Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Should United Introduce 757s To Shuttle?  
User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Posted (14 years 14 hours ago) and read 1191 times:

Hello,

Most of the time, the SFO-LAX and LAX-SFO flights are full/oversold. There are aprox. 3 flights/ hour from SFO to LAX. So here is my question...Should UA introduce, oh lets say 6 757s to fly on Shuttle? These planes could be equiped with Shuttle Galleys, and Video systems would be removed. The 757s would fly in addition to the 737s on this route, but would help to ese congestion at both SFO and LAX.

What do you think? Good idea, or bad?

goU N I T E DS H U T T L E

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (14 years 4 hours ago) and read 1137 times:

Interesting idea...(one proposed by SFO airport).

Instead of flying 737's and 757's, United just needs to put on larger aircraft for all of their Shuttle flights. The 757's could help in the interim (galleys and video to stay for mainline cross-utilization), but overall, United just needs to put some A320's on there.

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L


User currently offlineFFMilesJunkie From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 4 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

Although SFO would like to see bigger planes on these shuttle services, don't expect it anytime soon. The airlines like their planes in the air, and the larger the plane, the longer it needs to spend on the ground (loading/ unloading/ fuel/ cater, etc). That's one reason why SW has been so sucessful. They turn around planes in an extremely quick and efficient manner. The 737 is the right plane for the job in my opinion. I'm sure the bean counters at UA have calculated that the 737 is the best for the job.. and I guarantee the second they figure the route justifies a 757 on economic basis, you'll see it there.



User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6902 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (14 years ago) and read 1076 times:

When the Shuttle started, I think the agreement with the pilots didn't allow 757s or larger aircraft on any Shuttle flight. Does it now?

User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years ago) and read 1069 times:

I think just introducing some mainline 767s or 777s to the route would be the best idea.

User currently offlineBigo747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1056 times:

The bigger the plane... the longer the boarding and unboarding... I think this is UA's biggest concern.

User currently offlineCactusA319 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2918 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1055 times:


Bean counters are the guys who run the airlines, and jam-packed 737's bring up the dollar signs for them. They are the model aircraft for this type of operation=Easy and quick to turn, meaning short ground time, and economical on short-runs. If anything, the A320 would be a better fit on shuttle routes instead of the larger 757. It would bring a capacity increase, yet have a decent turn-around time for Shuttle runs.

The 767 and 777 are the worst idea. PSA tried the ultimate shuttle aircraft out in the '70's in the form of the L1011. PSA was similar to SWA or the United Shuttle operation, as it flew high-frequency, short-haul routes. The L10 was just the wrong type of plane for that, as are the 767 and 777. They are meant for other types of routes.


User currently offlineAerLingus From China, joined Mar 2000, 2371 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1046 times:

I think what you suggest is feasable for an airport like La Guardia. Since so many airlines cut flights out of LGA due to the government, it only makes sense in for the reduction of congestion.


Get your patchouli stink outta my store!
User currently offlineUnited_Fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7540 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1039 times:

I don't see why not if they have the spare 757's. They could keep the video systems for the pre-flight safety demo.It wouldn't take long to cater the plane because it's only pop cans and pretzels!



United_Fan



'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineG-SPOT From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1036 times:


Average turn time on a 737-300/500:30-35 mins.
Average turn time on an A320:30-35 mins.
Avg. turn time on a 757-45-50 mins.

Time on the ground means a lot to UA Shuttle.


User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1025 times:

The reason that you would convert the galleys is to hold more soda, and other beverages. On the shuttle planes there is sort of a closet area with lots of extra soda, and snacks. If you convert the galleys on a 757, you cut the turn time down.

Next. On the 757 you get 2 additional doors. Boarding can be done through 1l, 2L, an 3L. So can deplaning.

Boarding through 1L:
First Class

Boarding Through 2L:
Zones 2, 4, and 6.

Boarding through 3L:
Zones 1, 3, and 5


User currently offlineCactusA319 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2918 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1020 times:


Yes, but does UA have 75's to spare for this kind of thing??? They might have more need for those planes on other, longer routes..Just a thought, I don't think you're idea is bad at all. It makes sense, and it's better for SFO and LAX since it would help reduce a few 737 flights....



