Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UAx Taking Over Some SAN-SFO Flights  
User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5440 posts, RR: 12
Posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4487 times:

Seeing all the new UAx announcments so far today, I did a little looking around.

I wondered when it would happen but I see on the UA website's booking engine that starting 10/25/09, OO will begin taking over some of the SAN-SFO flights with CR7s. In addition, the number of flights is being reduced (from 10 to 8.) Further downgrading takes place at the beginning of Standard Time -- November 1. I suppose the route will become all-Express no later than 2010...

Looks to me like "chalk up another one for WN" in the California intra-state markets. (Of course UA is also surrendering to VX in this particular market.)

bb

21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDesertFlyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4300 times:

Wow that's pretty dramatic considering they are flying 752s on the same route.

User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15749 posts, RR: 27
Reply 2, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4279 times:

Could this just be due to the 737 retirements with no mainline replacements in the pipeline? When you take that many planes out of the fleet, something is going to have to give.


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAnonms From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 620 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4274 times:

I'd say the switch to UAx is actually an improvement for those that fly UA on that route; the commuter terminal seems to be less miserable than T1 is.


This is my signature.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25511 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4260 times:

Should not be a surprise really, but the schedule change is only till 12/17 when its back to all mainline, and a 9th frequency Northbound is back also.

Over time however lots of Bay Area-SoCal markets have transitioned away from mainline. BUR, ONT and SBA are all UAX now with SNA mix between mainline/UAX.

But the 3 class ExPlus product on the UAX 70-seater which SAN will see briefly is in many ways just as comfortable to a mainline plane, so in my view its really not really a loss especially when compared to a 737.

Frankly if not for the pilot contract prohibition, I could see off peak SFO-LAX even being UAX.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineKGAIflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 4287 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4229 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Anonms (Reply 3):
I'd say the switch to UAx is actually an improvement for those that fly UA on that route; the commuter terminal seems to be less miserable than T1 is.

CR-7 service and increased frequencies makes plenty sense seeing how SAN has a dedicated commuter terminal and SFO has a dedicated Skywest concourse. The concessions within the SAN commuter terminal will need to be upgraded to match the increased traffic.

One of the oddly placed 79 or 87-A gates at SFO could be dedicated to SAN service.

Quoting SANFan (Thread starter):
In addition, the number of flights is being reduced (from 10 to 8.) Further downgrading takes place at the beginning of Standard Time -- November 1. I suppose the route will become all-Express no later than 2010...

Given traffic on SFO-SAN, reducing the number of flights may not pan out as a smart decision.


User currently offlineJolau1701 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 234 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4174 times:



Quoting KGAIflyer (Reply 5):
One of the oddly placed 79 or 87-A gates at SFO could be dedicated to SAN service.

87A is a Brasilia-only gate. As are 76A and 78B.

UAX uses 69 and 70 for RJs. The rest can take all UAX OO aircraft. And considering SFO's current gate situation, I doubt UAX could "dedicate" a single gate for the SFO-SAN flights.


User currently offlineBananaboy From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 1581 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4137 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
BUR, ONT and SBA are all UAX now with SNA mix between mainline/UAX.

Actually, ONT now has mainline service with DEN flights (previously TED) on Airbus aircraft.

Mark



All my life, I've been kissing, your top lip 'cause your bottom one's missing
User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3988 times:

I wonder if these CR7s will use the Commuter Terminal or T1 at SAN. It will be awfully confusing for passengers if they don't know what kind of plane they are on to SFO, and are forced to take the landside "Red Bus" between terminals...

User currently offlineKGAIflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 4287 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3946 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Jolau1701 (Reply 6):
87A is a Brasilia-only gate

I should know that since I arrived from SMF at that gate two weeks ago. 87-A is a real pain to disembark at. Many of my fellow passengers were middle-aged (like me). It took the cohort of us about fifteen minutes to struggle up two different staircases and into the terminal with our rollerbags.
 weightlifter 

I mention gate 79 because its singular location up from Emporio Rulli's makes it a last-to-be-used stepchild -- though there is plenty of seating in its gate area.


User currently offlineKGAIflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 4287 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3876 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Trvlr (Reply 8):
I wonder if these CR7s will use the Commuter Terminal or T1 at SAN. It will be awfully confusing for passengers if they don't know what kind of plane they are on to SFO, and are forced to take the landside "Red Bus" between terminals...

I'm guessing that most SAN-SFO / SFO-SAN travelers are regulars or business types who aren't that hard to confuse. However, it might be helpful if the port authority replaced the present truck-body-type Red Bus with a larger red-and-white Metro bus set up to carry luggage which might be more recognizable to locals.

[Edited 2009-09-20 09:42:33]

User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25511 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3833 times:



Quoting Bananaboy (Reply 7):
Actually, ONT now has mainline service with DEN flights (previously TED) on Airbus aircraft.

Comment was about.....

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Over time however lots of Bay Area-SoCal markets have transitioned away from mainline.

DEN is not a Bay Area market.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1563 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3715 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):
Could this just be due to the 737 retirements with no mainline replacements in the pipeline? When you take that many planes out of the fleet, something is going to have to give.

Probably, there's been a similar replacement at EWR for the 737 replacements.



The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15749 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3502 times:



Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 12):
Probably, there's been a similar replacement at EWR for the 737 replacements.

Plus the loss of mainline at MIA (coming back with a couple flights I think) IND, and STL.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineLACA773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4026 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3468 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

E90/95s would be perfect to run on SFO-LAX flights when they run on the half hour during the busy times of the day same as running the same on SFO-SAN/SNA/BUR/ONT and run E70/75s during off peak periods of the day but until there are new contracts, we won't see that happening.

