Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA To Launch DEN-NRT  
User currently onlinepanam330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2679 posts, RR: 9
Posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 20481 times:

Per the Denver Business Journal, to be announced later today.

http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/ne...rlines-to-launch-denver-tokyo.html

147 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineN809FR From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 182 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 20414 times:

I am incredibly excited about this service, glad to hear Denver is finally getting some more international destinations!

User currently offlineStressedout From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days ago) and read 20221 times:

Awesome..............I just hope it is with the 787!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

User currently offlinedia77 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 705 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days ago) and read 19982 times:

Wow!! Awesome news! I wish it was on ANA metal, but still great news nonetheless!

User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2636 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days ago) and read 19986 times:

Great news. Maybe indicates UA is not going to have a wholesale reduction at DEN.

It will be interesting to see how it's scheduled.

Obviously out of the UA bank in NRT, but DEN looks like a couple hours short of a turn at DEN to be first out of NRT and last back in NRT. If a 787, then there may have to be a swap out in DEN or in NRT. One swap out alternative may be LHR. A morning LHR-DEN could provide the DEN-NRT and return NRT-DEN could make up an afternoon DEN-NRT. 2 aircraft package that would need a maintenance swap out at NRT or LHR.


Otherwise, depending on demand, it might be a better 763ER bird or 772, unless there are other 787s operating into NRT.


User currently offlinesmoot4208 From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1307 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 19914 times:

This is great news. With DEN, SJC, ans SAN getting NRT service, this leaves LAS, PHX, and MIA as the top three remaining cities to support Tokyo service.

User currently onlinepanam330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2679 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 19842 times:

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 4):
Otherwise, depending on demand, it might be a better 763ER bird or 772, unless there are other 787s operating into NRT.

It won't be a 763 for sure. Likely to be a 777, or it'll be the same type of 'in the future, with the 787' announcement they made for IAH-AKL.

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 4):

Great news. Maybe indicates UA is not going to have a wholesale reduction at DEN.

They just signed an agreement with DEN to grow their ASMs from the airport by 4.5% over the next four years - so I think we can put all of the 'the sky is falling!' threads to rest for now.


User currently offlineCOSPN From Northern Mariana Islands, joined Oct 2001, 1619 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 19833 times:

LAS had it before but the promised support of the casinos was lacking because Vegas was "booming" at the time, so NW dropped NRT-LAS, really sad but a route like that takes support..from the businesses in the area

User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 19820 times:

Quoting Stressedout (Reply 2):
Awesome..............I just hope it is with the 787!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I bet that's gonna be so.

IMO if DEN can successfully support NRT service, I don't know why PHX can't sustain service either. (Most likely from NH or JL depending on IF the merger happens)



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinelegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2077 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 19703 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 8):
(Most likely from NH or JL depending on IF the merger happens)

NH and JL merging? Unlikely.



John@SFO
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32788 posts, RR: 72
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 19609 times:

Quoting smoot4208 (Reply 5):

This is great news. With DEN, SJC, ans SAN getting NRT service, this leaves LAS, PHX, and MIA as the top three remaining cities to support Tokyo service.


MCO is the largest market without Tokyo service, then Vegas, Miami and Philly.

Denver is a smaller market to Asia than any of the above (and Phoenix even smaller), which is why I find this addition questionable, specially given United's shaky history in DENLON, a market around 6x larger.



a.
User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19520 times:

Wonderful... More international flights to my home city.

Maybe it has finally dawned on UA they need to finally diversify their presence in DEN. Being an almost purely domestic hub will not cut it.


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7560 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19437 times:

Quoting legacyins (Reply 9):
NH and JL merging? Unlikely.

I mean depends on US AIRWAYS merges or not -_- sorry



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineual777uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19386 times:

Great news for UA and DEN. I had thought we would see this route on NH metal but glad its UAs

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 4):
One swap out alternative may be LHR. A morning LHR-DEN could provide the DEN-NRT and return NRT-DEN could make up an afternoon DEN-NRT. 2 aircraft package that would need a maintenance swap out at NRT or LHR.

I would so love to see the DEN-LHR flight back, it was always packed to the gills on the times I flew it (I know that does not tell the whole story). With the merger with CO and ramping it up at DEN I really cannot see why UA out of one of its largest hubs cannot give BA a run for its money on the route.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3469 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19358 times:

Finally a product differentiation for united over frontier and southwest. I am very surprised but I think it's a good move. Can't wait to hear details. With two pacific hubs I still think London would make more sense to retry given its so much larger and can take a 767.

Last I heard delta still wanted to bring back slc-nrt when the economy improves. This flight to will make it harder though if us adds phx then they won't I bet. For those that didnt see dl isn't flying the slc-nrt this summer and trying to increase load factors on the other nrt routes plus the a330 still had to have weight limits on the slc-nrt portion of which killed some cargo and didn't sell all the seats so they didn't really have a perfect plane for the route. A 787 and denver longer runways will help alot to fill cargo and have every seat full. The a330 had take off limitations on an almost identical route a 767-200/300 cannot make it. If it's united could it really be a 777? Seems way too big with two pacific hubs by United I would hope it's a 787


User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5434 posts, RR: 12
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19360 times:

Seems to me this route is another that the 787 was built for. The only question for me is who's metal it will be flown on? ANA seems the most logical. However, NH seems to be talking "early 2013" for SJC-NRT and that was announced late last year! I don't think UA would have enough of the Dreamliners within that timeframe but they certainly could use another a/c to start the route, then switch to the '87 when available.

I guess we will learn many more details in just a few hours...

bb


User currently offlineatcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 1205 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19324 times:

Quoting smoot4208 (Reply 5):
this leaves LAS, PHX, and MIA as the top three remaining cities to support Tokyo service.

LAS is probably a matter of time to allow the economy to recover a bit more. US plans on starting PHX-NRT with the A350, but that's years off at best and if I had to guess, it'll never happen. PHX would be better suited for a return of FRA service. I'm not sure if a MIA service would work or not...787 service would be the only chance in hell it could be profitable -- same with PHX. LAS could eventually sustain a 777 probably 5-6x weekly, but pulling in the premium loads would be a challenge in all three markets.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3469 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 19255 times:

I hope it's a 787. It would be an amazing change of international dedication for ua at denver to refuse to fly a 767-300 on Lhr-den but to fly a 777 to nrt a route that's so much smaller. I would just worry a 777 is way too large even if it's temporary and united might have a change of heart so I hope it's a 787

I wouldn't be too surprised to see a connection between this flight and maybe ua ending sea.....I'm surprised no one went down that road yet........

Las-nrt is the only route I am pretty confident we will see once the economy improves.

[Edited 2012-05-22 02:03:43]

[Edited 2012-05-22 02:11:17]

User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3969 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 18931 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 10):

difference being as UA will not be going head to head with a competitor like they were with BA on the LHR lane.



okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineyeogeo From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 882 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18925 times:

Congratulations, Denver!  

The route will be Denver's first appearance in World's Longest Flights, 16 May Updates (by yeogeo May 9 2012 in Aviation Polls)

For now, it will appear in the lineup as the 233rd longest reg. sched. pax flight in the world:

5030nm YYZ-TLV Air Canada 763x5[4] / El Al 767x3[4]
(5029nm DEN-NRT United scheduled early 2013)
5027nm DME-PUJº Transaero 744x4


cheers!
yeo



[Edited 2012-05-22 04:45:46]


Yokoso! to my world
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11637 posts, RR: 61
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18677 times:

Smart move by United. This is a big hub-hub market that was not filled in their network, and perhaps more importantly, it appears the deal United cut yesterday with DIA shrewdly included "growth" commitments based on ASMs. Well there you go! This one route - with a plane likely seating 200+ people, flying nearly 5,800 miles - alone will generate a sizable portion (maybe even 1/4-1/3) of United's entire ASM growth commitment. Again - smart move by United.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 14):
Finally a product differentiation for united over frontier and southwest. I am very surprised but I think it's a good move. Can't wait to hear details. With two pacific hubs I still think London would make more sense to retry given its so much larger and can take a 767.

I, too, still find it surprising that United doesn't fly DEN-LHR - even just summer/ski seasonal, with a 767.


User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18230 times:

Maybe with Iceland Air and now UA launching international routes, maybe some have finally realized DEN is not a poor market for new international service.

I think UA should consider LHR-DEN at least on a seasonal basis. There is room for another carrier.


User currently offlineHOONS90 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 52
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18189 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Great to see DEN getting Asia service again, after 13 years!


The biggest mistake made by most human beings: Listening to only half, understanding just a quarter and telling double.
User currently offlineytib From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 574 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 17981 times:

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 21):
I think UA should consider LHR-DEN at least on a seasonal basis. There is room for another carrier.

Where should they take the slot from to do that service? That becomes the issue with DEN-LHR, they find the usage of the slot from a different city makes more sense to them.


User currently offlinecjpmaestro From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 17929 times:

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 16):
LAS is probably a matter of time to allow the economy to recover a bit more. US plans on starting PHX-NRT with the A350, but that's years off at best and if I had to guess, it'll never happen. PHX would be better suited for a return of FRA service. I'm not sure if a MIA service would work or not...787 service would be the only chance in hell it could be profitable -- same with PHX. LAS could eventually sustain a 777 probably 5-6x weekly, but pulling in the premium loads would be a challenge in all three markets.

I think a combined AA/US could make PHX-NRT happen more quickly, particularly if US becomes part of OW.


User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2636 posts, RR: 9
Reply 25, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18577 times:

Quoting ytib (Reply 23):
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 21):
I think UA should consider LHR-DEN at least on a seasonal basis. There is room for another carrier.

Where should they take the slot from to do that service? That becomes the issue with DEN-LHR, they find the usage of the slot from a different city makes more sense to them.

On another thread, it was stated EWR would go down to 4 trips with two 752s being replaced by one 763. Not sure if that's permanent or even correct.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25399 posts, RR: 49
Reply 26, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 18602 times:

Nice 787 route, in time for the Summer 2013 schedule.

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 21):
I think UA should consider LHR-DEN at least on a seasonal basis. There is room for another carrier.

UA already tried DEN-LHR for several years. Decent loads, not much premium demand. Perhaps might work better on something smaller than previous 777.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1676 posts, RR: 3
Reply 27, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 18349 times:

Where are the haters that have been saying DEN was getting pulled down to nothing? Present yourselves to the crowd please....

User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5957 posts, RR: 9
Reply 28, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 18402 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 26):
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 21):
I think UA should consider LHR-DEN at least on a seasonal basis. There is room for another carrier.