User currently offlineChepos From Puerto Rico, joined Dec 2000, 6234 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1017 times:

I just think that the A-320 is better for United Shuttle rather than the 757


Fly the Flag!!!!
User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1017 times:

Possibly...but he 757s have a lot more seats, so you can cut he number of Shuttle flights down by atleast 1/3. Well at least the SFO-LAXsector

User currently offlineSEVEN_FIFTY7 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 957 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1004 times:

Who says flights between LAX-SFO *HAVE* to be all Shuttle flights? Why not have regular Shuttle flights supplemented with a few extra mainline ones? Don't convert any galleys or try to mimic Shuttle in any way. Just treat these extra SFO-LAX frequencies the way you would a mainline SFO-SNA segment, or a LA-DEN one.

Just wondering.


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8034 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 986 times:

Those who said that UA will never introduce the 757-200 on the SFO-LAX shuttle are right in their assessments.

Between having to embark and disembark 175 passengers, you also have to load and unload a larger cargo hold and likely load more fuel into the plane. That's why it takes about 45-55 minutes to turn around a 757-200 even in Shuttle configuration; WN can turn around a 737-300/700 in an amazing 20 minutes!

I believe back in the 1970's when PSA flew the 727-200 between SFO and LAX their turnaround times was about 35-40 minutes given having to embark and disembark 150 passengers on a 722.


User currently offlineCritter_592 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 279 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 976 times:

ILUV767,

How can a plane board from 3 doors at a time? 1L, 2L, 3L. I thought all airplanes boarded/deboarded from the front door.


User currently offlineDeltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1663 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 969 times:

Seven Fifty7 is right, UAL doesn't have to have LAX-SFO exclusively Shuttle. They could throw in a mainline 757 or 320 in there during peak times and still charge Shuttle prices. Some of the Shuttle flights on the route don't even carry the designated Shuttle 2000 series flight number and often originate as 777/757/747/320 flights in other cities and then transfer the flight number to the 737 for the LAX to SFO or SFO to LAX hop.

Just six or seven years ago UAL used to routinely fly 727, DC-10 and 757s between LAX, OAK, SFO and SJC. This was before SW of course.  


User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 970 times:

Critter,

On current Shuttle flights they board using both doors 1L, and 2L. If 757s were to be put on shuttle, they could use all 3 doors on the left side. Door 2 would get the jetway, and 1 and 3 would get stairs.


User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 963 times:

Actually, the galleys wouldn't need to be configured at all. The 757 has plenty of room (cart space) on it for 4-6 legs of pretzels/sodas (the standard for Shuttle galley packing). In addition, the video equipment wouldn't need to be removed (needless cost)...just throw an episode of Seinfeld or two at them...they already have free headsets...

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L


User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 960 times:

You're right fly777ual.



User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 951 times:

About the video onboard Shuttle flights...that's already a cost-less upgrade right there...

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L


User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (13 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 946 times:

Its a very good idea to keep video on those flights, as long as some video is shown. I flew down to SNA and back on tuesday, and the only video was the safety video. For that 1 flight, they could easily shown an episode of Seinfeld (sp?) or Alley McBeal. Looking at water got a little boring.

By keeping the video and the galleys it allows you to move the planes on to mainline flights.

A 757 may then fly this routing:

SFO-LAX
LAX-SFO
SFO-DEN
DEN-SEA
SEA-LAX
LAX-SFO
SFO-LAX




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...
When Did United Start Flying 757s To Hawaii? posted Fri Aug 3 2001 02:49:53 by KonaB777
Qantas To Introduce Y+ According To Aust. Aviation posted Wed Jun 20 2007 15:51:04 by QantasAirways
United And TAM To Launch Codeshare posted Fri May 18 2007 20:46:02 by Laxintl
Does AA Fly 757s To Hawaii? posted Fri May 18 2007 18:31:38 by Tonytifao
RUMOR: AA To Sell 90 757s To Fedex posted Mon Apr 16 2007 04:54:19 by AA787823
Singapore Airlines Introduce 744 To Istanbul posted Sun Apr 8 2007 17:00:52 by 777way
United Headquarters Moving To Chicago...When? posted Tue Feb 13 2007 20:57:16 by United787
United 777 Service To Hawaii posted Sun Dec 31 2006 20:14:23 by AAden
Should LH Double Frequency To BOM?+ posted Sun Dec 10 2006 06:13:05 by B773ER
United Extra Flights To ANC? posted Sat Dec 9 2006 22:25:40 by Jourdan747