G500
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:45 pm

Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:29 pm

(point of inquiry)

Why is UA replacing the 777 with the 787 on LAX-NRT.... This route is probably the most important route over the Pacific Ocean, I guess the Pacific's version of JFK-LHR... I'd think they would want to offer more seats, not less... United flies to NRT from 8 U.S points, LAX is where they will offer the least amount of seats. Why?

there is far more O&D traffic from LAX to NRT than any of these

SEA-HNL-777
HNL-NRT-777
ORD-NRT-777
IAD-NRT-777
EWR-NRT-777
IAH-NRT-777
SFO-NRT-747
LAX-NRT-787???

comments
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 4792
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:37 pm

Yeah, but have you seen how many airlines fly LAX-Tokyo? UA, AA, DL, ANA, JL, MAS, and SQ all fly the route. With the 787 UA can still capture the higher yielding business traffic while pushing the junk economy fares onto someone else. (See the Transcon PS service as a model).
 
AA737-823
Posts: 4898
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 11:10 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:43 pm

Two reasons, if you ask me (which you did):
1. Offer the best onboard product, which at this point, is definitely the 787. Unless, of course, you're one of the schmucks stuck in coach, in which case you'll emerge in Narita approximately the same size as the average Japanese tourist.
2. Bring yields back up. Where there is competition, there is ever-decreasing yields. By taking seats out of the market, prices can increase.

I'm sure it's way more complicated than that, but I'm not a route analyst.
 
777ord
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:04 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:02 am

It can also be a marketing ploy. As UA knows their product is inferior (especially in Y) they can use the "state of the art" 787 to entice fliers to try us out  . As someone who works sCO scheduling, I am excited to see how we schedule this route. sCO takes control of the ORD-SNN route (ewr-snn-ord-snn-ewr). And, just for trivia sake, the third IAH-LHR route is now a 6 day trip. yikes!! lol
 
speedbird0125
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 2:22 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:13 am

Does it mean that LAX-NRT will be operated by sCO's 787 along with sCO crews? What about LAX based sUA crews? Are they losing NRT trip? I guess this is the only Japan route that LA base has.

[Edited 2012-12-11 16:19:58]
 
as739x
Posts: 5001
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:58 am

Quoting speedbird0125 (Reply 4):

All the 787's are s-CO, so yes. The s-CO type have been picking up more Trans-pac flying as of late including NRT-SIN. The s-UA crew will find other flying, this is only 1 route.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
 
delimit
Posts: 759
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:08 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:05 am

There's a ton of capacity in the market. This will give UA a much more efficient plane on the route, which should make the numbers looks a bit nicer from the cost end of the equation.

Dis UA offer First to NRT? The loss of the premium seats would seem to be a bigger deal than the loss of Y seats. And, of course, a 788 isn't that much smaller than a 772, or is UA sticking with 8 across Y?
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:29 am

Quoting Polot (Reply 1):
Yeah, but have you seen how many airlines fly LAX-Tokyo? UA, AA, DL, ANA, JL, MAS, and SQ all fly the route. With the 787 UA can still capture the higher yielding business traffic while pushing the junk economy fares onto someone else. (See the Transcon PS service as a model).

This is all pretty much the case here. Also maybe UA wanted to promote their 787 on this heavily-traveled and competitive route.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
nomorerjs
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:24 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:35 am

ORD-NRT at the peak was 2x daily 744 and ORD-KIX daily as well. LAX has much more competition and UA has to do what they have to do.

