Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA: LAX-SEA Discontinued Becomes All UAX On 2 Nov.  
User currently offlineLACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7611 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi All,
I was just checking out airlineblogspot.com and noticed UA is axing mainline service on the LAX-SEA market on 1 November and the service will become all UAX on 2 November 2008.
Link from airlineblogspot:
http://airlineroute.blogspot.com/ (look under 3 October 2008)
Current schedule until 1 November 2008:
6:56a-733, 1:41p-319, 6:10p-CR7, 6:50p-319

Schedule will become on 2 November 2008:
7:40a, 3:25p, 8:05p all operated with CR7s.

Sad to say, UA continues to axe away @ LAX. I know they have operated this route for many many years and never thought we would see it go all UAX.
At the same time, it's understandable why UA maybe having a problem with VX having added service on this route and offering a much better product by far and the hourly service AS offers with excellent service as well. It seems to have become a bit too much for UA. I wonder how long they will run this UAX schedule.
Does anyone know how UA mainline was doing on this route before VX stepped into this market and after the fact?

Best
LACA773

54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEXAAUADL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 7519 times:

really sad. the CR7 isnt a viable alternate to the 73G on a 2+ hour flight.

User currently offlineAWACSooner From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 1882 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 7521 times:

Their SFO-PDX runs are getting downsized too, IIRC. The wife and I flew em last month...it was a 752 when we booked the tix...then a 320...then a 319...then a 735 on the day of flight.

I was figuring, at the rate they're going, it would be an EMB120 by November  Wink


User currently offlineBufordb From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7457 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

they did the same thing to LAX-PDX recently. all non-stops are RJs.

User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5890 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7402 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I wouldn't be the least-bit surprised if SEA-LAX or PDX-LAX service is discontinued in the not-too-distant future.

Based on how UA is doing financially, it wouldn't surprise me if UA discontinued the SEA-NRT service and/or all of the Skywest service eventually.

Or perhaps SEA-NRT is replaced with ANA.


User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1560 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7388 times:

Too bad United is dismantling LAX...although this does give a certain new carrier room to expand (breathing space if you will), now that on some routes it is the only real competitor to AS.

The daily LAX-EWR flight is also going on October 31, and the UAX LAX-OAK and LAX-AUS routes are also being cut on November 2.



The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5890 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 7374 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 5):
the UAX LAX-OAK

So that leaves on WN on the OAK-LAX route. UA should only have one gate at OAK, since they will only fly the OAK-DEN route. How long will that last???


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30548 posts, RR: 84
Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 7319 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 4):
I wouldn't be the least-bit surprised if SEA-LAX or PDX-LAX service is discontinued in the not-too-distant future.

I imagine that AS handles a good percentage of CO intra-West Coast travel thanks to their codeshare agreement. With CO joining STAR, I was under the assumption that CO would cancel their codeshare with AS and create new ones with UA. But perhaps this will not be happening? Or it will take some time to happen and, in the interim, the O&D traffic on UA between SEA and LAX is so low it's more effective to fly CRJ-700's?

I expect UA already serves most city-pairs out of LAX that they do out of SFO, so it's easier for SEA-based passengers to connect in SFO.



Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 4):
Based on how UA is doing financially, it wouldn't surprise me if UA discontinued the SEA-NRT service and/or all of the Skywest service eventually.

SEA-NRT continues to do well for UA in terms of total revenue per flight. The loads during the winter months are not great, but they do command solid revenues from the fares (I know because I fly UA875 and UA876 enough). And during baseball season, the planes fill up with tours from Japan to come see Ichiro. Also folks coming out of DEN and ORD can connect to it, as well, which means UA doesn't have to operate a separate DEN-NRT or ORD-NRT flight or upgauge all the SFO services to 744s.

That UA has kept both the service and the gauge of equipment (77E) for so long should be pretty conclusive proof that it makes them money.

Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 4):
Or perhaps SEA-NRT is replaced with ANA.

There were rumors many years back that NH was considering NGO-SEA to support the 787 program, but nothing ever came of it.

Personally, I still think UA875 and UA876 are the best flights in UA's system in terms of onboard service. I hope those senior ex-Pan Am crews are setting a good example for their junior peers so when they retire, the service standards will not drop. Otherwise, I might just start pining for NH 77Ws...


