Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Updated First UA 787 Configuration Announced  
User currently offlineATLflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 735 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 21145 times:

UA has announced Its first 787 will have 36 BF, 63 E+, and 120 Economy. Not announced if it is 2-4-2 or 3-3-3 in Economy. Any speculation?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/United...ing-prnews-540308450.html?x=0&.v=1

96 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetpaewr From United States of America, joined May 2001, 450 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 21135 times:

Interesting that the BF brand is still being used in this post-CO context.

User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3678 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 21102 times:

Quoting tpaewr (Reply 1):
Interesting that the BF brand is still being used in this post-CO context.

I was wondering the same. I'm hoping that the Continental brand disappears by the time the first 787 is delivered.


User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 21057 times:

Are the first 787s still gonna be used for IAH-AKL? Interesting news regardless!

I think that over time the majority of the fleet will be 2-class, with Asia routes getting First and maybe a handful of premium Europe routes.

I wonder if they will go through with converting the entire PMUA 777 fleet into the new IPTE, or make some of them 2-class...


User currently offlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8525 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20986 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Looking at the total numbers ( 229 seats) I think they will be sticking with 2-4-2 in economy which I am pretty sure CO had already announced way back ( by contrast ET who are going 3-3-3 in economy will have total seating of 270, even allowing for the fact that the ET configuration will be less premium heavy it still suggests to me that UA will be 2-4-2 ), interesting the number of seats in E+ is nicely divisible by 7 , so maybe they are going to go to a true premium economy 2-3-2 rather than the current E+ offering where the only difference is extra pitch.


Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlinebohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2661 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20960 times:

Quoting ATLflyer (Thread starter):
Not announced if it is 2-4-2 or 3-3-3 in Economy. Any speculation?

Sounds like 3+3+3. 63 Y+ seats would equal 7 rows of 9 seats each.


User currently offlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8525 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20932 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bohica (Reply 5):
Sounds like 3+3+3. 63 Y+ seats would equal 7 rows of 9 seats each.

or 9 rows of 2-3-2 for a true premium economy rather than just Y with a bit extra seat pitch.



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineATLflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 735 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20901 times:

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 4):
Looking at the total numbers ( 229 seats) I think they will be sticking with 2-4-2 in economy which I am pretty sure CO had already announced way back ( by contrast ET who are going 3-3-3 in economy will have total seating of 270, even allowing for the fact that the ET configuration will be less premium heavy it still suggests to me that UA will be 2-4-2 ), interesting the number of seats in E+ is nicely divisible by 7 , so maybe they are going to go to a true premium economy 2-3-2 rather than the current E+ offering where the only difference is extra pitch.


The PR states E+ as "extra-legroom" seats so probably not.


User currently offlinejoeljack From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 932 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20877 times:

This is the percentage of premium seats on UA aircraft (including Business and First). As one can see, the 787 is going to have the smallest percentage of premium seats out of any PMUA aircraft. For us 1K's...I'm very disappointed with this. Upgrades on the 787 will be REALLY though! I was really hoping for 18% premium! I know UA won't be getting the W fare from me on the 787! I'll stick with the $1,000 cheaper fare.

UA747 17.1%
UA777 17.8%
UA767 17.5%
UA787 16.4%


User currently offlinejpetekyxmd80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 4372 posts, RR: 27
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20810 times:

This is a 9-abreast configuration.


The Best Care in the Air, 1984-2009
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21456 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20738 times:

It's 9Y. Old CO configuration was 36/192. New UA configuration is 36/63/120.

63 is 9x7 as others have noted.

63+120=183, 9 less than COs configuration. That's 1 row of Y removed to up the pitch in Y+ by 4".

So the question is will Y pitch be 31" or 32", not 8Y v 9Y.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8525 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20706 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jpetekyxmd80 (Reply 9):
This is a 9-abreast configuration.

Source please? of is this just your opinion, in which case perhaps you would like to share your reasoning?

It seems a very low seating number for 9 abreast. ET who are confirmed to have 9 abreast in 9 will have a total of 270 in all classes ( admittedly in a less premium heavy configuration) , UA will have a total of 229 seats in all classes. If they are going for 9 abreast they must be planning on a very generous seat pitch to have such low numbers.



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlinebohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2661 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20688 times:

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 6):
or 9 rows of 2-3-2 for a true premium economy rather than just Y with a bit extra seat pitch.

