Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
JFK And The New UA  
User currently offlineORD Boy 2 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 287 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9402 times:

Hey,
Just a thought, now that the UA/CO merger is progressing, does anyone think that UA could add flights to JFK from IAH, ORD, CLE or DEN? I know that LGA is not that far away, but on the other hand, several Star partners operate out of JFK and I am sure the routes could produce some revenue.

54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejfklganyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3480 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9376 times:

CO hated JFK and UA downsized to LAX SFO and IAD.

The two combined will not add up to much. Perhaps they will reinstate twice daily to IAH


User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9292 times:

I think IAH on 738 or 739 would be a good thing.


"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16870 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9280 times:

Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 1):
CO hated JFK and UA downsized to LAX SFO and IAD.

CO hates JFK so much they built a modern $25 Million Cargo building at JFK.

http://www.asiatraveltips.com/travel...ews2002/23May2002Continental.shtml

They truck the cargo from JFK to EWR, several times each day.

In fact UA moved their cargo operations to CO's cargo building (bldg #71) at JFK last June.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8375 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9220 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Besides the current PS flights to LAX and SFO there is little United should fly from JFK unless they see a need for JFK to LHR flights for the Star Alliance.

User currently offlinetsnamm From United States of America, joined May 2005, 628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9187 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 3):
CO hates JFK so much they built a modern $25 Million Cargo building at JFK.

Bingo....it actually ended up costing $32 million... it shows how important JFK is in the CO Cargo network...CO only built 3 new dedicated cargo facilities...1 in EWR, 1 in IAH and 1 in JFK...JFK is the 3 rd largest/profitable cargo station in CO's network operating 10-12 exclusive trucks daily back and forth JFK/EWR...


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16870 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9090 times:

Quoting ORD+Boy+2" class="quote" target="_blank">ORD Boy 2 (Thread starter):
does anyone think that UA could add flights to JFK from IAH, ORD, CLE or DEN?

DEN and CLE no.

If they were to launch any new hub flights from JFK it would most likely be to IAH with a couple daily 737-800s . On the existing IAD-JFK I think Q400s would be a nice improvement.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinenascarnut From New Zealand, joined Oct 2008, 287 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8982 times:

Quoting tsnamm (Reply 5):
Bingo....it actually ended up costing $32 million... it shows how important JFK is in the CO Cargo network...CO only built 3 new dedicated cargo facilities...1 in EWR, 1 in IAH and 1 in JFK...JFK is the 3 rd largest/profitable cargo station in CO's network operating 10-12 exclusive trucks daily back and forth JFK/EWR...

The EWR vs JFK cargo is a bit like LGW vs LHR. It used to be that over half the cargo that was flown into LGW ended up at LHR due to the majority of your freight forwarders were well established at LHR.
EWR is the same. A majority of your freight forwarders are established at JFK while EWR was not as significant until PMCO established it as a significant hub into Europe.

United may stay clear of JFK and let AA/DL/B6 fight it out. Some still believe it is still easier to get from Manhattan to EWR than it is to JFK. Do they still offer the Helicopter service from Gate 71 to Manhattan


User currently offlinem11stephen From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.


My opinions, statements, etc. are my own and do not have any association with those of any employer.
User currently offlinewashingtonian From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8704 times:

Quoting tsnamm (Reply 5):
in CO's network operating 10-12 exclusive trucks daily back and forth JFK/EWR...

Jeez! Is most of this cargo flying in on international carriers into JFK and then going onto American cities on United at EWR?

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark

It serves NYC, the most important business market in the country. And that market combined with NJ, a very wealthy state, makes EWR very lucrative. It doesn't serve the city of Newark alone.


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5957 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 8683 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

UA's Terminal C is actually very nice and it's convenient to catch a NJ Transit train to Manhattan....just because the city is a wasteland doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the airport besides the usual NYC related delays.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16870 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 8662 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

If your fascinated with crime take a look at this:

http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map

Gives you an idea of where the bad neighborhoods are located in NYC.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21634 posts, RR: 55
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 8648 times:

There's not a whole lot of market for CO/UA at JFK - they could probably add a couple of IAH and ORD flights for connecting purposes, but that's about it.

