Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA EWR-ICN?  
User currently offlinestaralliance85 From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 201 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5914 times:

UA/CO has been adding popular routes from EWR to places like EZE and IST. The NYC area has such a big Korean population that I am shocked that CO did Not add ICN years ago. ICN is a *A hub of OZ and offers UA customers extensive connections all through Asia. That is in addition to *A hubs like NRT and PEK. DO you think it is inevitable that UA will add EWR-ICN?


brad Fitzpatrick
52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5838 times:

Quoting staralliance85 (Thread starter):

UA/CO has been adding popular routes from EWR to places like EZE and IST. The NYC area has such a big Korean population that I am shocked that CO did Not add ICN years ago. ICN is a *A hub of OZ and offers UA customers extensive connections all through Asia. That is in addition to *A hubs like NRT and PEK. DO you think it is inevitable that UA will add EWR-ICN?

I can envision 789 doing EWR-ICN then another 788 doing ORD-ICN. The current tag of NRT-ICN can be chopped once the 3 nonstops are in place, unless the flight breaks even itself.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16856 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5817 times:

It's long been rumored, KE had their own EWR flight up until 9/11. Huge Korean population in New Jersey, especially near Palisades Park.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2698 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5762 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 1):
788 doing ORD-ICN

I actually wonder if this route might be first...less O&D but I am guessing more connection opportunities on the ORD end...of course OZ already does that route...


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5693 times:

Quoting United787 (Reply 3):
I actually wonder if this route might be first...less O&D but I am guessing more connection opportunities on the ORD end...of course OZ already does that route...

OZ already does both ORD and NYC, but that shouldn't prevent UA from doing it themselves too.


User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 422 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5628 times:

EWR-ICN needs to happen very soon. Issue with the OZ connection is that the hub is directional and not conducive to beyond connectivity, whereas KE has much more of a true hub. That being said, the route would work on O&D alone from the NJ side of the Hudson


We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5471 times:

I don't see it as soon as say IAH-SCL but it could happen down the road.

I think the first step is just for them to do a same plane thru flight: EWR-SFO-ICN on a 777.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlinetsnamm From United States of America, joined May 2005, 628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 5069 times:

I have been thinking about this one for some time...SEL is a top 10 destination from NYC; and has no US carrier from there. This would definitely be a great 787 destination, although I believe it could handle a 777...should have great cargo potential as well...here's hoping they do it soon....

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 6):
I don't see it as soon as say IAH-SCL but it could happen down the road.

SCL is the 1 hole in SA)">CO/UA's deep SA network, since they pulled out a while ago from EWR. This would be doable right now with the 767-200, a good long thin route for this a/c. Perhaps they could start it with the 762 and switch to the 787 when sufficient numbers come on line, as they unload the 762 fleet.


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 5039 times:

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 6):

I don't see it as soon as say IAH-SCL but it could happen down the road.

I think the first step is just for them to do a same plane thru flight: EWR-SFO-ICN on a 777.

Only if UA figures how to deal with the terminals at SFO.

At that airport, most (if not all) UA domestic flights arrive at T3 while i believe all long-haul international flights for UA depart out of Concourse G of the International Terminal (it's not the same setup as ORD where internationals depart next to domestics). So even if they offer same plane service, they would disembark you at T3, ask you to walk to Concourse G, then tow the plane over, and do the whole thing again =)

For now, EWR-NRT-ICN is the most seamless transfer.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16856 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4578 times:

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 6):
I don't see it as soon as say IAH-SCL but it could happen down the road.

EWR-ICN, like EWR-IST, makes sense as it connects two Star Hubs. IAH-SCL might happen, but it's going to be rough without a partner.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1761 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4504 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 8):
At that airport, most (if not all) UA domestic flights arrive at T3 while i believe all long-haul international flights for UA depart out of Concourse G of the International Terminal (it's not the same setup as ORD where internationals depart next to domestics). So even if they offer same plane service, they would disembark you at T3, ask you to walk to Concourse G, then tow the plane over, and do the whole thing again =)

Moving from the domestic to international terminal for passengers is no biggie at SFO. As far as one plane service, who says the incoming flight can't park at the International Terminal? As long as there is gate space, it can happen. Remember that Virgin America flew out of the international terminal while renovations to the domestic terminals was under way.


User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7247 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4494 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This would be a great addition to EWR and help me get to work a lot easier.   

User currently offlineCO787EWR From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4469 times:

Quoting tsnamm (Reply 7):
SCL is the 1 hole in SA)">CO/UA's deep SA network, since they pulled out a while ago from EWR. This would be doable right now with the 767-200, a good long thin route for this a/c. Perhaps they could start it with the 762 and switch to the 787 when sufficient numbers come on line, as they unload the 762 fleet.

Aren't the 762's really hard to make money with... they have a lot of seats up front that you would need to fill.


User currently offlineav8r915 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4427 times:

Quoting tsnamm (Reply 7):
This would be doable right now with the 767-200, a good long thin route for this a/c. Perhaps they could start it with the 762 and switch to the 787 when sufficient numbers come on line, as they unload the 762 fleet.
CO 762s don't have bunk beds for the flight crew. A 4th pilot & crew rest is required on flights scheduled over 12 hours.

