PDX88 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 245 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 10 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 8761 times:
Most of their operations have been shifted over to EWR since the CO merger, but I still see a few TCONs left in the system to LAX and SFO. Do they have any INTL ops left at JFK or is it all EWR now? Are they trying to phase out UA completely at JFK or are those TCON flights there to stay?
GCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1653 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7792 times:
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 7): I wonder if UA would consider two more slots at LHR to reinstate JFK-LHR. It would give them an edge with service to LHR from both NYC international airports. Worth a shot?
While a lack of LHR-JFK is a big gap in the Star Alliance route network, once daily would not be a competitive schedule against any of the operators (especially the BA/AA JV shuttle service) nor would it offer good connections on UA/Star at either end. The best bet for Star if they want to offer LHR-JFK is to bring VS into the alliance, which is rumoured to be a strong possibility.
klwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2258 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 7736 times:
I was thinking JFK-LHR twice or three times a day might work with sUA aircraft equipped with F, since EWR-LHR does not have F.
I think if UA could gain a little more of a foothold at JFK, UA could be more oriented to serving all of the NYC metro area. At one time UA did serve both JFK and EWR to LHR in the 90's. So did AA.It's not as if UA is an unknown player in the UA. UA should build on its reinvigorated strength in the NYC market after having dwindled there so long up to the merger.
tsnamm From United States of America, joined May 2005, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7429 times:
Quoting PDX88 (Thread starter): Most of their operations have been shifted over to EWR since the CO merger
As a matter of fact none of their operations were shifted at all since the merger...everything that was shifted was done long before the UA/CO merger...everything at JFK is exactly the same as it was at the time of the merger. As to what may happen, we will see...I do agree that the only additions would be hub flying...I don't expect any non hub additions, if they add anything at all...
fun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1219 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 6 days ago) and read 7309 times:
JFK>LHR and JFK>NRT : Weren't they both UA at one time?
Interesting points on whether to have them or not. I guess by not having them, they have allowed DL and foreign carriers to get these going. Surely, UA would have enough pull to get 170 people on a 752 JFK>LHR, no? Slots, I realize, are a different story.
Yes I remember that. I remember when United flew the 747 (100 or 200, not sure which) to JFK. That was back in the 80s when the 400 did not exist, although already on order by the major airlines including United. Northwest, United and JAL were the three competitors on that route. I'm not sure if United flew the route nonstop, or with a stop in SFO. The 741 could not fly JFK-NRT nonstop (that's why Pan Am bought the SP) but the 742 could.
Speaking of United's operations at JFK, I believe that they also flew JFK-SEA nonstop with 752 equipment 1x daily back in the 90s when they were pretty strong in the NYC market (JFK/LGA/EWR combined).
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 10447 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6393 times:
UA had already cut JFK-LHR and JFK-NRT before the merger. They went away in the bankruptcy and reorganization years.
Those two routes are prestige routes. UA doesn't run prestige routes anymore. They could operate them, but with 4 airline serving them and AA and DL in a fierce yield killing battle in JFK, there's no money to be made for UA.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
That's because they have so few flights and the flights they have are in cherry picked routes.
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 6): I hope UA revives CO's on again, off again, IAH-JFK route.
No reason for this route to exist.
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 9): I was thinking JFK-LHR twice or three times a day might work with sUA aircraft equipped with F, since EWR-LHR does not have F.
Flying JFK-LHR would completely undermine CO's and now UA's argument that EWR is just as convenient for NY especially Manhattan as is JFK. There is no demand for JFK-LHR F class on UA. People with that high loyalty for UA would use EWR.
bobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6769 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (2 years 10 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5873 times:
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 7): It would give them an edge with service to LHR from both NYC international airports. Worth a shot?
Wouldn't it cost a great deal of money to do anew route like this just because it worth a shot? I don't think airlines
"look at a new route as worth a shot. It is much more involved and complicated than that.