Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
United Swaps SEA-NRT To 787; Rumor Close Crew Base  
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24858 posts, RR: 46
Posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21479 times:

Per GDS United will replace 777 service on Seattle - Tokyo market effective November with the 787.

Effective November 5th.
UA105 SEA-NRT 1210-1540
UA106 NRT-SEA 1835-1010

Also with this swap, its rumored the company will close down the pmUA Seattle 777 crew base which was hanging on solely thanks to the Narita flight.

The downgauge in capacity is likely no surprise as the Seattle route has long been one of the weaker ones especially off season, and now with partner ANA running the segment also.


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
82 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinecosyr From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 374 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21465 times:

This is a little dissappointing. I get that they probably don't need all the capacity of a 777 on that route, but a 763 has the range, no? I thought the 787 would open up all these new routes that existing planes were either too large or didn't have the range to do, like AKL, SCL, etc.

I bet this one has more to do with losing 3 Intl Config 777 to HI config.


User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6098 posts, RR: 23
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21453 times:

This sounds about right. Time to free up the 777 for a better utilized route in my opinion. This crew base has been making the walk up to the Guillotine for a while now. Good info LAX


"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1025 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21452 times:

Seems like a smart move. Increase yields, offer a unique plane and use the 788 for its intended purpose of long thin routes (SEA>NRT, DEN>NRT). Of course, they can always upgauge the a/c to 789 in the future if demand dictates it. So now we know where the next delivered UA 788 is going to - recently taking flight at Paine I'm told so it won't be too far from home when finished.

User currently offlineCONTACREW From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 424 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21279 times:

I feel for the SEA sUA based FAs who will no longer have 875/876 to work in November, since this will be flown by the sCO side out of either the NTA (Newark Transatlantic), NLS (Newark Language Speaker), or HTA (Houston Transatlantic), HOS (Houston Other Speaker) FA bases.


Flight Attendants prepare doors for departure, cross check verify straps standby for all call
User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21231 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):

They would not necessarily would close the sUA SEA base because of this flight. The sUA BOS and LAS bases remain open and they don't have any int'l flying.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlinejetskipper From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 393 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21201 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 5):
They would not necessarily would close the sUA SEA base because of this flight. The sUA BOS and LAS bases remain open and they don't have any int'l flying.

That's very true for the flight attendants, however I would find it hard to believe that they would keep the pilot 777 base open considering SEA will no long have any 777 flights.


User currently offlineCONTACREW From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 424 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21202 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 5):
They would not necessarily would close the sUA SEA base because of this flight. The sUA BOS and LAS bases remain open and they don't have any int'l flying.

I assume he's talking about the pilots and not the FAs.

[Edited 2013-07-13 11:30:21]


Flight Attendants prepare doors for departure, cross check verify straps standby for all call
User currently offlinenutsaboutplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 496 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21198 times:

I am actually somewhat surprised that UA will continue to fly NRT out of SEA at all. I know there was some speculation (on A.net) about the route being dropped completely when ANA entered last year.


American Airlines, US Airways, Alaska Airlines, Northwest Airlines, America West Airlines, USAFR
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24858 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21167 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 5):
They would not necessarily would close the sUA SEA base because of this flight.

SEA was the only flight these guys have been doing.

For instance in August all they are doing is SEA-NRT-ICN runs.

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 5):
The sUA BOS and LAS bases remain open and they don't have any int'l flying.

   

You are mixing apples and orange.

The only other 777 bases are LAX, ORD, SFO, and DC. No need to have a 777 base in a city with zero flights.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21117 times:

Quoting jetskipper (Reply 6):
Quoting CONTACREW (Reply 7):

Ah, I forgot UA had a pilot base in SEA. Thought it was just F/A's only.

Quoting nutsaboutplanes (Reply 8):

They have a long history of flying this route. I'm willing to bet it still makes money for them especially since this bean counting management team is keeping it around.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlineDL747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 20964 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
The downgauge in capacity is likely no surprise as the Seattle route has long been one of the weaker ones especially off season, and now with partner ANA running the segment also.

The fact that DL is now operating both SEA-HND and SEA-HND certainly didn't make life easier for UA. Sounds like the market is speaking.


User currently offlineroseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9503 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 20924 times:

I think SEA makes sense for the 787. ANA joined the market and DL has increased capacity with the HND flight and up gauging seasonally to a 747 to NRT.

also with the DEN nonstop flight, there will be fewer connecting passengers through SEA since DEN O/D which was traditionally routed via SEA dried up.

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 5):

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):

They would not necessarily would close the sUA SEA base because of this flight. The sUA BOS and LAS bases remain open and they don't have any int'l flying.


I assume the 757/767 pilot base will remain open also. SEA gets a lot of 757s still and as far as I know is one of only two cities that does the 757 A-checks.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17351 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 20896 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 11):

The fact that DL is now operating both SEA-HND and SEA-HND certainly didn't make life easier for UA.

I think DL has bitten off way more than it can chew in SEATYO, between its equipment changes that are all over the place and its higher exposure to low yield traffic, questionable AS flow, and the huge increase in capacity, it's just not sustainable.

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 10):
this bean counting management team is keeping it around.

Right. Unlike all those successful US carriers that aren't a'bean countin' 



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2362 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 20765 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 11):

I think this hurt UA. It's been a 77E flight for a long while. Too bad UA never got a SEA-FRA working, or other Europe service.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24858 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 20719 times:

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 12):
I assume the 757/767 pilot base will remain open also.