[Edited 2012-02-25 08:02:29]

User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2403 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4335 times:

The 762 does not have enough seats to generate the revenue to make such a long flight profitable, nor is its business class product acceptable for a flight to Asia. In this fuel environment, the airplane is a dog (from a P&L standpoint) and you won't see it much longer in the UA fleet.

User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 422 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4157 times:

Quoting av8r915 (Reply 13):
Quoting tsnamm (Reply 7):
This would be doable right now with the 767-200, a good long thin route for this a/c. Perhaps they could start it with the 762 and switch to the 787 when sufficient numbers come on line, as they unload the 762 fleet.
CO 762s don't have bunk beds for the flight crew. A 4th pilot & crew rest is required on flights scheduled over 12 hours.

IAH-SCL would be significantly shorter than 12 hours, so this wouldn't be an issue.

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 14):
The 762 does not have enough seats to generate the revenue to make such a long flight profitable, nor is its business class product acceptable for a flight to Asia. In this fuel environment, the airplane is a dog (from a P&L standpoint) and you won't see it much longer in the UA fleet.

The 763s are marginally more expensive to operate than the 762s, so really any incremental passengers and cargo would make a 763 more preferable than the 762 on any route. It's not that the 762s cannot make money, it's just that the 763s can almost always make more money. With UA's domestic 763s receiving the new long-haul 2-class interiors, the 762s no longer have a place in the combined fleet.



We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
User currently offlineav8r915 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3965 times:

Quoting Tdan (Reply 15):
IAH-SCL would be significantly shorter than 12 hours, so this wouldn't be an issue.

My bad. I saw "SEL" earlier in that post, so I got confused with Seoul/ICN.

[Edited 2012-02-25 12:46:51]

User currently offlinem11stephen From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3862 times:

With UA's already large Asian network it seems inevitable and a great addition.

Quoting CO787EWR (Reply 12):
Aren't the 762's really hard to make money with... they have a lot of seats up front that you would need to fill.

Last I heard the 767-200s were being retired...?



My opinions, statements, etc. are my own and do not have any association with those of any employer.
User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2179 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3780 times:

Quoting Tdan (Reply 5):

EWR-ICN needs to happen very soon. Issue with the OZ connection is that the hub is directional and not conducive to beyond connectivity, whereas KE has much more of a true hub. That being said, the route would work on O&D alone from the NJ side of the Hudson

Really? Very interesting - ORDICN on OZ is going from 4x to daily starting this summer, alongside what is already a 10x operation on KE from ORD. So, if the market is large enough here to support it, then definitely the case remains the same in NJ



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3692 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 10):
As far as one plane service, who says the incoming flight can't park at the International Terminal? As long as there is gate space, it can happen. Remember that Virgin America flew out of the international terminal while renovations to the domestic terminals was under way.

Yep

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 8):
At that airport, most (if not all) UA domestic flights arrive at T3 while i believe all long-haul international flights for UA depart out of Concourse G of the International Terminal (it's not the same setup as ORD where internationals depart next to domestics). So even if they offer same plane service, they would disembark you at T3, ask you to walk to Concourse G, then tow the plane over, and do the whole thing again =)

Not exactly accurate.

I have arrived SFO concourse G on a UA744 from ORD and that bird continued to SYD, albeit with a different flight number. Last month I left concourse G to IAH on the 763 and next to us was a 763 departure to KOA. My 763 arrived from OGG.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2403 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3559 times:

Quoting Tdan (Reply 15):
It's not that the 762s cannot make money, it's just that the 763s can almost always make more money.

Right, but on a 6000nm sector, standard RASM/CASM figures and fuel prices at current levels, the 762's breakeven LF is somewhere around 110%, unless my math is way off.

[Edited 2012-02-25 16:21:17]

User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7543 posts, RR: 25
Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3529 times:

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 6):
I don't see it as soon as say IAH-SCL but it could happen down the road.

Out of curiosity, if IAH-SCL was high on the list, whats stopping them?

They have the plane that would already be suited for it in the 762. They didnt need a merger or a 787 to do it.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3516 times:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 21):
They have the plane that would already be suited for it in the 762. They didnt need a merger or a 787 to do it.

They had only what? 10 762s? CO had better more profitable (at the time) uses for the 762. Too bad the 762 couldn't have been reconfigured to a more profitable CASM.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4447 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3492 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 2):
It's long been rumored, KE had their own EWR flight up until 9/11. Huge Korean population in New Jersey, especially near Palisades Park.

If this is the case, then why hasn't any Asian carrier operated service from Korea to EWR?


User currently offlineTdan From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 422 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3371 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 20):
Right, but on a 6000nm sector, standard RASM/CASM figures and fuel prices at current levels, the 762's breakeven LF is somewhere around 110%, unless my math is way off.

