Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will The New UA Resume RTW Service?  
User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9106 posts, RR: 15
Posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3822 times:

Will the new UA resume RTW service?

Wonder if they can apply for HKG-LHR nonstop.

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5638 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3768 times:

No, they won't.

With their revenue sharing joint venture with ANA, there is no reason to try to sustain round-the-world style flights.


User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3643 times:

As stated above, no point. I would be just a prestige revenue losing service which makes no sense. LHR-HKG is covered by NZ so why go there.
One might argue what about a service to India from LHR but with AI joining Star (sometime!) again, little point and of course UA serves India from the states (or should we say CO does?)
It will never happen IMHO.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5095 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3368 times:

RTW flights make no sense in a code-share, alliance world.

They are a piece of nostalgia just like water injection, "stewardesses," 40 inch pitch, and huge clouds of cigarette smoke.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 5885 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3288 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 3):
They are a piece of nostalgia just like water injection, "stewardesses," 40 inch pitch, and huge clouds of cigarette smoke.

like free baggage, meals, travel agents...



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineN104UA From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 897 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3153 times:

I would love to see it but it will never happen because from Asia to Europe people can fly STAR ALLIANCE, and I do not know how many Americans fly Asia to Europe and I would say they are more likely to go with a home country carrier. With alliances airlines do not need their metal to sell seats on a flight

Here are some possibilities that people can take to get to Europe from Asia and still get miles on UA and still connect to a UA flight going back to the stats
LH
HKG-FRA
NRT-MUC
HKG-MUC
BKK-FRA
NRT-FRA

ANA
NRT-LHR/FRA

TG
BKK-LHR/FRA/MUC/ZRH/CDG

Air China
PEK-FRA/LHR



"Learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly." -H.H. The Dalai Lama
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 6, posted (3 years 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3119 times:

Quoting United Airline (Thread starter):
Will the new UA resume RTW service?

Didn't we just do this by the same author?

Will The New UA Resume RTW Service? (by United Airline Nov 9 2010 in Civil Aviation)



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2797 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2835 times:

Quoting United Airline (Thread starter):
Will the new UA resume RTW service?

No. There is absolutely no reason to pull several 747s off the profitable routes they currently serve to restart a route that failed twice before (3x if you count the brief LAX-HKG attempt in the late 2000s). If you want to see an airline lose money hand over fist for reasons of prestige, then you need to look no further than the Middle East!  .

Quoting United Airline (Thread starter):
Wonder if they can apply for HKG-LHR nonstop.

Why would they? They would face BA, VS, CX, QF, and fellow Star Alliance partner NZ on that extremely well-served route. It could be said that the UA product is inferior to all of those carriers, and that is without a doubt true in Y.

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 1):
With their revenue sharing joint venture with ANA, there is no reason to try to sustain round-the-world style flights.

Not to mention their transatlantic JV with LH. They probably wouldn't be too happy with UA pulling premium London pax off their own flights to DEL.

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 2):
One might argue what about a service to India from LHR but with AI joining Star (sometime!) again, little point and of course UA serves India from the states (or should we say CO does?)

Forget AI, the LHR-DEL market is not nearly as attractive today as it was back in the late 90s and early 2000s when UA flew it. Today you have high-quality Indian competition, not to mention the ever-popular trio of Persian Gulf carriers more than happy to connect you...

Also, UA would probably undercut its own Indian routes (EWR-DEL and EWR-BOM) by having to price the one-stop flights via LHR for less.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 3):
RTW flights make no sense in a code-share, alliance world.

Actually, you *can* fly Air New Zealand all the way around the world (AKL-LAX-LHR-HKG-AKL). But that's just a coincidence, and I don't think they even promote themselves as a round the world airline. Perhaps they should?

Also, keep in mind that to get more HKG traffic rights (sometime in the mid-2000s), UA had to give up its authority for HKG-DEL fifth freedom rights. So, they couldn't simply revive the old JFK/IAD-LHR-DEL-HKG-LAX-JFK/IAD routing even if they wanted to.