User currently offlineKWBL From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 442 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 7292 times:

To me, it is more than downsizing LAX, it is the dismantling of two major UA stations at SEA and PDX that is sad to me. UA was the largest carrier at these two airports into the eightees and was usually 2nd through the 90's. The UA ops at PDX and SEA are a mere shell of what they once were. The switch to regional jets is really the first step to pulling out of the market completely. Baed on history, it is unlikely UA is going to reinvest resources on the west coast other than SFO and maybe LAX. I would not be surpised if UA ultimately routes all west coast traffic through SFO

User currently offlineLACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7193 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting LACA773 (Thread starter):
Current schedule until 1 November 2008:
6:56a-733, 1:41p-319, 6:10p-CR7, 6:50p-319

Schedule will become on 2 November 2008:
7:40a, 3:25p,

With the current schedule they have 420 seats every day up until 1st of November.
The new schedule shows them having 198 seats every day!
This market will lose 222 seats total. A real shame considering they used to routinely utilize 757s on this route.

Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 4):
I wouldn't be the least-bit surprised if SEA-LAX or PDX-LAX service is discontinued in the not-too-distant future.

I wonder about this as well since there are much better products out there from AS on both the SEA & PDX trips and VX to SEA. UA's service has been going down hill at a very fast pace for sometime now. When VX entered this market which was dominated by AS & UA for so long (as well as DL in the 90s), it seems UA just gave up.

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 5):
The daily LAX-EWR flight is also going on October 31, and the UAX LAX-OAK and LAX-AUS routes are also being cut on November 2.

I'm not surprised about OAK. WN really has that market wrapped up for themselves.
Too bad about AUS though I'm not surprised. When you have WN & AA providing mainline service on this route as well B6 from Long Beach, why would you want to take a UAX flight over those? I feel WN is the best in this market other than B6 from Long Beach.
I think their LAX-SAT route would be in the history books now if AA hadn't dropped this route and a while ago, CO dropped it. WN is the main guy on this route. I have to wonder if WN will add another flight or two on this route.

I understand about their soon to be discontinued LAX-EWR flight. Since CO is joing Star Alliance, it sounds like CO will handle this route just fine.
I was surprised they decided to add PHL back to the LAX line up since US has this one wrapped up though there's no competition.

Quoting KWBL (Reply 8):
To me, it is more than downsizing LAX, it is the dismantling of two major UA stations at SEA and PDX that is sad to me. UA was the largest carrier at these two airports into the eightees and was usually 2nd through the 90's. The UA ops at PDX and SEA are a mere shell of what they once were. The switch to regional jets is really the first step to pulling out of the market completely. Baed on history, it is unlikely UA is going to reinvest resources on the west coast other than SFO and maybe LAX. I would not be surpised if UA ultimately routes all west coast traffic through SFO

It sounds like they are really wanting to focus on the funneling everyone thru their hubs. Out of LAX I see them retaining, LHR, JFK, HNL, OGG, KOA, LIH, NRT, BOS & of course SYD (that is until VA starts flying. We'll have to see what happens.)


User currently offlineBahadir From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 1772 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7172 times:

It's sad to see these news. I used to take LAX-SEA a lot when i did some consulting work in SoCal. I think EMB170s with Republic would have served the market better.


Earthbound misfit I
User currently offlineCschleic From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1246 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7129 times:

Will be interesting to see if VX expands on northwest to California routes, or WN. Or maybe even B6? So far, WN has stuck to PDX & SEA to OAK and SJC only, and only one-stops to sourthern California, since it didn't serve SFO again until recently, and AS and UA dominated LAX routes. Seems like an opportunity to fill a developing void.

User currently offlineDoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3401 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7128 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 7):

I'm pretty sure that the number of CO passengers transferring to AS flights (particularly those that compete directly with UA) is a tiny and almost insignificant drop in the bucket.



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1560 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7122 times:



Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 6):
So that leaves on WN on the OAK-LAX route. UA should only have one gate at OAK, since they will only fly the OAK-DEN route. How long will that last???

Probably not too long, considering Southwest's base in Oakland and the fact that the SFO hub is across the Bay. However OAK's lost a good deal of non-WN service recently.



The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4411 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 7041 times:



Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 5):
The daily LAX-EWR flight is also going on October 31.

You mean they aren't gonna try LAX-EWR using a CR7 instead?  duck 


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24813 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6946 times:



Quoting LACA773 (Thread starter):
I was just checking out airlineblogspot.com and noticed UA is axing mainline service on the LAX-SEA market on 1 November and the service will become all UAX on 2 November 2008.

 white  This is not a new development, and has been on the books for well over 3 months now and posted in a long thread which you even participated in.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...general_aviation/read.main/4071651

Simply put LAX-SEA has been trashed with the entry of VX, and Alaska's West Most schedules.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineLACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6513 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 15):
Simply put LAX-SEA has been trashed with the entry of VX, and Alaska's West Most schedules

It's UA's choice to be "trashed" with the entry of VX and AS increasing their schedules.