Breakeven LF varies by the route since it is a function of yield and on-board revenue passengers. Your math may be right for a particular route, but since the measure depends on the revenue generated, there is not one single break-even LF number that can be applied fleet wide unless you are using the average (in which case, it should be a weighted average aggregating the total fleet fixed costs divided by the total revenue generated less the variable costs).



We will ride this thunderbird, silver shadows on the earth, a thousand leagues away our land of birth... -Captain Bruce
25 Post contains images jporterfi : Couldn't they just have the domestic flight use a gate at the International Terminal, and therefore avoid the confusion of having passengers walk ove
26 christao17 : I've flown domestic flights into the International terminal many times. There is no problem with that and it happens regularly. As for towing passeng
27 CODC10 : Exactly, but since I don't have access to their proprietary numbers, I can only estimate with public figures. It may not be 100% accurate but it is i
28 Post contains links STT757 : Korean air did until 9/11, now Korean air provides buses connecting Bergen County NJ with their flights at JFK. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koreatow
29 washingtonian : This is very interesting. On a daily basis?
30 STT757 : Yeah, it's a charter company.
31 N62NA : That's interesting - and ridiculous. If northern NJ has such a high population of Koreans as you said earlier, the fact that there hasn't been a flig
32 STT757 : There's a lot more that goes into route planning than just population, for instance Korean air serves Atlanta. Do you really think there are more Kor
33 HOONS90 : Just a thought... KE has, within the past decade, invested quite a bit at JFK in terms of facilities, etc. IIRC They are a part owner of T1 (and were
34 Post contains links STT757 : 94,000 Korean Americans in New Jersey, 3rd largest population in the Country after California and New York. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Ameri
35 N62NA : You're all over the place. FIrst you state that the Korean population in New Jersey is "huge" as if that will somehow justify having a nonstop between
36 HOONS90 : I think that STT757 means that an EWR-ICN service is likely, just not on KE metal.
37 Fly2yyz : I think if KE sees an economic reasoning to justify having two flights to the same city/region i.e LHR and LGW (slot reasoning?) then it will. As stat
38 Post contains links STT757 : Forgot to mention, besides having the third largest Korean American population in the US, Cliffside Park NJ (next to the aforementioned Palisades Park
39 HOONS90 : The scenario in London is a bit different because they have less freedom to expand at LHR than they do at JFK. I'm surprised that OZ hasn't moved to
40 Post contains links STT757 : Besides Samsung, Hanjin also has their North American Headquarters in (Bergen County) New Jersey. http://www.hanjin.com/hanjin/CUP_HOM_1810.do?sessLoc
41 N62NA : What's truly interesting is despite all these facts you keep coming up with about New Jersey, nobody has provided nonstop service from Korea to EWR i
42 STT757 : Exactly, which is why UA is going to launch the route.
43 STT757 : Before they went under Daewoo's North American headquarters was also in Bergen County NJ.
44 Boeing773ER : IIRC they are, but I'm not sure how quickly this is being done.
45 N62NA : So why hasn't there been nonstop service from Korea to EWR in over 10 years, since New Jersey has all these Koreans living there and Korean company h
46 STT757 : They've already retired two, five more will be retired by the end of the year as per UA's fleet plan.
47 HOONS90 : A lot has changed even just within the past 4-5 years to improve market conditions for flights between Korea and the USA. South Korea was accepted in
48 LJ : Or the Korean pax don't mind traveling to JFK to catch the KE flight. If Samsung and Hanjin really care about a EWR service, KE would be there (KE wi
49 N62NA : Yes, eventually, that I would agree with you on. Most likely, yes. But it truly is a hike to go from New Jersey over to JFK - even if it is on a "spe
50 Tdan : The major reason why the 762 doesn't fly much more than 4500nm is due to the lack of crew-bunks which are required for 12+ hour operations.EWR-TLV is
51 N62NA : Imagine how this would go over: KE flies only out of EWR and tells their "sizable" customer base in NYC and Long Island to take the "special" bus the
52 CODC10 : I suspect if it were economical to operate the 762ER on such sectors, we would have seen bunks installed.
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 EWR Terminal C Check-in Not Re-branded. Why? posted Sun Dec 4 2011 19:28:55 by TOMMY767
CO (CO/UA) EWR-VCE? posted Wed Sep 8 2010 06:16:32 by Matt777
Status Of UA's SFO-ICN posted Tue Aug 16 2005 02:19:12 by JoFMO
UA ANC-ICN 26MAR05 posted Mon Mar 28 2005 00:38:18 by WeAreUnited
UA's EWR Terminal posted Sun Nov 30 2003 01:23:43 by FLY777UAL
UA/CO Adds EWR-Nantucket (ACK) posted Tue Feb 21 2012 15:26:14 by STT757
UA/CO To Start EWR-IST posted Tue Feb 21 2012 04:31:11 by COalways
UA To Launch EWR To Bozeman (BZN)? posted Wed Feb 8 2012 06:14:35 by STT757
New UA Widebody Hangar In EWR & IAD posted Fri Feb 3 2012 07:17:12 by ramprat74
CO/UA 80 EWR - GVA Is A 772 On 28/01/2012 posted Thu Jan 26 2012 05:33:12 by flybhx764