Page 1 of 1

UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 5:55 am
by psa1011
Indeed this has been discussed, but can anyone remind me why United never used 767's on flights to or within Asia? I think it was a Union issue but I didn't know which.

Thanks.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 5:55 am
by ikolkyo
SFO-Asia is really pushing the 767 so UA just sent 747/777s there since they had sufficient range and passenger capacity.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 6:03 am
by FlyHossD
IIRC, Air Mike/CO did operate some 767-400s between GUM and NRT and also NGO and HNL at one time or another.

But I suspect that's not what you meant. Did you mean to/from the NRT gateway?

Also, what would the "Union issue" be?

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 6:05 am
by VC10er
A 767 to certain thinner routes to Asia would have been great if she had the legs. Enter the 788!

I guess UA could have considered more HNL to points in Asia but then would mainland passengers be happy with a connection midway vs West Coast?

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 6:32 am
by intotheair
I don't think UA ever had much of a reason to want to send them across the Pacific. I suppose they could have tried to send them on some of the shorter routes like SEA-NRT, SFO-NRT, SFO-SEL/ICN, but UA always seemed to have enough 747s, DC10s, and 777s to go around.

DL doesn't, which is partly why they're using 767s across the Pacific from SEA. On that note, DL did run into pilot union issues with the 777 crew rests, which explains why DL ultimately took delivery of fewer 777s than they had on order. Maybe that's what you're thinking of?

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 6:53 am
by psa1011
It seems like a 767 would have been useful for some kind of connection, since United has been flying to Asia since the mid-1980's. I realize that they had sufficient numbers of 747's & 777's, however it's odd to me that not one route in the pre-787 era would have been flown by the 767 (e.g., SEA-NRT, a RTW leg, HNL-Japan, etc.). I do have some vague recollection of someone on Airliners mentioning a Union rule about this (obviously unlike Delta), but I'm clearly unsure.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 7:11 am
by adambrau
UA did operate a 763 LHR - DEL - HKG and vv in the late 1990's as part of their RTW service, though technically not a Trans-Pacific flight.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 7:16 am
by DocLightning
ikolkyo wrote:
SFO-Asia is really pushing the 767 so UA just sent 747/777s there since they had sufficient range and passenger capacity.


SFO-NRT is only ~10h westbound and ~8h eastbound. DL used a 763 on SFO-NRT.

If you look at the payload-range for the 763ER (page 50) (http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingd ... ps/767.pdf) you see a range of about 6000nm with full pax and baggage load. SFO-NRT, LAX-NRT, and SEA-NRT are all comfortably under 5,000nm. None of these even come close to an ETOPS 180 limit.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 8:05 am
by JustSomeDood
Why fly a 767 on routes to Asia when the major UA hub that is in range for 767 TPAC (SFO), is also the destination where there is robust enough demand for most Asian routes such that larger aircraft would be more profitable?

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 9:12 am
by 55flyer
adambrau wrote:
UA did operate a 763 LHR - DEL - HKG and vv in the late 1990's as part of their RTW service, though technically not a Trans-Pacific flight.


and well before the merger with CO UA did try to compete with Northwest and was flying 767s from NRT to SPN and GUM. I do not recall if they flew from NRT to anywhere else, though, possiblylater it was HNL for a bit?

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 1:01 pm
by jjb415
55flyer wrote:
adambrau wrote:
UA did operate a 763 LHR - DEL - HKG and vv in the late 1990's as part of their RTW service, though technically not a Trans-Pacific flight.


and well before the merger with CO UA did try to compete with Northwest and was flying 767s from NRT to SPN and GUM. I do not recall if they flew from NRT to anywhere else, though, possiblylater it was HNL for a bit?


The GUM/SPN operation was with a 747 and from Osaka.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 1:47 pm
by gwrudolph
I kinda think they also never had reason to need to push the limits of the 763. Even if it could do it, most if not all of UAs TPAC routes from SFO and LAX have always been high traffic routes, unlike some of DLs SEA routes. As such, I don't think they have/had excess capacity issues in using the 744/772/773 and now the 788/789. The only one(s) they may have struggled to fill with a larger aircraft over the years before they had the 788/9 and had to use a 744/777 was/were SFO-OSA and SFO-NGO.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 1:52 pm
by ual763
If I remember right, back in the early 90s, back when United had a Seattle 767 pilot base, they did have a few TPAC routes on the 767.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 2:01 pm
by RetiredNWA
Northwest Airlines *never* operated the 767.

NRT had several 757 5600’s in our “Beach Market” and Intra-Asia routes when the operation was right-sized in the mid 2000’s.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 3:36 pm
by ikolkyo
DocLightning wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
SFO-Asia is really pushing the 767 so UA just sent 747/777s there since they had sufficient range and passenger capacity.


SFO-NRT is only ~10h westbound and ~8h eastbound. DL used a 763 on SFO-NRT.

