g500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 726 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13813 times:
(point of inquiry)
Why is UA replacing the 777 with the 787 on LAX-NRT.... This route is probably the most important route over the Pacific Ocean, I guess the Pacific's version of JFK-LHR... I'd think they would want to offer more seats, not less... United flies to NRT from 8 U.S points, LAX is where they will offer the least amount of seats. Why?
there is far more O&D traffic from LAX to NRT than any of these
Polot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 1502 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13773 times:
Yeah, but have you seen how many airlines fly LAX-Tokyo? UA, AA, DL, ANA, JL, MAS, and SQ all fly the route. With the 787 UA can still capture the higher yielding business traffic while pushing the junk economy fares onto someone else. (See the Transcon PS service as a model).
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5341 posts, RR: 11 Reply 2, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13721 times:
Two reasons, if you ask me (which you did):
1. Offer the best onboard product, which at this point, is definitely the 787. Unless, of course, you're one of the schmucks stuck in coach, in which case you'll emerge in Narita approximately the same size as the average Japanese tourist.
2. Bring yields back up. Where there is competition, there is ever-decreasing yields. By taking seats out of the market, prices can increase.
I'm sure it's way more complicated than that, but I'm not a route analyst.
777ord From United States of America, joined May 2010, 355 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13539 times:
It can also be a marketing ploy. As UA knows their product is inferior (especially in Y) they can use the "state of the art" 787 to entice fliers to try us out . As someone who works sCO scheduling, I am excited to see how we schedule this route. sCO takes control of the ORD-SNN route (ewr-snn-ord-snn-ewr). And, just for trivia sake, the third IAH-LHR route is now a 6 day trip. yikes!! lol
speedbird0125 From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 183 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 13439 times:
Does it mean that LAX-NRT will be operated by sCO's 787 along with sCO crews? What about LAX based sUA crews? Are they losing NRT trip? I guess this is the only Japan route that LA base has.
All the 787's are s-CO, so yes. The s-CO type have been picking up more Trans-pac flying as of late including NRT-SIN. The s-UA crew will find other flying, this is only 1 route.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
delimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1433 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 13170 times:
There's a ton of capacity in the market. This will give UA a much more efficient plane on the route, which should make the numbers looks a bit nicer from the cost end of the equation.
Dis UA offer First to NRT? The loss of the premium seats would seem to be a bigger deal than the loss of Y seats. And, of course, a 788 isn't that much smaller than a 772, or is UA sticking with 8 across Y?
PHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4985 posts, RR: 14 Reply 7, posted (5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12998 times:
Quoting Polot (Reply 1): Yeah, but have you seen how many airlines fly LAX-Tokyo? UA, AA, DL, ANA, JL, MAS, and SQ all fly the route. With the 787 UA can still capture the higher yielding business traffic while pushing the junk economy fares onto someone else. (See the Transcon PS service as a model).
This is all pretty much the case here. Also maybe UA wanted to promote their 787 on this heavily-traveled and competitive route.
nomorerjs From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 320 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12965 times:
ORD-NRT at the peak was 2x daily 744 and ORD-KIX daily as well. LAX has much more competition and UA has to do what they have to do.
ORD-NRT has NH with a 77W to compliment UA and is adding a 2nd flight (so we are "rumored" to hear). I would guess ORD-KIX and ORD-NGO will be added with 787's in the next few years. Right plane for the route and can connect to GRU (and possibly others - DTW DL lovers and DFW AA lovers know the routine of Asia to deep South America via any place but the left coast).
dank From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 829 posts, RR: 16 Reply 9, posted (5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12939 times:
Quoting g500 (Thread starter): Why is UA replacing the 777 with the 787 on LAX-NRT.... This route is probably the most important route over the Pacific Ocean, I guess the Pacific's version of JFK-LHR... I'd think they would want to offer more seats, not less... United flies to NRT from 8 U.S points, LAX is where they will offer the least amount of seats. Why?
there is far more O&D traffic from LAX to NRT than any of these
I'd think that NYC-TYO is probably a "more important" route. Traffic doesn't equal profit and maybe they can deploy those planes somewhere where they will generate better profit. For UA SFO likely can generate more traffic to TYO than LAX.
SR117 From Mexico, joined Jun 2000, 754 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12830 times:
Quoting gigneil (Reply 10):
The correct term is downgauge. We can all agree the 787 is an upgrade.
Is 3-3-3 in a 787 better than 3-3-3 in a 777?? Given the fuselage width of both airplanes, one would be hard pressed to argue that the 787 is an upgrade with regards to passenger comfort... at least with regards to the Y cabin.
The correct term is downgauge. We can all agree the 787 is an upgrade.
Is 3-3-3 in a 787 better than 3-3-3 in a 777?? Given the fuselage width of both airplanes, one would be hard pressed to argue that the 787 is an upgrade with regards to passenger comfort... at least with regards to the Y cabin.