UA already tried DEN-LHR for several years. Decent loads, not much premium demand. Perhaps might work better on something smaller than previous 777.

The two-class 764/763 might make it feasible this time around.

The flight is loaded in SHARES.....UA 123 with 788 service...Departs DEN at 1155 and arrives NRT 1500

Starts 03/31/2013

NRT-DEN starts 04/01/2013 UA122 1640-1230

[Edited 2012-05-22 07:13:10]


Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25399 posts, RR: 49
Reply 29, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 18155 times:

Quoting United1 (Reply 28):
The two-class 764/763 might make it feasible this time around.

763 had performance issues at DEN, hence 777 was the only option.

If they want to dedicate a 788 that could make it, however with limited frames, I dont see a DEN-LHR as much of a priority to try again.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5957 posts, RR: 9
Reply 30, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 18069 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 29):
763 had performance issues at DEN, hence 777 was the only option.

If they want to dedicate a 788 that could make it, however with limited frames, I dont see a DEN-LHR as much of a priority to try again.

I didn't realize that the 763 would have performance issues...if that's the case completely agreed that it will be a while (if ever) until UA retries DEN-LHR.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 31, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17966 times:

Congrats to UA, NH, DEN and NRT! I am sure NH blessed this decision since it seems to have been a key negiotating tatic by UA.

I thought UA is only supposed to get 5 787s this year. They have already announced that IAH-AKL and IAH-LOS would be 787s. Since both routes require 2 airplanes that only leaves one spare and DEN-NRT would require 2 airplanes also... is that right? Could they make IAH-LOS-IAH-AKL-IAH with 3 airplanes? How many 787s are arriving next year? Maybe this could start as a 772 and then go to a 788 once more arrive or maybe they would put the 788 on this route instead of one of the others but all 3 seem like perfect 788 routes.

Now DEN has NRT, LHR and FRA, the big three, not sure what would be next, CDG/AMS/GRU?

I don't see UA starting LHR again, although neither airline has much feed on the other side, I think BA has an advantage on this route because LHR has much more feed for BA east of London than UA has feed to DEN west of Denver. Plus, I could see the route being dominated by Brits coming to visit the Rockies more than Coloradians visiting London...IMHO...

EDIT: Posts crossing in the night, looks like it will after they receive more 787s in the Spring...

[Edited 2012-05-22 07:25:04]

User currently offlineOOer From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1466 posts, RR: 2
Reply 32, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17901 times:

Quoting United1 (Reply 30):
I didn't realize that the 763 would have performance issues...if that's the case completely agreed that it will be a while (if ever) until UA retries DEN-LHR.

The SLC-CDG flight runs into performance issues in the summer and it's on a 767-300ER on DL metal. Considering that KDEN is about 1,000 feet higher then SLC...a DEN-LHR flight would also have performance issues.


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5957 posts, RR: 9
Reply 33, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17807 times:

Quoting United787 (Reply 31):
I am sure NH blessed this decision since it seems to have been a key negiotating tatic by UA.

As the flight is flown as part of the joint venture between UA and NH I'm sure both airlines looked at it and decided which carrier would be a better fit.

Quoting United787 (Reply 31):
I thought UA is only supposed to get 5 787s this year. They have already announced that IAH-AKL and IAH-LOS would be 787s.

They are getting 5 this year but keep in mind that IAH-LOS is operating with a 777 they may not switch to a 788 when they get those aircraft on board. IAH-AKL is not loaded in the system yet so who knows what's going on with that flight.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 34, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17810 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 29):
If they want to dedicate a 788 that could make it, however with limited frames, I dont see a DEN-LHR as much of a priority to try again.

They will need 2 frames to do DEN-NRT anyway (given the schedule posted by United1), so why not incorporate LHR into that? They should just about be able to fit it into the 23.5 hours between the plane arriving in DEN and departing to NRT the next day...

Depart DEN 2:30pm -- Arrive LHR 6:30am
Depart LHR 8:15am -- Arrive DEN 10am.

It would be very tight though... Certainly not something to do while the airline is still new to the 787, but it's a possibility down the track. They could then rotate the frames through LHR (which could also allow some extra slack in the timings) saving the need to fit a domestic positioning flight into the schedule.

The other issue would be LHR slots at that time of the morning...


User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1676 posts, RR: 3
Reply 35, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17591 times:

Quoting United787 (Reply 31):
I thought UA is only supposed to get 5 787s this year.
Quoting United1 (Reply 33):
They are getting 5 this year

How many they are getting this year is irrelevant. The route doesn't start until next year and we don't know how many deliveries UA expects in 1Q13...


Does anyone suspect that this flight had something to do with:

"Coincidentally or not, the Denver City Council voted unanimously Monday night to lower the cost of United Airlines operating at DIA, despite protests from competitor airlines, as long as the airline increases its business at the airport over the next four years."

From the OP's article.


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 8
Reply 36, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16901 times:

Way to go DEN! And to think that everyone keeps saying this hub is a goner. They were (are) wrong.


"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineStressedout From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16801 times:

Quoting United1 (Reply 28):
The flight is loaded in SHARES.....UA 123 with 788 service...Departs DEN at 1155 and arrives NRT 1500

Starts 03/31/2013

NRT-DEN starts 04/01/2013 UA122 1640-1230

This is awesome news!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


User currently offlinebobbypsp From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16367 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Interesting side note: I used United's mobile app and believe this is the first UA 787 loaded along with a seat map

Business First and Economy. Economy is 3 x 3 and currently not showing Y+


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5957 posts, RR: 9
Reply 39, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16154 times:

Quoting bobbypsp (Reply 38):
Business First and Economy. Economy is 3 x 3 and currently not showing Y+

Looks like a dummy seat map that they threw together....the forward Y class cabin and a few J class seats are blacked out.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineCO787EWR From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16084 times:

Quoting bobbypsp (Reply 38):
resting side note: I used United's mobile app and believe this is the first UA 787 loaded along with a seat map

Business First and Economy. Economy is 3 x 3 and currently not showing Y+

That has to be 3x3x3 by which I mean 9 across no way is UA having 6 seats in Y. To bad UA doesn't go with a real Y+ setup like some international carriers.


User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 41, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16000 times:

Quoting bobbypsp (Reply 38):
Interesting side note: I used United's mobile app and believe this is the first UA 787 loaded along with a seat map

Business First and Economy. Economy is 3 x 3 and currently not showing Y+

I just check some early dates and some seats are already blacked out!


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3469 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 15920 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 27):
Where are the haters that have been saying DEN was getting pulled down to nothing? Present yourselves to the crowd please....

To be accurate i dont remember many saying that on here. Very few people have ever said untied would dehub denver but reducing domestic o&d to the ultra low fare spots is still something that might happen if frontier survives and the three way fight looks idefinite.

IMHO Frontier is looking more desperate by the day so united confidence in an eventual two hub city might be increasing. The city is keeping united happy for a four year period which is honestly pretty short. Clearly there was a danger hence why they went out of their way to make the deal so sweat for united and so weak for everyone else. 4 years is relatively short but it gives united time to see how the three way hub battle works out or is looking and can try to hit the city for more money again after this. This isnt a we love united so much we are just throwing them money for no reason this is a we are giving up $20 million to keep united happy for four years while the whole three hub situation unfolds. This ensures they dont end up with the dreaded united shrinks and frontiers house of cards still falls apart anyway and you are left much worse off for the airport. I would think the airport has rightfullly decided that united offers more to the airport and city than anyone else and they are much more stable and likely to survive than frontier so they need to support them more.

This is exactly the kind of flight needed for united, to differentiate themselves from frontier and southwest at the most competative airport in the country maybe world especially since business travelers are the crowd they need to keep happy. The 787 is the perfect plane for this route and will help united to be profitable hopefully with lots of cargo and full planes.


User currently offlinebobbypsp From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 32 posts, RR: 0
Reply 43, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 15786 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CO787EWR (Reply 40):

Nothing like nitpicking. 3seats x 3 = 9.


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32788 posts, RR: 72
Reply 44, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 15605 times:

Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 16):
I'm not sure if a MIA service would work or not...787 service would be the only chance in hell it could be profitable -- same with PHX.

People really underestimate how big Florida-Asia is, with MIAHKG larger than any other Southeast/Texas market from Hong Kong an with MCONRT the second largest Southeast/Texas-Asia market after ATLICN. PHX-Asia is significantly smaller, not to mention DEN-Asia. Yield isn't awesome outside of some Miami markets, but the market is big. In fact, to compensate for te fact that all the larger Florida-Asia markets sans MIAHKG have weaker yields, the ideal plane probably isn't a low-density 787-8, not allowing for density in the Y cabin to capture the two largest markets, MIAMNL and MCONRT.

MIA and PHL will see Asia service before PHX, I have no doubt. Much larger markets and capture from must larger connecting flows, LatAm and the Northeast.

[Edited 2012-05-22 09:48:02]


a.
User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 45, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 15546 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SANFan (Reply 15):
Seems to me this route is another that the 787 was built for. The only question for me is who's metal it will be flown on? ANA seems the most logical. However, NH seems to be talking "early 2013" for SJC-NRT and that was announced late last year! I don't think UA would have enough of the Dreamliners within that timeframe but they certainly could use another a/c to start the route, then switch to the '87 when available.

Wasn't NH in talks with DIA to start DIA-NRT with the 787? Did the talks stall, come to an end?

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 26):

UA already tried DEN-LHR for several years. Decent loads, not much premium demand. Perhaps might work better on something smaller than previous 777.

Would the 763ER possibly be able to do a route of this length out of DEN when UA starts using the these birds fitted with blended winglets?

Quoting United787 (Reply 31):

Now DEN has NRT, LHR and FRA, the big three, not sure what would be next, CDG/AMS/GRU?

Negative on all of these, United787. The first two are SkyTeam hubs. If UA was in SkyTeam, then, CDG & AMS could possibly work, maybe not both, but at least one. GRU never. In fact, is there any decision if the merger with JJ-LA will see the combined carrier staying in OneWorld or moving to Star Alliance? I'm very interested to see what happens here.

Quoting United787 (Reply 31):

I don't see UA starting LHR again, although neither airline has much feed on the other side, I think BA has an advantage on this route because LHR has much more feed for BA east of London than UA has feed to DEN west of Denver. Plus, I could see the route being dominated by Brits coming to visit the Rockies more than Coloradians visiting London...IMHO...
Quoting qf002 (Reply 34):
They will need 2 frames to do DEN-NRT anyway (given the schedule posted by United1), so why not incorporate LHR into that? They should just about be able to fit it into the 23.5 hours between the plane arriving in DEN and departing to NRT the next day...

