tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6195 posts, RR: 9 Posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 17701 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, 4737 posts, RR: 25 Reply 5, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 17565 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.
questions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 333 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 17474 times:
Quoting PHX787 (Reply 2): Did they anticipate this and load more food on board? I'd be really hungry
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 4): Hopefully they still have food and drink after 6 hours!
Are you kidding? Do you think they would anticipate anything like this? Even if they did, do you think they would think through the implications to the customer? Of course not. They simply don't care.
Always pack snacks. Always pick up water in the terminal. Regardless of class of service.
Never depend on an airline to take care of you. The concept of service and hospitality left the airline business years ago.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3229 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 17448 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.
XFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3996 posts, RR: 36 Reply 8, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 17388 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 7): IRC 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.
That depends on the cost index they are flightplanned for. The 757 can cruise faster, but for the most part runs around at .78 or .79 just like the other fleets at my airline.
ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21041 posts, RR: 60 Reply 11, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 17265 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.
tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6195 posts, RR: 9 Reply 12, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 17237 times:
Quoting mercure1 (Reply 9): The 737 and 757 planned on the same route?
Quoting IAHFLYR (Reply 5): From your post and links I don't find a 757 flying BOS-SFO, only 738/9.
A half hour is a big difference. Is it really just a few numbers off on cruising speed?
Does a 757 gain altitude and speed quicker (anyone)? Maybe explains part of the difference if so.
7 hours on BOS-SFO has to be pushing it on a 737-900 if it's near MTOW I would think? Of course it if wasn't a full or near full flight that greatly helps.
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.
Thanks,
Cary
tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6195 posts, RR: 9 Reply 15, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 16837 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.
Thanks,
Cary
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.
warreng24 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 684 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15479 times:
laca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 3752 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 14936 times:
VX's BOS-SFO flights were also 7 hours. They downgauge the a/c to a A319 so they don't run into issues with needing to divert. http://flightaware.com/live/flight/V...7/history/20130124/2355Z/KBOS/KSFO . There are several days this month where this flight was on the verge of 7 hours which I'd still consider being that considering boarding, taxing times.
caljn From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 173 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 14435 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, 642 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 13793 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.
gdg9 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 488 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (4 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 13284 times:
Quoting mah4546 (Reply 3): I flew LAXMIA a few weeks ago with extreme tailwinds - 3 hours, 29 minutes take off to touchdown.
Impressive!
25 tommy767: I honestly don't think so. How is a UA 737 low density in even the least? A few years ago I saw on flight aware 739s diverting on CLE-LAX because of
26 seabosdca: 167 or 173 passengers is low-density for a 737-900ER, which is certified for 215 passengers. A Lion Air 737-900ER with all seats full couldn't stay i
27 Mir: If the route you're going to fly to avoid winds takes you closer to LAS anyway, that's where it makes most sense to stop. -Mir
28 threeifbyair: It was bad on Wednesday too. ASA3 (DCA-SEA) took a southern routing flying over the KY-IN border, 6h05m in the air. My mother was none to happy about
29 airproxx: An A320 without ACT can carry 18,7t of fuel (without any payload consideration). With an average fuel flow of about 2,5t/hour for both engines, it ca
30 flyer737sw: I was looking at the winds yesterday via NOAA's site and the winds aloft at FL 380 was 150kts. The direction of the jet stream would have affected fli
31 KC135TopBoom: Well, it is the middle of winter here in the Northern Hemisphere. Having headwinds (westbound) in the 125-150 knot range is really not all that unusua
32 tommy767: they were 738s, not 739s. Again, I'm pretty sure a strong headwind on BOS-SFO with a 739 wouldn't make it without diverting
33 usairways85: On the reverse my ORD-PHL flt last night had some nice tail winds and was in the air 15 minutes less than normal. That is a pretty big difference for
34 redzeppelin: You may have heard that SLC was shut down for several hours yesterday due to an ice storm. The B6 flight in question landed at LAS just a little afte
35 rampbro: How do airlines mitigate the added costs associated with strong headwinds such as these? Is there a 1:1 with the savings of flying with a tailwind in
36 9w748capt: On the flipside looks like they're making great time eastbound. Look at VX 1358 - 4:32 SFO-BOS yesterday - sure beats 7h going the other way! Most EB
37 Roseflyer: High headwinds overall are added costs. The late arrivals into the west coast airports cause delays and missed connections. The early arrivals into t
38 Highflier92660: During the height of the annual mid-winter transcontinental jetstream battle one has to think of JetBlue and their range-challenged A320s. http://flig
39 idlewildchild: Tell you what, 8 hrs 15 mins LHR-EWR on 27DEC in chronic turbulence was no picnic either. I was up front and can't imagine what it was like in the ful
40 DalDC9Bos: Hey Tommy, I worked Ops at JFK for a couple years and these types of winter headwinds and the delays for westbound flights is very normal during the w
41 haggisman: Dunno if it's related but we flew on Alaska Airlines SEA -> LIH on Jan 24th and we were serenaded to the tune of a 6hr 20min flight with ugly moder
42 usxguy: I remember USAirways decision to start parking the 757s used on the transcons and replacing them with A321s... FlyerTalk was lit up for MONTHS about a
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6195 posts, 
From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 5100 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31155 posts, 
From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 333 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3229 posts, 
From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 642 posts, 
From Finland, joined Jan 2010, 674 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