Although I like the idea, it just simply isn't going to happen. Creating a premium economy with 2+3+2 seating would be creating a separate third class on a 2-class airplane. Y+ has always been about extra legroom, and being in the front of the Y cabin for the convenience of full fare passengers and those in the highest levels of Mileage Plus or the Star Alliance equivalent. Otherwise the seats and the service in Y+ is the same as Y.


User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16793 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20651 times:

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 3):

Are the first 787s still gonna be used for IAH-AKL? Interesting news regardless!

As of now it's AKL, but we should be hearing some more routes this fall. The first routes will be domestic proving runs, for instance the first CO 777 routes were EWR-MCO 2x daily and EWR-IAH-LAX 1 daily. I expect the new 787s to do similar routings before going Trans-Ocean. IAH-LOS was supposed to be launched with the 787 too, but due to delays and the cancellation of the new EWR-CAI route they are deploying 777s on IAH-LOS. Whether that route sticks to the 777 or goes to the 787 remains to be seen. I expect though two or three 787 route announcements for 2012 to be forthcoming in the next couple of months.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2577 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20633 times:

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 2):
Quoting tpaewr (Reply 1):
Interesting that the BF brand is still being used in this post-CO context.

I was wondering the same. I'm hoping that the Continental brand disappears by the time the first 787 is delivered.

Has the merged UA announced what they will call the front section of two-class international aircraft? Why can't it be called Business First? The lie flats are slightly different than UA's ITPE Business seats. If the merged UA was to change all lie flat Business seats to CO's angled seat, maybe there would be an issue with naming, but I understand the PMUA 763ERs going into conversion will have the angled BF seat. Would it be confusing to sell FB, Y+, Y on one set of aircraft and F, C, Y+ and Y on another set? Would the BF and C products be priced the same?

Regarding the 63 Y+ seats, even considering there could be bulkheads, bathrooms, galleys, etc. that could make the rows not full rows, the odd number cannot be achieved with a 2-4-2 arrangement in the middle of the aircraft as all seat sets are an even number. So are we looking at 9 across? There was a thread Updated First UA 787 Configuration Announced (by ATLflyer Aug 17 2011 in Civil Aviation) that ent into some detail, stating the CO announced that the 788 would have 228 seats. With this announcement stating 219 seats, it looks like a lock that 9 across is the deal as 228-219=9 (one row pulled for Y+).


User currently offlinetpaewr From United States of America, joined May 2001, 450 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20471 times:

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 2):
I was wondering the same. I'm hoping that the Continental brand disappears by the time the first 787 is delivered.

I was hoping the whole merger would be undone and the planes repainted with CO titles, but regardless these a/c will be delievered to PMCO and flown by their pilots and crews from CO bases till all the union BS is sorted out (unless I find a magic lamp, then all bets are off)


User currently offlinematt777 From Cayman Islands, joined Oct 2001, 503 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 20263 times:

Here is a quick representation by modifying the Ethiopian configuration. This is just to have an idea of what will it look like (I think I need to take one row out of economy and enlarge the pitch)
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y284/mati777/ETseatmap.jpg


User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3678 posts, RR: 19
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 19932 times:

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 14):
Has the merged UA announced what they will call the front section of two-class international aircraft? Why can't it be called Business First? The lie flats are slightly different than UA's ITPE Business seats. If the merged UA was to change all lie flat Business seats to CO's angled seat, maybe there would be an issue with naming, but I understand the PMUA 763ERs going into conversion will have the angled BF seat. Would it be confusing to sell FB, Y+, Y on one set of aircraft and F, C, Y+ and Y on another set? Would the BF and C products be priced the same?

That would be a nightmare. Imagine how the passengers would feel if there's a replacement? Going from BusinessFirst to Business would feel like a downgrade.


User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 19778 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 13):

As of now it's AKL, but we should be hearing some more routes this fall. The first routes will be domestic proving runs, for instance the first CO 777 routes were EWR-MCO 2x daily and EWR-IAH-LAX 1 daily. I expect the new 787s to do similar routings before going Trans-Ocean. IAH-LOS was supposed to be launched with the 787 too, but due to delays and the cancellation of the new EWR-CAI route they are deploying 777s on IAH-LOS. Whether that route sticks to the 777 or goes to the 787 remains to be seen. I expect though two or three 787 route announcements for 2012 to be forthcoming in the next couple of months.