Depart DEN 2:30pm -- Arrive LHR 6:30am
Depart LHR 8:15am -- Arrive DEN 10am.

See above. For a DEN-LHR route to work well on any sized a/c, I feel UA would need to be in OneWorld for JV and connections on each end. If we see another EU destination, I could possibly see DEN-MUC with a 788 since LH has their secondary hub there. I don't think we'll ever see LX via ZRH, SN via BRU or OS via VIE start flights to DEN as these hubs are smaller, niche hubs, albeit, ZRH, is a great transfer point.


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 46, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15392 times:

if i'm reading the seat map correctly it's 32 J plus 177 Y and Y+ combined for a total of 209 ?

User currently offlinematt777 From Cayman Islands, joined Oct 2001, 503 posts, RR: 6
Reply 47, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15175 times:

I find it incredible that UA would come back to intercontinental DEN flying.
Why is not ANA operating the route?


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 48, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 14911 times:

Why would you find it incredible? Denver is a large business community located far from other major cities. It deserves service.

Why would ANA fly it but not United, when they have a JV on the route.

NS


User currently offlineBACCALA From United States of America, joined May 2009, 133 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 14958 times:

United will operate the service with Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft with 219 seats—36 in BusinessFirst and 183 in United Economy, including 63 Economy Plus seats with extra legroom.

[Edited 2012-05-22 11:06:19]

User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 50, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 14801 times:

Quoting BACCALA (Reply 49):
UA will operate the route on Dreamliners featuring 42 BusinessFirst seats and 183 in coach.

Any info regarding Y and Y+ split of the 183 ? Will Y+ be 2-4-2 or 3-3-3 ?


User currently offlineKBJCpilot From United States of America, joined May 2012, 176 posts, RR: 6
Reply 51, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 14852 times:

A story in the Denver Post this morning mentioned that Tokyo is the number one Asian destination for overseas travelers from Denver. If that is the case this new route makes perfect sense to utilize the 787 and keep those travelers in Denver rather than transferring them in ORD, SFO, or LAX. And this flight opens up all kinds of connecting opportunities for Asian travelers who are looking for destinations throughout the inter-mountain west as well as the midwest.

$130 million in economic benefits to Colorado as a result of this new flight according to a live report on 9News right now. If it wasn't for the 787 this flight wouldn't have happened.

It's a great day for DIA and NRT.

http://business-news.thestreet.com/d...begin-direct-denver-tokyo-flight/1

[Edited 2012-05-22 11:15:35]


Samsonite, I was way off!
User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1676 posts, RR: 3
Reply 52, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 14498 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 51):
and keep those travelers in Denver rather than transferring them in ORD, SFO, or LAX.

I would think this hurts the SEA flight the most as it has the smallest catchment. But perhaps there is also enough local demand there as well.

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 50):
Any info regarding Y and Y+ split of the 183 ?

I see he edited his post so you may have missed it.

Quoting BACCALA (Reply 49):
United will operate the service with Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft with 219 seats%u201436 in BusinessFirst and 183 in United Economy, including 63 Economy Plus seats with extra legroom.


User currently offlineredzeppelin From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 597 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 14157 times:

It will be interesting to see how UA uses the 787 during the 23 hour stopover in DEN. While Delta was running SLC-NRT, they used the A330s to make a SLC-ATL turn, which I hoped to get on but never made it. (I only realized they were doing that when I was in SLC one day and saw 2 A330s on the ground at once -- I was shocked.) Some have speculated an LHR turn, but others have pointed out the problems there. Could we see them on a domestic run? Maybe to IAD, EWR, or even HNL?


Flown: DL,OS,NZ,UN,VV,NW,AA,UA,HP,TZ,AS,AF,KL,SK,WS,AZ,OK; op by OO,MQ,XJ,9E,G7,EV,QX,RP
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 54, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13793 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 52):
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 50):
Any info regarding Y and Y+ split of the 183 ?

I see he edited his post so you may have missed it.

Ahh yes. I've posted before his edit. Thanks.


User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 55, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13805 times:

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 53):
It will be interesting to see how UA uses the 787 during the 23 hour stopover in DEN. While Delta was running SLC-NRT, they used the A330s to make a SLC-ATL turn, which I hoped to get on but never made it. (I only realized they were doing that when I was in SLC one day and saw 2 A330s on the ground at once -- I was shocked.) Some have speculated an LHR turn, but others have pointed out the problems there. Could we see them on a domestic run? Maybe to IAD, EWR, or even HNL?

Would something like NRT-DEN-IAH-AKL work out schedule wise ?


User currently offlineplanespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3527 posts, RR: 5
Reply 56, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13644 times:

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 10):
MCO is the largest market without Tokyo service, then Vegas, Miami and Philly.

Not sure if you're referring to something more specific (like O&D pax?), but Denver (#21) is a larger market (per MSA population) than both Orlando (#26) and Las Vegas (#30). Miami and Philly are both in the top ten (#6 and #8, respectively).



Do you like movies about gladiators?
User currently offlineOH-LGA From Denmark, joined Oct 1999, 1436 posts, RR: 19
Reply 57, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13492 times:

Quoting United1 (Reply 28):

The flight is loaded in SHARES.....UA 123 with 788 service...Departs DEN at 1155 and arrives NRT 1500

Starts 03/31/2013

NRT-DEN starts 04/01/2013 UA122 1640-1230

Congrats to UA, DEN and NRT! Very cool news... 

Just noticed the flight numbers - I guess we know now what they're doing with the flight numbers vacated by the termination of EWR-CPH...



Head in the clouds... yet feet planted firmly on the ground.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25399 posts, RR: 49
Reply 58, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13399 times:

Quoting laca773 (Reply 45):
Wasn't NH in talks with DIA to start DIA-NRT with the 787? Did the talks stall, come to an end?
Quoting matt777 (Reply 47):
Why is not ANA operating the route?

Does not really matter now that NH-UA have begun their comprehensive metal neutral Pacific JV.

Both cost and revenues are shared between the airlines. Ultimately flights are operated by the party that it works best for. (eg upcoming NRT-SJC on NH)



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25399 posts, RR: 49
Reply 59, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13412 times:

Here is the formal press release:

DENVER SAY "KONNICHIWA" TO TOKYO
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/united...er-konnichiwa-tokyo-173000458.html

Effective March 31st

Flights available for booking in GDS.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6764 posts, RR: 31
Reply 60, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13324 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 51):
A story in the Denver Post this morning mentioned that Tokyo is the number one Asian destination for overseas travelers from Denver. If that is the case this new route makes perfect sense to utilize the 787 and keep those travelers in Denver

That statistic says very little since Tokyo is the top Asian destination from practically every U.S. city, with the possible exception of NYC (TLV) and SFO (HKG IIRC).

Quoting commavia (Reply 20):
it appears the deal United cut yesterday with DIA shrewdly included "growth" commitments based on ASMs. Well there you go! This one route - with a plane likely seating 200+ people, flying nearly 5,800 miles - alone will generate a sizable portion (maybe even 1/4-1/3) of United's entire ASM growth commitment.

   Doing a very rough calculation, with 400 daily departures on UA/UA*, an average of 100 seats/departure, and an average stage length of 1000 miles, that single flight would increase ASM's at DEN by over 3% vs. the target of 4.5%. A seasonal DEN-LHR would cover the rest.


User currently offlinewestern727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 751 posts, RR: 4
Reply 61, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13306 times:

Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 22):
Great to see DEN getting Asia service again, after 13 years!

That means about 1999...what was that last service, out of curiosity, and on what month did it end? Thanks in advance.



Jack @ AUS
User currently offlineThe777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6570 posts, RR: 55
Reply 62, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13326 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 55):
Would something like NRT-DEN-IAH-AKL work out schedule wise ?

That's the most likely routing of the aircraft, in my opinion. Makes total sense.

The777Man



Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....CI, MU, LX and LH 777s
User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2636 posts, RR: 9
Reply 63, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13362 times:

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 53):
It will be interesting to see how UA uses the 787 during the 23 hour stopover in DEN. While Delta was running SLC-NRT, they used the A330s to make a SLC-ATL turn, which I hoped to get on but never made it. (I only realized they were doing that when I was in SLC one day and saw 2 A330s on the ground at once -- I was shocked.) Some have speculated an LHR turn, but others have pointed out the problems there. Could we see them on a domestic run? Maybe to IAD, EWR, or even HNL?

The fact that the announcement didn't include 1-stop service means the aircraft will come from a hub, probably IAH. While LHR is possible, it would be tight and probably require another turn in LHR for maintenance or reduction from daily in NRT or LHR markets.

As far as 1 stops - the best possibilities might be CLE (hub) or MCO, maintenance base and stated in Reply #10 as the largest NRT market without Non-stop service.

How about a two aircraft package: MCO 0845 DEN 1045-1155 NRT 1500-1640 DEN 1230(+1)-1430 MCO 1900?


User currently offlinedia77 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 705 posts, RR: 6
Reply 64, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13327 times:

I think he's referring to Korean Air's one stop service between Denver and Seoul which terminated in early 2001 or late 2000.

Quoting western727 (Reply 61):
Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 22):
Great to see DEN getting Asia service again, after 13 years!

That means about 1999...what was that last service, out of curiosity, and on what month did it end? Thanks in advance.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 65, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 12907 times:

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 63):
The fact that the announcement didn't include 1-stop service means the aircraft will come from a hub, probably IAH.

Yep, as of now that's the only 787 pilot base. My guess is it will run NRT-DEN-IAH-AKL or NRT-DEN-IAH-LOS. At least it'll run that way until enough are on property to establish a second pilot base and stage more aircraft.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineordjoe From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 708 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 12701 times:

The 787 seems perfect for this, I can see it doing we'll. DEN has a good economy, good amount of tech firms. Way to go united.

User currently offlineklkla From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 933 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 12055 times:

I would think this is related to ANA's new SEA-NRT route. I would be willing to bet that United stops their SEA-NRT flight and moves the metal to DEN-NRT. This makes much more sense for the JV as ANA has better connections in Tokyo to serve Seattle and United had better connections in Denver. It's a much better use of resources.

User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 68, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 11929 times:

Quoting klkla (Reply 67):
moves the metal to DEN-NRT

Well, moves the resources not the metal. The carbon fiber will be out of DEN. They would move that 777 elsewhere IF it moved, they have not announced that they would be cancelling it though.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineHOONS90 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 52
Reply 69, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 11875 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting dia77 (Reply 64):
I think he's referring to Korean Air's one stop service between Denver and Seoul which terminated in early 2001 or late 2000.