SEA 757/767 crew base is tiny. Down to mere 22 Captains, and 21 FO's these days.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineDL747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 20636 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
I think DL has bitten off way more than it can chew in SEATYO, between its equipment changes that are all over the place and its higher exposure to low yield traffic, questionable AS flow, and the huge increase in capacity, it's just not sustainable.

I don't think that anyone should assume that DL is or will be filling their flights with primarily O&D traffic. There are still many, many cities in the USA without their own nonstop service to Japan. Many of these cities already have nonstop service to SEA, while those that don't could easily receive nonstop service from either AS or DL.

Make no mistake: DL is not looking to the low yield travelers. They have been and continue to be very successful in attracting the higher yielding business traveler, attracting and creating new elites, cementing the loyalty of existing elites and winning the coveted corporate contracts away from other carriers.


User currently offlineDL747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 20517 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 16):
I think DL has bitten off way more than it can chew in SEATYO, between its equipment changes that are all over the place

You are totally overlooking the fact that DL's equipment changes are one of the key elements of it's success: Matching supply with demand.

DL's diverse fleet gives it a significant advantage over the competition by providing them with more flexibility to put the right aircraft on the right route to match demand.

Been watching DL's stock price lately?

Tune in on Wednesday, July 24th to find out about DL's Q2 earnings.

Here's a hint: The engine is hitting on all cylinders.


User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17351 posts, RR: 46
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 20368 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 17):
You are totally overlooking the fact that DL's equipment changes are one of the key elements of it's success: Matching supply with demand.

You're jumping from "I don't think DL will be able to maintain this much capacity in SEATYO" to "I don't think DL is a well run airline", which is not the case. In fact DL probably has the strongest management team in the industry after US--regardless they still will have to rationalize their SEATYO capacity.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2392 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 20303 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 17):
You are totally overlooking the fact that DL's equipment changes are one of the key elements of it's success: Matching supply with demand.

So what, exactly, do you make of UA reducing the 777 to a 787 in the market, especially with an immunized JV/revenue sharing partner also operating 787 service on the route?


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 20237 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
Right. Unlike all those successful US carriers that aren't a'bean countin'

It would be one thing if they were bean counting and making money but they uh, aren't.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
I think DL has bitten off way more than it can chew in SEATYO, between its equipment changes that are all over the place and its higher exposure to low yield traffic, questionable AS flow, and the huge increase in capacity, it's just not sustainable.

They seem to be doing fine but believe what you want to believe.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlinenutsaboutplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 496 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 19952 times:

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 12):
also with the DEN nonstop flight, there will be fewer connecting passengers through SEA since DEN O/D which was traditionally routed via SEA dried up.

That makes a lot of sense, I had not considered the DEN-NRT addition as a possible player in the down-gauge.



American Airlines, US Airways, Alaska Airlines, Northwest Airlines, America West Airlines, USAFR
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1025 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 19820 times:

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 12):
I think SEA makes sense for the 787. ANA joined the market and DL has increased capacity with the HND flight and up gauging seasonally to a 747 to NRT.

also with the DEN nonstop flight, there will be fewer connecting passengers through SEA since DEN O/D which was traditionally routed via SEA dried up.

Right, Star is pretty well represented with 2x 787 out of SEA + the new DEN>NRT routing makes sense on the down gauge. So, there are 600 + seats on the 3 flights which is probably right for the market.


User currently offlinejetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7405 posts, RR: 50
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 19511 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 18):
You're jumping from "I don't think DL will be able to maintain this much capacity in SEATYO" to "I don't think DL is a well run airline", which is not the case. In fact DL probably has the strongest management team in the industry after US--regardless they still will have to rationalize their SEATYO capacity.

Why? As long as we're making money, hand over fist, it really doesn't matter. We can afford to piss money down the drain at the moment as long as we're building market-share. As long as we're offering connecting service within Asia, NRT must remain in place as the primary TYO destination, while HND is purely to establish a foothold in the top-tier business fare demographics. Could there come a day when we drop NRT in favor of HND only out of SEA? Sure if we drop our interport routes and move them to SEA instead. Someday, we'll have to "simplify our model" but not now. The goal is to diminish UA's foothold on the TYO market out of SEA. I think we're beginning to see that take place.



Made from jets!
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17351 posts, RR: 46
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 18153 times:

Quoting jetjack74 (Reply 23):
while HND is purely to establish a foothold in the top-tier business fare demographics.

HND is there to maintain the allocation and lose the least amount of money possible at the same time.

Quoting jetjack74 (Reply 23):
The goal is to diminish UA's foothold on the TYO market out of SEA. I think we're beginning to see that take place.

I think UA is almost tangential in this case, as it is a JV with a hub on one end, whereas DL only has another airline's hub on one end. SEATYO, along with the other Asian destinations, is more about redrawing the Asian model for DL, as well as forcing AS' hand in the matter.

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 20):

They seem to be doing fine but believe what you want to believe.

This SEP13 SEANRT is mostly 76W, whereas SEP12 was almost all 333.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 18718 times:

It will be interesting to see where UA gets the 788 from...AFAIK they are only supposed to have 8 on property by November.

LAX-PEK
LAX-NRT
DEN-NRT
IAH-LOS
SEA-NRT

It seems like it will take more than 8 frames to fly those routes.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4378 posts, RR: 19
Reply 26, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 18108 times:

another downgrade, shrinking to profitability !