Though with other characteristics (such as the lower cabin atmosphere), etc. it could be an upgrade.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8754 posts, RR: 52 Reply 15, posted (5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12805 times:
LAX-NRT has the lowest yield route to NRT from the US for United. There are 8 airlines competing on the route which kills yields. There's no other route to the US with that much competition. Discount travel agents frequently route people via LAX to get to Tokyo since both LAX-HND and LAX-NRT are very cheap.
The 787 makes sense because it has great operating economics and doesn't have that many seats to fill. UA doesn't have to offer cheap discount tickets in business or economy to fill up the plane.
Another beneficial factor is it is easy to reroute people on NRT-LAX if an airplane goes tech. There are always entry into service problems, so the on time completion factor will be low.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
delimit From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1433 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 12674 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 13): The 747 offers Global First as do the pmUA 777s.
So, downgrade in that the 787 will not offer a true First (ANA can handle those fliers I guess?), but upgrade in that the 787 should be a nicer ride in general.
SR117 From Mexico, joined Jun 2000, 754 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 12529 times:
Quoting dank (Reply 14): Though with other characteristics (such as the lower cabin atmosphere), etc. it could be an upgrade.
Yeah but being a couple of inches closer to your next door neighbor can make all the difference .
I'll change my tune if there's somebody that does a longhaul in a full Y cabin and they say that the higher humidity and lower cabin atmosphere made the pain less vs a 777 with seats that give you almost 2 more inches of shoulder room
So far most of the long hauls are operated by ANA and JAL, operating 2-4-2 cabins, so let's wait and see for reports from people flying carriers flying with 3-3-3 configurations.
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10696 posts, RR: 100 Reply 21, posted (5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9080 times:
Down GAUGE! Its not a downgrade in service quality, but a reduction in gauge. Heck, it might be an improvement in service quality.
Quoting Polot (Reply 1): Yeah, but have you seen how many airlines fly LAX-Tokyo? UA, AA, DL, ANA, JL, MAS, and SQ all fly the route.
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 15): LAX-NRT has the lowest yield route to NRT from the US for United. There are 8 airlines competing on the route which kills yields.
The above two explain why there is no reason to compete on size on the route.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):
LAX is becoming a 787 base -- LAX-PVG also gets the 787.
Interesting. That makes sense. So will SYD go to the 787.
Quoting SR117 (Reply 18): So far most of the long hauls are operated by ANA and JAL, operating 2-4-2 cabins, so let's wait and see for reports from people flying carriers flying with 3-3-3 configurations.
Once the A359 is out in numbers, we'll see more airlines convert to the 3-3-3 just as the 777s are going to 10 across Y. Its economics. If someone is going to be cheap, they're looking for the lowest cost. If they want a little more room, go Y+.
777ord From United States of America, joined May 2010, 355 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (5 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 8846 times:
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11): LAX is becoming a 787 base -- LAX-PVG also gets the 787.
That is correct! There will be a 787 base, as well as a 75 base in the near future!!
Quoting as739x (Reply 5): All the 787's are s-CO, so yes. The s-CO type have been picking up more Trans-pac flying as of late including NRT-SIN. The s-UA crew will find other flying, this is only 1 route.
LAX is becoming a 787 base -- LAX-PVG also gets the 787.
Interesting. That makes sense. So will SYD go to the 787.
I can't imagine SYD going to the 787. That would be too dramatic of a capacity downgrade. Also SYD fills the first class and business class cabin with revenue passengers.
LHR is a candidate. 5 airlines on the route and similar to NRT and while they have used 767s in the past to supplement capacity, that fleet is relatively thin.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
25 laca773: ! UA has Star partner NH, flying the route daily to NRT with a 77W which has PJWY and HND with a 77E JWY. Since UA product is markedly behind in rega
26 N62NA: This isn't all that surprising, for many of the reasons others have already listed. Also, you mentioned the NYC (well JFK)-LHR route. Remember, UA fl
27 AussieItaliano: I wouldn't be shocked to see the 788 on LAX-LHR. I fly this route often, and there are always lots of empty seats in Y and especially in Y+. Even thou
28 brilondon: You mean EWR-LHR, I hope as UA does not fly to LHR from JFK. Plus they use a 772 in addition with the 752's form EWR.
29 copter808: Wow, you mean I can actually watch some good movies enroute? Last week I actually booked NRT-EWR-ORD just so I could watch my choice of movies! I jus
30 PSA727LAX: UA it appers has determined there is too much direct competiton out of LAX to NRT so they are goin after the business flyers primarily by offering 787
31 slider: Bingo--which makes the 787 the perfect fit for exaclty this route. It's an optimal application for the mission and why Boeing's decision to go in thi
32 Viscount724: But "service" is often applied to schedules. I've seen dozens of references in the media, and even in airline ads, to airlines increasing "service" i
33 Roseflyer: I’m not sure UA management agrees on all models except the 747. They have upgraded the food in business class to match what they had been offering
34 YULWinterSkies: LAX is not really a hub for UA (on the Pacific, SFO is THE hub), therefore, they have no need for capacity. Only way they can survive on this highly
35 Polot: If you consider QF flying LAX-SYD hub to hub than you have to consider LAX a hub for UA, considering they are larger than AA (who I presume you are a
36 ukoverlander: On United?.....you've got to be kidding surely?
