DeltaSFO From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2488 posts, RR: 23 Reply 7, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1344 times:
I think the 737s have 10 years max left at UA Shuttle. These are high cycle, heavily used birds, and although they are in good shape right now, they will eventually start to show their age.
I think we have better chances of seeing a Delta A380 than we do a United 737NG. Okay, so maybe I went a little far. But United has made it pretty clear that they want to standardize their narrowbody fleet with the A319, A320, and B757. Smart move, IMO.
It's a new day. Every moment matters. Now, more than ever.
BA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11150 posts, RR: 60 Reply 11, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1318 times:
What are you talking about? Most of the 737-200s have already been retired! The remaining have 1 to 2 years left. And as for United Shuttle's 737s being around for 20 years? No way, 10 years max. After that they'll be replaced by another aircraft, most probably A320s.
And no, United will NEVER get the 737NG. Why should they? They have the A320 and A319 which are almost the same aircraft as the 737NG. If they get the 737NG, then they'll have to pay double the maintenence costs, for the A320 Family, and the 737NG. That is not a smart approach, and United knows better. They've made the decision to go with the A320, that means no 737NG. Now I'm not saying its impossible that they will get the 737NG. But VERY unlikely. There future narrow body fleets will be all Airbus (excluding 757).
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7873 posts, RR: 5 Reply 13, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1300 times:
Given that UA is flying the 737-300/500 on their "Shuttle" flights from SFO to SEA, LAS, LAX, SNA and SAN, I think they'll be around until at least 2010.
I wonder has UA studied the possibility of replacing these planes with an A319 using an upgraded and stronger fuselage that is designed for high-cycle operations? I'm sure Airbus may consider this some time in the future.
ILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8 Reply 14, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1279 times:
Ok...lets get some things straight...NOW.
First about 75 737s are dedicated to Shuttle operation. These planes have been outfitted with special galleys that allow the plane to fly for half of the day with out being restocked. There is also a refridgerator, and a trash compactor on all of teh Shuttle 737s.
The oldest 733 is only about 13 years old. It still has a lot of years left. There is no plans on retiring these birds anytime soon, as they do their job cheaply, efficintly, and very well.
Next, the A319 will not be joing UA shuttle anytime soon as the pilots union will not allow it. Why? Good question...different pay scales between 737 and A319.
Regarding the 757... while the only route that would require a plane of this size is SFO-LAX, lets be realisitc. It wont happen anytime soon. We need them on mainline, not on shuttle. UA operates aporx. 3 flights from LAX to SFo per hour. Some of those flights have 40 people on them, some have 126. It all depends. When they are full, they are making money (at least for the most part), when they are empty, they are not. A good plane is a good thing for United.
The 757 could do 25 minute turns. Thats easy. Simply do not refeul it after each flight, and have enough beverages stokced in the galleys for 5 flights. Just like on the Shuttle 737s. Also, multiple boarding can be done. Hey, if you wanted to, you could use all three doors.
United Shuttle serves the following destinations:
SFO, LAX, ONT, SAN, SBA, BUR, PSP, LAS, PHX, TUC, RNO, SMF, MFR, EUG, PDX, BOI, SEA, GEG, and SLC. As I said before, SFO to LAX is the only one that warrents a 757. The others like SFO-MFR, actually have UA Express serving most of the flights.
So, UA wont be operating 757s on Shuttle. But, what about putting some mainline flights in during peak hours? Good idea! At 8am, I would not mind seeing a 757, and a 737 go to LAX to relieve some of the congestion in SFO. You could dump the 8:30, and mpve half of the 8:45 flight passengers on to that 757. It would be full. Two flights would be cancled. Very good! The other half of people from the 8:45 flight would go at 9:00am.
Regarding the 737NG. I have been saying for a long time, to never rule out the possibility. I have my mixed thoughts on this. Right now, if Boeing approached UA with the 736, I know that they would look at it. There is really no need for any of the others right now.
Also, the 737-291s...ahh these little bundles of joy. Guess what...they are going thorugh Heavy Maintence again and should be here for another 3-5 years. Why...there is no replacement for these yet. None.
BTW...this is a little heads up for y'all. The A320 is not a 737 replacement for United, it never was and probably never will be. It was here to replace the 727s. That is what they are doing. All of what they are doing. The A319 was and still is United's plane of growth. It has opened up new markets for us such as SFO-BDL, and LAX-PIT which may have not been economical with a 757 before. The A319 is not a 737 replacement.
SJC>SFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1239 times:
ILUV767, sorry for the ignorance but I take it you work for United? I have never been on an SFO-LAX run that wasn't full or near full, however having a 757 on this route wouldn't be great either. The 25 minute turnaround is.... well not always a 25 minute turn around. the double door boarding is a great help to that I think, but as was noted, United has so many flights, but may end up cancelling one or two a day due to low capacity, and stick them on another shuttle flight. I hate to be that "aviation enthusiast playing manager of multi-billion dollar corporation" but I have to give my two cents. At SFO United has already separated their Shuttle gates from the rest, but wouldn't it be wise to separate other check in facilities too? Or would this just create more confusion and delay?
ILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8 Reply 17, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1239 times:
actually...my dad works for United.
First thing...regarding the 25 minute turns. You know, if you cut frequency, (which the 757s would allow), you can incease the turn time. Who ever siad that a shuttle flight had to be turned in 25 minutes?
I was on a shuttle flight with 30 people last month to LAX. So, there are times when they are empty. That was one of them. Also, UA does not like to cancle flights...especially Shuttle because they need to fly the plane to LAX or SFO for positioning. If it doesnt make its run down the coast, then it cant go on to TUC or BOI.
regarding the seperate check in, I think that may be a good idea for people only traveling on Shuttle. It would help to ease the lines at the counters.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7873 posts, RR: 5 Reply 18, posted (12 years 10 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1228 times:
I think there are several issues conspiring against using the 757-200 on United Shuttle flights out of SFO:
1. Outside of SFO-LAX, they isn't the demand to fly such a BIG plane.
2. It will be expensive to modify the interior of a 752 to Shuttle standards.
3. The 752's structural design is NOT going to withstand the large number of takeoff and landing cycles demanded by Shuttle operations unless the plane is modified at great cost per plane.
4. The 752 would hog the gates at any airport disembarking one group of passengers plus cargo, cleaning up the plane and loading a new group of passengers plus cargo. UA will be lucky if they can do a turnaround on a 752 in 35-40 minutes, as opposed to 20 minutes on a 737-300/500.
5. The 752 is better used on longer routes such as SFO-DEN or SFO-ORD. Now, if UA is willing to use the plane on SFO-IAD and reassign the A319/A320 fleet for other routes.
ILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8 Reply 19, posted (12 years 10 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1223 times:
ray, did you read anything that I wrote? That is exactly what I've been saying.
Also, if they put 757s on shuttle, which they could do, why would they change the interiors? I mean, this way you can swap the plane out on to other mainline flights.
With 9 carts in th egalley for economy, and 5 for first, you could have enough soda and juice for 5 flights.
Also, right now there is no need for Shuttle to be in anything larger than a 737. I said that they could through in a few mainline flights...during peak hours, to ease up some shuttle flights.
Also, there are days when there is weather in SFO or LAX, and UA cancles all of the SFO-LAX and LAX-SFO flights. Crazy huh? No way...They put 1 747-400 on that, and shuttle it down and back. It has an hour turn in each city.
Also, Ray, on Shuttle, the reason that the turns are done as fast as they are, is because, there are no cleaning crews that board the plane, and there are no galleys that are to be stocked. Sometimes they do an upload. That is only at select cities. If you have flown on shuttle, you may have noticed a big big closet in the back. It has hundreds of cans of soda stored in there.
On more thing...you mentioned that the turn would be longer in a 757, and that it would hog gate space. Not really...WHY? becasuse if you put 757s on shuttle, you would then be operating less 737s, and less planes all togther. So, yuo wouldnt be hogging the gate.
Oh, and a 25 minute turn can be dopne with a 757. I saw it done last week when I was in SFO. There was also a crew change. Pretty amazing huh?
SegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (12 years 10 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1215 times:
Surprised I'm the first to mention this.
A few times a month, United has flown a few 747-400s on LAX-SFO/return and the thing went out full. Granted this is to get everything caught up when weather goes bad, I don't see UA putting up larger aircraft anytime soon.
These planes are meant for long-haul flying, and CAN handle the short runs, but I don't see any reason WHY United WOULDN'T get them for Shuttle.
Everyone is forgetting that United is getting a large # of nicely wrapped Boeing 737-400s w/ cute lil red bows on them from the USAirways purchase.
SJC>SFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (12 years 10 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1201 times:
Alright, sorry about the mixup. However regarding the cancellation of flights, I was under the impression that United had devoted many of these airplanes solely to the SFO-LAX route, because of the constant delays at SFO so that they would not cause delays at other airports. I actually read this at a United poster at BUR, but I assumed it was the same for LAX, so cancelling wouldn't cause as much trouble. Maybe they would, I'm not an expert..... and could I just ask one more question? Why would the 734s be good for UA Shuttle? Thanks for the all the info ILUV767
ILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8 Reply 23, posted (12 years 10 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1195 times:
The 734 would be great for Shuttle for the following reasons:
-same pilots canfly them
-galleys can be outfitted so they are identical to the 737s on shuttle.
-The 734 provides more capacity where that extra umph is needed. They would just rotate around on the schedule like the other 737s do.
Possible routing could be:
SFO-LAX, LAX-SAN, SAN-SFO-SEA, SEA-SFO, SFO-LAS, LAS-LAX, LAX-SFO.
Or something like that. Some of the flights do not require a 734, but for positioning, they do. Such as LAX-SAN. Those flights are empty. Although, if you were to fly a larger plane, you could cancle 3 EMB-120 flights. Actually 5. But, once the plane is in SAN, SAN-SFO can be very busy, and SFO to SEA warrents a 734.
Basicly, it would allow you to lower some frequencys, but still move the same amount of passengers.