The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30584 posts, RR: 84
Reply 27, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18497 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'd have preferred a 767-300ER to keep Global First, as I really like the cabin crews on UA875 and 876, but I'll just move to NH's 777-300ER (be it from SEA in the summer or LAX/SFO the rest of the year).

[Edited 2013-07-13 17:58:42]

User currently offlineKingAir200 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1611 posts, RR: 2
Reply 28, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18396 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 24):
This SEP13 SEANRT is mostly 76W, whereas SEP12 was almost all 333.

For product, not necessarily capacity. The A330 will be back as soon as there are enough in the new config.



Hey Swifty
User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5890 posts, RR: 6
Reply 29, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18303 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
I think DL has bitten off way more than it can chew in SEATYO, between its equipment changes that are all over the place and its higher exposure to low yield traffic, questionable AS flow, and the huge increase in capacity, it's just not sustainable.

All these armchair CEO's who choose to make the comments. They may be right but where's the data to show this. How do you know AS is not feeding DL's Asian flights? How do you know there's too much capacity in the market? The market is peaking during this summer with a 747-400, 767-300, 777-200 and a 777-300ER.

Sorry to pick on you, MaverickM11.

In another thread, it appears that DL is going to be doing some juggling of aircraft between the 767-300, 747-400 and the 777-200ER. ANA will reduce their capacity from the summer 777-300ER to a 787. It doesn't surprise me that UA is going to a 787. If UA can't make the 787 work, then they're out. A good thing would be that UA would use the 787 during the off-peak months and return to the 777-200ER during the summer. Likewise, I hope ANA will bring back the 777-300ER next summer.


User currently offlineDL747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 18123 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 19):
So what, exactly, do you make of UA reducing the 777 to a 787 in the market, especially with an immunized JV/revenue sharing partner also operating 787 service on the route?

I think it may be an indication that UA's immunized JV isn't as strong as some may think, at least in this market.


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22726 posts, RR: 20
Reply 31, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 17949 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 16):
There are still many, many cities in the USA without their own nonstop service to Japan. Many of these cities already have nonstop service to SEA, while those that don't could easily receive nonstop service from either AS or DL.

What you are overlooking is that most of those cities are either tiny markets to Japan (EUG, GEG) or have a lot of other hubs over which they can connect (AUS, STL). Despite its fairly small size, SEA isn't that easy a place in which to connect.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 32, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 17914 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 30):
I think it may be an indication that UA's immunized JV isn't as strong as some may think, at least in this market.

I'm not sure how you can infer that...as you stated above SEA is used by DL as a connecting hub (DL and AS feeder flights) one would hope that DL can support more seats out of SEA than UA which doesn't use SEA as a connection point any longer. In essence UA offers double daily 788 service from SEA to NRT...that's not to bad for a spoke.

Why does every thread on UA or DL have to turn into a DL vs UA pissing match it's truly childish.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7210 posts, RR: 17
Reply 33, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 17098 times:

Im not entirely surprised, as much as I was surprised at NH for sending the 787 there in the first place.

But think about it, *A customers in the PacNW have two flights now to choose from, and more seats still, than just the one 787.


And the crew base? well, if the 777 to NRT was keeping it alive, then i think it's gone.



One of the FB admins for PHX Spotters. "Zach the Expat!"
User currently offline30west From Brazil, joined Mar 2010, 33 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16427 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter):
Per GDS United will replace 777 service on Seattle - Tokyo market effective November with the 787.

Effective November 5th.
UA105 SEA-NRT 1210-1540
UA106 NRT-SEA 1835-1010

Also with this swap, its rumored the company will close down the pmUA Seattle 777 crew base which was hanging on solely thanks to the Narita flight.

The downgauge in capacity is likely no surprise as the Seattle route has long been one of the weaker ones especially off season, and now with partner ANA running the segment also.

FYI

Might be one problem closing crew base, doesn't surprise me that Ual management doesn't know about it though

From UPA LOA-25:

Seattle Base Commitment
The Company shall not exercise its rights under Section 8-H-3 of the Agreement to close
the Seattle Base for a period of two (2) years from date of signing (“DOS”) of the
Agreement.

The 787 and 777 share a common type rating just FYI, UPA was signed Dec 2012

30west


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 35, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16414 times:

Quoting 30west (Reply 34):
Might be one problem closing crew base, doesn't surprise me that Ual management doesn't know about it though
UA also bases 767/757 pilots at SEA....as the rumored closing only would only effect the 777 pilots I'm not sure why you think there would be a contract issue. Fairly sure that UA management knows exactly what they are doing.

[Edited 2013-07-13 20:11:15]


Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineCONTACREW From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 424 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16398 times:

Quoting 30west (Reply 34):
The 787 and 777 share a common type rating just FYI, UPA was signed Dec 2012

All 787 flights are currently flown by sCO pilots out of the IAH base. No sUA pilots are 787 qualified.



Flight Attendants prepare doors for departure, cross check verify straps standby for all call
User currently offline30west From Brazil, joined Mar 2010, 33 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16324 times:

And there-in lies the rub, a grievance will be the outcome as you point out close the 777 pilot domicile but the contract says nothing about downsizing so the next step is if management decides to keep base open and reduce staffing to 1 capt and 1 copilot on the 767/757. Are they still complying with contract ?

Goes to intent and negotiators notes and I don't know what those say, do you?


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 38, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 16176 times:

Quoting 30west (Reply 37):
if management decides to keep base open and reduce staffing to 1 capt and 1 copilot on the 767/757.

