Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA LAX-YVR  
User currently offlinesptv From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 136 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6477 times:

Why does United continue to operate this flight LAX-YVR-LAX using their own (albeit Skywest) metal? Alaska, Air Canada and Westjet offer a far better product and generally better-priced. UA code-shares on all AC flights, and the times of their own flights are almost identical to AS and AC flights. I've flown the UA flight a couple times. Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3461 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6475 times:

Connections I'd imagine.


AA AC AQ AS BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OO OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN
User currently offlineORDBOSEWR From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6417 times:

I am pretty sure that LAX-YVR was carved out when the authorities granted the immunized alliance between AC and UA, which means that AC and UA can't jointly plan capacity or price on the route.

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26029 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 4 weeks ago) and read 6211 times:

Quoting ORDBOSEWR (Reply 2):
I am pretty sure that LAX-YVR was carved out when the authorities granted the immunized alliance between AC and UA, which means that AC and UA can't jointly plan capacity or price on the route.

No, LAX-YVR was not one of the carved out markets.

I bellieve the transborder markets carved out by the US DOT originally were the following.

Toronto - Cleveland, Houston, Chicago, San Francisco
Ottawa - New York
Calgary - Houston

As far as I know, that AC/UA transborder joint venture hasn't yet been implemented.

[Edited 2013-02-03 14:47:40]

[Edited 2013-02-03 14:49:10]

User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6080 times:

LAX-YVR was not a carve out.

List of the 14 transborder carve outs were listed in recent thread.
RE: Air Canada/United Transborder JV Update (by ElPistolero Oct 26 2012 in Civil Aviation)

What AC-UA might chose to do once the JV is fully implemented is to be seen, but for now LAX-YVR remains the busiest or second busiest (neck and neck each year) city pair between the US and Canada, and a market UA obviously has wanted to keep its feet in.

Quoting sptv (Thread starter):
Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

Whats the difference with AC E190 and UAX CR7? 1x2 in F and 2x2 in Y.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26029 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5982 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Quoting sptv (Thread starter):
Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

Whats the difference with AC E190 and UAX CR7? 1x2 in F and 2x2 in Y.

The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

........................E190..........CRJ
Cabin width.....9 ft........ 8 ft. 4 in.
Aisle height....6 ft. 7 in. 6 ft. 2 in.


User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33289 posts, RR: 71
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5914 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
What AC-UA might chose to do once the JV is fully implemented is to be seen, but for now LAX-YVR remains the busiest or second busiest (neck and neck each year) city pair between the US and Canada, and a market UA obviously has wanted to keep its feet in.

No where near neck-and-neck with the busiest pair - New York-Toronto - which is double the size. Miami-Toronto is also a good bit larger than LA-Vanocuver, which is the third busiest just ahead of Miami-Montreal and Las Vegas-Toronto.

It's a very large local market, obviously, so it makes sense UA wants to have a presence, even if minor.



a.
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5848 posts, RR: 28
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5795 times:

Having connected to UA's YVR flight several times I can tell you that staying inside the UA concourses is preferrable to me rather than trying to switch between T7/T8 and T2 at LAX.


"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5633 times:

Quoting mah4546 (Reply 6):
No where near neck-and-neck with the busiest pair - New York-Toronto - which is double the size. Miami-Toronto is also a good bit larger than LA-Vanocuver, which is the third busiest just ahead of Miami-Montreal and Las Vegas-Toronto.

Per DOT Full year 2011

YVR-LAX: 798,693
YYZ-LGA: 710,159

For 12-months ending June 2012

YVR-LAX: 786,125
YYZ-LGA: 777,261

Another top US-Canada route in enplanements is YYZ-ORD.

For info neither YYZ-EWR or your YYZ-MIA even make the Top-50 US International airport-pairs.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.

People look at fares, schedule timings, airline name. Equipment type is hardly a factor for the vast majority of airline passengers. Frankly most have no clue what the difference between a 737 or 767 would be, let alone between two RJs like E190 or CR7.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinemark8762 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 133 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5545 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

........................E190..........CRJ
Cabin width.....9 ft........ 8 ft. 4 in.
Aisle height....6 ft. 7 in. 6 ft. 2 in.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.

People look at fares, schedule timings, airline name. Equipment type is hardly a factor for the vast majority of airline passengers. Frankly most have no clue what the difference between a 737 or 767 would be, let alone between two RJs like E190 or CR7.

Exactly. I think the people on here are the only ones that really worry about this stuff.


User currently offlinemah4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33289 posts, RR: 71
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5460 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
For info neither YYZ-EWR or your YYZ-MIA even make the Top-50 US International airport-pairs.

DOT info is passengers carried, airport pair, which isn't really relevant to determine market size.

MIDT O&D traffic FY2011:

1) New York-Toronto - 1,317,892
2) Miami-Toronto - 668,838
3) Los Angeles-Vancouver - 565,638
4) Miami-Montreal - 477,207
5) Las Vegas-Toroto - 470,478

Local market wise, NYCYYZ and MIAYYZ are the third and tenth larger international O&D markets from the United States.



a.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26175 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5362 times:

And we are speaking about apples and oranges.

My point stands, regardless of O&D, the routes of YVR-LAX and YYZ-LGA for several years now have vied for being the busiest US-Canada route pairs.