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineNorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1812 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2692 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 4):
like free baggage, meals, travel agents...

I would hardly call myself and thousands of my colleagues who work hard every day to get large numbers of corporate travelers where they need to be when they need to be there pieces of nostalgia.....

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 7):
Also, keep in mind that to get more HKG traffic rights (sometime in the mid-2000s), UA had to give up its authority for HKG-DEL fifth freedom rights. So, they couldn't simply revive the old JFK/IAD-LHR-DEL-HKG-LAX-JFK/IAD routing even if they wanted to.

With so many destinations in asia and elsewhere converting from bilaterals to open skies, are fifth freedom rights even still necessary?



Why are people so against low yields?! If lower yields means more people can travel abroad, i'm all for it
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5095 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2590 times:

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 7):
Actually, you *can* fly Air New Zealand all the way around the world (AKL-LAX-LHR-HKG-AKL). But that's just a coincidence, and I don't think they even promote themselves as a round the world airline. Perhaps they should

NZ is a special case. LHR is one of its top three long-haul destinations and is yet almost exactly halfway around the world, there are conveniently placed stopovers which are themselves major NZ destinations in both directions, and NZ has fifth freedom rights from both stopovers to LHR. No other carrier in the world has this set of circumstances.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlinehaynflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2494 times:

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 7):
Also, keep in mind that to get more HKG traffic rights (sometime in the mid-2000s), UA had to give up its authority for HKG-DEL fifth freedom rights. So, they couldn't simply revive the old JFK/IAD-LHR-DEL-HKG-LAX-JFK/IAD routing even if they wanted to.

Good point. From my understanding though, a true RTW itinerary must cross the equator tiwce, so as a technicality, JFK/IAD-LHR-DEL-HKG-LAX-JFK/IAD would not qualify as a true RTW routing.

AKL-LAX-LHR-HKG-AKL does fulfill the dual equatorial-crossing requirement and I think you're right, they should bill that as a RTW itinerary!



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts."
User currently offlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8492 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2457 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting haynflyer (Reply 10):
AKL-LAX-LHR-HKG-AKL does fulfill the dual equatorial-crossing requirement and I think you're right, they should bill that as a RTW itinerary!

NZ does it with separate flight numbers AKL-LAX-LHR vv NZ2/NZ1 and AKL-HKG-LHR vv NZD39/38 , so they offer a round-the-world service but not a round-the-world flight number .



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently onlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2491 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2389 times:

With newer long haul aircraft RTW service is less needed as the one-stop destination may be closer to the orgin point if flown the other direction. If you want a RTW operation that would work with the addition of two legs (one which would feed the NRT hub) and cross the equator twice, try this one.

EWR-DEL-JKT-NRT-EWR the only non-hub leg added is 3100NM leg DEL-JKT. This would provide one stop service EWR-JKT and JKT-EWR both "east and westbound". The mileage of these two one-stop routes are only 60 nm different and only about 3% over the great circle routing. The question is if the EWR-NRT and EWR-DEL flights need the extra passengers attracted by the one-stop market.
JKT is south of the equator.


User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9106 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (3 years 2 months 18 hours ago) and read 2238 times:

But isn't HKG-LHR very profitable? Perhaps UA can give it a try?

User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19097 posts, RR: 53
Reply 14, posted (3 years 2 months 18 hours ago) and read 2238 times:

Why on earth would they?! You're a few decades behind.


"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24075 posts, RR: 22
Reply 15, posted (3 years 2 months 2 hours ago) and read 2077 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 9):
NZ is a special case. LHR is one of its top three long-haul destinations and is yet almost exactly halfway around the world, there are conveniently placed stopovers which are themselves major NZ destinations in both directions, and NZ has fifth freedom rights from both stopovers to LHR. No other carrier in the world has this set of circumstances.