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 7):
Some still believe it is still easier to get from Manhattan to EWR than it is to JFK.

Depending on where in Manhattan you are, they're right.

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

Surely you can't be serious. By that logic, why would DL put a hub in Detroit? And yet that hub is a very nice one that's a great asset to DL's network.

An airport is about more than just the city it's named after. EWR's coverage area is not just the city of Newark.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinejamake1 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1010 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 8581 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

Continental inherited the EWR hub when they took over People Express in 1987. EWR serves a very wide catchment area for NY and NJ and the carrier has leveraged the hub's convenience to Manhattan by transforming EWR during the 1990's from what was primarily a transatlantic and Caribbean gateway to one that has become a premier global gateway that serves Europe, Latin America, Asia, India, and the Middle East...



United's B747-400. "She's a a cruel lover."
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4469 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 8542 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

You make it sound like the airport is in downtown Newark!

And, FYI... The city of Newark is not at all as you describe.


User currently offlineAussieItaliano From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 442 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8260 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?
UA will put a hub (and structure their network) wherever they can make the most money. EWR is extremely profitable for them. Many of UA's premium travellers who work in NYC live in NJ, and this makes EWR the most convenient airport for them, hands down. Many Manhattanites and some from the suburban upstate counties also find EWR to be more convenient, especially when flying to cities that can't be served from LGA because of the perimeter rule.

What some people don't understand about NYC is that both long-haul airports are about equally convenient to Manhattan. So unlike in cities such as London, or Tokyo, where one airport is clearly more convenient for most travellers going to those cities' centres, the difference in travel time between EWR or JFK to Manhattan is so negligible that people on a.net argue all the time about which one is more convenient.  

I grew up in NYC for years, and both airports have their advantages and disadvantages, as does LGA. And believe me, even though there are some crime-ridden and dirty areas in Northern NJ, there are some really nice areas too.

I personally prefer JFK, and would love to see more UA service to JFK. I also prefer BUR here in Southern California. My UA dream come true would be new service to both JFK and BUR from IAH!

But the bottom line about the EWR hub is that airlines are ultimately driven by profit, and the EWR hub has been a gold mine for years.

[Edited 2012-01-26 20:44:37]


LHR - The Capital of the World
User currently offlinetsnamm From United States of America, joined May 2005, 628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7940 times:

Quoting washingtonian (Reply 10):
Jeez! Is most of this cargo flying in on international carriers into JFK and then going onto American cities on United at EWR?

No it is CO business... import/export to from Europe /Asia into/from JFK...as well as air mail....the equivalent of 100-120 LD-3 positions daily....

[Edited 2012-01-27 04:38:02]

User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5957 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7797 times:

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 16):
My UA dream come true would be new service to both JFK and BUR from IAH!

You almost got your wish a few years ago...UA was looking at P.S. service from BUR-JFK as part of the NBC contract.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4469 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7321 times:

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 16):
Many of UA's premium travellers who work in NYC live in NJ, and this makes EWR the most convenient airport for them, hands down

But not enough to justify p.s. service to LAX/SFO apparently.


User currently onlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2707 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6720 times:

I think the only reason that UA even has any service to JFK is because they can't fly to LGA from SFO and LAX...otherwise there would be none...

User currently offlinecaljn From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6141 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
This is something that I don't understand... Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

WOW! Way to jump off a cliff! I'm counting the minutes until your post is deleted.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21634 posts, RR: 55
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 5982 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 21):
But not enough to justify p.s. service to LAX/SFO apparently.

The p.s. layout isn't conducive to a hub-to-hub route. SFO is definitely a hub for the new UA, and LAX is a small hub. I suppose they could use three-class 767s on those routes, but those frames may not be available.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 5933 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark? Granted I have never flown to EWR and have never experienced it first hand but, if I were a frequent flyer, I most certainly would want to avoid anything associated with the city of Newark.