ORD-NRT has NH with a 77W to compliment UA and is adding a 2nd flight (so we are "rumored" to hear). I would guess ORD-KIX and ORD-NGO will be added with 787's in the next few years. Right plane for the route and can connect to GRU (and possibly others - DTW DL lovers and DFW AA lovers know the routine of Asia to deep South America via any place but the left coast).
 
dank
Posts: 926
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:39 am

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
Why is UA replacing the 777 with the 787 on LAX-NRT.... This route is probably the most important route over the Pacific Ocean, I guess the Pacific's version of JFK-LHR... I'd think they would want to offer more seats, not less... United flies to NRT from 8 U.S points, LAX is where they will offer the least amount of seats. Why?

there is far more O&D traffic from LAX to NRT than any of these

I'd think that NYC-TYO is probably a "more important" route. Traffic doesn't equal profit and maybe they can deploy those planes somewhere where they will generate better profit. For UA SFO likely can generate more traffic to TYO than LAX.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:45 am

The correct term is downgauge. We can all agree the 787 is an upgrade.

NS
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:47 am

LAX is becoming a 787 base -- LAX-PVG also gets the 787.

Also remember JV partner ANA also has 2x daily to LAX. Between them plenty of capacity and flights.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
sr117
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 2:00 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:51 am

Quoting gigneil (Reply 10):

The correct term is downgauge. We can all agree the 787 is an upgrade.

Is 3-3-3 in a 787 better than 3-3-3 in a 777?? Given the fuselage width of both airplanes, one would be hard pressed to argue that the 787 is an upgrade with regards to passenger comfort... at least with regards to the Y cabin.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23088
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:52 am

Quoting delimit (Reply 6):
Does UA offer First to NRT?

The 787 has Business First.

The 747 offers Global First as do the pmUA 777s.
 
dank
Posts: 926
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:53 am

Quoting SR117 (Reply 12):

Quoting gigneil (Reply 10):

The correct term is downgauge. We can all agree the 787 is an upgrade.

Is 3-3-3 in a 787 better than 3-3-3 in a 777?? Given the fuselage width of both airplanes, one would be hard pressed to argue that the 787 is an upgrade with regards to passenger comfort... at least with regards to the Y cabin.

Though with other characteristics (such as the lower cabin atmosphere), etc. it could be an upgrade.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:54 am

LAX-NRT has the lowest yield route to NRT from the US for United. There are 8 airlines competing on the route which kills yields. There's no other route to the US with that much competition. Discount travel agents frequently route people via LAX to get to Tokyo since both LAX-HND and LAX-NRT are very cheap.

The 787 makes sense because it has great operating economics and doesn't have that many seats to fill. UA doesn't have to offer cheap discount tickets in business or economy to fill up the plane.

Another beneficial factor is it is easy to reroute people on NRT-LAX if an airplane goes tech. There are always entry into service problems, so the on time completion factor will be low.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
G500
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:45 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:08 am

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 15):

8 airlines competing on LAX-NRT? I think I got my awswer right there
 
delimit
Posts: 759
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:08 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:09 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
The 747 offers Global First as do the pmUA 777s.

So, downgrade in that the 787 will not offer a true First (ANA can handle those fliers I guess?), but upgrade in that the 787 should be a nicer ride in general.
 
sr117
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 2:00 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:36 am

Quoting dank (Reply 14):
Though with other characteristics (such as the lower cabin atmosphere), etc. it could be an upgrade.

Yeah but being a couple of inches closer to your next door neighbor can make all the difference .

I'll change my tune if there's somebody that does a longhaul in a full Y cabin and they say that the higher humidity and lower cabin atmosphere made the pain less vs a 777 with seats that give you almost 2 more inches of shoulder room  

So far most of the long hauls are operated by ANA and JAL, operating 2-4-2 cabins, so let's wait and see for reports from people flying carriers flying with 3-3-3 configurations.
 
DTWLAX
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:19 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:47 am

Quoting g500 (Reply 16):
8 airlines competing on LAX-NRT? I think I got my awswer right there

Yeah.. AA, DL, UA, JL, NH, SQ, KE and MH
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 4666
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:03 am

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):

same reason Delta doesn't keep a 747 on LAX-NRT. Market has a ton of capacity.