Quoting western727 (Reply 61):
Quoting HOONS90 (Reply 22):
Great to see DEN getting Asia service again, after 13 years!

That means about 1999...what was that last service, out of curiosity, and on what month did it end? Thanks in advance.

Correct, it was via SFO and ended in late 1999.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © DIAspotter
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Christopher Smay




The biggest mistake made by most human beings: Listening to only half, understanding just a quarter and telling double.
User currently offlinetpaewr From United States of America, joined May 2001, 452 posts, RR: 0
Reply 70, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11063 times:

It is ironic that while "widebody rich" UA could only launch this with a plane ordered by CO.

User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 71, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11015 times:

It really is not, no, since launching a route with a plane that doesn't make sense.... well, doesn't make sense.

NS


User currently offlinetpaewr From United States of America, joined May 2001, 452 posts, RR: 0
Reply 72, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 10766 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 71):
It really is not, no, since launching a route with a plane that doesn't make sense.... well, doesn't make sense

I am not sure I follow. I agree UA couldn't have made it work with a 777 or 747. So they needed the right plane, correct?


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 73, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 10724 times:

They did need the right plane!

NS


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 74, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 10651 times:

Quoting tpaewr (Reply 70):
It is ironic that while "widebody rich" UA could only launch this with a plane ordered by CO.

It has everything to do with the fact that the 787 is the right airplane for the route. With the 777, it's probably a non-starter.


User currently offlineMarcoPoloWorld From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 639 posts, RR: 0
Reply 75, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 9820 times:

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 10):
MCO is the largest market without Tokyo service, then Vegas, Miami and Philly.

Denver is a smaller market to Asia than any of the above (and Phoenix even smaller), which is why I find this addition questionable, specially given United's shaky history in DENLON, a market around 6x larger.

That's kind of what I thought also.

When I visited Denver a few years ago, I had expected a modern, albeit isolated, city. Instead I found it to be a backwater-type place surrounded by nothingness (scenic nothingness but still). And the only public transit line to the center city was a bus once an hour. So now, how is there a viable market connection between Denver and Tokyo and who would want to or have the means to travel between the two?

Hard to understand this move; maybe just a desperate roll of the dice I suppose.

[Edited 2012-05-22 21:02:05]

User currently offlineKBJCpilot From United States of America, joined May 2012, 176 posts, RR: 6
Reply 76, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 9616 times:

Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 75):
When I visited Denver a few years ago, I had expected a modern, albeit isolated, city. Instead I found it to be a redneck-type place surrounded by nothingness (scenic nothingness but still). And the only public transit line to the center city was a bus once an hour.

That will soon be a thing of the past. The Regional Transportation District (RTD) is in the process of building a light-rail line to DEN that will connect the downtown business core to the airport while passing through the Aurora and University of Colorado Medical Center. From Union Station, the terminus of the RTD line, riders can utilize the light rail throughout the south and west Denver metro area and can take shutle busses to the north metro areas including Boulder and the Broomfield/Westminster Interlocken area. By 2017 DEN will be a different airport, especially if the Gaylord Hotel complex is built just off-site from DEN.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...-tourism-tax-incentives?source=pkg



Samsonite, I was way off!
User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 77, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 9658 times:

Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 75):
When I visited Denver a few years ago, I had expected a modern, albeit isolated, city. Instead I found it to be a redneck-type place surrounded by nothingness (scenic nothingness but still).

You clearly didn't actually go into Denver then.

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 76):
That will soon be a thing of the past. The Regional Transportation District (RTD) is in the process of building a light-rail line to DEN that will connect the downtown business core to the airport while passing through the Aurora and University of Colorado Medical Center.

The spur to the airport is electrified heavy commuter rail, but the spirit of your comment is quite on point.

Heavy rail was selected for several RTD metro corridors for railway re-use and the distance, speed, and ridership expected. The longer lines will be "clean" diesel, with the shorter lines like this one being electrified.

NS

[Edited 2012-05-22 21:01:17]

User currently offlineftrguy From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 78, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 9582 times:

United has wanted to do this route for years now, but they have never had an aircraft with the performance to do it. Even with the new 16000ft RWY, a 777 couldn't do it with any decent load. A 767, forget it. DEN's long range international growth has been primarily limited by aircraft performance, not by the market. Sounds like the 787 is the first aircraft to be able to pull it off with some sort of a decent payload.

User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 79, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9429 times:

I'm very hopeful that a year-round LHR is possible with this aircraft. I'm nearly certain it would be.

NS


User currently offlineytib From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 574 posts, RR: 1
Reply 80, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9446 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 77):
The spur to the airport is, if I am not mistaken, heavy commuter rail.

Correct.

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 76):
That will soon be a thing of the past. The Regional Transportation District (RTD) is in the process of building a light-rail line to DEN that will connect the downtown business core to the airport while passing through the Aurora and University of Colorado Medical Center.

Not quite, the stop at the Fitzsimmons campus where the Medical Center is located will require a change from heavy rail to light rail at the Peoria Station.

http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/ec_1


User currently offlineMarcoPoloWorld From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 639 posts, RR: 0
Reply 81, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9401 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 76):
That will soon be a thing of the past. The Regional Transportation District (RTD) is in the process of building a light-rail line to DEN that will connect the downtown business core to the airport while passing through the Aurora and University of Colorado Medical Center. From Union Station, the terminus of the RTD line, riders can utilize the light rail throughout the south and west Denver metro area and can take shutle busses to the north metro areas including Boulder and the Broomfield/Westminster Interlocken area. By 2017 DEN will be a different airport, especially if the Gaylord Hotel complex is built just off-site from DEN.

Great to hear that, and thanks for the update!   

Quoting gigneil (Reply 77):
You clearly didn't actually go into Denver then.

I didn't? Anyways, I wish the best for Denver, and I hope to find a re-vitalized city on a next visit. Keep up the good work of promoting it.   


User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 82, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 9264 times:

Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 75):

If UA wants to fly a bunch of rednecks to NRT from DEN and it puts money in the bank, what's your issue really? Rednecks? Denver? I'm at a complete loss for words here...but oh well.

You are entitled to your judgment whether or not it makes you look good or bad but I think you owe Denver an apology.  Big grin

[Edited 2012-05-22 21:54:04]


Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 83, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 8767 times:

Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 81):
I didn't? Anyways, I wish the best for Denver, and I hope to find a re-vitalized city on a next visit. Keep up the good work of promoting it.   

I'm uncertain what part you visited.

Since I was in high school, Denver has become an entirely new city almost. The downtown area has been fully revitalized, the tech center expanded, and vast new sections of town developed.

There are still large sections of the Denver area that maintain a rural feel; Denver does cover many hundreds of square miles. But the central core and close in suburbs are bustling and vibrant.

NS


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32788 posts, RR: 72
Reply 84, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 8694 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 60):
That statistic says very little since Tokyo is the top Asian destination from practically every U.S. city, with the possible exception of NYC (TLV) and SFO (HKG IIRC).

Not at all. DFW's busiest before NRT is ICN, same with ATL. MIA has two busier, MNL and HKG. Plenty of others. I'm sure. From many cities, Manila and Seoul are busiest.

Though, you are right, it means nothing, especially given Denver-Asia isn't big to any city.



a.
User currently offlinedia77 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 705 posts, RR: 6
Reply 85, posted (2 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 8585 times:

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 84):
Not at all. DFW's busiest before NRT is ICN, same with ATL. MIA has two busier, MNL and HKG. Plenty of others. I'm sure. From many cities, Manila and Seoul are busiest.

Though, you are right, it means nothing, especially given Denver-Asia isn't big to any city.

Can you share your numbers?


User currently offlineBN747DFWHNL From United States of America, joined May 2005, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 86, posted (2 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 8509 times:

Can't wait for March 31 and a UA 787 at DEN.

Considering that many seem surprised by yesterday's
UA announcment, this article from the Associated Press,
also from yesterday, seems to shed some new light on
the subject:

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/arti...lights-what-about-houston-auckland

Without taking anything away from the City of
Denver, which clearly lobbied for this route, it
seems as though UA's decision has the
added motive of snubbing the City of Houston
for being receptive to SWA service from Hobby
to Mexico.


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 87, posted (2 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 8451 times:

Quoting ftrguy (Reply 78):
a 777 couldn't do it with any decent load
Quoting BN747DFWHNL (Reply 86):
Without taking anything away from the City of Denver, which clearly lobbied for this route, it seems as though UA's decision has theadded motive of snubbing the City of Houstonfor being receptive to SWA service from Hobbyto Mexico.

If UA is worried about Soutwest flying a bunch of 737s to LatAm/Caribbean then we have bigger things to worry about.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineBeechToBus From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 88, posted (2 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 8402 times:

Quoting BN747DFWHNL (Reply 86):

Interesting take, I don't know if DEN to NRT necessarily to snub Houston though. If there was more announcements about routes leaving IAH or skipping over it then that would make sense, plus I'm sure that this announcement has been in the works for a while, several weeks at least, where the city of Houston just came out in favor of SWA.

I think DEN on its own plus the connections to the mountan and plains states that UA in DEN provide will see that this route is successful. Like many have said, the 787 is the right plane for this route. The 747 was too much plane and 777 and 767 would have been too weight restricted muh of the year.

Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 75):

I too am kind of at a loss of what Marco Polo is referring to. If your metric of how modern a city is is by its public transit link from its airport to its city center (which agreed, Denver's is currently less than adequate for a few more years anyhow), then maybe Denver is backwoods. If however you look at other metrics, vibrancy, nightlife, cultural/sporting attractions, shopping, resturants, downtown employment numbers, other booming parts of the metro area and their attractions, workforce, and over economic health of the area, then Denver is far ahead of the curve for a metro area of 3 million.


User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 3
Reply 89, posted (2 years 4 months 20 hours ago) and read 8292 times:

I am so so excited about this route.. Having grown up in DEN, this is really big news. I remember a lot of history regarding international service to DEN.

I remember I was flying out of Stapleton the day CO launched nonstops to LGW. It was in June 1987. That was an exciting time also. I was at Stapleton to see the pax checking in for the last flight out of old Stapleton airport, which interestingly enough was CO flight 34 to LGW. Of course the return flight landed at the new Denver Airport.

I thought Korean Air's one stop flight to DEN was not going to last, and it was the case. A 747 flying to the west coast and then to Korea? Inefficient use of resources.

This flight to NRT on UA is big big news. As I said, this flight along with FI to KEF, shows that DEN is finally getting some love, and it's about time!