Lordy lordy lordy..... I have to chime in here....

As a resident in Manhattan for many years, when I took a trip, yes, LGA was the most convenient, but that is if LGA provide the route, price and time that suited me. Otherwise, my second choice was most likely EWR.

Yes, JFK has it prestige, so to speak, but then this prestige changes into being a pain in the a** after about 2-3 times of going through there. Between the travel there, JFK to/from my home, and just the maneuvering around the airport itself on some occasions, I found JFK to be such a production number, that I avoided it like the plague if I could. EWR, on the other hand, seemed much easier to get to/from either driving or with public transportation, had a pretty good facility, and by no means in a crime-ridden area. Industrial yes, but crime ridden? And yes, with driving there, the ride from/to Manhattan/EWR is anything but pretty most of the way (those big ugly dirty swamps/marshes are hideous), there is nothing dangerous about them, unless one would want to go swimming in them or something like that. And the City of Newark itself has made great strides over the last many years, and is by no means as grim as envisioned maybe in the 60s-70s.

Nonetheless, I think that is quite an unfair characterization of EWR. If one has an opportunity to use it, either as O&D, or to transfer through there, please know that from my numerous experiences with EWR, it is nothing like described above. There may be other issues (such as delays, etc.) but these are on par with the other city airports of LGA and JFK. And if anyone does go through EWR with the impression above, I would suggest trying out EWR if possible, and one will find quite the opposite and be pleasantly surprised as to how good of a facility that it can be.

 


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21531 posts, RR: 59
Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5849 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 9):
Why would a quality airline like CO, now UA, choose to put their main hub in one of the dirtiest, crime ridden cities in the United States... Newark?

Well, you don't have to enter Newark to get to the airport. It's as much in Newark as SFO is in San Francisco or IAH is in Houston or DFW is in Dallas or... you get the picture. It's in a swampy area outside of the city, accessed by a billion or so highways. It has a very direct shot to NYC via the holland tunnel, and easy access from various national headquarters of multinational companies.

Growing up in New Jersey, I can count the number of times I actually went to the city of Newark on one hand. But we flew out of the EWR often.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5389 times:

EWR is technically in Elizabeth, which for you non-tri state area users out there is more of a hole than Newark proper. But don't worry, crime doesn't come anywhere near the airport. Not when you have overpaid Port Authority cops patrolling around the perimeters all day in their brand new police cruisers. They aren't looking for hit and runs either, they are looking for national security concerns.