Perhaps even EWR-LAX or SFO?



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 18521 times:

Quoting C010T3 (Reply 17):
Going from BusinessFirst to Business would feel like a downgrade.

Why?

NS


User currently offlineC010T3 From Brazil, joined Jul 2006, 3678 posts, RR: 19
Reply 20, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 17769 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 19):

Why?

Expecting lie-flat and getting angled...


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 17742 times:

Its not really angled. It is, in fact, lie flat. I've not heard that angled seats are going in the planes.

NS

[Edited 2011-08-17 19:32:59]

User currently onlinecslusarc From Canada, joined May 2005, 838 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 17579 times:

Thanks for the pic, but it has 33Y in forward of Door 3 and 96Y behind it, making 119 in Economy and missing 1 Economy seat. Where do you think they'd place that extra seat?


--cslusarc from YWG
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30402 posts, RR: 84
Reply 23, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 17427 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting gigneil (Reply 21):
I've not heard that angled seats are going in the planes

They aren't. The only non lie-flat product is the old "recliner-style" Business Class on UA's 777s and those are being refurbished to the new lie-flat product.


User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2679 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 17127 times:

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 14):
The lie flats are slightly different than UA's ITPE Business seats. If the merged UA was to change all lie flat Business seats to CO's angled seat, maybe there would be an issue with naming, but I understand the PMUA 763ERs going into conversion will have the angled BF seat.

I thought that the PMUA and PMCO lie flat seats are actually very similar hence the argument that they could be called the same product name, Business. The new PMCO seats are lie flat, not angled, and it is my understanding that the PMUA domestic 763s will be getting the PMCO lie flat seats.

http://www.continental.com/CMS/en-US...D=2E7FEC377A96474F8097C6062B89B182

http://www.united.com/page/article/0,6867,1935,00.html

Can someone confirm if UA is getting 2-4-2 or 3-3-3 layout for the economy class? I would be really disappointed if they went 3-3-3  

Does anyone know what the seat width would be on the 787 with a 2-4-2 and 3-3-3 layout? I am curious to know how that would compare with the current widebody fleet:

762 - 17.9" wide 2-3-2
763 - 18" wide 2-3-2
764 - 17.9" wide 2-3-2
772 - 18-18.3" wIde 2-5-2 and 3-3-3
744 - 17" wide 3-4-3

Source: SeatGuru

Also, interesting to compare the UA 787 to the existing international fleet in numbers:

762 - 25 BF, 149 Y, 174 total
752 - 16 BF, 159 Y, 175 total PMCO (International)
763 - 6 F, 26 C, 71 Y+, 80 Y, 183 total (International)
788 - 36 BF, 63 Y+, 120 Y, 219 total
764 - 35 BF, 200 Y, 235 total (Non-Micronesia)
772 - 8 F, 40 C, 104 Y+, 117 Y, 269 total PMUA (New International)
772 - 50 BF, 226 Y, 276 total PMCO
744 - 12 F, 52 C, 70 Y+, 240 Y, 374 total

It looks like a perfect 764 replacement, especially after they get Y+. I was always worried that the 788 would be too big to replace the 763, not just the 757 and 762, I think I may be right. I wish Boeing would have made the 787 slightly smaller so the 3-3-3 layout wasn't feasible. I know the 739ER and A320NEO will replace most 757s but I think there will be a huge gap not just for the 757s, but also for the routes that currently see the 762 and 763...I worry the A330 and 787 are too big for a lot of those routes. The 787 will make some long haul routes more feasible but make a lot of medium haul routes less feasible...secondary cities in Europe will see less service from the US, more Hub traffic, opposite of what the 787 was supposed to do...rant over, flame away...