User currently offlineB727LVR From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6445 times:

Are the CRJ's and ERJ's really a viable solution to save or make more money on routes that long? I thought that was UA's main reason for parking the 737's and using their 57's in an expanded role if you will? Isn't that a total opposite of their original plan? I kw that UA and UAX are sperate, but the money making of one does effect the other, I know that much.

[Edited 2008-10-04 13:44:28]


I'm like a kid in a candy store when it comes to planes!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30548 posts, RR: 84
Reply 18, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6434 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Doug_Or (Reply 12):
I'm pretty sure that the number of CO passengers transferring to AS flights (particularly those that compete directly with UA) is a tiny and almost insignificant drop in the bucket.

Could be, but AS has been launching competing services against CO to cities CO currently serves from SEA. I doubt AS is doing that just so their MVPs can upgrade to First Class...  Wink


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24813 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6383 times:



Quoting LACA773 (Reply 16):
It's UA's choice to be "trashed" with the entry of VX and AS increasing their schedules.

Instead of competing for volume, United chose to still offer some flights primarily for its FF'ers and connections. Basically keep the yield up, and avoid the seat grab battle.
Good move imo.

Also SEA position has been on a long decline as a UA core market.

Quoting B727LVR (Reply 17):
Are the CRJ's and RRJ's really a viable solution to save or make more money on routes that long?

The 70 seater RJs are very viable mainline replacement aircraft and is exactly what United is doing acquiring more and more of them.

The 3 class ExPlus product UA offers on them actualy scores higher on traveller surveys then mainline planes such as the 737!



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineB727LVR From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6304 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 19):
The 3 class ExPlus product UA offers on them actualy scores higher on traveller surveys then mainline planes such as the 737!

I did not know that. Interesting tho. I also never understood the 3 class product UA offers. I'm familiar with the whole First Class, Business Class, and Coach, but the "Economy Plus" they offer stumps me. I know its a marketing ploy and maybe I shouldn't try to think of it as more than that. I guess thats why I'm just a mechanic...



I'm like a kid in a candy store when it comes to planes!
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24813 posts, RR: 46
Reply 21, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6264 times:



Quoting B727LVR (Reply 20):
but the "Economy Plus" they offer stumps me. I know its a marketing ploy and maybe I shouldn't try to think of it as more than that

Economy Plus is much more then just a marketing ploy.

United physically offers 3-5inches more legroom then standard economy, while they will also often try to leave the middle seat open for premium flyers load factors permitting.

According to United, E+ drove over $200mil in upsell revenues in 2007.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineB727LVR From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 630 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6229 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 21):
According to United, E+ drove over $200mil in upsell revenues in 2007.

That ain't too shabby. I new about all the extra leg room, but not about leaving the middle seat open. I guess I am more in the mind set of WN and why just do part of the plane where we can do the whole thing, maybe split the cost difference of the two seats, and possibly make even more. I wil admit tho, 3-5 inches is pretty awesome, almost like a miny first class cabin.



I'm like a kid in a candy store when it comes to planes!
User currently offline300CAP From United States of America, joined May 2007, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6076 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Typical UAL, they run when competition gets tough rather improving their own product. Also, it already looks like the planned parking of the 737's is already starting to hurt Glenn and his "grand scheme." The West coast routes have been a strong part of UAL's feed to international flights from LAX and SFO, and just for business people traveling up and down the West coast, but I guess not anymore. No one is going to sit in an RJ for 2 hours when they can fly on a big airplane. What UAL needs is a CEO and BOD that wants to run an airline!

User currently offline300CAP From United States of America, joined May 2007, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6053 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Wedgetail737 (Reply 4):
Or perhaps SEA-NRT is replaced with ANA.

It seems that UAL is outsourcing alot of their int'l flying to its star members, just like the second ORD-NRT going to ANA, which is already flying one ORD-NRT route.