Quoting BeechToBus (Reply 88):
Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 75):

I too am kind of at a loss of what Marco Polo is referring to. If your metric of how modern a city is is by its public transit link from its airport to its city center (which agreed, Denver's is currently less than adequate for a few more years anyhow), then maybe Denver is backwoods. If however you look at other metrics, vibrancy, nightlife, cultural/sporting attractions, shopping, resturants, downtown employment numbers, other booming parts of the metro area and their attractions, workforce, and over economic health of the area, then Denver is far ahead of the curve for a metro area of 3 million.

Let's not allow this thread to be hijacked over a strange remark, starting an argument over what the city of Denver is, and isn't. It's not worth it.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16872 posts, RR: 51
Reply 90, posted (2 years 4 months 20 hours ago) and read 8282 times:

Quoting BeechToBus (Reply 88):
Interesting take, I don't know if DEN to NRT necessarily to snub Houston though

While Tokyo is huge for Denver, and hopefully LHR will soon follow, it's not like there are many other international opportunies waiting to be realized. I love Denver, go there for work from time to time, but it's not an international city like Houston.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8379 posts, RR: 10
Reply 91, posted (2 years 4 months 18 hours ago) and read 8090 times:

Quoting redzeppelin (Reply 53):
It will be interesting to see how UA uses the 787 during the 23 hour stopover in DEN.

Indeed. How about FRA or MUC since UA and LH have a TATL JV? May be too tight but if there's an airport in Europe that can turn around a 787 quickly it should be MUC.

Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 63):
The fact that the announcement didn't include 1-stop service means the aircraft will come from a hub

I don't follow. Aren't DEN and NRT both UA hubs?

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 65):
Yep, as of now that's the only 787 pilot base

That was before the merger. Looks to me like UA's 787 pilots will be commuting to work in DEN. Has IAH-AKL been loaded, even?

Quoting peanuts (Reply 82):
If UA wants to fly a bunch of rednecks to NRT from DEN and it puts money in the bank, what's your issue really? Rednecks? Denver? I'm at a complete loss for words here...but oh well.

That all depends on what his point of reference is. If he's comparing it with San Francisco, Chicago, NYC, London, Paris or Tokyo, then yes, Denver is kinda of a sleepy "backwater" city. I had a similar opinion when I visited but for a lot of people that is part of its appeal. Not everyone enjoys living is a large metropolis, myself included. What a lot of outside visitors don't realize is how spread out the city is if you include neighboring cities and towns.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 92, posted (2 years 4 months 17 hours ago) and read 8001 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 82):
Rednecks? Denver? I'm at a complete loss for words here...but oh well.

I am too...Cowboys maybe, rednecks...?

Quoting BN747DFWHNL (Reply 86):
added motive of snubbing the City of Houston
for being receptive to SWA service from Hobby
to Mexico.

Doubt it as the bird will probably originate at IAH anyway...

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 87):
UA is worried about Soutwest flying a bunch of 737s to LatAm/Caribbean then we have bigger things to worry about.

Exactly, from 5 gates. Get real UA.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 91):
That was before the merger. Looks to me like UA's 787 pilots will be commuting to work in DEN. Has IAH-AKL been loaded, even?

Probably, but where is the plane coming from...The bird will probably rotate on a DEN-IAH run to link with AKL (which has not been loaded yet which could be a non-starter) or LOS which I'm sure will go 787.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 93, posted (2 years 4 months 17 hours ago) and read 7985 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 91):
I don't follow. Aren't DEN and NRT both UA hubs?

Officially, it's still a hub. Functionally, it's more a large focus city. In recent years, the rapid expansion of US mainland (via SFO, LAX, ORD, IAD, EWR) to non-NRT Asia nonstops allowed NRT's role to shrink considerably. I think the current count is somewhere between 15 and 20 (would've been more if SFO-NGO/TPE were not dropped)

UA's NRT is a pale comparison to DL's NRT, but UA's total Far East connectivity is definitely at least as good as DL's.


User currently onlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 1217 posts, RR: 1
Reply 94, posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 7651 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Surprisingly they already announced on the Company Newsline the airplane would be a 787 proably the first one out of the gate. The Japanese are HUGE ski enthusiasts and Saporro is a MECCA for Japanese Ski Bums every year. So,, the Denver skiing would be right in line with that theme.
I don't know if this is a redirection of efforts with Houston's decis ion BUT We're moving into our New Digs in the downtown Chicago Offices and it's rumored there will be the CEO, Mayor Emanuel, the Mayor of San Francisco and the Mayor of Denver touring the place the first week of June, right following the Continental Ops guys moving in to work along side of us because there are a DAMN lot of us in that room on that Floor. . And I mean RIGHT along side of us... so Obviously Something is Up What?? Heck I don't know!! Maybe they're going to get off their Duffs and start REally negotiating with the Pilots like they're doing with the IAM..Especially since all 3 towns are BIG IAM represented Cities and Hubs, I can and Do sure Hope so because I DON'T wish to see another summer of 2000 being Repeated. That Sucked Lemons!! And Nobody made any Lemonade either!!


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 8
Reply 95, posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 7626 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 65):

How is IAH-LOS even doing? I thought UA wasn't all that pleased with the results thus far.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 96, posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 7671 times:

Quoting BN747DFWHNL (Reply 86):
Without taking anything away from the City of
Denver, which clearly lobbied for this route, it
seems as though UA's decision has the
added motive of snubbing the City of Houston
for being receptive to SWA service from Hobby
to Mexico.

On Tuesday, United spokesman Christen David said the airline had planned Houston-Auckland flights "on the assumption that (Bush Intercontinental) would be the sole international airport, maximizing connecting traffic. If that isn't the case, the flight won't work."

This makes absolutely no sense for a carrier like UA.
If there is even a grain of truth to this nonsense, it would shed a light possibly how messed up UA really is.
I'm still very sceptical about the truth level of this article though. UA wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot now, would they? Why start DEN-NRT out of spite? Unless they got favorable deals out of it and UA had promised DEN an increase in ASM's ....

See:

Quoting commavia (Reply 20):
Smart move by United. This is a big hub-hub market that was not filled in their network, and perhaps more importantly, it appears the deal United cut yesterday with DIA shrewdly included "growth" commitments based on ASMs. Well there you go! This one route - with a plane likely seating 200+ people, flying nearly 5,800 miles - alone will generate a sizable portion (maybe even 1/4-1/3) of United's entire ASM growth commitment. Again - smart move by United.


I know, I know, every carrier gets sucked into its share of politics, it's part of business. I think UA would be wise to let the IAH/HOU drama die down a bit though.



Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 97, posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 7606 times:

Quoting BeechToBus (Reply 88):

I too am kind of at a loss of what Marco Polo is referring to. If your metric of how modern a city is is by its public transit link from its airport to its city center (which agreed, Denver's is currently less than adequate for a few more years anyhow),

Agreed, if the public transit links to the airport defined a city then NYC and LAX would be "red neck towns" also. Yes, I know JFK and EWR have connections but they don't go directly to the airport, you have to connect to the airport train and LGA has no access...


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 98, posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 7568 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 95):
How is IAH-LOS even doing? I thought UA wasn't all that pleased with the results thus far.

Loads are improving but the 777 is probably too much airplane for the route. Yields are strong. It will be an early 787 route without question.


User currently onlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 1217 posts, RR: 1
Reply 99, posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 7538 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

what is a redneck town when talking about Flying?? is this some hidden meaning?? and Why is Houston Not considered as red neck as Denver?? I know a LOT of guys that would sell their Sisters to live and work in Denver. So Obviously Something is there since guys will wait 15 YEARS for an open slot to Move there with their Family. And I ONLY know 2 guys that would Vuluntarily LEAVE Denver (for a 28% raise, the mercenaries!)

User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1676 posts, RR: 3
Reply 100, posted (2 years 4 months 12 hours ago) and read 7419 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 96):
This makes absolutely no sense for a carrier like UA.

Unless they actually WANT to move the flight, and they are using the IAH/HOU debacle as cover. They are not starting DEN-NRT instead or AKL, but I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that they could move the AKL flight to SFO.


User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 3
Reply 101, posted (2 years 4 months 12 hours ago) and read 7312 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 98):
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 95):
How is IAH-LOS even doing? I thought UA wasn't all that pleased with the results thus far.

Loads are improving but the 777 is probably too much airplane for the route. Yields are strong. It will be an early 787 route without question.

Good news on that front. Again, the route is only 7 months old.. Too early to say too much about it.


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25399 posts, RR: 49
Reply 102, posted (2 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 7259 times:

Quoting MarcoPoloWorld (Reply 75):
So now, how is there a viable market connection between Denver and Tokyo and who would want to or have the means to travel between the two?

Hard to understand this move; maybe just a desperate roll of the dice I suppose.

The route is much more than simply connecting Denver to Tokyo.

As with any hub, its about connections. UA can channel folks in Albuquerque, Billings, Omaha, Oklahoma City, etc on this flight.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1676 posts, RR: 3
Reply 103, posted (2 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 7194 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 102):
As with any hub, its about connections. UA can channel folks in Albuquerque, Billings, Omaha, Oklahoma City, etc on this flight.

And since it's a JV NH can do the same on the other end. This could be highly successful.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8379 posts, RR: 10
Reply 104, posted (2 years 4 months 7 hours ago) and read 7070 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 92):
Probably, but where is the plane coming from...The bird will probably rotate on a DEN-IAH run to link with AKL (which has not been loaded yet which could be a non-starter) or LOS which I'm sure will go 787.

Why can't the plane just be based at DEN? Why does it have to come from IAH?

Quoting peanuts (Reply 96):
This makes absolutely no sense for a carrier like UA.

IAH-AKL never seemed like a viable route to begin with. Maybe UA shares this opinion.

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 98):
Loads are improving but the 777 is probably too much airplane for the route. Yields are strong. It will be an early 787 route without question.

I wonder if the 787 won't be too small for the cargo though. If yields are strong then who cares about the LF. It's a young route still.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 105, posted (2 years 4 months 7 hours ago) and read 7039 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 104):
Why can't the plane just be based at DEN? Why does it have to come from IAH?