It's around 20 of each right now....doubt if it will go any lower until the base closes. Kind of a logical end for it as the domestic 757 fleet continues to be drawn down and replaced by 739ER.

Quoting 30west (Reply 37):
Goes to intent and negotiators notes and I don't know what those say, do you?

I don't but I bet that....

Quoting 30west (Reply 34):
Ual management

...does which is why they are making this change in the first place. I know people on this board will have a hard time accepting this but UA management does know what it's doing and does not intentionally screw over or harass their employees.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offline30west From Brazil, joined Mar 2010, 33 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15908 times:

Sorry I disagree on the running of the airline (compare it to DAL) operations

Also, disagree on the employee side, how many joint contracts done in how many years ? (compared to DAL/NWA)

I know , I heard the excuse for years " we are (UAL) exactly where we should be two years behind DAL in the merger process" how many years do you get to use this excuse as to why you can't execute?


User currently onlinehkcanadaexpat From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2012, 572 posts, RR: 3
Reply 40, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15907 times:

Quoting United1 (Reply 25):
It will be interesting to see where UA gets the 788 from...AFAIK they are only supposed to have 8 on property by November.
LAX-PEK
LAX-NRT
DEN-NRT
IAH-LOS
SEA-NRT
It seems like it will take more than 8 frames to fly those routes.
Semper Fi

Plenty of aircraft and then some...
IAH-DEN-NRT-DEN-IAH-LOS-IAH needs 3 aircraft
LAX-NRT-LAX-PVG-LAX needs 3 aircraft
That takes care of current 6 frames.
7th frame is coming end of this month and will be used as a "spare" for those routes.
8th frame is coming late Sep/early Oct and will go on SEA-NRT-SEA route.
9th frame to arrive around Christmas and opens up next set of routes in early 2014.
Cheers
A


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 41, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15809 times:

Quoting 30west (Reply 39):
Sorry I disagree on the running of the airline (compare it to DAL) operations

DL is not UA and UA is not DL....neither airline is expected to run the same way nor should they be.

Quoting 30west (Reply 39):
how many joint contracts done in how many years ? (compared to DAL/NWA)

Just one....on both sides ....remember outside of DALPA DL has no unions (or at least no major ones as there is probably some simulator or ect union at DL I am forgetting about.) It did however take them two and a half years to finally de-certify all or NWs unions.....



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17351 posts, RR: 46
Reply 42, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15815 times:

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 29):
They may be right but where's the data to show this

Seats in SEATYO have more than doubled over the past two summers. I guarantee you the market size has not doubled. So that means lots more flow, which NH-NH should have little problem flowing beyond NRT. UA-NH should still be decent as it's a JV and both NH/UA are lighter on Y seats than F/J. DL, however, has to rely on a much smaller NRT presence, and zero presence at HND. On the SEA end the bulk of its flow is controlled by another carrier, whose interest is maximizing their revenue, not DL's; after all AS' operating margin is much higher than DL's. *Plus* codeshares are *always* much more difficult than same metal connections--see WN/FL and CO/UA disasters recently, and those were with carriers that could talk and make changes to pricing/scheduling/etc.. Since DL can't control the AS flow and perhaps since AS is also in bed with AA, DL has added a boat load of flying to SEA for that reason, and since DL's top flows on SEANRT tend to be things like LAS and MNL, forgive me if I don't think it's high yield. So there are a bunch of reasonable data points as to why I don't think the SEATYO capacity is sustainable. Pick your favorite.

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 29):
ANA will reduce their capacity from the summer 777-300ER to a 787

It was meant to be a 787 from the beginning.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 43, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15733 times:

Quoting hkcanadaexpat (Reply 40):
LAX-NRT-LAX-PVG-LAX needs 3 aircraft

Possible but not sure those two flights can be combined that way...PVG and NRT both leave about an hour apart from one another.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently onlineAVENSAB727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 913 posts, RR: 1
Reply 44, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15579 times:

Quoting hkcanadaexpat (Reply 40):

I wonder what routes they could be? IAH will prolly get a new one.



Always look on the bright side of Life!
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17351 posts, RR: 46
Reply 45, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15584 times:

Quoting AVENSAB727 (Reply 44):

I wonder what routes they could be? IAH will prolly get a new one.

It sure will. Straight to the moon. Right after all the hubs get a nonstop first.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently onlineAVENSAB727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 913 posts, RR: 1
Reply 46, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15514 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 45):

Of course, but it won't be to the moon.



Always look on the bright side of Life!
User currently onlinehkcanadaexpat From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2012, 572 posts, RR: 3
Reply 47, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15491 times:

Quoting United1 (Reply 43):
Possible but not sure those two flights can be combined that way...PVG and NRT both leave about an hour apart from one another.

Actually its almost 2 hours.
Day 1: LAX-NRT 13:45-17:00
Day 2: NRT-LAX 19:30-13:35 + LAX-PVG 15:25-19:45
Day 3: PVG-LAX 22:10-19:20
In theory there's even room (although not currently scheduled) for a LAX-IAH-LAX red eye in between arrival of PVG flight and departure of NRT flight the next day. Will likely happen to allow swap of aircrafts with the IAH routes.
A


User currently offlineUnited1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 48, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 15391 times:

Quoting hkcanadaexpat (Reply 47):
In theory there's even room (although not currently scheduled) for a LAX-IAH-LAX red eye in between arrival of PVG flight and departure of NRT flight the next day.

Excellent...thanks for answering my question.