25 gigneil : It really depends on the cost of operating those additional 40 seats. If the 787 is in fact a gift from the gods, then it should still cost much less
26 ChicagoFlyer : My count was 219 seats.
27 kiwiandrew : Ooops, you are right of course, I will use my current dose of man flu as my excuse for getting that simple equation wrong.
28 LAXtoATL : I can't see it. The 788 has way more range than a 764, to use it to replace 764 missions would be woefully underusing the aircraft. Also, the 764 is
29 UAL777UK : I dont see how an airline that flies internationally can continue to call a seat Business First when on other Routes it will offer First. It will be
30 GullAirACK : It will be called United First and Unted Business. The theory behind Businessfirst was first class service at a business class fare. This is harder t
31 jimbobjoe : Have they done that in the past? My understanding is that airlines like to have shorter flights for the domestic trial runs, because shorter flights
32 UAL777UK : In which case lets send them to ATL and DFW and show off the goods to the competitors.
33 Post contains images CALTECH : These aircraft may be delivered to United, not Continental. It will be close. August 17, 2011 UNITED’S FIRST BOEING 787 STARTS ASSEMBLY Our first Bo
34 whorsefield : The 787-8 is specifically a replacement for the 763, 787-9 for the 764 and 787-10 for the 772.
35 bonusonus : Is there any taper in the rear of the a/c? Often times the last row loses 2 seats. Your point makes sense though. Barring something like the A380 mis
36 seabosdca : It's not that clear, especially since the 788 is almost exactly the same size as the 764 in terms of floor area. The 789, similarly, will be right on
37 pdpsol : Will they be delivered with a "22" customer code, 787-822. despite the fact they were ordered by CO? Will all future deliveries from Boeing receive t
38 ikramerica : CO used the 777 on lax-iah for this purpose.
39 CODC10 : Conversely, the 787 is substantially more premium than PMCO aircraft, with the exception of the CO777 (the most premium-heavy a/c in the fleet). CO77
40 whorsefield : In terms of boeings fleet replacement plan, it is that clear. Now as for what airlines choose to replace what with what, thats a different matter, BA
41 ikramerica : Will feel like any other Boeing aircraft other than the 767 and 777, and then only if the carriers who fly those choose to use the wider seats. Some
42 jackhi : When in Chicago, a month ago, I did see a sketch of a "proposed" F/C arrangement for their 787. Showed two rows of a 1-2-1 configuration, so I would a
43 TOMMY767 : Yup. CO was always big on giving widebodies their "training wheels" on IAH-LAX, EWR-MCO etc. EWR-LAX/SFO seems pretty natural given they are hubs now
44 ikramerica : I would also assume that. 789s most likely. My guess is that the full 788 fleet will be 2+ class. The 789 fleet will be partly 2+ class and partly 3+
45 dragon6172 : 96Y + 33Y = 129Y. Take out the extra row of Y in the pic would be 120Y.
46 VC10er : Does this mean that ALL the 767's in the new fully United fleet will be 2 class? ergo: all the PMUA 767's that are 3 class are going away after all th
47 gigneil : No. The 767s with IPTE will be staying 3 class. There will only be 14 2 class 763s. That 3 class product will be IPTE, if they choose to do it. NS
48 daron4000 : What does the configuration of the 787 have to do with the reconfiguration of UA's two class 767s to international two class? So far no one knows wha
49 AADC10 : Probably not very much since they received IPTE not long ago.
50 gigneil : Yeah I'm having a hard time following his logic, too. He just REALLY hates CO. NS
51 ikramerica : He's talking about eventually, not tomorrow, and yes, eventually, one assumes that 767s are replaced with 787s (or A350s, or whatever). And he's readi
52 Boeing12345 : They will be delivered as 787-824.
53 Post contains links STT757 : This article is from July, comes with quotes from Jeff. http://www.ausbt.com.au/united-conti...787-dreamliner-flights-by-mid-2012
54 ikramerica : What's interesting is that AKL-IAH is the "anti-point-point" route. It connects two hubs with a flight that wasn't otherwise viable. But honestly, Boe
55 CALPSAFltSkeds : I have enjoyed reading VC10ers posts for quite a while. From what I read, he's not a CO hater, but he's a first Class advocate. While it seems VC10er
