Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jayunited
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 2:31 am

intotheair wrote:
I think UA pursuing point to point would be a bad idea. All of the recent success has centered around building up the existing hubs, and it appears to be working really well.

One big problem I see with point to point for UA is that most of the midsize cities are accounted for. Delta has established sizable operations in a lot of mid market cities in the east and Midwest, and Southwest has gobbled up the rest. The only city that might be left is CLE, and UA doesn’t appear to think there’s any value in having a bigger operation there.

Plus, all of UA’s hubs are major population centers with huge amounts of O&D. There’s a good chance that many fliers in those secondary places are looking to travel to New York, DC, Chicago, San Francisco, et al anyway.


Not to turn this into a UA v DL thread I still think UA is a few years behind DL in terms of progress. UA is making the right moves in building up our hubs, DL went through this process some years ago, UA still has some work to do in our hubs but more point to point flying will come in my opinion. I think hubs like IAH, DEN and IAD is where our future growth should be focused. SFO is tapped out even on days when there isn't an ATC program in effect UA's ontime performance at SFO is abysmal because of gate constraints at both the domestic and international terminals. Unless UA can get their hands on more gates at SFO adding any more flights is counter productive because we can't get the flights we already have out on-time as it is. At ORD UA still has room to grow but that growth would need to be during off peak hours like 5:30am - 7:30AM or 8:30pm - 11pm. From 7:30am - 8:30pm terminal 1 and 2 are just about maxed out especially from mid spring through early fall. LAX like ORD is restrained during peak travel times because of gate space. With hindsight being 20/20 Scott Kirby was happy to lease 4 gates from UA in 2014, fast forward to today and Kirby has stated on many occasions he wants to grow LAX and was happy to take UA's gates in 2014 but now wishes UA had those 4 gates back. Our hub at EWR is in the most congested airspace in the U.S. and again is gate restrained really from 6am - 10pm.

At IAH I think UA needs to really get in and fight for more intra-Texas traffic. I think the CRJ550 or E170/75 would be a perfect aircraft for intra-Texas routes to those small cities not currently served by UA. Also IAH needs more South and Southeast traffic from mid size cities in states like AK, LA, MS, AL, and FL and Southwest states like OK, NM, and AZ. IAD should relieve the pressure on EWR. Even though EWR has many international destinations that can only be reached from there, IAD should serve as a major connector hub for UA's entire eastern seaboard operations from FL to ME. Last but not least DEN for years UA has allowed this gem of a hub go under utilize and it wasn't until Kirby came in that we now see UA starting to build up DEN. I think UA still has 2-4 years of work ahead of them in building up these hubs before we can look at point to point.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8519
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 3:32 am

UAinAUS wrote:
UAX Update:

ER4:
N847HK (2004 build) entered the UAX fleet with TransStates. Should be in new TSA livery. This should be the last AX ERJ addition.


What was old is new again!

N847HK was the frame that was operating UA8050 (LOF8050) that crashed on landing at YOW in 2010.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 5561
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:28 pm

cosyr wrote:
intotheair wrote:
I think UA pursuing point to point would be a bad idea. All of the recent success has centered around building up the existing hubs, and it appears to be working really well.

One big problem I see with point to point for UA is that most of the midsize cities are accounted for. Delta has established sizable operations in a lot of mid market cities in the east and Midwest, and Southwest has gobbled up the rest. The only city that might be left is CLE, and UA doesn’t appear to think there’s any value in having a bigger operation there.

Plus, all of UA’s hubs are major population centers with huge amounts of O&D. There’s a good chance that many fliers in those secondary places are looking to travel to New York, DC, Chicago, San Francisco, et al anyway.


I agree that hubs are UA's strength, particularly with O&D focused high dollar markets like SFO, LAX and EWR. But I do think there is room for not point to point per se, but a couple little focus cities. The problem is markets change, which is why formerly profitable cities like CLE, PIT and STL (and maybe someday DTW) can no longer sustain hubs. Those populations and the companies that employ them have moved and AA and DL are making steps to identify the hubs of the future, like RDU. If UA doesn't dip their toe in anywhere, they won't be able to expand to new markets the same way. I still think there's room to explore growth in Nashville. It is a booming city, and room in the future for a competitor to WN. Also, being equidistant between IAH and IAD, would allow UA to grow in the south, which is generally their weakest region, and the fastest growing region of the US. Tampa could also be an opportunity, but more of a PHX-style destination focus city, not so much for connections.