Semper Fi - PowerPoint makes us stupid.
User currently offlineklwright69 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jan 2000, 2017 posts, RR: 3
Reply 49, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 13251 times:

The move to a 787 on SEA-NRT should have been completely expected. I am surprised it didn't come before LAX-NRT. There is a lot of competition in both markets but SEA is smaller of the two.

A 3 class 777 on SEA-NRT is simply too much.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30584 posts, RR: 84
Reply 50, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 13084 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 49):
A 3 class 777 on SEA-NRT is simply too much.

UA could have subbed in a 767-300ER years ago, but chose not to, so I am guessing the 777-200ER has proven over the years to not be completely unsuited for the route.


User currently onlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4125 posts, RR: 1
Reply 51, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 12967 times:

Slightly off topic, but still related to this post:
,

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 19):
So what, exactly, do you make of UA reducing the 777 to a 787 in the market, especially with an immunized JV/revenue sharing partner also operating 787 service on the route?

Are they going to retire some of their crappy domestic 777? Are they going to replace some of their older 767s with the 787 as they seem to have plenty of old 767 from the pmUA days.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinefun2fly From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1025 posts, RR: 1
Reply 52, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 12969 times:

United NRT Summary:

788's: DEN, LAX, SEA
777's: ORD, IAH, EWR, IAD, SFO, GUM (2x), SIN, BKK, ICN
744's: HNL, SFO
738's: GUM 2x, HKG

Will any of these eventually also go 788? I'd guess 789 on IAD.


User currently offlineCONTACREW From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 424 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 12577 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 51):
Are they going to retire some of their crappy domestic 777? Are they going to replace some of their older 767s with the 787 as they seem to have plenty of old 767 from the pmUA days.

No the 6 domestic 777s + 3 additional 3-cabin 777s that did not receive the IPTE configuration are getting reconfigured to have 32J seats in a 2x3x2 configuration (These seats are the seats that came off the 3-cabin 777s prior to getting the IPTE configuration) and Y will remain with the 2x5x2 configuration that currently exists. The overhead monitors/audio entertainment will come out, and will replaced with satellite wifi. These aircraft will also be the first aircraft to have the on-demand streaming content turned on. Also these aircraft will be getting a partial refresh including bulkhead decor, sidewalls, overhead bins and carpets to give the aircraft an updated look. Power ports will be installed nose to tail starting next year.

As for the 3-cabin 767s those will be getting retired eventually and the 787s will replace some of those I believe.

[Edited 2013-07-14 06:21:17]


Flight Attendants prepare doors for departure, cross check verify straps standby for all call
User currently offlineMasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 5368 posts, RR: 7
Reply 54, posted (1 year 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 11192 times:

Quoting DL747400 (Reply 16):
Make no mistake: DL is not looking to the low yield travelers. They have been and continue to be very successful in attracting the higher yielding business traveler,

That's like the "old" Continental of the Bethune and early Kellner days. It was said that CO always operated routes with a plane one size too small. They never wanted to carry *all* the traffic, just the profitable part.

With capacity reductions continuing, maybe the new UA is finally catching on. A 787 on SEA-NRT makes perfect sense.



I love long German words like 'Freundschaftsbezeigungen'.
User currently offline777ord From United States of America, joined May 2010, 489 posts, RR: 1
Reply 55, posted (1 year 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 10728 times:

Quoting CONTACREW (Reply 4):

Im glad to see it be closed. If its not needed, trim the excess weight, and place those employee's where needed. It's not like they aren't commuters anyhow. I think I know of 10 pilots who do NOT commute  


User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24858 posts, RR: 46
Reply 56, posted (1 year 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 10712 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 50):
UA could have subbed in a 767-300ER years ago, but chose not to, so I am guessing the 777-200ER has proven over the years to not be completely unsuited for the route.

UA seriously wanted to as the 777 was too big.

There was a marketing plan and push to do SEA-NRT-SIN on the 763, but it ran across crewing legality issue left over from days when round-the-world service had a 763 for the HKG-DEL run. Basically they need to open an NRT TDY base due for the 767. Ultimately this proved too complex and costly, so the 777 stuck around.
Interesting to note, SEA-NRT was one of the last routes to get the IPTE product with 777s plying the route often having the old cabin.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1448 posts, RR: 17
Reply 57, posted (1 year 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 10638 times:

Quoting 30west (Reply 34):
Might be one problem closing crew base, doesn't surprise me that Ual management doesn't know about it though

As pointed out to you by another poster there is a 756 base at sea and that conforms to the contract language. Closing the 777 type at sea is not prohibited. In fact the sea LEC chairman voted no on the contract for this very reason. He was only worried about sea 777 and not the pilot group as a whole. By the way we are coming up on 1 year from DOS. The entire SEA base could be gone by the end of '14.

I don't understand people that post that UA mgmnt hasn't done enough to keep up with DL, yet when they make a change to put the company in better financial shape (swap 777 for 787) they claim it is unfair and they are being picked on. You can't have it both ways. It is high time the employees (all of us, not just pilots) look around and see that if we don't do what it takes to keep the company going we are going to wind up back in BK sooner rather than later. If you want to be a CEO enroll in a graduate program and enter that field. You don't want management telling you how to fly the plane yet you want to tell them how to run the airline? There have been very few pilot CEO's over history and most of them have been less than stellar.

It is a merger, things change and they are not always perfect. If you can't embrace change you picked the wrong industry.