UA/ANA have (IIRC) 3x NRT 1x HND.
New airliners.net web site sucks.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11831
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:25 pm

Down GAUGE! Its not a downgrade in service quality, but a reduction in gauge. Heck, it might be an improvement in service quality.   

Quoting Polot (Reply 1):
Yeah, but have you seen how many airlines fly LAX-Tokyo? UA, AA, DL, ANA, JL, MAS, and SQ all fly the route.
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 15):
LAX-NRT has the lowest yield route to NRT from the US for United. There are 8 airlines competing on the route which kills yields.

The above two explain why there is no reason to compete on size on the route.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):

LAX is becoming a 787 base -- LAX-PVG also gets the 787.

Interesting. That makes sense. So will SYD go to the 787.  
Quoting SR117 (Reply 18):
So far most of the long hauls are operated by ANA and JAL, operating 2-4-2 cabins, so let's wait and see for reports from people flying carriers flying with 3-3-3 configurations.

Once the A359 is out in numbers, we'll see more airlines convert to the 3-3-3 just as the 777s are going to 10 across Y. Its economics. If someone is going to be cheap, they're looking for the lowest cost. If they want a little more room, go Y+.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
777ord
Posts: 677
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:04 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:54 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):
LAX is becoming a 787 base -- LAX-PVG also gets the 787.

That is correct! There will be a 787 base, as well as a 75 base in the near future!!  
Quoting as739x (Reply 5):
All the 787's are s-CO, so yes. The s-CO type have been picking up more Trans-pac flying as of late including NRT-SIN. The s-UA crew will find other flying, this is only 1 route.

Look for ORD-NRT to go sCO 777.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1553
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:39 pm

Anything that can differentiate you from the competitors has got to be good. And the 787 is different!

Quoting 777ord (Reply 3):
And, just for trivia sake, the third IAH-LHR route is now a 6 day trip.

Can you explain what this means for us non-professional aviation enthusiasts (such as myself)?
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:21 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):

LAX is becoming a 787 base -- LAX-PVG also gets the 787.

Interesting. That makes sense. So will SYD go to the 787.

I can't imagine SYD going to the 787. That would be too dramatic of a capacity downgrade. Also SYD fills the first class and business class cabin with revenue passengers.

LHR is a candidate. 5 airlines on the route and similar to NRT and while they have used 767s in the past to supplement capacity, that fleet is relatively thin.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
laca773
Posts: 2033
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:17 pm

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 24):
LHR is a candidate. 5 airlines on the route and similar to NRT and while they have used 767s in the past to supplement capacity, that fleet is relatively thin.

   !

UA has Star partner NH, flying the route daily to NRT with a 77W which has PJWY and HND with a 77E JWY.
Since UA product is markedly behind in regards to service and product, it makes since for UA to downgauge LAX-NRT to a 788. I don't see upgrades happening like they probably do now with a PJWY 77E. I see the J cabin being more revenue flying passengers versus upgrades on the 788.
I wouldn't be surprised to see LAX-LHR downgauged to a 788 as well. Star partner NZ flies in this market with the best product out there when you compare it to what BA, AA, UA and VS offer in the same cabins.
 
N62NA
Posts: 4006
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:36 pm

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
Why is UA replacing the 777 with the 787 on LAX-NRT.... This route is probably the most important route over the Pacific Ocean, I guess the Pacific's version of JFK-LHR..

This isn't all that surprising, for many of the reasons others have already listed. Also, you mentioned the NYC (well JFK)-LHR route. Remember, UA flies 4 out of their 5 daily flights on that route with 757s. so they apparently have no qualms putting a smaller aircraft on an "important" route when others are flying much larger aircraft.
 
AussieItaliano
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:39 pm

I wouldn't be shocked to see the 788 on LAX-LHR. I fly this route often, and there are always lots of empty seats in Y and especially in Y+. Even though I prefer NZ, many times I'm happy to fly UA when I get 3 seats to myself in Y+ to lie down and sleep. I find it easier to sleep across 3 Y seats on the sUA 772 than in J on the same aircraft!