37 Tango-Bravo: Do you have the actual numbers to back that claim? Just curious to know inasmuch as, historically speaking, based on timetables of 1960s-'80 vintage,
38 Roseflyer: I’m not sure QF is hub to hub. UA has more LAX traffic than AA. LAX-SYD is filled mostly with point to point for all airlines operating the route,
39 spacecadet: Well, he said O&D, not "gateway", and as to "why" SFO might not even have that traffic anymore would probably be because there are more non-stops
40 Roseflyer: Honolulu - Tokyo is the biggest O/D route to Tokyo from the US. It has around 12 daily flights compared to 8 from LAX and has virtually zero connecti
41 SFOA380: JFK-LHR has 1.4 million more passengers than LAX-NRT--more than double the traffic and it's a declining route. SFO-HKG isn't too far behind LAX-NRT a
42 LAXintl: SFO is a significantly smaller US-Asia local market compared to LAX except to HKG. If anything LA basin having double the population of the Bay Area i
43 Flighty: If UA had a huge network at LAX, which they do not, they might need to haul a lot of economy passengers from the network. But it's mainly just local.
45 N62NA: No, I was careful to write NYC-LHR, as we're always being preached to here on a.net that EWR is a NYC airport. And the count is 4 752s and 1 772, whi
46 CODC10: The 787 on LAX-NRT serves a few purposes, as have been pointed out. The route is a worse performer than other NRT transpacs, so the '87 reduces capaci
47 spink: I think you are undervaluing the value of the SFO-ASIA biz market. Bay Area to Asia flights have a vary high percentage of corp/biz passengers.
48 bobnwa: Be assured that not everyone agees with your definition of Down gauge or Up gauge.
49 HeeseokKoo: According to airlineroute.net, NRT-LAX sector is all zeroed out from Mar 31st 2013. Although there's no confirmation yet, KE might be stepping away f
50 klwright69: Maybe a shoe finally fell to earth here. Why on earth is KE in this market to start with. I had a friend that flew MH LAX-NRT in the 80's. So they ha
51 HOONS90: KE has been in the LAX-NRT/TYO market for 41 years.[Edited 2012-12-13 08:02:42]
52 IAH59: Well Korean Air is ending there Tokyo route this up coming March and Delta flies to both Tokyo Airports.
53 klwright69: I stand corrected. This area is not my area of expertise. Thanks.
54 IrishAyes: Interesting. DL and KE do not have TATL ATI as far as I know. Is SkyTeam simply trying to right-size the amount of capacity on LAX-NRT?
55 coolfish1103: As of now, ICN is decent enough to do transit on its own. KE can offer lower prices to force the passengers to route NRT-ICN-LAX v.v. and still have d
56 commavia: Agreed, although they are the smallest player in the market with only a few flights per week. I still think that once MH is in oneworld, and once AA
57 LAXintl: One thing to keep in mind -- US-Japan is a shrinking market. Not only has the overflights of Japan become more prevalent reducing number of folks that
58 PHX787: I wouldn't be so sure yet, my buddy is confirmed on the KE LAX-NRT sector in April.
59 Viscount724: I believe many passengers connect to OGG and other islands. They're not all destined to HNL.
60 AADC10: I was not impressed with the seating on the UA 788. People are excited now but the reality is that the 788 is less comfortable than current 772 in bo
61 gigneil: Its impossible to disagree. An upgauge is an increase in the size of an airframe. And a downgauge is a decrease. There's no way to misinterpret it .
62 United1: The Y class seats are a little narrower then those that are on the 777s (same width as the seats on the 744s actually) ...the seats in J however are
63 N782NC: I'm assuming this doesn't include JAL's HND service? If not, these number don't accurately reflect the entire market.
64 LAXintl: No it does not - but market only year prior when JAL was at NRT was not much bigger. NRT-JFK - 616,646 NRT-ORD - 609,512 NRT-SFO - 608,361 Even at 100
65 brilondon: As you can see, you stated JFK-LHR route and did not even hint you meant EWR. I thought you were talking about from JFK.
66 Viscount724: I would say it's the seating capacity, not the size of the aircraft. For example, NH high-density 10-abreast 772s used on domestic routes have almost
67 panamair: DL and KE have had ATI since 2002. However, they don't have a JV as yet, and they don't codeshare on each other's NRT-LAX service - only the nonstops
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 726 posts, 
. As someone who works sCO scheduling, I am excited to see how we schedule this route. sCO takes control of the ORD-SNN route (ewr-snn-ord-snn-ewr). And, just for trivia sake, the third IAH-LHR route is now a 6 day trip. yikes!! lol
From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 4985 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Jun 2000, 754 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