That's not an efficient use of aircraft. It would have to have the two 787s dedicated to DEN-NRT with no way to efficiently move them around the system. They would have to open a 787 base at DEN - now they could be planning more 787 routes from DEN or NRT...the problem with that is there won't be enough on property to make that viable. Even if IAH-AKL is a non-starter look for that bird to go somewhere else from IAH or even EWR/ORD/SFO that is more lucrative than DEN. Lets remember this DEN flight is also part of the deal with DEN to increase the ASM. So if they dedicate the planes to DEN-NRT what happens when one goes tech? It'll be more economically feasible to turn the 787 to IAH where they are based right now until more planes come on property. Of course I could be totally wrong. And for the record - if IAH-AKL is a non-starter it will NOT be because of the WN/UA/Houston fiasco, they'll use that for propaganda and further piss off Houstonians which will start flying other carriers (like I now do) and continue to have a drop in passengers...like the 6.7% drop they have experienced systemwide. The non-start of IAH-AKL will be something that they had desired to do anyway if it happens. Smisek and UA are full of $@%~



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 106, posted (2 years 4 months 6 hours ago) and read 7039 times:

DEN-NRT and IAH-AKL don't have to be mutually exclusive, although it may work out that way. SFO-AKL seems to make a lot more sense.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 104):

IAH-AKL never seemed like a viable route to begin with. Maybe UA shares this opinion.

We'll see. The fact that they haven't loaded it in the schedule yet is telling, I think.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 104):

I wonder if the 787 won't be too small for the cargo though. If yields are strong then who cares about the LF. It's a young route still.

It's a high-yield route by nature, but the 787 can improve the margins of low-volume, high-yield markets. The 787 is a great cargo hauler too. You only lose 4 LD3s vs. the 772, less than 1000cu.ft. of volume and neither aircraft is at the top of its range profile on IAH-LOS, so weights are not a major concern.

Of course, UA hasn't officially scheduled the 787 on IAH-LOS, but there is reason to believe they will soon.


User currently offlineSeeTheWorld From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1325 posts, RR: 4
Reply 107, posted (2 years 4 months 6 hours ago) and read 7001 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 93):
Officially, it's still a hub. Functionally, it's more a large focus city. In recent years, the rapid expansion of US mainland (via SFO, LAX, ORD, IAD, EWR) to non-NRT Asia nonstops allowed NRT's role to shrink considerably. I think the current count is somewhere between 15 and 20 (would've been more if SFO-NGO/TPE were not dropped)

UA's NRT is a pale comparison to DL's NRT, but UA's total Far East connectivity is definitely at least as good as DL's.
UA is in a JV with ANA ... NRT is certainly a hub (for ANA) ...

Quoting peanuts (Reply 96):
On Tuesday, United spokesman Christen David said the airline had planned Houston-Auckland flights "on the assumption that (Bush Intercontinental) would be the sole international airport, maximizing connecting traffic. If that isn't the case, the flight won't work."

This makes absolutely no sense for a carrier like UA.
If there is even a grain of truth to this nonsense, it would shed a light possibly how messed up UA really is.
I'm still very sceptical about the truth level of this article though. UA wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot now, would they? Why start DEN-NRT out of spite? Unless they got favorable deals out of it and UA had promised DEN an increase in ASM's ....

Come on .. UA is playing politics just as Houston is ... While IAH-AKL was announced, CO was still independent .. DEN-NRT makes more sense than IAH-AKL otherwise they wouldn't be doing it ... Was the announcement to coincide with Houston's support of WN (which I contend UA knew was a foregone conclusion)? Maybe it was good timing ... The comment by UA that IAH-AKL might not work could be political blather.. maybe the flight now works better from SFO or LAX ..

[Edited 2012-05-23 17:15:51]

User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1676 posts, RR: 3
Reply 108, posted (2 years 4 months 6 hours ago) and read 6994 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 105):
It'll be more economically feasible to turn the 787 to IAH where they are based right now

Last time I checked they are "based" at Everett because UA doesn't have any, so how could they be based at IAH right now when there are none?

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
We'll see. The fact that they haven't loaded it in the schedule yet is telling, I think.

I think that is really a function of the uncertainty of when they will have the frames to start the operation. Whereas the DEN-NRT flight is being announced far enough into the future that it's a relative certainty that they'll have the aircraft by then.


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 109, posted (2 years 4 months 6 hours ago) and read 6992 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
We'll see. The fact that they haven't loaded it in the schedule yet is telling, I think.

Ding. Neil concurs with this analysis.

NS


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25338 posts, RR: 22
Reply 110, posted (2 years 4 months 6 hours ago) and read 6983 times:

Quoting OOer (Reply 32):
Considering that KDEN is about 1,000 feet higher then SLC...a DEN-LHR flight would also have performance issues.

However the longest DEN runway is 1/3 longer than SLC (16,000 ft. vs. 12,000 ft.)


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 111, posted (2 years 4 months 6 hours ago) and read 6950 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 108):

I think that is really a function of the uncertainty of when they will have the frames to start the operation. Whereas the DEN-NRT flight is being announced far enough into the future that it's a relative certainty that they'll have the aircraft by then.

So what's to stop them from announcing a March 31 start date for IAH-AKL? It's pretty clear that the first ships will be coming on property in the late fall, with 5-6 in service by March. Theoretically, that should be enough to start the route.

Any further delays would probably be apparent by now.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 110):

However the longest DEN runway is 1/3 longer than SLC (16,000 ft. vs. 12,000 ft.)

Right, but with such long runways you also get close to max wheel speed.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 112, posted (2 years 4 months 5 hours ago) and read 6855 times:

Indications are pointing to Aug sept for arrival of 787s.


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 113, posted (2 years 4 months 5 hours ago) and read 6784 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 112):
Indications are pointing to Aug sept for arrival of 787s.

I'm hearing October-November, but August-September would be wonderful!


User currently offlineBeechToBus From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 114, posted (2 years 4 months 4 hours ago) and read 6746 times:

Quoting OOer (Reply 32):

"The SLC-CDG flight runs into performance issues in the summer and it's on a 767-300ER on DL metal. Considering that KDEN is about 1,000 feet higher then SLC...a DEN-LHR flight would also have performance issues."

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 111):


"Right, but with such long runways you also get close to max wheel speed."

In the twins (330, 757, 767, 777) long distance performance From higher elevation airports is not so much a runway length issue or a wheel speed issue ( keep in mind DL launces a 777-200LR out of Johannasburg's 5558 ft elevation airport from a 14495 ft. Runway for 16.5 hours to ATL fully loaded most days of the year). Performance problems out of DEN and SLC are a driftdown issue because of the Rockies running north/south for thousands of miles between DEN and SLC, the Rockies wouldn't be feasible to just go around as too much fuel would be required and the flight would be too long and uneconomical. Aircraft leaving Denver towards Asia northwest bound have to cross the Rockies fairly soon after takeoff when they are heaviest, as do Northeast bound planes out of SLC going towards Europe. Driftdown is the contingency for when an aircraft loses an engine and has to decend, it may or may not be able to maintain a safe altitude depending on how high the terrain is that it's crossing. In a twin, this is obviously a bigger issure than in a tri or a quad. This is why you see performance issues from SLC to Europe but not DEN to Europe ( remember Martinairs 767s from DEN to AMS and I believe Thompson ran 767s to LGW for a summer or two) and problems from DEN to Asia but not SLC to Asia (DLs 330s to NRT).

[Edited 2012-05-23 19:52:26]

User currently onlineZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5333 posts, RR: 11
Reply 115, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6328 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
DEN-NRT and IAH-AKL don't have to be mutually exclusive, although it may work out that way. SFO-AKL seems to make a lot more sense.

Taking Star Partner NZ on, hmm, I could more likely see NZ dropping its second LAX flight and UA operating that with some sort of revenue sharing but even that would seem unlikely to me.

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
IAH-AKL never seemed like a viable route to begin with. Maybe UA shares this opinion.


We'll see. The fact that they haven't loaded it in the schedule yet is telling, I think.

Maybe its not viable who other than UA knows atm. I'd say UA is awaiting conformation of 787 delivery dates, looking at an October November beginning.


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 116, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6306 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
SFO-AKL seems to make a lot more sense.

SFO-MEL makes even more sense.


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3263 posts, RR: 5
Reply 117, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6316 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 17):
I wouldn't be too surprised to see a connection between this flight and maybe ua ending sea.....I'm surprised no one went down that road yet........

I was thinking this exact thing reading this thread, maybe the intent all along, since NH announced SEA, would be for NH to fly SEA thus freeing up a 777 to fly NRT-DEN, both carriers enjoying mutual benefit from the 2 routes. SEA-NRT was UA's first trans-pacific route, but does not fit well in their route map. I'd expect with the loss of stations in the NW, that we will see an end to OO flying within the NW for UA, if connections onwards to NRT were to go on UA. The OO routes to SFO from MFR, EUG, RDM, OTH & PDX would remain, imo.



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8379 posts, RR: 10
Reply 118, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6141 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 105):
That's not an efficient use of aircraft. It would have to have the two 787s dedicated to DEN-NRT with no way to efficiently move them around the system. They would have to open a 787 base at DEN - now they could be planning more 787 routes from DEN or NRT...the problem with that is there won't be enough on property to make that viable. Even if IAH-AKL is a non-starter look for that bird to go somewhere else from IAH or even EWR/ORD/SFO that is more lucrative than DEN.

Ah, but one of the big advantages of the 787 is to turn marginal routes into more lucrative routes. Case in point: JL's NRT-BOS. Another case in point, CO could have chosed EWR from the beginning and they didn't. Having said that, I suspect they will want to pad the schedule with the first frames in order to account for familiarization so my guess is it will start as IAH-DEN-NRT-DEN-IAH.

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
It's a high-yield route by nature, but the 787 can improve the margins of low-volume, high-yield markets. The 787 is a great cargo hauler too. You only lose 4 LD3s vs. the 772, less than 1000cu.ft. of volume and neither aircraft is at the top of its range profile on IAH-LOS, so weights are not a major concern.

By the same token, they can put it on any other route out of DEN where the yields are marginal with any other plane, say LHR or MUC just to name a couple.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 119, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6119 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 108):
Last time I checked they are "based" at Everett because UA doesn't have any, so how could they be based at IAH right now when there are none?

I don't know what is more sad...the fact that you actually took time to post this stupid comment...or the fact that I took time to acknowledge it.   

Quoting airbazar (Reply 118):
Ah, but one of the big advantages of the 787 is to turn marginal routes into more lucrative routes. Case in point: JL's NRT-BOS. Another case in point, CO could have chosed EWR from the beginning and they didn't. Having said that, I suspect they will want to pad the schedule with the first frames in order to account for familiarization so my guess is it will start as IAH-DEN-NRT-DEN-IAH.

Yep, my thoughts exactly. I fully expect them to open more 787 routes from DEN once more come online.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1676 posts, RR: 3
Reply 120, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6103 times:

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 119):
I don't know what is more sad...the fact that you actually took time to post this stupid comment...or the fact that I took time to acknowledge it.