On the other hand, the reason why we may not see a 787 on this route is because the J cabin almost always goes out full, and the F cabin often goes out full. The 787 would mean a reduction of J and elimination of F.

That may be the reason why UA is keen to allow so many empty Y seats between LAX and LHR, and possibly between LAX and SYD as well.
Third Runway - LHR, Second Runway - LGW, Build Them Both!!!
 
brilondon
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:06 pm

Quoting N62NA (Reply 26):

This isn't all that surprising, for many of the reasons others have already listed. Also, you mentioned the NYC (well JFK)-LHR route. Remember, UA flies 4 out of their 5 daily flights on that route with 757s. so they apparently have no qualms putting a smaller aircraft on an "important" route when others are flying much larger aircraft.

You mean EWR-LHR, I hope as UA does not fly to LHR from JFK. Plus they use a 772 in addition with the 752's form EWR.
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
copter808
Posts: 1383
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2000 1:14 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:14 pm

Quoting 777ord (Reply 22):
Look for ORD-NRT to go sCO 777.

Wow, you mean I can actually watch some good movies enroute? Last week I actually booked NRT-EWR-ORD just so I could watch my choice of movies! I just hope there are still enough seats available to get me there and back!
 
PSA727LAX
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:26 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:42 pm

UA it appers has determined there is too much direct competiton out of LAX to NRT so they are goin after the business flyers primarily by offering 787 service. Out of SFO they can use the 747 because they OWN SFO an also are aware there is huge vacation traffic to/from that won't always be after upper class seats.

Also it seems that several of the regulars of TransPac service are setting up LAX as their respective 787 base much as they did with the 777 when fazing out 747 service.
 
slider
Posts: 6806
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:46 pm

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 15):
There are 8 airlines competing on the route

Bingo--which makes the 787 the perfect fit for exaclty this route. It's an optimal application for the mission and why Boeing's decision to go in this direction is validated.

High number of F seats, lower # of Y, goose yield up on a premium aircraft with outstanding economics and get an advantage over competitors.

Isn't that the whole point?
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18991
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:53 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
Down GAUGE! Its not a downgrade in service quality, but a reduction in gauge. Heck, it might be an improvement in service quality.

But "service" is often applied to schedules. I've seen dozens of references in the media, and even in airline ads, to airlines increasing "service" in a market, referring to frequency or capacity, nothing to do with product changes or inflight service.

If an industry jargon term like "downgauge" or "upgauge" was used in an airline press release, few people would know what it means.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:04 pm

Quoting laca773 (Reply 25):
UA has Star partner NH, flying the route daily to NRT with a 77W which has PJWY and HND with a 77E JWY.
Since UA product is markedly behind in regards to service and product, it makes since for UA to downgauge LAX-NRT to a 788. I don't see upgrades happening like they probably do now with a PJWY 77E. I see the J cabin being more revenue flying passengers versus upgrades on the 788.

I’m not sure UA management agrees on all models except the 747. They have upgraded the food in business class to match what they had been offering in first. They upgraded the seats in all cabins to again be industry competitive (some might complain about 2-4-2 in business, or bad flight attendants, or poor reliability). UA has no illusions that they are market leading in the product they offer, but I don’t think UA leadership thinks they are markedly behind. A.net and flyertalk might think that, but they aren’t the ones making fleet decisions.

[Edited 2012-12-12 13:05:25]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
YULWinterSkies
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:05 pm

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
Why is UA replacing the 777 with the 787 on LAX-NRT.... This route is probably the most important route over the Pacific Ocean, I guess the Pacific's version of JFK-LHR... I'd think they would want to offer more seats, not less... United flies to NRT from 8 U.S points, LAX is where they will offer the least amount of seats. Why?

there is far more O&D traffic from LAX to NRT than any of these

LAX is not really a hub for UA (on the Pacific, SFO is THE hub), therefore, they have no need for capacity. Only way they can survive on this highly competitive (but potentially lucrative) market is to adjust capacity to a minimum while maintaining the premium offer at its best. The 787 will certainly give them an advantage as it is their most modern product (when was last time UA got a new plane again?)