UA has a lot of work to do before they should even attempt p2p flights. I'll preface what I am about to say by mentioning that not all RJs are bad (ex. E170/E175), but the amount of RJs they fly between large metro areas is staggering and it shows how limited they are in some of their outstations.

06/21
CMH-IAH is all RJ
BNA-IAH is all RJ
PIT-IAH is all RJ
MKE-IAH is all RJ
ABQ-IAH is all RJ
DTW-IAH is all RJ
IND-IAH is all RJ (4/5 are 50 seaters)
MSP-IAH is all RJ
ATL-IAH is all RJ
OKC-IAH is all RJ
JAX-IAH is all RJ except 1 A319
CLT-IAH is all RJ except 1 A319
STL-IAH is all RJ except 1 A319
MCI-IAH is all RJ except 1 A320
DFW-IAH is all RJ except 1 737
SLC-IAH is all RJ except 1 737
PHL-IAH 50/50 mainline/RJ

JAX-IAD is all RJ
STL-IAD is all RJ all 50 seater
SDF-IAD is all RJ all 50 seater
LGA-IAD is all RJ
SAV-IAD is all RJ
CHS-IAD is all RJ
IND-IAD is all RJ
CVG-IAD is all RJ
CMH-IAD is all RJ
PIT-IAD is all RJ
DTW-IAD is all RJ
CLT-IAD is all RJ
EWR-IAD 50/50 RJ/mainline
ATL-IAD 50/50 RJ/mainline
CLE-IAD is all RJ except 1 B738
DFW-IAD is all RJ except 1 A319
MEM-IAD no service
MIA-IAD no service (recent drop IIRC)
MYR-IAD no service
MKE-IAD no service
MSN-IAD no service
XNA-IAD no service
SLC-IAD no service
OMA-IAD no service

STL-EWR is all RJ
MKE-EWR is all RJ
JAX-EWR is all RJ
IND-EWR is all RJ
CVG-EWR is all RJ
CMH-EWR is all RJ
DTW-EWR is all RJ
MSP-EWR is all RJ
CLT-EWR 50/50 RJ/mainline
BWI-EWR has been dropped
PHL-EWR no service (reasonable)

ATL-ORD all RJ except 1 A319
MEM-ORD all RJ except 1 A319
MSY-ORD all RJ except 1 A320
SAT-ORD all RJ except 1 B738
BNA-ORD all RJ except 1 A319
CLT-ORD all RJ except 1 A320
DTW-ORD all RJ except 1 A320
STL-ORD all RJ except 1 B738
CVG-ORD all RJ
OKC-ORD all RJ
JAX-ORD all RJ
IND-ORD all RJ
SDF-ORD all 50 seater

No service from
LAX to: DFW, MCI, OKC, OMA, MSP, STL, SJC, PDX, MSY, IND, CVG, CMH, MKE, BNA, CMH, PIT, PHL, ATL, RDU, TPA, MIA/FLL, DTW, DCA (reasonable), ABQ
PHX-LAX all RJ
SMF-LAX all RJ
SLC-LAX all RJ
SAT-LAX all RJ
AUS-LAX all RJ

You need to have relevance outside of your hubs to make p2p work, and with schedules like this in peak summer that isn't going to happen. A lot of this has to do with the scope that they have, nevertheless, it isn't a good look.
ORD & IND

AA & DL
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1456
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:37 pm

Does anyone know how many daily departures all the UA hubs are at? And Cleveland.
 
User avatar
kordcj
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 17, 2019 1:15 am

VC10er wrote:
I have learned a lot here about how UA is so behind in domestic routes and aiming to remedy that. I think I have a fairly good idea of what ac is being added to catch up. However, in the past couple of years my traveling changed a lot, from the VAST majority of international a year to being about 50/50. (BTW: I not that happy about that, but it’s not where my clients are these days)