25 300CAP : Especially when UAL mainline pilots hopefully will be flying the newer 70 seaters!
26 300CAP : Hopefully UAL mainline pilots will be flying these so-called "more 70 seat RJ's."
27 DurangoMac : By the way they're configured with 66 seats not 70. 6 F, 28 Y+ and 32 Y seats. I for one actually prefer the 700 over the 737 for multiple reasons an
28 LAXintl : If you MEC wants to proffer some competitive rates for large RJ flying I'm sure UA would listen. However short of matching or beating the rates of pr
29 LAXintl : yes, but the class of planes as the CRJ-700 and EMB-170s are refered to as "70 seaters"
30 AlexInWa : This is brutal,.........from hourly service in the early 90's on 727/737 to 3 daily CR7's!!! It's a shame how far UA has fallen in SEA. Would it make
31 Cschleic : I remember flying SFO - SEA on UA back in the 70's.....they even ran DC-10's and DC-8's. And the DC-10 was full! Yes, a lot of the passengers connecte
32 N174UA : After this last season, it will be interesting to see how long he stays in Seattle, too.... No kidding...I still recall with fondness riding on DC-10
33 Doug_Or : I thought it was initially a 342? At any rate, I don't think the drawdown on the UAL side will hurt LH much at all. They already serve SFO, LAX, ORD,
34 United Airline : We will eventually see United Express flying HKG-SFO, HKG-ORD, LAX/SFO-SYD etc. Sad to see that they are replacing everything with United Express
35 Phllax : It's a no brainer to many people. Better service on United, offering E+ (which is more legroom than in F on the US 321's), and no having to pay for b
36 LACA773 : Completely agree. When you are flying LAX-ORD often, E+ is a life saver and helps keep your flight experience somewhat satisfactory. The only thing t
37 PlanesNTrains : I've pondered this too, but don't see it happening - at least for WN - in the nearterm. WN doesn't seem to seek out it's own separate terminals from
38 DTWAGENT : I love this website. Thanks for putting it on here. As a travel agent it will come in handly when planning vacations for next year. And this winter. c
39 AWACSooner : And to the WN folks, UA's E+ is nothing more than their standard coach class spacing.
40 United1 : WN offers 32/33" seat pitches throughout their aircraft, Y+ is at least 34" to 36" depending on the aircraft.
41 EA CO AS : AS uses about a third of all the N gates at SEA already.
42 Wedgetail737 : It seemed that AS was using about 50% of the N-gates. I think the Port, UA and AS should try and group the airlines gates. Right now, UA, AS and AC o
43 F9Animal : This is sad news. I remember the good old days of LAX and UA. Really sad however is to see UA giving up so much to CRJ traffic. Hopefully one day we w
44 N174UA : And you're helped even more when airline employees break confidentiality rules and post booking information and loads for various flights on this sit
45 LACA773 : Do you think there will ever be a good chance UA will lease/purchase E90s for flights such as LAX-PDX/SEA?
46 LAXintl : No as the current pilot contract scope clauses do not allow for such large type to be operated by UAX partners. While a 100 seater E190 might be perf
47 LACA773 : Thanks for the information LAXintl. That's too bad. I think the along with many other's the E90 would be a great asset to UA.
48 CXA330300 : According to airlineroute.blogspot.com, UA will also be reducing LAX-LAS down 2 frequencies in Nov.
49 LAXintl : Wrong Random date schedule: Nov 18 LAX-LAS UA1848 0900-0916 A320 UA1548 1058-1222 A320 UA1574 1241-1359 A320 UA1588 1647-1805 A320 UA1492 2235-2353 A
50 FATFlyer : I think it means LAX-LAS will drop by 2 flights TO 5 a day. Right now it is 6 or 7 flights a day.[Edited 2008-10-06 13:20:46]
51 Apodino : Not quite true. What the scope clause says is that planes between 75 and 100 seats can be flown by a regional partner, as long as the regional partne
52 Hatbutton : There was talk for some time about UA moving out of N because of them scaling down and AS continuing to grow. However, that was over a year ago when
53 LAXintl : Actualy this is what the agreement says. 1-K-10 "Feeder Carrier" means a Domestic Air Carrier that, when engaged in code sharing with the Company: 1-K
54 Apodino : Ok interesting. But someone is going to have to give on this soon. This is putting carriers like United and American at a disadvantage over carriers w
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: LAX-CDG Discontinued? posted Wed Sep 5 2001 21:22:28 by AFa340-300E
QF108 JFK-LAX & QF176 LAX-BNE On 4 Nov posted Sat Nov 4 2006 12:41:39 by Aussieindc
United First Class Service On Lax-sea Flights posted Wed Jun 1 2005 23:01:19 by HpB737100
All Eyes On LAX: The Series, Tonight! posted Mon Sep 13 2004 14:58:32 by John
UA LAX-ACA On 31APR04? posted Mon Mar 22 2004 00:21:35 by FA4UA
UA LAX-AKL On 777 posted Fri Mar 5 2004 22:24:24 by FlyingDoctorWu
SY Closes JFK/LAX/SEA/SFO 1/5/09? posted Fri Aug 1 2008 07:24:44 by Enilria
UA And AS Planes At Boeing Field On 5/11 posted Sun May 11 2008 20:25:24 by RoseFlyer
BA SEA-LHR Diverted To YEG On Dec 17 posted Sat Dec 22 2007 17:59:29 by CraigYEG
Virgin America SFO-SEA And LAX-SEA posted Wed Dec 12 2007 07:41:39 by B757capt