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 24):
I can't imagine SYD going to the 787. That would be too dramatic of a capacity downgrade. Also SYD fills the first class and business class cabin with revenue passengers.

And why not? QF A380s are there to make every single plane in UA's fleet (besides the 787) look obsolete. LAX-SYD is almost point-to-point for UA (vs hub-to-hub for QF obviously)
When I doubt... go running!
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 4792
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:11 pm

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 34):
And why not? QF A380s are there to make every single plane in UA's fleet (besides the 787) look obsolete. LAX-SYD is almost point-to-point for UA (vs hub-to-hub for QF obviously)

If you consider QF flying LAX-SYD hub to hub than you have to consider LAX a hub for UA, considering they are larger than AA (who I presume you are attributing to QF's LAX "hub") in LAX.
 
ukoverlander
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 10:57 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:11 pm

Quoting Polot (Reply 1):
1. Offer the best onboard product, which at this point, is definitely the 787.

On United?.....you've got to be kidding surely?
 
Tango-Bravo
Posts: 2887
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 1:04 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:04 pm

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
there is far more O&D traffic from LAX to NRT than any of these

Do you have the actual numbers to back that claim? Just curious to know inasmuch as, historically speaking, based on timetables of 1960s-'80 vintage, SFO has/had been the primary U.S. gateway to/from Tokyo...don't know whether/how/why that may have changed between 'then' and 'now.'
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:22 pm

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 34):

And why not? QF A380s are there to make every single plane in UA's fleet (besides the 787) look obsolete. LAX-SYD is almost point-to-point for UA (vs hub-to-hub for QF obviously)

I’m not sure QF is hub to hub. UA has more LAX traffic than AA. LAX-SYD is filled mostly with point to point for all airlines operating the route, and UA splits connections over SFO & LAX.

QF has both the A380 and 747 on LAX-SYD. It’s not all about having the best product. UA’s first and business class seats on their 747s are better than QF. UA has a lousy economy product, and some say UA has a lousy overall product, yet they are still the largest airline in the world depending on how you measure.

UA does a pretty good job of filling their 747s, however the route is nothing like the cash cow it was before Delta and V started competing. I don't see the route going to the 787.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
spacecadet
Posts: 2793
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:57 pm

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 37):
SFO has/had been the primary U.S. gateway to/from Tokyo...don't know whether/how/why that may have changed between 'then' and 'now.'

Well, he said O&D, not "gateway", and as to "why" SFO might not even have that traffic anymore would probably be because there are more non-stops now - there's no need to fly JFK-SFO-NRT, for example. So that takes that traffic away from SFO, and Los Angeles is just a bigger city so would probably have more O&D traffic naturally.

Of the routes UA serves (which includes EWR but not JFK), I wouldn't doubt LAX has the most O&D to/from NRT.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:15 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 39):

Of the routes UA serves (which includes EWR but not JFK), I wouldn't doubt LAX has the most O&D to/from NRT.

Honolulu - Tokyo is the biggest O/D route to Tokyo from the US. It has around 12 daily flights compared to 8 from LAX and has virtually zero connecting traffic.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
User avatar
SFOA380
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:35 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:25 pm

Quoting g500 (Thread starter):
.... This route is probably the most important route over the Pacific Ocean, I guess the Pacific's version of JFK-LHR

JFK-LHR has 1.4 million more passengers than LAX-NRT--more than double the traffic and it's a declining route. SFO-HKG isn't too far behind LAX-NRT and probably has way higher yields than LAX-NRT to boot.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:55 am

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 37):
Do you have the actual numbers to back that claim? Just curious to know inasmuch as, historically speaking, based on timetables of 1960s-'80 vintage, SFO has/had been the primary U.S. gateway to/from Tokyo...don't know whether/how/why that may have changed between 'then' and 'now.'
SFO is a significantly smaller US-Asia local market compared to LAX except to HKG. If anything LA basin having double the population of the Bay Area is a good reason for the difference.

