Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
So-long, United Shuttle  
User currently offlineBoeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2282 posts, RR: 1
Posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1764 times:

It's official:

United Airlines to Phase Out United Shuttle Brand
CHICAGO, Oct. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- United Airlines (NYSE: UAL - news) announced today it will discontinue the United Shuttle brand and incorporate Shuttle flights into its mainline and United Express service this fall. The move will be effective from Oct. 31, 2001.

United Shuttle operates primarily in the Western United States with a dedicated fleet of 59 Boeing 737 aircraft. The move is part of United's continued response to customer needs since the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Since those events the airline has adjusted its capacity and continues to fine tune its operation to match capacity with customer demand. In particular, the airline now sees less demand for high utilization, quick turnaround flights in its system.

United or United Express will continue to offer service in nearly all markets that currently have Shuttle service. Prior to September 11, United Shuttle offered approximately 468 daily flights.

``This will be a seamless experience for our customers as we transition away from the United Shuttle brand,'' said Christopher D. Bowers, United Airlines' senior vice president-North America. ``Our goal is to maintain the best possible schedules for customers and communities that rely on United for service, while maintaining flexibility to fine tune our capacity to meet demand. Eliminating Shuttle allows us to achieve this by using a mix of either larger or smaller jet aircraft depending on market conditions and frequency needs.''




Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJohnboy From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2592 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1609 times:

So what difference would any passengers notice, except for the Zone boarding process? And, as outlined, less flights to choose from?

User currently offlineUALfa@jfk From United States of America, joined May 2000, 311 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1592 times:

I was always led to believe that Shuttle made money for UA.

Also, UA is cutting service to such cities as ORF, RDU, PWM, SBA, and some others. They're turning service over to United Express (Regional Jets). Recall earlier this year that UA stopped serving MEM, BNA, JAX, MKE, Palm Springs, Lincoln (NE), and Saginaw (MI).

Rono Dummy, er, Dutta claims that it is "obviously because of the terrorist attacks and softened demand for air travel."

Guess what? --He's a lying SOB, because earlier this year UA announced that it was cutting additional cities by this fall. Thus, the Sept 11 attacks HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS DECISION since these station closings were already planned.

The point? Goodwin and Dutta are using the recent horrific tragedy to justify the dumb and misinformed decisions they're making. Expect them to run roughshod over the entire company with the attack as the "official" excuse. My opinion is that it's better to just be honest. These knuckleheads SHOULD NOT be using the tragedy for such reasons.

Shame on them. When will this nightmare end at UA. We all want those two gone. For good.


User currently offlineBoeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2282 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1573 times:

Wow, tell us how you really feel.

First MetroJet, then DL Express cuts, now this. A flawed business model?



Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
User currently offlineLindy field From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 3120 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1551 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Very curious whether or not Delta Express will be next.

In the meanwhile, a little tribute to Shuttle by United or United Shuttle or whoever.


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © James Richard Covington, Jr



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Leonardo Oliveira



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Scott Leazenby



User currently offlineUALfa@jfk From United States of America, joined May 2000, 311 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1533 times:

A flawed business model?

Hmmm. Well considering last June when I ran into a couple of WHQ Yield Management boys, they claimed that Shuttle is one of the "top strengths" of UA (financially), which almost led to an east coast version of UA Shuttle. They said, however, that a few Shuttle cities would be cut and some "tweaking here and there", but definitely "our domestic strength is in our west coast and Shuttle operations."

And pray tell, 3 yrs ago in FA training in Chicago, we had a mandatory tour of ALL WHQ facilities where at the Operations Department they told us the reason why so many FAs were (then) being assigned to the NY, DC, PHL, Bos, and EWR bases, was ....drum roll, please....the soon-to-come east coast United Shuttle!

It never happened.

Again, and I must emphasize, I don't have a problem with UA ceasing unprofitable operations. My problems with UA management is that they simply NEVER seem to know how (or even try) to make certain operations work. I swear it almost seems as though they've fired all market analysts and yield specialists long ago. There seems to be a lot of lack of planning and random trial and error activities going on during the past year and a half. We're dealing with people who have zero idea what to do in airline management. The events during the summer of 2000 made this fact very obvious.

You know it's bad when my supervisors are no longer putting on that fake smiley, professional demeanors that they used to. Two of 'em just yesterday were literally laughing at the bizjets venture saying that things are just a bad "comic strip" at UA nowadays. Apparently, bad morale has hit them as hard as it hit us.



User currently offlineSkychuck From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1525 times:

UA Shuttle was just an attempt to keep WN from bleeding UA dry in California. Looks like Herb and Company win another one (even if it's slightly by default)

User currently offlineLindy field From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 3120 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1514 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It really does seem that United is very poorly managed. Here's another thought: I want a low fare carrier to offer me my San Diego--San Francisco flights! Southwest pulled out of that market last year and now there's nothing!?! Just United mainline? Is this an opportunity for JetBlue?

User currently offlineTsully From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 651 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1486 times:

UALfa@jfk,

I think everyone at UAL wants the management at UA done away with...