Isn't it expensive to run the 75s on these short hops SFO-LAX/SAN, rather than using the 319/320s? UA really does need a plane in the 90-115 seat range.


User currently offlineUAL757 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 806 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3449 times:

They are also showing up on ORD-BOS/LGA and other mainline exclusive routes. It's because they just don't have the same narrowbody fleet they did 1-2 years ago.

User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5440 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3398 times:



Quoting Trvlr (Reply 8):
I wonder if these CR7s will use the Commuter Terminal or T1 at SAN. It will be awfully confusing for passengers if they don't know what kind of plane they are on to SFO, and are forced to take the landside "Red Bus" between terminals...

I'm betting they will keep the SFO Express flights at T1. We've been through this before with both DL and AA and non-LAX flights have often stayed with mainline at T1 or T2. (Especially in this case where the route is split between mainline and Express.)

As some have mentioned, it's the capacity reduxn that really surprises me; from 9 or 10 daily r/ts on all-mainline (inc., as mentioned by DesertFlyer, many 752s) to about half CR7s in November... I'm pleased to see (thanx to LAXintl) that it's back to all mainline in December but of course that might just be for the holidays...

UA has surrendered other SAN--intra-CA markets to WN (SMF and, I'm not sure but I think OAK at some point) so this is not unprecedented. However, unlike those other routes, I can't see UA ever getting out of SAN-SFO completely.

bb


User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5440 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3289 times:

Thanks to C767P, it was also brought to my attention that CR7s are appearing in the DEN-SAN market as well. Things just keep getting interestinger and interestinger!  Wink

bb


User currently offlineKGAIflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 4287 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3243 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SANFan (Reply 16):
I can't see UA ever getting out of SAN-SFO completely.

There is "not smart" and then there is "suicide". Completely downgrading SAN-SFO to all UAX all the time would be the latter.

The flight number of at least one SAN-SFO jet (is it UA930?) continues on the FRA. SFO connects many San Diegans to both the Pacific and to Europe. They can't do that on AS, B6, WN, or VX.

Plus, San Francisco is a class-A business destination and corporate headquarter location.
First-class seats and Economy+ sell to SFO.

While hourly service may not be necessary, too much express service would be bad business.


User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5440 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3080 times:



Quoting KGAIflyer (Reply 18):
There is "not smart" and then there is "suicide". Completely downgrading SAN-SFO to all UAX all the time would be the latter.

Couldn't agree more and I hope UA sees it that way.

Quoting KGAIflyer (Reply 18):
The flight number of at least one SAN-SFO jet (is it UA930?) continues on the FRA. SFO connects many San Diegans to both the Pacific and to Europe.

There are actually 2 SAN-SFO flights that are Europe-bound (900 & 930), 1 thru to HNL (73) and 1 to TYO (853!) (And it's currently the same thing on SFO-SAN.)

bb


User currently offlineUAORD2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 266 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2252 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Frankly if not for the pilot contract prohibition, I could see off peak SFO-LAX even being UAX.

Laxintl,

Is this a restriction for UAX between hubs?

Another question about the ALPA scope clause. I know for years it stated that UAX was restricted to 50 seats or less. I think now it is 70 seats. When did that change?

Do you know if there is also an ALPA restriction that allows UAX only a certain percentage of total domestic ops?

Sorry for all the questions, but I consider you to be a very reliable source of info.

J


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25511 posts, RR: 50
Reply 21, posted (5 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2153 times:



Quoting UAORD2000 (Reply 20):
Is this a restriction for UAX between hubs?

In simplitic terms yes

Quoting UAORD2000 (Reply 20):
Another question about the ALPA scope clause. I know for years it stated that UAX was restricted to 50 seats or less. I think now it is 70 seats. When did that change?

I'm not sure about the history of CBA's, however United today has size leeway with feeder carrier operations for jets up to 70seats/80,000lbs MTOW and props up to 78seat/75,000lbs MTOW.
(note: a side letter exception was made for the E170 which is certified 82,100lbs MTOW)

Quoting UAORD2000 (Reply 20):
Do you know if there is also an ALPA restriction that allows UAX only a certain percentage of total domestic ops?

There are several restrictions on the type of flying including;
-90% of feeder flying must originate or terminate at: IAD, DCA, MIA, LGA, EWR, JFK, ORD, DEN, LAX, SFO, SEA, BOS, PDX, PHX, LAS, SJC and SAN.
-Feeder flying cannot displace or replace mainline flying unless it passes a revenue/cost litmus test.
-Maximum number of scheduled annual block hours for feeder flying may not exceed number of scheduled annual mainline block hours
-No scheduled nonstop intra-hub flying.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
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...
Chances Of B6 Taking Over NK? posted Fri Jul 31 2009 19:24:55 by Flyiguy
NW Taking Over DL BOS-PBI/BOS-TPA posted Mon May 4 2009 14:45:12 by NWBOS
BMI In Hot Water Over Maps On Israeli Flights posted Thu Apr 30 2009 07:53:03 by Semsem
Registration For Some Of My Flights On DL posted Sun Mar 29 2009 09:13:50 by DAL763ER
Rumor: DL Taking Over Skywest posted Sat Mar 14 2009 06:27:24 by SLCguy
BA Interested In Taking Over SAS Routes posted Thu Feb 5 2009 09:20:37 by Mortyman
Delta - Odds Of Taking Over AF's LAX-PPT? posted Sun Nov 30 2008 11:20:44 by Breaker1011
AS Moving Taking Over North Satellite At SEA? posted Thu Oct 30 2008 19:56:20 by Rgreenftm
BA/openskies Taking Over L'avion. Progress? posted Tue Sep 23 2008 18:05:45 by Aisak
BLI-SAN/SFO A Big Hit; Allegiant Goes Year-round posted Thu Jun 5 2008 09:42:57 by FATFlyer