Matter of fact what service SFO does have today is exaggerated due to the UA hub. If there was no hub, there would be even less seats in the market between Asia and SFO.

I posted the O&D numbers for dozen US city pairs a few months back in a thread. Since I don't feel like repeating the exercise, here are the Tokyo numbers for 12-months ending June 2012.

NRT-HNL: 1,472,045
NRT-LAX: 1,188,167
NRT-GUM: 973,749
NRT-ORD: 631,090
NRT-JFK: 619,140
NRT-SFO: 590,411

As you can see the NRT-SFO market is smaller than even Chicago.

[Edited 2012-12-12 17:04:23]

[Edited 2012-12-12 17:05:31]
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Flighty
Posts: 7683
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:10 am

If UA had a huge network at LAX, which they do not, they might need to haul a lot of economy passengers from the network. But it's mainly just local. 787 tells us, pay a premium fare in this O&D market, otherwise don't fly UA. If they are flying onward from NRT, UA most likely isn't getting that revenue either so screw that person as well.
 
User avatar
SFOA380
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:35 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:23 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 42):
If anything LA basin having double the population of the Bay Area is a good reason for the difference.

Thanks captain obvious
 
 
N62NA
Posts: 4006
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:30 am

Quoting brilondon (Reply 28):
You mean EWR-LHR, I hope as UA does not fly to LHR from JFK. Plus they use a 772 in addition with the 752's form EWR.

No, I was careful to write NYC-LHR, as we're always being preached to here on a.net that EWR is a NYC airport.  

And the count is 4 752s and 1 772, which is my point: Clearly UA has no problem using small aircraft on an "important" route.
 
codc10
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:31 am

The 787 on LAX-NRT serves a few purposes, as have been pointed out. The route is a worse performer than other NRT transpacs, so the '87 reduces capacity, improves margins and serves as a product differentiator that United will most certainly attempt to exploit. The NH joint venture also dictates strategies as to capacity discipline/rationalization.


Quoting N62NA (Reply 45):
No, I was careful to write NYC-LHR, as we're always being preached to here on a.net that EWR is a NYC airport.

Why am I not surprised you've found a way to work your tired schtick into a thread about NRT, LAX and the 787?  
 
spink
Posts: 316
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:58 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:19 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 42):
SFO is a significantly smaller US-Asia local market compared to LAX except to HKG. If anything LA basin having double the population of the Bay Area is a good reason for the difference.

Matter of fact what service SFO does have today is exaggerated due to the UA hub. If there was no hub, there would be even less seats in the market between Asia and SFO.

I think you are undervaluing the value of the SFO-ASIA biz market. Bay Area to Asia flights have a vary high percentage of corp/biz passengers.
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4464
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:28 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
Down GAUGE! Its not a downgrade in service quality, but a reduction in gauge. Heck, it might be an improvement in service quality.

Be assured that not everyone agees with your definition of Down gauge or Up gauge.
 
HeeseokKoo
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:54 pm

RE: Out Of 8 Routes To NRT, UA Downgrades LAX, Why?

Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:45 pm

Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 19):
Yeah.. AA, DL, UA, JL, NH, SQ, KE and MH

According to airlineroute.net, NRT-LAX sector is all zeroed out from Mar 31st 2013. Although there's no confirmation yet, KE might be stepping away from this war.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 737tanker, A330freak, a380787, Baidu [Spider], dabpit, DDR, flydia, frmrCapCadet, Gemuser, INFINITI329, KarelXWB, LFW, LJ, micstatic, Mumrik, rutankrd, Sightseer, SJOFlyer, thebigl, timf and 410 guests