56 daron4000 : I also enjoy reading his posts but sometimes, as in the one I quoted, they are very hard to decipher in meaning. As a presumably high-paid Landor exe
57 Post contains images gigneil : I don't mean to be respectful. I just also know he doesn't seem to be a huge fan. NS
58 Post contains images koruman : United is going to really struggle on Houston-Auckland in this configuration. The product is clearly going to be inferior to Air New Zealand in every
59 kiwiandrew : Unless NZ are going to operate on the IAH-AKL route with their own metal in competition to UA I don't really see an issue. For a lot of flyers the IA
60 koruman : A large proportion of the Americans who visit Australia and New Zealand do so from the west coast, in part due to the very short vacation time Americ
61 CODC10 : Time is money. AKL-IAH-(US) will be a faster and dramatically easier connection to East Coast business centers than transit at LAX, and the UA 787 pr
62 STT757 : SYD-DFW and soon AKL-IAH will do well simply because they are the only routes from Australia and New Zealand to serve major US hubs, SFO and LAX are
63 ORDBOSEWR : I think you are downplaying the frustration that many have with connections at LAX. SFO is much better than LAX but IAH is even that much better than
64 TOMMY767 : Honestly, I don't get IAH-AKL either. This was a CO planned route that hung on at the beginning of the merger process with UA. I think it would make m
65 mogandoCI : yup, as large as the DFW-BNE one. IAH-AKL is nearly guaranteed to make it nonstop everyday, year-round. Good luck with DFW-BNE having the same non-di
66 ikramerica : Why go hub-hub-hub? Makes no sense. Anyway, IAH becomes a one-stop hub to europe via Star. AKL-IAH on UA, IAH-EU on UA and LH. That is of course if t
67 Post contains links and images matt777 : After some adjustments, here's what it might look like...
68 FlyPNS1 : How can you say this? Have you somehow magically been on a UA 787 that no one else has? From what I can tell, UA's Y product will be competitive with
69 TOMMY767 : Why would anybody want to fly via Houston to get to Europe from New Zealand? Wouldn't they just take a European carrier?
70 mogandoCI : how many European carriers are left serving AKL ? i only have a handful of them the only downside to this connection is the hassle of clearing US cus
71 kiwiandrew : That is a pretty massive downside. I see the flight more about offering UA flyers from the East through to the midwest an alternative route to Austra
72 CALPSAFltSkeds : I believe I was the schedule and it's not set up to connect to/from Europe,m which wouldn't get much traffic. Aboput 4 hours connection time at IAH t
73 sunrisevalley : They will be limited to 180-min;. diversion for one year which would mean a fly around so they may not.
74 Post contains links qf002 : Only around 200nm to fly around (per gcmapper) so it's hardly a deal breaker...
75 kiwiandrew : Are you sure about that? Can I ask what you are basing that on?
76 gigneil : Where did you hear that? They will be delivered ready for 330 mins. NS
77 Post contains links qf002 : It will initially be delivered with up to a 180 minute rating, though this article indicates that they should be certified to 330 mins by the time Un
78 gigneil : I agree there is quite a bit of room for error on that. But assuming it goes well, I think the route is still on track. NS
79 genybustrvlr : Having flow in both, I suspect that they're made by the same manufacture. The only differences that I could detect were cosmetic. Also, the legacy UA
80 sunrisevalley : I am referring to the IAH - AKL route and the New Zealand EDTO standard to which it will have to comply. see recent posts in the following thread.. B
81 CALPSAFltSkeds : Actually, they are about the same as CO uses the angle= fewer across, but less pitch. I guess the CO seat seems to have more room width-wise, but the
82 gigneil : What exactly do you mean by angle, exactly? The direction the seat faces? NS
83 qf002 : CO has a slight herringbone layout - the seats are angled very slightly towards the window but still in pairs.
84 gigneil : Ok that makes sense of course. When people talk about angled seats, the first thing that comes to mind is a seat without 180 degrees of recline. NS
85 ORDBOSEWR : So far they have been pretty much spot on for the certification portion of the flight testing since the electrical fire. They did mention how long it
86 gigneil : Flight testing took somewhere between 3 and 4 times as long as it was supposed to. NS