Thinking about the upcoming UA domestic fleet, a mix of RJ’s and MAX’s and used Airbuses, got me thinking about the following: in a month I will need an itinerary that originates at EWR, to Boston, the next day from Boston to Columbus OH, the next day Columbus OH to DFW, then the next day back to EWR (in 5 days). It’s the first time where I cannot build an entire itinerary on UA without requiring a stop at a hub. (Except for out and back to EWR)
My question basically is, in the future, probably a good handful of years, will UA have non-hub to non-hub flights?
Do airlines like Delta and AA and Southwest (etc) have non-hub to non-hub NONSTOPS?
Or will it “almost always” be that flying from a secondary city to another secondary city will require being routed through a hub, no matter the airline? (Does make the new 50 seat, and E-170/5’s much more attractive- although short flight times, the buy up into F is frankly not that bad and more conducive to working)
(If I was forced to guess, Southwest would be the best at zigzagging the USA, but not needing an ORD, DFW, MIA, DEN, JFK, IAD etc)


Welcome to domestic United, which is a far different beast if you’re not flying hub-large city routes. Hopefully you fare better than I. I flew on 78 united branded flights last year. 18 of them were actually operated by United. Skywest was my carrier of choice for 2018 coming in at 37 flights. Every survey I complain about the CRJ-200.
The most obvious proof for intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't tried to contact us.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4384
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 17, 2019 6:59 pm

The fleet changes and fleet status posts at the start of this thread have been updated.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
VC10er
Posts: 4283
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 17, 2019 8:41 pm

I just flew UA to Ft Meyers Florida from EWR, on an A320. I have to say it was a perfect a flight as one could have domestically. Early departure and early arrival, AWESOME crew. I was in one of the new F seats, which I love (so far superior to the old 737-800’s which are real pieces of junk) the 739 F seat is better- but I really wish there was more consistency, so is it PLANNED to ultimately refurb the 737 pre-existing fleet? (sometime in the future?) And, yet why did the 737G get the new F seats of all 737s?
Only the United Club upstairs was disappointing. It’s so crowded and SO dated. Yeah, it has the new furniture but in a very dated, dark wood and worn interior with disgusting bathrooms! Really BAD for such a mega gateway- if you’re not flying Polaris.

The interiors had the old sUA bulkhead design, but they still looked good, and design wise, pretty close the the newest bulkhead design- silver & dark blue vs the solid medium blue-grey.

I did not fly CO much domestically, occasionally in international BF, but I don’t recall much WHEN CO upgraded from BF recliner chairs to the diamond lie flat seats- is that when the plain medium-grey blue (with the micro squiggles) bulkheads, galley walls etc were introduced fleet wide? Or were they already there, and consistent on the 737, 757, 767 & 777?
Then post merger, did UA change the mottled tan to that medium blue-grey as per CO’s fleet? (I guess I’m mixed up because while the livery was CO’s but name became United, the sUA fleet was still 3 class, and only part of sUA had new interiors that came with “shades of blue” livery.

What transpired over time? As Pentagram’s 3 class “Shades of Blue” was only partially done, were some sUA birds changed to Diamond seats with medium plain blue in the years before Polaris (or new narrow body interior design?)- I assume new ac (like 788/789) were delivered with the CO Diamond interiors?

In essence, if I am on a 757, 767 or 777 TODAY with Diamond seats with plain medium blue-grey bulkheads and galley walls, am I on an sCO bird, or were sUA birds changed to match CO too?— I realize that all but the 757s will ultimately be the new Polaris design, and all new 737MAX’s will have the brand new narrow body design. (As I’ve seen on refurbished “used” Airbuses)
Thanks- apologies for all the questions, but no news of any of this online, not even mention of the plan to build a brand new UC at EWR on another concourse roof!
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:28 pm

I'm not 100% sure what you're asking, but the bulkhead design that UA was moving toward in the pre-merger days was what you see below. It had a cool light grey with navy on the bottom pattern and a metallic grid design over it. A lot of the A319/320s have/had it, the original 3-class p.s. 757s, and I think all of the planes that got IPTE got these bulkheads too.

Image
(photo via airlinesfleet.com)

What I thought was so classy about that bulkhead design is that not only did it mimick the livery, but the walls at check-in counters (at least at DEN) and maybe also some Red Carpet Clubs also had a very similar design.

Image
(own photo)

That later PMUA bulkhead still lives on in a lot of planes today even if the seats have been replaced. I believe the Airbuses and domestic 777s still have it and probably others.

I think post-merger UA went with CO-style plain lavender tinted bulkhead walls whenever new seats were installed until in the last three years when the newer bulkhead started rolling out (below) that looks similar to the PMUA one, only the top is a warmer tone, the bottom is a very fine navy/royal blue grid pattern, and there's no metallic grid lining on top of it.