As to notes in negotiations, would t it specify (SEA 777 base to stay open?). They spent 3 months working on the language. That looks like a big oversight on ALPA's behalf if that's the case. By the time the grievance and system board hold the hearing the 24 months will be over.


User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 887 posts, RR: 1
Reply 58, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 10349 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 14):
I think this hurt UA. It's been a 77E flight for a long while.

This change of equipment does not hurt UA at all it helps UA by hopefully increasing UA's yield. Anyone who has followed this flight UA857 and UA876 knows that the 777 was to much aircraft for this route on a year around basis. Only in the summer did the aircraft have a decent load factor somewhere between 87%- 94% at other times during the year the load factor fluctuates anywhere between 50%-70% and rarely has this flight ever been completely sold out. I believed that UA should have made this flight a 763 years ago but UA does not use 763 on TransPac flights so the options were either a 777 or drop the flight completely UA chose the 777. By putting the 787 on this route UA is making the right choice and finally right sizing this market. For years SEA-NRT-SEA route has been known as the "go to" flight or "your back up flight" if employees can't get to or from NRT on any other UA flight this was due to the fact that the flight was a 777. By down gauging the flight it may no longer be the "go to" or back up plan flight for employees standing by. So for those of you who believe that this move signifies that DL is pushing UA out of the SEA-NRT-SEA market I think you are wrong I think and I am glad that UA is finally going to put the right size aircraft on this route because it never should have been a 777 to begin with in my opinion.

My question is when are the next batch of sCO 787's being delivered to UA? Where is this 787 coming from especially with LAX-NRT and LAX-PVG scheduled to go 787 sometime in August and IAH-LOS scheduled to go 787 as well sometime later this year, where is the SEA-NRT 787 coming from?


User currently offlineytib From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 568 posts, RR: 1
Reply 59, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 10106 times:

Ask

Quoting jayunited (Reply 58):
My question is when are the next batch of sCO 787's being delivered to UA? Where is this 787 coming from especially with LAX-NRT and LAX-PVG scheduled to go 787 sometime in August and IAH-LOS scheduled to go 787 as well sometime later this year, where is the SEA-NRT 787 coming from?

and you shall receive...

Quoting hkcanadaexpat (Reply 40):
Plenty of aircraft and then some...
IAH-DEN-NRT-DEN-IAH-LOS-IAH needs 3 aircraft
LAX-NRT-LAX-PVG-LAX needs 3 aircraft
That takes care of current 6 frames.
7th frame is coming end of this month and will be used as a "spare" for those routes.
8th frame is coming late Sep/early Oct and will go on SEA-NRT-SEA route.
9th frame to arrive around Christmas and opens up next set of routes in early 2014.
Cheers
A


User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17351 posts, RR: 46
Reply 60, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 10031 times:

Quoting ytib (Reply 59):
Quoting hkcanadaexpat (Reply 40):
Plenty of aircraft and then some...
IAH-DEN-NRT-DEN-IAH-LOS-IAH needs 3 aircraft
LAX-NRT-LAX-PVG-LAX needs 3 aircraft
That takes care of current 6 frames.
7th frame is coming end of this month and will be used as a "spare" for those routes.
8th frame is coming late Sep/early Oct and will go on SEA-NRT-SEA route.
9th frame to arrive around Christmas and opens up next set of routes in early 2014.
Cheers
A

I'm sure that will have the operational reliability of a Sudanese train  



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30584 posts, RR: 84
Reply 61, posted (1 year 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 9712 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 56):
Interesting to note, SEA-NRT was one of the last routes to get the IPTE product with 777s plying the route often having the old cabin.

Yeah, fortunately I just used my iPad or MacBook Air.  

Though since the First Suites had the 8mm tape players, I often considered just recording some shows (I had a Sony portable 8mm VCR) and see if they would have worked,  


User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2163 posts, RR: 15
Reply 62, posted (1 year 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9289 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 56):
Interesting to note, SEA-NRT was one of the last routes to get the IPTE product with 777s plying the route often having the old cabin.

Funny you say that. I flew UA 876 last October in BF. Indeed, old config, and since this was right around the Sandy period, UA sent a lot of IRROP EWR/IAD pax on this flight.

Here's a link to my TR.

www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/trip_reports/read.main/237933/‎

Quoting jayunited (Reply 58):
For years SEA-NRT-SEA route has been known as the "go to" flight or "your back up flight" if employees can't get to or from NRT on any other UA flight this was due to the fact that the flight was a 777.

Yup. I know a lot of my friends who work for UA and NRSA to Tokyo generally fly ORD-SEA-NRT.



next flights: msp-phx-slc, msp-mdw, ord-sju, sju-dfw-ord, msp-dfw, dfw-phl, phl-msp, jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg
User currently offlineslider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6785 posts, RR: 34
Reply 63, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8613 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 2):
This sounds about right. Time to free up the 777 for a better utilized route in my opinion. This crew base has been making the walk up to the Guillotine for a while now. Good info LAX

Yup. Sounds like a perfect rightsizing of maket to gauge.

Quoting MasseyBrown (Reply 54):
That's like the "old" Continental of the Bethune and early Kellner days. It was said that CO always operated routes with a plane one size too small. They never wanted to carry *all* the traffic, just the profitable part.

Better to be one gauge too small than too big, usually. Good capacity discipline and a smart play here. Heck, it's the raison d'etre for the 787!