They have no concept of how to run an airline. They are selfish morons who don't give a sh*t about the good of the company or the employees.

The BOD should be recalled as well. UAL's BOD failed to do it's job as it has allowed Dutta and Goodwin to remain in office.

Bottom line: everyone from Goodwin to Dutta to the Board of directors needs to be fired. They are sucking the life out of UA and it is ashame.



I love America. I guess that makes me Bush's poodle, but I'd rather be a dog in New York City than a prince in Riyadh.
User currently offlineMikeybien From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1462 times:

In my experience the shuttle was nothing more than mainline UA service with zoned boarding and a different livery... but then again i only flew it DEN-PHX. So in other words I don't think it's much of a loss. But anyway, I remember somebody saying awhile back that UA didn't make a whole lot of money(if any) off the shuttle routes. The bulk of their profit came from their hubs like DEN where those pesky WN jets weren't anywhere to be found. Again, I can't remeber the source, but it makes sense to me... I have a little bit of a hard time believing UA could run lower costs than WN, especially when I see the WN jets turning around waaaay faster than the UA ones. I have nothing against UA, In fact when I'm flying anywhere for more than a few hours I prefer them, but I think they should stick to what they are good at, and that's not trying to be WN.

User currently offlineSFOintern From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 770 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1435 times:

I called this yesterday  Big thumbs up

REQUIESCAT IN PEACE


User currently offlineClimbout From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1425 times:

Too bad about the shuttle.

"Requiescat"-- I've never heard this word before. Big grin

I'm always learning something new here.


User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

I obviously was too young and airline-unconscious to have fully experienced the birth and formation of UA Shuttle tend to agree with the notion that it was created mainly for the sake directly fighting WN by creating a subsidiary that was supposed to mirror them. That way, the public wouldn't get confused about the nature of mainline United (low-fare? Not low-fare? Different from the other majors? etc). However, perhaps in recent years UA has come to realize that the public doesn't really care if a mainline carrier offers bargain basement fares, and the integration of the Shuttle operation into mainline UA would be a prudent thing to do to keep costs minimal. UA would continue to be on the forefront of low-fare travel in the West, but they could go about marketing and running it internally, essentially operating an "two airlines in one," each with a different fare structure. This is what American has been doing for years (the Sabre system being the reason why AA had a head start on this whole concept), and it seems to me like it has been pretty successful.

Aaron G.

Seriousness aside, I think it will be good to see a little more aircraft variety here in SAN once the UA Shuttle planes start to get replaced by mainline a/c.


User currently offlineDeltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1651 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1366 times:

This is very crazy indeed. I was also lead to believe that Shuttle was profitable.

Aaron: You mention that you were not cognitive of the industry when Shuttle formed. Let me tell you (or anyone else who may be interested), when it came about, it came about with tones of hoopla. It was never anything that just kinda showed up one day like Metrojet and DL Express did. UA spent a year before hand letting the public know it was developing a project called U2-a second airline from United that would revolutionize the way we thought of short hop flights. Then it was announced "U2" would be on the west coast only. It was then anyone with that followed airlines knew this had to do w/ WN. WN beefed CA. Soon we came to know U2 as Shuttle by United. It would overlap the majority of routes that SW flew. When it launched, it launched with much fanfare. They showed spots on TV of Space Shuttles taking off and the announcer saying something like, "so, you need a shuttle to get up to San Francisco, we're not sure if this one would work, how about this one." and you would see the white 737 with the blue cursive Shuttle markings taking off. Meanwhile WN launced a massive campaign that openly said that they felt like their loving ways in CA were under attack by this new airline. Herb ended the spots with, "I'm not worried, we will Nuke them!" Sure enough that prophecy came true.

Anyway, as time passed, WN did start to beat Shuttle out on a lot routes, and as ILUV767 pointed out on another thread, Shuttle has become mainly a feeder for the hubs at LAX and SFO. It seemed to be working and they were able to coexist w/ WN.

I agree with Trvlr, if anything, at least we might get a broader choice in A/C to fly when commuting within the state. It would be cool to get an Airbus or 757/767 to just OAK or SFO from LAX and San.


User currently offlineAirbus380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1345 times:

See Ya zone boarding.

User currently offlineDEN-HNL From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 164 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1329 times:

Rono Dummy, er, Dutta claims that it is "obviously because of the terrorist attacks and softened demand for air travel."

Guess what? --He's a lying SOB, because earlier this year UA announced that it was cutting additional cities by this fall. Thus, the Sept 11 attacks HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS DECISION since these station closings were already planned.

The point? Goodwin and Dutta are using the recent horrific tragedy to justify the dumb and misinformed decisions they're making. Expect them to run roughshod over the entire company with the attack as the "official" excuse. My opinion is that it's better to just be honest. These knuckleheads SHOULD NOT be using the tragedy for such reasons.

Shame on them. When will this nightmare end at UA. We all want those two gone. For good.


My thoughts exactly, UALfa. These goons, from Goodloss all the way down to local management have been making up their own rules and poor decisions all along. Now they have an excuse. PATHETIC!