So be it local, or connections travelers going other places the YVR-LAX route has generated the numbers it has, and maybe this large volume is a reason why UA has chosen to keep its feet in the market regardless of its AC codeshare.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4068 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3674 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Per DOT Full year 2011

YVR-LAX: 798,693
YYZ-LGA: 710,159

For 12-months ending June 2012

YVR-LAX: 786,125
YYZ-LGA: 777,261

Another top US-Canada route in enplanements is YYZ-ORD.

For info neither YYZ-EWR or your YYZ-MIA even make the Top-50 US International airport-pairs.

Quoting

Thanks for the information, LAXintl. I learned something new today. You mention a/c doesn't make a difference, and that it doesn't. AC using the smaller E90s, I would think keeps their yields and fares higher versus flying the larger A319/A320/A321s.

I do think UAEX should pull their pathetic CR7 service out of the market and get together with AC and do a JV in this market as well.


User currently offlinekgaiflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 4331 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3340 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting laca773 (Reply 12):
I do think UAEX should pull their pathetic CR7 service out of the market and get together with AC and do a JV in this market as well.

Slightly off topic, I wish UA could find a CR7 for the SFO-YYJ route.

It's a long torturous trip in a CR2


User currently offlinerampbro From Canada, joined Nov 2012, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2124 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):
Whats the difference with AC E190 and UAX CR7? 1x2 in F and 2x2 in Y

AVOD!


User currently offlinethreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2188 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1776 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.
Quoting mark8762 (Reply 9):

Exactly. I think the people on here are the only ones that really worry about this stuff.

What abut overhead bin space? While not generous, the Embraer offers more space than a CRJ for those wishing to avoid checking their luggage.



The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4416 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1701 times:

Quoting threepoint (Reply 15):

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.
Quoting mark8762 (Reply 9):

Exactly. I think the people on here are the only ones that really worry about this stuff.

What abut overhead bin space? While not generous, the Embraer offers more space than a CRJ for those wishing to avoid checking their luggage.

While I can appreciate your sentiment about checking luggage, I am not about to find a flight based on the amount of space for a carry on, and also I am not sure that every body is just going to LAX, but also transferring to another flight to go further than Los Angelas.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineFATFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2001, 5848 posts, RR: 28
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1549 times:

Quoting threepoint (Reply 15):
What abut overhead bin space? While not generous, the Embraer offers more space than a CRJ for those wishing to avoid checking their luggage.

But if there is a connection at LAX would a passenger really be willing to lug carryons between T2 and T7/T8 just for overhead space?

Nor am I unusual about using LAX for a YVR connection. Last time I flew FAT-LAX-YVR I followed 4 other passengers off the FAT-LAX flight then thru the concourse to UAX's YVR flight (and I didn't know any of them).



"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26029 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1371 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 8):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 5):
The 8-inch wider E190 cabin makes a big difference. Seats and aisles are wider and the overall impression of space is much better. Headroom in the aisle is also 5 inches greater.

In the minds of the average traveler not a difference.

People look at fares, schedule timings, airline name. Equipment type is hardly a factor for the vast majority of airline passengers. Frankly most have no clue what the difference between a 737 or 767 would be, let alone between two RJs like E190 or CR7.

Agree for the once-a-year Y class passenger, but a route like LAX-YVR has many frequent flyers who do know the difference.


User currently offlineAerowrench From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 52 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1305 times:

Quoting sptv (Thread starter):
Why does United continue to operate this flight LAX-YVR-LAX using their own (albeit Skywest) metal? Alaska, Air Canada and Westjet offer a far better product and generally better-priced. UA code-shares on all AC flights, and the times of their own flights are almost identical to AS and AC flights. I've flown the UA flight a couple times. Don't see why anyone would choose a CRJ over mainline aircraft.

Those flights are either full or close to it most every day that I'm working. Seems like a lot of folks are stuck in pre dereg times. Airlines are right sizing the routes with the proper equipment so they will actually turn a profit so investors will look at the stock as worthy.

Quoting laca773 (Reply 12):

I do think UAEX should pull their pathetic CR7 service out of the market and get together with AC and do a JV in this market as well.

Feeble and ignorant. You obviously are unaware that a cross country flight used to take 20+ hours and would make 3 or more stops using an aircraft that would seat 50 people and had large, loud radial engines that with flames visible shooting from the exhaust at night. These aircraft you condemn are a blessing and some of the people on here with this attitude of entitlement really ought to reconsider before the airlines downgrade more cities back to turbo prop.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
UA LAX Gate Agent 'meltdown' Flight 90 LAX-EWR posted Tue Mar 20 2012 10:10:45 by TOMMY767
Canceled UA LAX Intl Routes posted Mon Oct 5 2009 16:49:55 by USAirALB
UA LAX-SFO With 777/747, When? posted Fri Jan 16 2009 16:32:51 by B747forever
UA LAX-NRT-BKK Aircraft Info Needed posted Mon Dec 29 2008 12:52:00 by UAL747
UA: LAX-SEA Discontinued Becomes All UAX On 2 Nov. posted Sat Oct 4 2008 03:59:08 by LACA773
UA LAX-NRT-LAX Changes 747 To 777 posted Sun Oct 21 2007 18:56:56 by Platinumfoota
Why No Nonstop UA LAX-SGN And LAX-ICN? posted Wed May 16 2007 20:01:25 by SparkingWave
EVA's New Re-configured 744 Going To LAX/YVR posted Thu May 3 2007 20:59:31 by Jimyvr
UA LAX-BOS 1992 posted Wed Nov 30 2005 09:41:30 by Scallar
UA LAX SFO 737? posted Fri Sep 2 2005 23:28:58 by 767ER