I was reading Lucky's blog, and he confirmed that the last UA 747 flights will be terminated this year, ending in late October.
http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/ ... 47-flight/

Seeing the demand of these routes, I would be surprised for them not to be replaced by 77W, whose delivery schedule roughly falls into this timeframe.

On another note, I heard somewhere that UA would put the 77W on SFO-HKG this spring, but according to the link below it is still 744 through summer.
http://info.flightmapper.net/flight/Uni ... nes_UA_869

Does this mean that 77W deliveries are delayed and/or going to be focused at SFO only? Seems like an interesting departure from the EWR-centric rumours last year.

I think I heard somewhere (I may be wrong) that the 747-400 will be replaced by the 777-200ER after it is retired on the axed routes. I am still kind of confused, but SFO will get the 777-300ER at some point to replace the 747-400.

My guess is that UA will assign the 77W to SFO first so they can fly long transpacific routes from SFO, then they''ll be reassigned after the A35K's take over in the 2018-2019 time frame.

I think the 77Ws will stay longer than the A35Ks delivery. 77W is the only replacement for the 744, the A350 was a bad choice.

Irehdna wrote:

On another note, I heard somewhere that UA would put the 77W on SFO-HKG this spring, but according to the link below it is still 744 through summer.

The 77W is bookable SFO-HKG beginning Mar 25, with SFO-EWR a bit before that. 77W probably just hasn't been loaded all the way through summer quite yet.

theSFOspotter wrote:

I think the 77Ws will stay longer than the A35Ks delivery. 77W is the only replacement for the 744, the A350 was a bad choice.

They're the same size. The A350-1000 is a more efficient 77W, so if the A350 is a bad choice, then the 77W is as well.

This has all been known for at least a month if not more now.

caverunner17 wrote:

theSFOspotter wrote:

I think the 77Ws will stay longer than the A35Ks delivery. 77W is the only replacement for the 744, the A350 was a bad choice.

They're the same size. The A350-1000 is a more efficient 77W, so if the A350 is a bad choice, then the 77W is as well.

Not quite: 77W seats about 10% more than a A35K does due to its 10x Y config.

If those extra 10% can be sold, the 77W is very close to equal to CASM to A35K. Especially at the low purchase price UA got, in fact could be less when fully loaded. Keep in mind UA's 77W have the latest aero PIP for additional fuel savings.

As load factor drops, A35K advantage grows fairly quick.

As such, expect UA to ultimately keep the 77W's on the highest LF routes, most from SFO but a handful possible at EWR.

In the other thread talking about the UA 744 retirements, it was mentioned by UA's chief network planner that they were still evaluating their options and would be figuring things out "over the coming weeks". I expect we'll hear something soon. Someone on that thread (with or without insider knowledge, I do not know...) said that the first routes for the 77W would likely be from SFO to HKG (already announced), NRT, ICN, TPE, and one FRA. Since they should have 14 frames by the summer schedule, they could probably do more than that if they wanted.

caverunner17 wrote:

theSFOspotter wrote:

I think the 77Ws will stay longer than the A35Ks delivery. 77W is the only replacement for the 744, the A350 was a bad choice.

They're the same size. The A350-1000 is a more efficient 77W, so if the A350 is a bad choice, then the 77W is as well.

You also have to factor in the purchase price fo the planes, the increase or decrease in training costs, i.e. putting a larger type of a plane yo already have versus an all new aircraft, against the long term efficiencies.

Talking of UA 77W, I saw that it flew SFO-NR last week and returned 2 days later. That's a looooong crew familiarization route. Any idea what it was doing there. Came back as UA 2120 on Friday, empty (figured it was empty because it was FL410 most of the route there and back which is too high for a loaded 77W).

Norcal773 wrote:

Talking of UA 77W, I saw that it flew SFO-NR last week and returned 2 days later. That's a looooong crew familiarization route. Any idea what it was doing there. Came back as UA 2120 on Friday, empty (figured it was empty because it was FL410 most of the route there and back which is too high for a loaded 77W).

ETOPS validation flight?

GoSharks wrote:

Norcal773 wrote:

Talking of UA 77W, I saw that it flew SFO-NR last week and returned 2 days later. That's a looooong crew familiarization route. Any idea what it was doing there. Came back as UA 2120 on Friday, empty (figured it was empty because it was FL410 most of the route there and back which is too high for a loaded 77W).

ETOPS validation flight?

Thought about that but with a 772 flying SFO-HND daily, is this really required by the FAA?

Norcal773 wrote:

GoSharks wrote:

Norcal773 wrote:

Talking of UA 77W, I saw that it flew SFO-NR last week and returned 2 days later. That's a looooong crew familiarization route. Any idea what it was doing there. Came back as UA 2120 on Friday, empty (figured it was empty because it was FL410 most of the route there and back which is too high for a loaded 77W).

ETOPS validation flight?

Thought about that but with a 772 flying SFO-HND daily, is this really required by the FAA?

Yes, they do for a new aircraft type.. and a 77W is considered as such.

iahcsr wrote:

Norcal773 wrote:

GoSharks wrote:

ETOPS validation flight?

Thought about that but with a 772 flying SFO-HND daily, is this really required by the FAA?

Yes, they do for a new aircraft type.. and a 77W is considered as such.

Good to know, Thanks.