John Hancock
User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1285 times:

Lets just pray that IMC and MOC can reconfigure the 737s to Economy Plus and put the galleys back in.... being stuck in a Shuttle 733 from SMF to ORD will be ONE tough flight!

User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1271 times:

Segmant King wrote:

Lets just pray that IMC and MOC can reconfigure the 737s to Economy Plus and put the galleys back in.... being stuck in a Shuttle 733 from SMF to ORD will be ONE tough flight!


Im not sure if they are going to reconfigure the galleys on the ex. Shuttle planes. My guess is that as the 13XX and the 97XX series planes get shifted about the company, they will retain their Unimatic designation of 37X and 37R. By doing that, certain routes that only recieve a beverage service would qualify to get one of those ex Shuttle planes. So for example ORD-MSP may get a 37X which is one of the Shuttle configured -300s.

If United keeps the 37Xs and the 37Rs (Shuttle configured 737s) on short, beverage only flights, there is no need to change the galleys.

Economy Plus can be done on an overnight. I bet that these planes will recieve economy plus configuration.

I L U V 7 6 7


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 19
Reply 18, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1231 times:

Southwest wins. We now own the West Coast.

Alaska won't be a tough one to beat.



Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineCV640 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 952 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1226 times:

Well, hopefulyl UAL will know concentrate on its core business and get itself put together. Going ot be tough with the current group in charge, for the employees there I hope they do, or at least get replaced before they cause any more damage.

User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1216 times:

We're Nuts: Hate to say it, but yes they will, especially after the economy picks up.

Reason: WN has no business product.

Aaron G.


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8017 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1211 times:

We're Nuts,

Actually, WN owns anywhere where it enters the market on a large scale.

WN practically redefined intra-California flying when it started using SMF, OAK, SJC, BUR, ONT, LAX, SNA and SAN for the north-south California flights.  Smile


User currently offlineThe747Man From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1201 times:

 Sad

 Pissed

KILL OSAMA BIN LADEN!


User currently offlineFLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1192 times:

I'm not so sure if United won't reconfigure the Shuttle galleys just for the sake of fleet continuity. It worked out fine on the West Coast if a Shuttle plane was swapped for, well...another Shuttle plane, but when you start to mix the two (Shuttle/Mainline) in ORD and back East, you lose a good deal of schedule flexibility (and product continuity in the event of an aircraft substitution).

For example, if you start a Shuttle plane in ORD with a few flights back East in the morning, followed by a MSP turn or something, you would then have two options: continuing to fly that plane on to, say, SMF (where it could arrive at 11 pm and overnight) or have it sit idle at the airport. However, as SMF is a three and a half hour meal flight, that plane wouldn't be able to fly that route. In turn, it would really behoove United to fit the aircraft with mainline galleys (and an extra lav for longer flights!) to avoid having to schedule around meals/beverages.

F L Y 7 7 7 U A L


User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4522 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (12 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1184 times:

Bad management!!!!!!!


Try Continental, I think we wrote the f****** book
TWENTY SIX profitable consecutive quarters and within
days of this national disaster, we're on our knees begging for help, apparently with NO ASSETS!

What a bunch of bloody idiots,the ghost of Lorenzo is alive and well at CAL.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
25 N839MH : RayChuang, I notice you didn't mention SLC in your post...I believe I remember SWA entering SLC on a large scale. Hasn't SWA pulled out of some market
26 Flashmeister : Southwest's presence at SLC is largely due to Morris. They pulled out of EUG and DEN, I know, after the merger.
27 TEDSKI : Will this cause United to retire their 737-200/300/500s early in favor of their A319s & A320s?
28 Post contains images JohnFKelly : I resent that comment!
29 ILUV767 : TEDSKI wrote: Will this cause United to retire their 737-200/300/500s early in favor of their A319s & A320s? The 732's are going, but the other 737s w
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...
United Premier Card, Why So Long To Deliver posted Mon Feb 26 2007 04:46:39 by HAMAD
Delta - Why So Long To Dim Lights On Red Eye? posted Fri May 25 2007 03:31:58 by Gh123
Seat Belt Sign On Usa Airlines, Why So Long? posted Sat May 12 2007 05:32:25 by HAMAD
Winglets, What Took So Long? posted Mon Mar 26 2007 21:25:25 by VC10er
Lufthansa 744 Configuration - Why So Long? posted Wed Mar 14 2007 11:27:30 by El Al 001
A350, Why So Long Before Fly? posted Mon Mar 12 2007 11:19:59 by RootsAir
Why Runway So Long @ LYS? posted Wed Jan 10 2007 20:18:11 by Continental123
Why Will It Take Airbus So Long To EIS The A350 posted Wed Dec 6 2006 22:21:39 by Clickhappy
Why So Long To Clear Us To The Assigned Altitude? posted Thu Nov 16 2006 18:48:32 by Golftango
Why Is Denver's Runway So Long? posted Sun Oct 22 2006 00:28:23 by Fll2993