I'll make one more "observation". Technically this DEN-NRT flight is the ONLY 787 flight loaded in the system for sale right? So couldn't one argue 'they' would be based at DEN right now?   


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 121, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6069 times:

Quoting RDH3E (Reply 120):
Technically this DEN-NRT flight is the ONLY 787 flight loaded in the system for sale right? So couldn't one argue 'they' would be based at DEN right now?

"Technically" the only 787 type-rated pilots for United are based out of Houston...


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 122, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 5782 times:

I am slapping myself for typing this.

Technically the 787 and the 777 are the same type.  

NS


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 8
Reply 123, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 5721 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 104):

IAH-AKL never seemed like a viable route to begin with. Maybe UA shares this opinion.

Definitely not. Power politics in IAH are at play. I'd give IAH-AKL a few months before it's either axed or moved to SFO.

Then the 787 could route DEN-NRT-SFO-AKL-SFO-DEN-NRT or something like that.

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
SFO-AKL seems to make a lot more sense.

I got flamed a few months back for suggesting SFO-AKL over IAH-AKL. People threw fits saying IAH was a more optimal connection point. Funny how things change around here.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 116):
SFO-MEL makes even more sense.

Hell yes.



"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: 84
Reply 124, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5646 times:

IAH is CLEARLY not an optimal connection point for the new company on South Pacific routes. It was for just CO.

NS


User currently offlineUnited787 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 125, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5564 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 123):
Definitely not. Power politics in IAH are at play. I'd give IAH-AKL a few months before it's either axed or moved to SFO.

Politics may be at play but lets be honest here, in the end, UA will make their decision based on what is the best route economically and for their network, period, not because of some bs between UA, WN, IAH and HOU!

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 123):
I got flamed a few months back for suggesting SFO-AKL over IAH-AKL. People threw fits saying IAH was a more optimal connection point. Funny how things change around here.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 123):
IAH is CLEARLY not an optimal connection point for the new company on South Pacific routes. It was for just CO.

I don't know the answer to this question but I am curious to know how many more destinations are served by IAH over SFO. Australia/New Zealand to SFO is already well served. But I think the connection opportunities to US Midwest, South, Southeast and Northeast and Mexico/Central America connections from IAH that aren't connected via SFO/LAX open up a different market for not only traffic coming from NZ but also Australia via AKL. Of course AA/QF is already taking advantage of this as well through DFW...


User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3263 posts, RR: 5
Reply 126, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 5550 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 123):
I got flamed a few months back for suggesting SFO-AKL over IAH-AKL. People threw fits saying IAH was a more optimal connection point. Funny how things change around here

I think we have all been flamed at one point or another for something that has later been brought up by another poster whose opinion is then welcomed. IMO, problem is, there are those who are bold enough to think out loud with a new idea, and those who follow along agreeing with whatever the tenor of the thread is. Which is why even if I disagree with someone, I do not go in guns blazing and just shoot them down, I encourage you to think bold and proud!



AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25399 posts, RR: 49
Reply 127, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 5313 times:

There was an internal Q&A news story this week.

Here is portion about 787 routes.


Q. Where will the 787s fly?
A. United has identified some markets for our Boeing 787s, including IAH-LOS (Lagos, Nigeria) and, just this week, DEN-NRT.

Q. Why those routes?
A. “The size and range of the 787 open new market opportunities for us,” said International Planning Director Andy Buchanan. The 787 has a similar capacity (219 seats) to the 767-400 but significantly more range. As a result, it is the ideal aircraft for higher-yield long-range routes with lower demand.
For example, our 767 fleet does not have the range to serve counter-seasonal markets in India and the South Pacific. The 787 will allow us to right-size the capacity in the softer demand periods rather than operating large aircraft year-round. Additionally, the 787s will help us launch profitable new routes — such as DEN-NRT. The aircraft will also serve as replacements for less-efficient aircraft and allow us to further improve contribution on existing routes through fleet optimization.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 128, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5186 times:

I think it is safe to say IAH-AKL isn't a thing anymore.

NS


User currently offlineCALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2636 posts, RR: 9
Reply 129, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5164 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 127):
Q. Where will the 787s fly?
A. United has identified some markets for our Boeing 787s, including IAH-LOS (Lagos, Nigeria) and, just this week, DEN-NRT.
Quoting gigneil (Reply 128):

I think it is safe to say IAH-AKL isn't a thing anymore.

DEN-NRT has the right aircraft with the 787 due to demand and range issues. IAH-LOS mauy need a smaller aircraft due to loads and the 787 fits the bill. As for IAH-AKL, it probably will be pushed back waiting for deliveries and maybe reassessed for profitability and feasibility. Besides a pissing match between Houston, UA and WN, IAH -AKL loads shouldn't make any difference if WN has international service south of IAH. Any connections to AKL would not be involved with WN international service.
SFO-AKL or SFO-MEL may make more sense since they would have a stronger O&D demand from the West Coast. The 787 might be a great aircraft for those routes. Sure there is more competition, but lots more traffic to fight over.


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 130, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5134 times:

Oh I know it has nothing to do with HOU.

I'm just sayin IAH-AKL pales in comparison to other routes begging to be flown.

NS


User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5664 posts, RR: 6
Reply 131, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 5080 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 116):
Quoting CODC10 (Reply 106):
SFO-AKL seems to make a lot more sense.

SFO-MEL makes even more sense.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 123):
Hell yes.
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 129):
SFO-MEL may make more sense since they would have a stronger O&D demand from the West Coast.

While I think SFO-MEL is a good idea I don't think you'll see it soon because of the way UAs Australian operations are arranged. For those not up on them, UA fly's a daily B744 on both SFO/LAX-SYD, one of which takes pax from/to both flights to/from SYD-MEL-SYD.

If you just put a B787 on SFO-MEL then IMHO you call into question the viability of the tag (which apparently is not the most heavily loaded B744 you've ever seen) and possibly SFO-SYD, not to mention needing to serve MEL-LAX. The answer might well be more B787s, but you are not going to see that many, that quickly.

As far as IAH-AKL goes I said in the original thread when it was announced that I would believe it when it actually started and even then wondered how long it would last, because I find it difficult to believe that CO and now UA couldn't find a more profitable route for two airframes, I still believe that this is the case.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 132, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 5038 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 105):
That's not an efficient use of aircraft. It would have to have the two 787s dedicated to DEN-NRT with no way to efficiently move them around the system. They would have to open a 787 base at DEN - now they could be planning more 787 routes from DEN or NRT...the problem with that is there won't be enough on property to make that viable. Even if IAH-AKL is a non-starter look for that bird to go somewhere else from IAH or even EWR/ORD/SFO that is more lucrative than DEN. Lets remember this DEN flight is also part of the deal with DEN to increase the ASM. So if they dedicate the planes to DEN-NRT what happens when one goes tech? It'll be more economically feasible to turn the 787 to IAH where they are based right now until more planes come on property. Of course I could be totally wrong. And for the record - if IAH-AKL is a non-starter it will NOT be because of the WN/UA/Houston fiasco, they'll use that for propaganda and further piss off Houstonians which will start flying other carriers (like I now do) and continue to have a drop in passengers...like the 6.7% drop they have experienced systemwide. The non-start of IAH-AKL will be something that they had desired to do anyway if it happens. Smisek and UA are full of $@%~

There's all this talk about adding LHR-DEN. I think another great route for the 788 out of DEN would be DEN-MUC-DEN. The 788 would suit this route better, at least in the begining since LH already serves DEN with either the 744 or A346. I think connecting with another significant Star hub in the EU, would do much better over LHR. This way the a/c could fly DEN-NRT-DEN-MUC-DEN.

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 123):

Definitely not. Power politics in IAH are at play. I'd give IAH-AKL a few months before it's either axed or moved to SFO.

Why would they do this when NZ already has this route well covered with the 77E/744s depending on the season?

Quoting qf002 (Reply 116):

SFO-MEL makes even more sense.

   ! Then you can downgauge SFO-SYD to a 77E and fly SFO-MEL with the 788. I don't think SFO-MEL needs to be daily. I think it could be flown 4-5x a week.

Quoting gemuser (Reply 131):
If you just put a B787 on SFO-MEL then IMHO you call into question the viability of the tag (which apparently is not the most heavily loaded B744 you've ever seen) and possibly SFO-SYD, not to mention needing to serve MEL-LAX. The answer might well be more B787s, but you are not going to see that many, that quickly.


MEL-LAX with a daily 788 would be a great route. LAX-SYD could then be flown with the usual 744 Though I think the 77E would be better if UA's birds have the power, range to do it without restrictions. too bad UA hasn't bought or leased any 77W or 77Ls for routes like this.).

Another route yet to be mentioned in this particular thread is UA re-starting LAX-HKG with the 788 (can it fly westbound during the winter without restrictions? ). Wouldn't this be the "right size" a/c for a route like this so they can get back into the market?


User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5664 posts, RR: 6
Reply 133, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 5015 times:

Quoting laca773 (Reply 132):

MEL-LAX with a daily 788 would be a great route

Probably, but with SFO-MEL you are now tying up 4 B787s, not happening in the near future, I think.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 132):
Though I think the 77E would be better if UA's birds have the power, range to do it without restrictions

Possibly too small for UA.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinewestern727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 751 posts, RR: 4
Reply 134, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4885 times:

So, the KE 744 was the last Asian route ending in 1999, according to HOONS90. However, it wasn't nonstop. I don't notice any mention in this thread about such. Has DEN ever had a nonstop from either DIA or Stapleton?


Jack @ AUS
User currently offlinetrent1000 From Japan, joined Jan 2007, 567 posts, RR: 2
Reply 135, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4878 times:

When will we know the proposed schedules?

User currently offlineCALMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3969 posts, RR: 7
Reply 136, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4750 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting trent1000 (Reply 135):

for the other destinations? There are a few out there already that have been shown to some internal personnel. Can't wait! DEN-NRT has been on there for quite some time and glad that one finally came public!!



okay, I'm waiting for the rich to spread the wealth around to me. Please mail your checks to my house.
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2412 posts, RR: 6
Reply 137, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4714 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 122):

Technically the 787 and the 777 are the same type.

The 787 and 777 share a common type rating but a pilot of one will not fly the other without completing a differences training course.


User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7298 posts, RR: 85
Reply 138, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4598 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Was there a typo? Is DL trying this?   

UA is scared WN is going to cause wake turbulence at HOU and they dream up DEN NRT? Do they even have a year round INT out of DEN anymore? Who in their right mind goes through DEN, especially a frequent UA flyer. Avoid it like the plague.


