Transpac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3138 posts, RR: 14 Posted (5 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8823 times:
Hey all,
Was just looking at our summer schedule and noticed that all the A319's are listed as having a capacity of 8/106, compared to their current configuration of 8/112. Is this true, that all A319's are/will be reconfigured??
If yes - why?? They all already have Y+ seating so it's not like the sCO birds that are having rows removed to add the Y+ cabin.
deltairlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8770 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (5 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 8669 times:
Would seem to be the opposite of Delta, which added seats to its A319s in order to reduce CASM. Interesting if true, to say the least.
HOMsAR From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 797 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 7851 times:
I recall reading that for schedules many months out, UA puts a generic configuration available on the seating chart to protect against equipment swaps (such as to a 737-500) that reduce capacity. When it gets closer to departure date, the seating chart will be revised to the actual planned aircraft type for the flight.
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1365 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (5 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5284 times:
Quoting N766UA (Reply 12): Quoting gigneil (Reply 7):
They're far more pleasant than their 73Gs due to the seating and the color scheme.
Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 11):
And seats on the 700s are 1/2 inch narrower than the 319s.
I'm neither here no there on the interior, but I just flew on a 73H last week for the first time in a while (last was an old-school DL 738 ~6 years ago), and the cabin size was quite noticeable. The seats were noticeably narrower, and I felt like the shoulder/head room was a bit tighter as well. It was interesting to compare after flying all Airbii the last couple years, but definitely much more "snug".
cosyr From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (5 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5242 times:
could this have anythibg to do with a capacity compromise for the pilot contract they are negotiating? I know it doesn't make much sense to lower capacity, but if they agreed to a certain number of aircraft under a certain capacity, then UA could use the 319's until a C series or ejet order could be delivered. Just wishful thinking on my part, but I can dream...
LHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1365 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (5 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5122 times:
Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 16): Haven't flown on a UA A319 but I have flown on one of the A320s. Why the hell cant they put the same cushiony seats from the A320 in their 737s!?
Well first I think many of the 737s from CO are relatively young so prob not in need of new seats anyway, but also given the narrower cabin they may not make the same seat in a smaller size for a 737. EIther way though, it will be interesting to see where all that goes moving forward. With the new refits to 2-class 763s and the like going "CO style", they may just standardize of that.
Quoting cosyr (Reply 17): could this have anythibg to do with a capacity compromise for the pilot contract they are negotiating? I know it doesn't make much sense to lower capacity, but if they agreed to a certain number of aircraft under a certain capacity, then UA could use the 319's until a C series or ejet order could be delivered. Just wishful thinking on my part, but I can dream...
I can't cite it exactly, but I know I have seen a couple rumors about the wanting to standardize the 73G and 319 part. So that doesn't mesh with dumping a row necessarily, but going to 12F I would think is certainly a possibility.
MountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 363 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (5 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5087 times:
Quoting HOMsAR (Reply 4): I recall reading that for schedules many months out, UA puts a generic configuration available on the seating chart to protect against equipment swaps (such as to a 737-500) that reduce capacity.
That's funny because that's exactly what happened on the last UA flight I was on. The flight was originally sold as a 738 from DEN-CLE, but it was later downgraded to a 735 a few weeks ahead of time.
Quoting gigneil (Reply 7): United's A319s are very, very comfortable and well maintained planes.
I think those seats never received FAA certification due to the fault and never made their way onto any frames. IIRC, there are a few pictures on the site with a bunch of CO 73H's sitting in Renton waiting on seats.
Thanks sir, I couldn't remember, I knew HP and UA were the only us airlines that bought the IGW versions. And I think they use the V2524-M5 engines like HP which are standard at 24k thrust with a bump for a bit more.... hope someone could verify that...
They just filled in the holes in row 8 which had no window seats on either side of the aircraft, so not really what I would call a big deal since they didn't add any new rows. They went from 12F/112Y to 12F/114Y.
But I would guess it would have something to do with increasing the front from 8 to 12 -- to be identical to the 737-700s which are already 12/106 .
That is not correct. With E+ the 73G is 12/100 not 12/106
73G is 12F, 40E+ and 60Y = 112
319 is 8F, 40E+ and 72Y=120
Using Seat Guru it looks like taking the 319 to 12F would reduce E+ pitch from 35 to 34 as 3 extra inches of pitch in F would need 1 inch from each from E+ rows. UA has some 34 inch pitch E+, but mostly 35 inches.
If a row of F added, 319 would become
12F, 36E+ and 72Y = 118, still 6 more seats than the 73G.
asqx From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 588 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3034 times:
Quoting sancho99504 (Reply 24): They just filled in the holes in row 8 which had no window seats on either side of the aircraft, so not really what I would call a big deal since they didn't add any new rows. They went from 12F/112Y to 12F/114Y.
Actually, Delta went from 16F/108Y to 12F/114Y on the A319. The 737-700s on the other hand have always been 12F/112Y.
United1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5337 posts, RR: 8 Reply 26, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3068 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 25): That is not correct. With E+ the 73G is 12/100 not 12/106
73G is 12F, 40E+ and 60Y = 112
319 is 8F, 40E+ and 72Y=120
Using Seat Guru it looks like taking the 319 to 12F would reduce E+ pitch from 35 to 34 as 3 extra inches of pitch in F would need 1 inch from each from E+ rows. UA has some 34 inch pitch E+, but mostly 35 inches.