87 qf002 : Where do I do that? All I did was link to an article that showed that they are hoping to have 330min EPTOS in place for the UA deliveries in 2012 and
88 tdscanuck : What, if any, of the delays have anything to do with anything that relates to ETOPS duration? Boeing has already said they'll have 180 out of the box
89 kiwiandrew : OK, I must have misread them, I thought that they allowed 240 for the first twelve months and then after that 330, I don't recall seeing anything whi
90 qf002 : Boeing says it's a simple system that just needs to be added, but they've said that about many parts/systems. Given their track record with 'simple'
91 sunrisevalley : I am going by the explanation that Aerorobnz provided on this site a few months ago for the 77L which is another 330-min. aircraft.
92 ikramerica : NZ does it with NZ1/2. But I thought that only NZ would have to meet that standard, not UA, which may be why UA/CO are the ones running the route?
93 sunrisevalley : Not according to an official of the N.Z. regulator that I spoke with. Think about it. From N.Z's point of view why would you allow different standard
94 ikramerica : Would I? No. Is that the legal precedent? I don't know. When you sign a bilateral, you agree that the governing body of your partner country is suffi
95 sunrisevalley : The person I am quoting was an official with the N.Z. regulator who deals with such issues. Not a friend. Take a look at replies 36 and 37 in the fol
96 AussieItaliano : This can already be done at LAX and SFO. NZ 1 and 2 are perfect examples. But you are right that some destinations are offered nonstop on Star Allian
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...
PIC: First JAL 787 Sees Daylight posted Wed Jul 7 2010 13:39:49 by iad787
PIC: First JAL 787 Sees Daylight posted Wed Jul 7 2010 13:39:49 by iad787
First ANA 787 Registration: JA801A! posted Tue Sep 30 2008 06:36:26 by NYC777
First ANA 787 Registration: JA801A! posted Tue Sep 30 2008 06:36:26 by NYC777
UA 777 Configuration posted Sun Jun 22 2008 13:31:49 by A340Crew
UA 777 Configuration posted Sun Jun 22 2008 13:31:49 by A340Crew
New UA 744 Configuration In System posted Tue Apr 29 2008 21:17:46 by N104UA
New UA 744 Configuration In System posted Tue Apr 29 2008 21:17:46 by N104UA
UA New Configuration posted Sun Jan 6 2008 18:18:22 by N104UA
UA New Configuration posted Sun Jan 6 2008 18:18:22 by N104UA
First UA 744s With New Classes? posted Sun Dec 23 2007 20:24:36 by Lufthansa
First UA 744s With New Classes? posted Sun Dec 23 2007 20:24:36 by Lufthansa
Messier-Dowty Delivers First Boeing 787 Nose Gear posted Fri Apr 13 2007 15:12:52 by NYC777
Messier-Dowty Delivers First Boeing 787 Nose Gear posted Fri Apr 13 2007 15:12:52 by NYC777
First Transatlantic 787? posted Thu Mar 22 2007 20:25:14 by DeltaDAWG
First Transatlantic 787? posted Thu Mar 22 2007 20:25:14 by DeltaDAWG
Alenia Ships First Boeing 787 Fuselage Sections posted Thu Mar 22 2007 16:56:43 by NYC777
Spirit Builds First Production 787 Section posted Thu Feb 15 2007 23:26:23 by Aeropiggot
Alenia Ships First Boeing 787 Fuselage Sections posted Thu Mar 22 2007 16:56:43 by NYC777
Spirit Builds First Production 787 Section posted Thu Feb 15 2007 23:26:23 by Aeropiggot
Completed UA 787 Frames posted Mon Apr 30 2012 08:08:59 by Sulley
UA 787 Domestic Routes? posted Wed Feb 22 2012 14:21:44 by 747400sp
First Boeing 787 With Genx Engines posted Thu Feb 16 2012 14:23:38 by OD-BWH
UA 787 Totally New Interior Colors? posted Sun Nov 27 2011 13:37:17 by VC10er
All 50 UA 787's Will Be 2 Class? Or Not? posted Fri Sep 23 2011 05:03:01 by VC10er
Is This The First UA/CO Aircraft Sub After Merger? posted Sat Dec 11 2010 23:13:00 by dl767captain
PIC: First JAL 787 Sees Daylight posted Wed Jul 7 2010 13:39:49 by iad787
First ANA 787 Registration: JA801A! posted Tue Sep 30 2008 06:36:26 by NYC777
UA 777 Configuration posted Sun Jun 22 2008 13:31:49 by A340Crew
New UA 744 Configuration In System posted Tue Apr 29 2008 21:17:46 by N104UA
All 50 UA 787's Will Be 2 Class? Or Not? posted Fri Sep 23 2011 05:03:01 by VC10er
Is This The First UA/CO Aircraft Sub After Merger? posted Sat Dec 11 2010 23:13:00 by dl767captain
PIC: First JAL 787 Sees Daylight posted Wed Jul 7 2010 13:39:49 by iad787
First ANA 787 Registration: JA801A! posted Tue Sep 30 2008 06:36:26 by NYC777
UA 777 Configuration posted Sun Jun 22 2008 13:31:49 by A340Crew
New UA 744 Configuration In System posted Tue Apr 29 2008 21:17:46 by N104UA