But getting back on topic, UA threw in the towel with JFK during BK. One of their last non hub routes out of Kennedy was to LHR, which was canned in 2006. So in theory if it was ever allowed for UA to operate PS out of LGA, they'd probably ditch JFK in a heartbeat.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
25 Post contains links STT757 : Not quite, a small part of the Southern end (including Terminal A) is in Elizabeth. The airport was entirely in the City of Newark until the Central
26 jfklganyc : EWR is a major hub for UA because it is a major airport in the largest travel market in the United States. -Near the largest collection of HQs in the
27 N62NA : Precisely. Which has always baffled me why the majors of that time (UA, AA, TW, DL, NW) always treated EWR as an after-thought and focused most of th
28 caljn : That's funny. I detest LGA and JFK and not a fan of the outer boroughs. To each his own I suppose...
29 HNL-Jack : UA now has in EWR what every airline would like in a major business market, a "fortress hub." Let the others, AA, US and DL fight it out at JFK &
30 Gman3 : The things we have been told so far at UA are that the PS planes are being reconfigured yet again to a 2 class aircraft. There has been no mention at
31 LAXintl : Having a cargo facility at JFK is very different that having flights at JFK. The reason there is a CO cargo facility at JFK is due to the fact the bul
32 AADC10 : I do not see UA expanding at JFK. If anything, there may be further reductions. Most NYC O&D prefer LGA, where UA has flights to most of its hubs
33 BOACCunard : IAH seems plausible to me. CLE, no way, it's a dying hub. If UA wanted to add ORD or DEN it could just have easily done it before the merger. Are you
34 VC10er : Gosh I have discussed this so many times. I fly Star Alliance exclusively and the vast majority on United or Continental- now it's just United. When I
35 BOACCunard : I doubt there was any hate, it just didn't serve very much purpose when CLE/IAH could be served from LGA and CO had a massive hub at EWR.
36 RWA380 : They certainly aren't the first carrier to retain a presence at all 3 NYC airports, NW did NRT and only a few domestic flights from JFK, and had a lar
37 slcdeltarumd11 : Maybe a few flights to IAH? Other than that i don't see any reason they need to. IAH might make some sense for connectivity and cargo because of stars
38 washingtonian : Very, very, very well said!!
39 jfklganyc : "That's funny. I detest LGA and JFK and not a fan of the outer boroughs. To each his own I suppose..." Read my entire post please...it was pro Newark.
40 klwright69 : Exactly.. Hindsight is always 20-20. And it shows how not thinking in new ways can be costly. But in the end UA is reclaiming some its lost shine in
41 TOMMY767 : Don't care enough about Jersey to even address this. That's true. Where I grew up was very Beverly Hills like -- in terms of snobbish and standoffish
42 point2point : DEN/JFK might be able to have a flight or two, since the only n/s service are a B6 redeye, and a noon DL flight. I've flown the B6 redeye quite a few
43 caljn : But address it you did. Interesting.
44 BOACCunard : I'd say it has gone way beyond that. UA is now the #1 airline in NYC, which as far as I know has never been the case before. UA has the only true NYC
45 N62NA : LHR and NRT
46 Post contains images nycdave : It's worth pointing out, that in spite of being "small" at JFK, with limited destinations, UA is STILL the #4 carrier out of there! Granted, the #4 ra
47 Rockinflyer : BUR is a wonderful airport. I would fly out of BUR rather than LAX any day even if it meant one connection.
48 Post contains images BOACCunard : Oh, yeah... I forgot about NRT but I certainly should have remembered LHR. I was just thinking about UA's EWR-LHR service (and AA's) a few days ago.
49 tpaewr : EWR,EWR,EWR, always find it interesting that it is such a lighting rod. What is funny the issue never comes up with IAD, or CVG, or any other place. W
50 STT757 : Yes: EWR-LHR from 1991-2004 EWR-NRT from 1989-1998
51 washingtonian : Yup. And combined with a decent amount of service to key business cities from LGA (IAH, ORD, IAD, DEN, CLE) and PS from JFK to LAX and SFO, United ha
52 RWA380 : UA had/has a nice presence at JFK, as they were offering non-stops to the west coast, a very lucrative service for them, they tried to fly EWR-west c
53 washingtonian : Yes. They enhance their competitive position by offering niche services at all three area airports. No other airline comes close to matching the leve
54 STT757 : 1998, UAL dropped EWR-NRT as soon as CO launched EWR-NRT. This occurred in a couple other places due to the liberalisation of rights between Japan an
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...
How Is The New UA 752 Service Bwt. JFK And LAX/SFO posted Wed Apr 6 2005 03:33:47 by Jdwfloyd
UA And The New Seats posted Mon Aug 28 2006 18:43:31 by FL370
United And The New 747-8 posted Mon Dec 5 2011 17:36:40 by marcouscg
Questions About The Ramp At The New UA/CO posted Mon Oct 3 2011 11:50:44 by WesternA318
The New UA Stays With Hemispheres Magazine posted Fri Dec 31 2010 17:51:53 by snn2003
What Will The "New UA" Do With CO's GE-fleet? posted Mon Nov 22 2010 14:26:10 by Northwest727
Will The New UA Resume RTW Service? posted Tue Nov 9 2010 19:16:22 by United Airline
Avianca At CLO - The MD, The Ugly And The New posted Sat Jan 2 2010 14:21:22 by Clo1973
AV Change Schedule To JFK And Brings A New A330 posted Wed Feb 18 2009 19:33:29 by TBYO787
Here They Are... The New UA Biz Seats! posted Mon Jul 23 2007 06:46:23 by UNITED777300