There's nothing to stop QF operating a similar RTW routing, e.g. SYD-SFO-LHR-BKK-SYD. And they operated RTW for many years starting in the mid-1950s. That service ended when 747s replaced 707s on their US routes.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5095 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (3 years 2 months 2 hours ago) and read 2064 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 15):
There's nothing to stop QF operating a similar RTW routing, e.g. SYD-SFO-LHR-BKK-SYD. And they operated RTW for many years starting in the mid-1950s. That service ended when 747s replaced 707s on their US routes.

The difference is that SYD-SFO-LHR is *way* longer than SYD-[SE Asia]-LHR, so there is far less reason to fly both ways. AKL and LHR are much better positioned to make the RTW thing work.

Quoting United Airline (Reply 13):
But isn't HKG-LHR very profitable? Perhaps UA can give it a try?

With no significant Star partner or feed on either end, competing with two colossus airlines operating from their principal hubs? Good luck with that.   



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlinetimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6707 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1784 times:

Quoting haynflyer (Reply 10):
a true RTW itinerary must cross the equator tiwce, so as a technicality, JFK/IAD-LHR-DEL-HKG-LAX-JFK/IAD would not qualify as a true RTW routing.

Depends what you mean by "true". FAI might have such a requirement, but no one else does.


User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9377 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 month 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1730 times:

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 7):

Also, UA would probably undercut its own Indian routes (EWR-DEL and EWR-BOM) by having to price the one-stop flights via LHR for less.

The only possibility I see is if they went for NRT-DEL or NRT-BOM. Japanese airlines do not cover India well. ANA only serves BOM. There is a possibility with connections of DL or UA starting India ops from NRT. It's a bit tight to get Japan-India-Japan with a single plane, but it is possible even though routes are a little less than direct because of the Himalayas.

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 7):

Actually, you *can* fly Air New Zealand all the way around the world (AKL-LAX-LHR-HKG-AKL). But that's just a coincidence, and I don't think they even promote themselves as a round the world airline. Perhaps they should?

I really think they should market the flights as around the world. It would be a good marketing ploy for an airline from one of the lowest populated and most isolated countries in the world.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinejoelyboy911 From New Zealand, joined Oct 2009, 244 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1608 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 9):
NZ is a special case. LHR is one of its top three long-haul destinations and is yet almost exactly halfway around the world, there are conveniently placed stopovers which are themselves major NZ destinations in both directions, and NZ has fifth freedom rights from both stopovers to LHR. No other carrier in the world has this set of circumstances.

  

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 15):
There's nothing to stop QF operating a similar RTW routing, e.g. SYD-SFO-LHR-BKK-SYD. And they operated RTW for many years starting in the mid-1950s. That service ended when 747s replaced 707s on their US routes.

Actually BA is there to stop them. You can fly RTW on QF, except the LHR-US sector would be a BA codeshare. Qantas has no need (and, I imagine, no desire) to open (or reopen) this route on their own metal.



Flown: NZ, NY, SJ, QF, UA, AC, EI, BE, TP, AF
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...
What Will The "New UA" Do With CO's GE-fleet? posted Mon Nov 22 2010 14:26:10 by Northwest727
What City Pairs/service Will The New US Drop? posted Mon Sep 26 2005 20:30:59 by Laxtwin
How Is The New UA 752 Service Bwt. JFK And LAX/SFO posted Wed Apr 6 2005 03:33:47 by Jdwfloyd
The New UA Stays With Hemispheres Magazine posted Fri Dec 31 2010 17:51:53 by snn2003
Will The New Engines Save The A340? posted Wed Dec 8 2010 06:27:01 by aquila3
Will The New United Be The Next 739ER Operator? posted Thu Nov 18 2010 11:52:15 by EA772LR
Will The New United Keep CO's 737s? posted Fri Jun 25 2010 09:19:36 by c5load
Will The New United Have First Class? posted Wed Jun 23 2010 00:04:11 by jayeshrulz
Which Routes Will The New EY Product Fly? posted Fri Nov 20 2009 03:17:58 by Jayeshrulz
Will The Concorde Ever Return To Service? posted Wed Jun 11 2008 19:24:24 by Airbuske