavies departing from the 1's......as mentioned above, the 28's are for arrivals..especially in the midmorning on (when most heavies arrive anyway)......
There are simultaneous departures off the 1's while there are planes arriving on the 28's...this speeds things up...
the photo above, our flight was departing 1R while there was an incoming NW757 on the 28....
Now, unlike LHR, etc. there is rarely a line of 5+ planes taxiing...of my 50-60 times spotting at SFO, I have might have seen a line of 6 planes taxiing for departure only 1-2 times.....usually 2-4 planes..that's about it..
..even with all of the problems SFO has with fog, etc. SFO has the ability to still take on a lot more flights....the fact WN is coming in is some positive proof as part of the reason why WN is coming back is not only because of renegotiated lease rates, but better capabilities of SFO to handle arrivals/departures.....
I don't think it depends. This is the standard good weather operations. But as we know the common weather changes things more then anything. Afternoon winds often make for 28 departures and arrivals which does reduce arrival rate though, but at a quite time of the day.
Yeah the heavies do depart the 1's, but not with a heavy loads. Other then NRT, I've hardly ever seen a Asia departure from 1R. The Euro flights do use 1R sometimes, but not very often. Even BA or VS need to lighter then average for a 1R departure.
ASSFO
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
CV880 From United States, joined Mar 2007, 599 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1982 times:
When the afternoon 'westerlies' get strong, as it has been of late, the departures frequently shift to 28. When it occurs in the early afternoon, the queues for departure can get quite long. Winds usually subside in the evening, allowing return to normal 1L/R departures. The positive fact is that this scenario occurs in clear weather. Major backups occur when fog obscures the approaches to 28L/R, then there are the rainy day approaches on 19L/R, inbound over OAK, which are confined to a few months in the winter.
Jacobin777 From United States, joined Sep 2004, 13323 posts, RR: 68 Reply 24, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1947 times:
Quoting AS739X (Reply 17): I don't think it depends. This is the standard good weather operations. But as we know the common weather changes things more then anything. Afternoon winds often make for 28 departures and arrivals which does reduce arrival rate though, but at a quite time of the day.
..true..I should have added that in my discussion...most of the operations are obviously due to weather patterns, but those are "typical" days and weather patterns.....
as I've said, I've spotted and flown out of SFO one too many times..and what I have mentioned is the "standard" way SFO operates...of course, there are times planes arrive on the 19's
and there are rare times when even heavies arrive on the 1's (spectacular views!) and 10's.....
Quoting AS739X (Reply 17): Yeah the heavies do depart the 1's, but not with a heavy loads. Other then NRT, I've hardly ever seen a Asia departure from 1R. The Euro flights do use 1R sometimes, but not very often. Even BA or VS need to lighter then average for a 1R departure.
....most heavies such as UA, NW, JL and NH depart noon/early afternoon, but by then, its back to the "usual" ops (i.e. departures on the 28)....now fellow A.net member did have a JL flight during the winter take off from the 19's!! It was a fairly light load B744..in fact, he has insisted that it even rotated off before crossing the 28 intersection! Being that he does have a pilots license (at least was working on one), I assume he knows what he's talking about...
Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 18): What about SFO-CDG, I didnt see that listed
....SFO-CDG ended a couple of years ago....loads were rather poor..AA ended SJC-CDG in 2001 only a few months after starting the route because the route was doing so poorly...
AeroWesty From United States, joined Oct 2004, 15634 posts, RR: 66 Reply 25, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1685 times:
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 24): now fellow A.net member did have a JL flight during the winter take off from the 19's!! It was a fairly light load B744..in fact, he has insisted that it even rotated off before crossing the 28 intersection! Being that he does have a pilots license (at least was working on one), I assume he knows what he's talking about...
From the layout of the 19s in the drawing below, I find that nearly impossible. I've taken off on the 19s in a 727, and it took far longer than that to take off, screaming over the hills the entire way. However, I must put in the standard disclaimer, I'm not a pilot--this is just my observation as a passenger whose home airport was SFO for a number of decades.
I wonder how many feet it is from the usable edge of whichever 19 they took off from to the intersection of the 28's. It's awfully short! Remember that Pan Am clipped the old platform at the end of the 1's with a 747 circa 1971 (before the days when there were runway length markers so they could tell how far along they were).
International Homo of Mystery
26 Legacyins: The loads were great. It was the yeilds that sucked.
27 Laxintl: Yes loads were very strong, revenue was not. Matter of fact annual average load factors were astounding 83.3% and 86.7% for 2004 and 2005, one of the
28 UnitedFlyer: I heard from a frequent SFO user that the UAX remote terminal has been closed....I can't imagine that is even possible with the amount of useage.....
29 Timz: On 19L, 3300 ft to the centerline of 28R. That's from the runway end, so subtract a bit for the planelength. So maybe the wind was 190 at 90.[Edited
30 Planecrazy2: I believe it's been closed for quite a while now. Here is the current layout: http://www.united.com/page/article/0,6722,1121,00.html
31 OH-LGA: It is indeed true. It closed down February of 2006... the remote terminal building has been razed and is completely wiped off the map. UAX operations
32 Jacobin777: .......apologies guys..it was right after the 28's..not before.....feel a bit dumb now.. ...my bad.... ....I meant AA's SJC-CDG loads were rather poo
33 Sydscott: So how does Air France do in terms of yields & loads into SFO? Since UA pulled off the route they surely would have been able to increase their yield
34 Johnboy: LOL, think LAX NIMBY'S times 100! The big difference would be the various sacred space drum circles/ mass "die-in's" on the runways representing all
35 Sydscott: LOL That's piss funny!! Are you serious??
36 AS739X: SFO has issue's with NIMBY's when an idea pops in planners heads while laying in bed Right now there are no to many plans though, so I have not heard
37 AeroWesty: I don't doubt it at all. Just not a 744 carrying a commercial load fueled for NRT against 10 hours of headwinds. But the issue has been addressed, it
38 AS739X: Sorry Aero. Misunderstood what you had said. I agree, not a chance a JAL 747 hit Vr before crossing the intersection. ASSFO
39 SailorOrion: UA might serve SFO-MUC next year SailorOrion
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 1620 posts, 
From United States, joined Oct 2004, 15634 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2007, 3650 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 2249 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