If you look at the payload-range for the 763ER (page 50) (http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingd ... ps/767.pdf) you see a range of about 6000nm with full pax and baggage load. SFO-NRT, LAX-NRT, and SEA-NRT are all comfortably under 5,000nm. None of these even come close to an ETOPS 180 limit.


You’re talking about 1 route. How about SFO-HKG, SFO-ICN, SFO-PVG? You’re not gonna see a 767 on those kind routes. Too small of capacity is a big one.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 4:05 pm
by SonomaFlyer
ikolkyo wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
SFO-Asia is really pushing the 767 so UA just sent 747/777s there since they had sufficient range and passenger capacity.


SFO-NRT is only ~10h westbound and ~8h eastbound. DL used a 763 on SFO-NRT.

If you look at the payload-range for the 763ER (page 50) (http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingd ... ps/767.pdf) you see a range of about 6000nm with full pax and baggage load. SFO-NRT, LAX-NRT, and SEA-NRT are all comfortably under 5,000nm. None of these even come close to an ETOPS 180 limit.


You’re talking about 1 route. How about SFO-HKG, SFO-ICN, SFO-PVG? You’re not gonna see a 767 on those kind routes. Too small of capacity is a big one.


SFO-PVG and HKG are too far for a 767 plus the demand calls for a bigger plane. HKG is a 77W.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 4:32 pm
by JustSomeDood
SonomaFlyer wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
DocLightning wrote:

SFO-NRT is only ~10h westbound and ~8h eastbound. DL used a 763 on SFO-NRT.

If you look at the payload-range for the 763ER (page 50) (http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingd ... ps/767.pdf) you see a range of about 6000nm with full pax and baggage load. SFO-NRT, LAX-NRT, and SEA-NRT are all comfortably under 5,000nm. None of these even come close to an ETOPS 180 limit.


You’re talking about 1 route. How about SFO-HKG, SFO-ICN, SFO-PVG? You’re not gonna see a 767 on those kind routes. Too small of capacity is a big one.


SFO-PVG and HKG are too far for a 767 plus the demand calls for a bigger plane. HKG is a 77W.


Currently SFO-PVG is served 2x daily on 787-9s by UA, it's around 350nm further than SEA-PVG, which Delta serves with its 767s. UA's new very premium heavy seatmaps for their Polaris 767s (46J/22W/99Y) would be a good replacement for the 787-9 up front, and should have the range (DL's 767s all have 40+ more seats). Wouldn't be surprising if UA does this move to combat the capacity flood from the Chinese carriers.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 4:35 pm
by LAXintl
Many moons ago, pre BK days UA looked at basing 763s over in Asia for the regional tags, however, pilot contract made it not practical from both pay and training perspective.

ual763 wrote:
If I remember right, back in the early 90s, back when United had a Seattle 767 pilot base, they did have a few TPAC routes on the 767.


UA 767s crews were never regionally qualified for such flying except for subset(I believe IAD or JFK based) that did the LHR-DEL-HKG run briefly.

SEA at one time was a 777 base however, and covered SEA-NRT along with some intra-Asia tags.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 4:39 pm
by codc10
JustSomeDood wrote:
SonomaFlyer wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:

You’re talking about 1 route. How about SFO-HKG, SFO-ICN, SFO-PVG? You’re not gonna see a 767 on those kind routes. Too small of capacity is a big one.


SFO-PVG and HKG are too far for a 767 plus the demand calls for a bigger plane. HKG is a 77W.


Currently SFO-PVG is served 2x daily on 787-9s by UA, it's around 350nm further than SEA-PVG, which Delta serves with its 767s. UA's new very premium heavy seatmaps for their Polaris 767s (46J/22W/99Y) would be a good replacement for the 787-9 up front, and should have the range (DL's 767s all have 40+ more seats). Wouldn't be surprising if UA does this move to combat the capacity flood from the Chinese carriers.


767s aren't going TPAC for UA. Only a handful of 763 will get this new configuration and they'll be primarily EWR/IAD/ORD to LHR, ZRH, GVA, etc.

Re: UA 767's and transpac

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 4:39 pm
by ikolkyo
SonomaFlyer wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
DocLightning wrote:

SFO-NRT is only ~10h westbound and ~8h eastbound. DL used a 763 on SFO-NRT.

If you look at the payload-range for the 763ER (page 50) (http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingd ... ps/767.pdf) you see a range of about 6000nm with full pax and baggage load. SFO-NRT, LAX-NRT, and SEA-NRT are all comfortably under 5,000nm. None of these even come close to an ETOPS 180 limit.


You’re talking about 1 route. How about SFO-HKG, SFO-ICN, SFO-PVG? You’re not gonna see a 767 on those kind routes. Too small of capacity is a big one.


SFO-PVG and HKG are too far for a 767 plus the demand calls for a bigger plane. HKG is a 77W.


I’m aware of this, that’s why I said those routes.