tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 9 Posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 18708 times:
Some of the BOS-SFO flight times are reaching 7+ hours. That's really long for transcon -- but it makes sense since it's about 11 degrees here in NJ with the Canadian cold front coming through. Here are some examples:
IAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 18572 times:
Quoting tommy767 (Thread starter): Is there a reason why some of these UA 737s on BOS-SFO are 7hrs flying time but the 757s are a little over 6hrs 30mins?
From your post and links I don't find a 757 flying BOS-SFO, only 738/9. Could be the 73's are using more of an ECON speed while the more fuel capable 75'7 is simply running along at .82. In any event glad I am not on any of them as I've had my but in airplane seats for 13 hours already this week.
Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3363 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 18455 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2): Did they not put enough gas in the plane in anticipation ?
Probably pushing to exceeding the MTOW of an A320 if they had a full load and full fuel. I recall from an earlier thread about strong winds that the fuel stop is planned from before departure as it is still the most economical option.
Quoting tommy767 (Thread starter): PS: Is there a reason why some of these UA 737s on BOS-SFO are 7hrs flying time but the 757s are a little over 6hrs 30mins?
Difference in cruising speed I would think.
IIRC the 757 cruises at Mach 0.80 and the 737 cruises at Mach 0.78, may only be a few knots but it adds up over 2000 or so nm.
ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21516 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 18272 times:
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 3): I flew LAXMIA a few weeks ago with extreme tailwinds - 3 hours, 29 minutes take off to touchdown.
I was expecting this on LAX-MCO-LAX last week, but the jetstream has moved north and the southern US has almost no wind aloft. We had no speedy east bound flight nor did we have a slow west bound. On the east bound, the moving map said tail wind of about 30 mph most of the way. Nothing much.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
This one dosn't seem that bad, but it was a B-767 and maybe should have got along quicker. Looks like they left a half hour late and arrived a few minutes early.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 4): Probably not but damn being on a UA 737 for 7 hours -- that has to be torture. Hopefully they still have food and drink after 6 hours!
I didn't think a B-737 in revenue service could stay in the air that long. I certainly wouldn't want to be there. I sometimes fly between SEA and MIA on AS B-737s and expect to be in the air 5 1/2 hours or so.
tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 17844 times:
Quoting Caryjack (Reply 14): I didn't think a B-737 in revenue service could stay in the air that long. I certainly wouldn't want to be there. I sometimes fly between SEA and MIA on AS B-737s and expect to be in the air 5 1/2 hours or so.
A point of correction: flight aware usually does a poor job of distinguishing a 739 or 738 with United. I believe the BOS-SFO routes are 738s, which happen to be listed at 739.
IMHO, I don't think the 739ER can do 7 hours in the air with full payload. I believe at the max it can do is 6hrs to 6hrs 30mins at the most.
"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
I'm with you! I don't find DLs ATL-SEA to be that off at all. 4h57mins sounds about right..maybe a few mins more than average. Can't tell you how many times I've sat on a flight over 5hrs flying PDX-ATL.
caljn From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 15442 times:
Quoting iowaman (Reply 13): Of course it if wasn't a full or near full flight that greatly helps.
I haven't been on a UA flight that wasn't full in years. Years!!
I also do the EWR-LAX run monthly and always dread it....need to gird myself just before boarding as those coach seats, even E+ are torture for 6 hours. Approaching 7 hours would be extremely unpleasant...the nonstop lavatory traffic in the aisles, the aroma and heat from all that humanity pervading the cabin. Ugh!
DualQual From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 14800 times:
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 12): A half hour is a big difference. Is it really just a few numbers off on cruising speed
The general wag is 1 minute per hour per mach. So if the 757 is doing .82 and the 737 is doing .78 that is about 4 min per hour which over the course of 5 hours is 20 minutes. Also are these block times? The 757 might have gotten lucky and gotten right out at a dead time in BOS, gotten into SFO at a dead time so no vectors on arrival, didn't have to wait on a gate, etc. A lot of seemingly little things can add up in a hurry.