If a row of F added, 319 would become
12F, 36E+ and 72Y = 118, still 6 more seats than the 73G.
UA is installing slimline seats on the 320/319s starting next year....think that might give you that lost inch.
Transpac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3138 posts, RR: 14 Reply 27, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2569 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 24): That is not correct. With E+ the 73G is 12/100 not 12/106
This, is actually, the incorrect statement.
Pre-Y+, the sCO 73G's were configured 12/112. Now post-Y+, they are configured 12/106. You may be mistaking them with the 735, which were originally configured 8/106 and are now configured 8/100.
gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 89 Reply 28, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2501 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 24): That is not correct. With E+ the 73G is 12/100 not 12/106
cosyr From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 29, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2452 times:
I don't know if they are planning to add a row of F later, but I just searched a random 319 flight in July and it definitely has 8/106 on the seating chart, and the last row is all filled, which I highly doubt that 6 passengers happened to choose, 9 months early!
kgaiflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 3639 posts, RR: 1 Reply 31, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2095 times:
Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 24): That is not correct. With E+ the 73G is 12/100 not 12/106
Oh? Then it's United.com that must be all wrong, since that's where I got the numbers.
CALPSAFltSkeds From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 2199 posts, RR: 8 Reply 32, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2037 times:
Quoting gigneil (Reply 28): Quoting CALPSAFltSkeds (Reply 24):
That is not correct. With E+ the 73G is 12/100 not 12/106
They are definitely 12/106.
NS
Sorry, I shouldn't have used SeatGuru, which shows 12/100, but has 12/106 seats on the map.
Adding 4 F seats to the 319 would result in equal numbers for the 73G and 319, except the 73G would have 6 more E+ and 6 fewer Y seats vs. the 319.
VC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2416 posts, RR: 9 Reply 33, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1934 times:
I have been on a hundred flights on UA from LaGuardia to O'Hare over many years. I hated the OLD UA 737's, loved the A319/320's and 757's. UA always had a darn good seat in F an Y.
CO, the worst. That makes me worry! Yes...CO often had better service but comfort for your butt and back was always bad...even worse in BusinessFirst in the old recliner.
I am dying to get on a renovated A320 - did the seats get better or worse? What fabric? The CO checker patterns?
The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
RDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1059 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1904 times:
So what you're telling me is:
73G = 12/106
319 = 8/112
So what are you seeing published at 8/106....Gee lets take a wild guess. These types get swapped back and forth like crazy, so perhaps they are just publishing the smaller of each cabin to increase flexibility as was already noted several times. 319 F cabin and 73G Y cabin.
cosyr From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 196 posts, RR: 0 Reply 35, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1618 times:
Why does the seat map skip from row 32 to row 34? It is the row 33/34 that are in question here. The flight I searched only went up to 32. I really hope it means that they are adding F. With only 8 seats, a lowly Silver like me has no chance of upgrade on the 319's.
Transpac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3138 posts, RR: 14 Reply 36, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1632 times:
Quoting RDH3E (Reply 34): Gee lets take a wild guess. These types get swapped back and forth like crazy,
Swing & a miss
The 73G is operated by sCO pilots and sCO FA's while the 319 is operated by sUA pilots and sUA FA's. Personally working 4 days a week in the operation, I've never once seen a 319 swap to a 73G or vice versa. The magnitude in the logistics of such a swap would be baffling and at which point the flights would likely just cancel.
A 319>320 swap, and reverse, are extremely common. As are 73G>738 and reverse. But crossfleet swaps, between the Airbus and the guppy, are nigh unheard of.
Quoting RDH3E (Reply 34): Lets put all the speculation to bed.
kgaiflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 3639 posts, RR: 1 Reply 38, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1521 times:
Quoting RDH3E (Reply 34): Gee lets take a wild guess. These types get swapped back and forth like crazy
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 36): The 73G is operated by sCO pilots and sCO FA's while the 319 is operated by sUA pilots and sUA FA's.
As far as I know both of these statements are correct -- on SFO-SNA-SFO and SFO-SEA-SFO.
I fly the routes every few weeks and it's a 737-700 one trip and a 319 the next
Transpac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3138 posts, RR: 14 Reply 39, posted (5 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1484 times:
Quoting RDH3E (Reply 37): God forbid someone who actually knows gets listened to around here
Indeed.
Clearly that person is not you, though. As you assumed the logistics in swapping sCO and sUA fleet types was something done "like crazy".
RDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1059 posts, RR: 0 Reply 40, posted (5 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1137 times:
Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 39): Clearly that person is not you, though. As you assumed the logistics in swapping sCO and sUA fleet types was something done "like crazy".
You crack me up. I stipulated later that I was referring to swapping them in the schedule, as that is what the OP is referring to. He's looking at summer 2013, where swapping equipment would have zero ramifications as crew pairings and bid lines have yet to even be considered.
I'm not sure why you are so quick to dismiss what I am saying, if you search my post history you will find that I don't post about things which are not in my purview.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3138 posts, 
From Canada, joined May 2012, 161 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