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5276 posts, RR: 24
Reply 139, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4440 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 138):
UA is scared WN is going to cause wake turbulence at HOU and they dream up DEN NRT? Do they even have a year round INT out of DEN anymore? Who in their right mind goes through DEN, especially a frequent UA flyer. Avoid it like the plague.

Do you even know what you're talking about? DEN-NRT because of WN starting international routes at HOU? UA does fly a year round international flight out of DEN through their JV with LH. BA also flies a daily year-round flight to LHR, FI just started flying from here, etc. DEN, in case you weren't aware, is one of the busiest airports in the world, and thousands of people connect through here on a daily basis. You really think that WN, F9, and UA are all operating hubs at DEN based on O/D traffic?   DEN is a great airport, very efficient, and thoroughly easy to use. I don't know why anyone would "avoid it like the plague."

As to the DEN-NRT flight itself, it's been rumored for years and was bound to happen once 787's became available. It makes sense to connect the largest city in the Mountain West with Tokyo, as well as to funnel traffic from smaller cities through DEN.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 138):
Was there a typo? Is DL trying this?

Grow up. The DL dart board insinuations stopped being funny years ago.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineBeechToBus From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 140, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4408 times:

Quoting OA412 (Reply 139):

Well said. Also, another interesting factoid, DEN is the busiest airport in the world outside of Asia that doesn't have non-stop service to Asia.


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5957 posts, RR: 9
Reply 141, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4317 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 121):
Quoting RDH3E (Reply 120):
Technically this DEN-NRT flight is the ONLY 787 flight loaded in the system for sale right? So couldn't one argue 'they' would be based at DEN right now?

"Technically" the only 787 type-rated pilots for United are based out of Houston...

Technicaly one could argue that UA does not base aircraft out of ANY hub as they rotate through the system.

Quoting trent1000 (Reply 135):
When will we know the proposed schedules?

See bellow...

Quoting United1 (Reply 28):
The flight is loaded in SHARES.....UA 123 with 788 service...Departs DEN at 1155 and arrives NRT 1500

Starts 03/31/2013

NRT-DEN starts 04/01/2013 UA122 1640-1230



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlinefxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7298 posts, RR: 85
Reply 142, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4254 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OA412 (Reply 139):
DEN-NRT because of WN starting international routes at HOU?

Huh?

Quoting OA412 (Reply 139):
UA does fly a year round international flight out of DEN through their JV with LH.

UA doesn't operate a international on their own metal out of DEN year around. That was my point in case you didn't get it the first time.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 139):
DEN is a great airport, very efficient, and thoroughly easy to use. I don't know why anyone would "avoid it like the plague."

blah blah blah... same story from the UA Denver loving cheerleaders on the site.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 139):
As to the DEN-NRT flight itself, it's been rumored for years and was bound to happen once 787's became available. It makes sense to connect the largest city in the Mountain West with Tokyo, as well as to funnel traffic from smaller cities through DEN.

Largest city in the mountain west is like making an apples and oranges comparison. What other largest city in the mountain west region is there for airlines? DEN at best is a o&d for UA and is used for frequent flyer miles. Try and use 60k miles from SFO to EWR w/o a DEN stop over.

Quoting OA412 (Reply 139):
Grow up. The DL dart board insinuations stopped being funny years ago.

I still use it regularly on this site and get positive feedback.

Quoting BeechToBus (Reply 140):
Well said. Also, another interesting factoid, DEN is the busiest airport in the world outside of Asia that doesn't have non-stop service to Asia.

So there are like 70 airports a head of DEN on the made up factoid list? Is SLC on that list to whatever pipe dream DL wanted to fly to in Asia a few years a go?


User currently onlinepanam330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2679 posts, RR: 9
Reply 143, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4158 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
UA doesn't operate a international on their own metal out of DEN year around. That was my point in case you didn't get it the first time.

Since we're being picky, they actually fly to YVR, CUN, PVR and SJD year-round on their own metal - in addition to seasonal ops to YYC and MEX. Counting Express metal, you can add a few more Canadian cities to the list. Intercontinental? Different story.


User currently offlinejonathanxxxx From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 673 posts, RR: 1
Reply 144, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4107 times:

Quoting BeechToBus (Reply 140):

Really? Do you mean by passengers, ASM, or aircraft movements...? I would've thought PHL, MIA, LGA, DCA etc. would be ahead... (assuming you meant passengers...)


User currently offlineBeechToBus From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 145, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4075 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):

1. Hartsfield–Jackson International Airport Atlanta, Georgia, United States ATL/KATL 92,365,860
2. Beijing Capital International Airport Chaoyang, Beijing, China PEK/ZBAA 77,403,668
3. London Heathrow Airport Hillingdon, London, United Kingdom LHR/EGLL 69,433,565
4. O'Hare International Airport Chicago, Illinois, United States ORD/KORD 66,561,023
5. Tokyo International Airport Ōta, Tokyo, Japan HND/RJTT 62,263,025
6. Los Angeles International Airport Los Angeles, California, United States LAX/KLAX 61,848,449
7. Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport Roissy-en-France, Île-de-France, France CDG/LFPG 60,970,556
8. Dallas/Ft.Worth International Airport Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas, United States DFW/KDFW 57,806,152
9. Frankfurt Airport Frankfurt, Hesse, Germany FRA/EDDF 56,436,255 6.5%
10. Hong Kong International Airport Chek Lap Kok, Hong Kong, China HKG/VHHH 53,314,213
11. Denver International Airport Denver, Colorado, United States DEN/KDEN 52,699,298

Here's your "made up" factoid list Fdxramper. these are called factual statistics of passenger numbers and rankings of the worlds busiest airports in 2011. Nope, sorry to say that there are not "70 or so" airports busier than Denver that do not have service to Asia, as far as airports that aren't already in Asia, I count 0 airports busier than DEN that do not have service to Asia currently.



[Edited 2012-05-26 18:49:53]

User currently offlineBeechToBus From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 146, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4052 times:

Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 144):

As far as busiest airports go, looking at passenger boardings, DEN is the busiest airport without Asia service, I'm sure there are several larger cities and markets that don't have Asia service.


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5276 posts, RR: 24
Reply 147, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3573 times:

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
Huh?

You suggested that DEN-NRT is in response to WN flying international from HOU did you not?

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
UA doesn't operate a international on their own metal out of DEN year around. That was my point in case you didn't get it the first time.

I saw exactly what you wrote. Whether it is on their own metal or not is immaterial because the JV between LH and UA is metal neutral. DEN-FRA is just as much a UA flight as it is a LH flight.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
blah blah blah...

Thank you for your well-reasoned response.  
Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
same story from the UA Denver loving cheerleaders on the site.

Well I'm not one of those "UA Denver loving cheerleaders" so I don't know what you're getting at. The fact remains that DEN is a great airport, and has won countless awards. The fact that you suggest that people should avoid the airport like the plague seems to stem from some personal bias against DEN rather than any fact-based analysis.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
Largest city in the mountain west is like making an apples and oranges comparison. What other largest city in the mountain west region is there for airlines?

Huh? What apples to oranges comparison is being made? You're making a circular argument. The fact that Denver is the largest city in the Mountain West obviously means that there is no larger city. I don't think I could have made that point any clearer.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
DEN at best is a o&d for UA and is used for frequent flyer miles. Try and use 60k miles from SFO to EWR w/o a DEN stop over.

I suppose you have the stats to back this up? No hub, not even EWR, survives on O/D alone. The last time I saw stats posted here, DEN was at either a 60/40 or 50/50 O/D vs. connections mix. The whole point of a hub is to connect people. Surely someone working in the airline industry should know that.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
I still use it regularly on this site and get positive feedback.

Not from any serious, respected poster you don't. Anyone who follows the industry, and doesn't have an axe to grind understands that the dart-board BS is just that. In case you've missed it, DL is actually doing quite well these days.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 142):
So there are like 70 airports a head of DEN on the made up factoid list? Is SLC on that list to whatever pipe dream DL wanted to fly to in Asia a few years a go?

This doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but are you suggesting that there are 70 airports with more demand to Tokyo than Denver or 70 airports busier than DEN without nonstop service to Tokyo? Either way, you're wrong. As for DL and SLC, did you miss the part about them operating a hub at NRT that the SLC flight would connect to or the fact that they operate a hub at SLC to funnel passengers onto a NRT flight. That it didn't work is unfortunate, but the suggestion that people are just sitting around throwing darts, or starting routes because of pipe dreams is ludicrous, to say the least.

Quoting BeechToBus (Reply 145):

Precisely



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
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 To Launch EWR To Bozeman (BZN)? posted Wed Feb 8 2012 06:14:35 by STT757
UA To Launch DXB And Moscow From IAD posted Tue May 6 2008 13:12:38 by PNQIAD
United To Launch DEN-LHR Nonstop posted Wed Oct 31 2007 20:55:42 by LAXintl
UA To Close DEN Call Center posted Thu Nov 17 2005 05:32:44 by UAPremierGuy
UA To Start DEN-Great Falls And SFO-ABQ posted Mon Feb 14 2005 19:42:27 by Iowaman
UA DEN-NRT Is Likely To Be Launched posted Sun Nov 5 2006 06:21:20 by Jimyvr
UA To Steelers Fans @ DEN posted Tue Jan 10 2012 13:56:54 by mattya9
UA's HKG-SIN/SGN+ Soon To Restart HKG-NRT posted Wed Oct 5 2011 22:25:06 by United Airline
UA/CO To Launch ORD-MAN/BHX/OSL/KIX/ICN In 2011? posted Tue Aug 17 2010 15:15:37 by GlobalCabotage
United To Launch ORD To DLH/AVL & DEN To MAF posted Sat Sep 19 2009 17:19:49 by UnitedTristar
UA To Start DEN-Great Falls And SFO-ABQ posted Mon Feb 14 2005 19:42:27 by Iowaman
UA DEN-NRT Is Likely To Be Launched posted Sun Nov 5 2006 06:21:20 by Jimyvr
UA To Steelers Fans @ DEN posted Tue Jan 10 2012 13:56:54 by mattya9
UA's HKG-SIN/SGN+ Soon To Restart HKG-NRT posted Wed Oct 5 2011 22:25:06 by United Airline
UA/CO To Launch ORD-MAN/BHX/OSL/KIX/ICN In 2011? posted Tue Aug 17 2010 15:15:37 by GlobalCabotage
United To Launch ORD To DLH/AVL & DEN To MAF posted Sat Sep 19 2009 17:19:49 by UnitedTristar