User currently offline777ord From United States of America, joined May 2010, 489 posts, RR: 1
Reply 64, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8541 times:

Quoting IrishAyes (Reply 62):
Yup. I know a lot of my friends who work for UA and NRSA to Tokyo generally fly ORD-SEA-NRT.

Sadly its the only way for us to get to NRT in F/J... THe route is always packed from everywhere else, and from DEN, does have J open frequently, but getting TO DEN is a nightmare! Its always oversold. Whatever happened to that ORD-DEN 777!!!


User currently offlineRDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1606 posts, RR: 3
Reply 65, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 8388 times:

Quoting 777ord (Reply 64):
Sadly its the only way for us to get to NRT in F/J... THe route is always packed from everywhere else

However, the ORD-SEA segment is frequently totally jammed. Combine reduced capacity with the fact that we've got double the management in CHI, and F/J is harder and harder to grab. Used to be every trip you could get it, now it's about 1/4, regardless of destination. Not that I'm complaining, put in context this is at the top of the list of "first world problems".


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16820 posts, RR: 51
Reply 66, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7786 times:

Getting back to the topic I think the 787 was meant for routes like this, long distance International away from hubs. The 3 class 777 would be better suited for hub flying, EWR, IAH, ORD etc.. The 787 is better suited for competitive routes as it's both efficient as well as offering a differentiated product then competitors. Which is why UA is replacing 777s with 787s on LAX-NRT, LAX-PVG etc.. I think LAX-LHR might be another possibility for conversion to 787.

My question is since the 787 crews are based in IAH (and LAX?), will they add a IAH-SEA 787 flight to position the aircraft for SEA-NRT?



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24858 posts, RR: 46
Reply 67, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days ago) and read 7663 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 66):
think LAX-LHR might be another possibility for conversion to 787.

LAX-LHR needs must stay on the 777 as long as LAX is a 777 base.

Per base memo its status will be determined over the winter as Summer 2014 schedules and 787 fleeting become clearer.
LAX-LHR provides a critical bridge to enable W patterns to fully utilize the base pilots.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 66):
My question is since the 787 crews are based in IAH (and LAX?)

Its all IAH at the moment. The grounding and mandatory crew retraining slowed opening of a LAX base for which there is already pending standing bid for.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 66):
will they add a IAH-SEA 787 flight to position the aircraft for SEA-NRT?

No need. SEA aircraft can do W pattern from LAX or DEN at NRT.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16820 posts, RR: 51
Reply 68, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7643 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 67):
Per base memo its status will be determined over the winter as Summer 2014 schedules and 787 fleeting become clearer.
LAX-LHR provides a critical bridge to enable W patterns to fully utilize the base pilots.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 67):
The grounding and mandatory crew retraining slowed opening of a LAX base for which there is already pending standing bid for.

It makes sense then when the 787 LAX base opens to move LAX-LHR to 787, the LAX 777 crews could be better utilized in growing the EWR 777 base.

As for 2014 I remember reading an interview with Jeff Smisek during the Terminal C 25 year celebration at EWR. A local reported asked when UA would start operating 787 flights from EWR, Jeff stated 2014.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently onlineAVENSAB727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 913 posts, RR: 1
Reply 69, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7473 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 68):

I wonder what routes though, I can see new 787 routes out of LAX, EWR, IAH, DEN in 2014.



Always look on the bright side of Life!
User currently offlinepoint2point From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 2740 posts, RR: 1
Reply 70, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 7216 times:

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 29):
They may be right but where's the data to show this.

per the recent Brooking Institute study

http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2012/10/25-global-aviation

pax to/from SEA/NRT-HND is roughly 300 pax per day.....

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 42):
forgive me if I don't think it's high yield. So there are a bunch of reasonable data points as to why I don't think the SEATYO capacity is sustainable.

How many seats are currently available each way between SEA/NRT-HND? I would think that a lot of them are filled with connects......

 


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 71, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 7140 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 68):
It makes sense then when the 787 LAX base opens to move LAX-LHR to 787, the LAX 777 crews could be better utilized in growing the EWR 777 base.

EWR doesn't see that many 777s as it is -- a lot more 757 and 767 for international routes.

If they want to more LAX based 777 folks, they are best up close in SFO.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17351 posts, RR: 46
Reply 72, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 7117 times:

Quoting point2point (Reply 70):

How many seats are currently available each way between SEA/NRT-HND? I would think that a lot of them are filled with connects......


About 1000 daily each way, up from about half that last June



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2392 posts, RR: 6
Reply 73, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 7125 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 71):
EWR doesn't see that many 777s as it is -- a lot more 757 and 767 for international routes.

9x per day. LHR, TLV x2, DEL, BOM, HKG, PVG, PEK, NRT. As the fleet mix shifts, it is likely that some routes will be upgauged. BRU, FRA, possibly MUC come to mind.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16820 posts, RR: 51
Reply 74, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 7021 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 71):
EWR doesn't see that many 777s as it is -- a lot more 757 and 767 for international routes.

Wouldn't moving the sUA 777s and crews to EWR change that? Just for discussion some former CO EWR routes that operated with 777s:

MXP, AMS, BRU, CDG, MAD, FCO, MAN, FRA

I could see BRU, FRA, CDG and AMS going back to 777s, FCO seasonally. For new additions perhaps GRU.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24858 posts, RR: 46
Reply 75, posted (1 year 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6223 times:

And looks like SEA 777 crew base shoe is falling....

Per company notice.

On Saturday, July 13, we loaded information into SHARES that changes the aircraft used for SEA-NRT-
SEA flying. Effective Nov. 5, 2013, we plan to use a 787 in this market. As a result of this
change, SEA will no longer have 777 flying. We will be discussing the future of the SEA 777 base
with the ALPA System Scheduling committee via the NPDM (Notice of Proposed Decision Making)
process, and will advise when more information is available.


=



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlinesonomaflyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1705 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (1 year 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6111 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The SEA 777 base will close at the two year mark unless the parties negotiate a side letter to close it earlier.

I think we've seen over the last 10 years or so how critical it is to be able to right size routes to the correct a/c. The new 787 fleet (-8 -9 and -10) will give UA that flexibility at a much lower cost than the 777 and 767. The only other issue is whether the contracts UA just negotiated hamstring the airline on scheduling flexibility (i.e. cross training F/As on either all main line a/c or at least wide bodies).

From a business perspective, moving to the 788 seems like a no-brainer. Its lower CASM and the a/c fits the demand profile. As more 788s come into the fleet, we'll see more flexibility in the 777 fleet to upgauge on existing routes and the three class 763s will go away.

I know you F class folks are bummed about losing the three class 763s but the refurbished two class birds are very nice.

Also keep in mind that UA has some of the oldest 777s in operation (including the first production a/c). We'll know in the next 12-18 months how soon those leave as the 789s come aboard.


User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1448 posts, RR: 17
Reply 77, posted (1 year 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6135 times:

Quoting sonomaflyer (Reply 76):
The SEA 777 base will close at the two year mark unless the parties negotiate a side letter to close it earlier.

The contract only specifies a "base". Nothing precludes closing the 777 base at SEA. As long as the 756 base stays there til December of 14.

The 777 base at SEA is dead. Nothing in the contract requires a side letter to stop the 777 flying.


User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1304 posts, RR: 2
Reply 78, posted (11 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4029 times:

Its interesting to see evolution in downgauge in capacity. I recall onetime UA had 744 going again NW 742 for SEA-NRT.

I think 787 in Pacific could do what the A310/767 did across the Atlantic when they push aside the bigger DC-10/L1011/747 flying.

Suppose the 787 is suitable for such market like Seattle and we see it open up new ones like SJC, BOS and SAN.


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6584 posts, RR: 11
Reply 79, posted (11 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3764 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 73):
9x per day. LHR, TLV x2, DEL, BOM, HKG, PVG, PEK, NRT. As the fleet mix shifts, it is likely that some routes will be upgauged. BRU, FRA, possibly MUC come to mind.

Ya, 9x 777 a day out of EWR? That's busch league compared to the other hubs.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 74):
Just for discussion some former CO EWR routes that operated with 777s:

Those routes were 777 when CO had D10s and weren't doing super long hauls to India yet. Unfortunately, not enough widebodies orders and 787 made CO cut a lot of these routes down to 757.

EWR ain't the center of the universe though. 777 are needed in other areas of the system.



"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
User currently offlinejustloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1038 posts, RR: 1
Reply 80, posted (11 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3256 times:

Quoting hkcanadaexpat (Reply 40):
7th frame is coming end of this month and will be used as a "spare" for those routes.

On the topic of spares, I saw three 787's on Saturday the 10th, side by side at IAH at the Maintenance hanger around 9AM. Anyone know what that was about?


User currently offlinecodc10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2392 posts, RR: 6
Reply 81, posted (11 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3180 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 79):
Ya, 9x 777 a day out of EWR? That's busch league compared to the other hubs.

Sometimes I wonder why I respond to this nonsense, but care to qualify this? Other UA hubs, other airline hubs, etc? For example, if 9x 777s/day from EWR is bush (not busch) league, where would that put IAH or ORD, with a similar # of 777 operations? Or Delta at JFK?

Your axe must be getting awfully ground.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16820 posts, RR: 51
Reply 82, posted (11 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3025 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 79):
Ya, 9x 777 a day out of EWR? That's busch league compared to the other hubs.

Tommy keep in mind most of the EWR 777 flights are ultra long haul, each requiring more than one aircraft to support each route. For instance EWR-HKG-EWR requires three 777s to support the daily flight. If they were used exclusively on Trans-Atlantic routes, instead of the Ultra long hauls the amount of daily UA 777 flights from EWR would jump from 9 daily to upwards of 15 without utilizing any additional frames.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
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...
Comair To Close Crew Base At GSO posted Fri Jun 1 2007 22:34:37 by Fdex727
US Rumor: MCO Crew Base? posted Thu Sep 24 2009 11:49:33 by Whappeh
Eastern Airways To Close SOU/BRS Crew Base posted Wed Apr 10 2013 14:19:22 by european742
United Close To 787 Or A350 Order posted Thu Nov 19 2009 19:44:08 by Zone1
DL SEA-NRT....Odd A/C Swaps! posted Fri Jul 5 2013 10:19:58 by alexinwa
F9 Moving Crew Base From MKE To CHI- Updates? posted Thu Aug 30 2012 11:53:19 by TWA1985
SJC To NRT ANA 787 Jan 2013 posted Tue Aug 21 2012 10:26:37 by heysfo
F9 Moving MKE Crew Base To Chicago posted Fri May 4 2012 11:07:05 by usflyguy
UA(CO) IAH 1st 787 Crew Base; LAX 737 Base posted Sun Jan 9 2011 09:57:36 by LAXintl
DL To Open ATL A330 Pilot Base (Rumor) posted Sun Oct 10 2010 16:54:53 by Transpac787