Image
(photo via airlinesfleet.com)
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 17, 2019 10:44 pm

Not sure if this is new, but UA has 4x daily all mainline scheduled on ORD-ALB for July (22nd used), 73G, 320, 738, 739
ORD-SYR has 2x CR7, 1x E75, 1x 73G, 1x 738
ORD-BUF has 2x 320, 1x 738, 1x 739, 1x CR2, 1x ERJ
ORD-ROC has 3x 320, 1x 738

In the midst of typically disappointing UA service, they have something going for northern New York

Also, even as United is adding "new" CRJ550s to replace CRJs /E145s --- I have this inkling that they'll actually be used to downgauge exisitng CR7/E175 flights - what do y'all think?
UA DL LH NW AA WN
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
Trk1
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:37 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:29 am

They will not be replacing existing flights. This is the line up change that we presently know:

25 Cr-700's will leave the fleet from Go Jet
25 new E-175's that seat 70 will be added to Express Jet
25 Cr-500's will be added to Go Jet after conversion
25 Erj's will leave the express jet fleet
 
VC10er
Posts: 4283
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 18, 2019 3:30 am

intotheair wrote:
I'm not 100% sure what you're asking, but the bulkhead design that UA was moving toward in the pre-merger days was what you see below. It had a cool light grey with navy on the bottom pattern and a metallic grid design over it. A lot of the A319/320s have/had it, the original 3-class p.s. 757s, and I think all of the planes that got IPTE got these bulkheads too.

Image
(photo via airlinesfleet.com)

What I thought was so classy about that bulkhead design is that not only did it mimick the livery, but the walls at check-in counters (at least at DEN) and maybe also some Red Carpet Clubs also had a very similar design.

Image
(own photo)

That later PMUA bulkhead still lives on in a lot of planes today even if the seats have been replaced. I believe the Airbuses and domestic 777s still have it and probably others.

I think post-merger UA went with CO-style plain lavender tinted bulkhead walls whenever new seats were installed until in the last three years when the newer bulkhead started rolling out (below) that looks similar to the PMUA one, only the top is a warmer tone, the bottom is a very fine navy/royal blue grid pattern, and there's no metallic grid lining on top of it.

Image
(photo via airlinesfleet.com)


Agreed I went a bit psycho in my last post: but your pictures made my point that the older silver and blue with the metal grid is similar to the newest version.

Perhaps the following will be a more simple way of putting it all: when did everything become the boring or monochromatic (imho) with the plain blue-grey (some could call periwinkle) bulkhead and galley walls? I assume it was CO? Basically so much was changing at pmUA, but I’m under the impression CO was much more consistent at time of merger.
-Was the monochromatic interiors selected and installed prior to merger at CO?
- About what year did CO select and install the Diamond seat, but changed nothing else?
-Obviously it continued post merger on new deliveries: but was it ever ALSO added to UA birds post merger, replacing either the silver & blue with metal grid, or mottled tan?

I absolutely LOVED the design work done for pmUA by Pentagram: and the back wall, pinned chrome
“TULIP UNITED” having the first flat biz seats, and new nicer, bigger silver First Class seat, right down to the menu design. But legacy UA clearly was not going to invest the way they are today with Polaris. And it was much less expensive to go all CO than do the new huge fleet in “Shades of Blue” (tulip killed)

As much as I always loved and gave United a chance, even today I’m surprised at how boring looking a non-refurbished 767/777 are, especially given how much more stylish the trend was for airline interiors.

United post merger became quite unstylish. (for minimalists that would be a good thing) Today, Polaris and other big changes are now making United a FAR more stylish airline, thanks in large part to Priestman Goode and United management approval.
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:25 am

VC10er wrote:
Perhaps the following will be a more simple way of putting it all: when did everything become the boring or monochromatic (imho) with the plain blue-grey (some could call periwinkle) bulkhead and galley walls? I assume it was CO? Basically so much was changing at pmUA, but I’m under the impression CO was much more consistent at time of merger.
-Was the monochromatic interiors selected and installed prior to merger at CO?
- About what year did CO select and install the Diamond seat, but changed nothing else?
-Obviously it continued post merger on new deliveries: but was it ever ALSO added to UA birds post merger, replacing either the silver & blue with metal grid, or mottled tan?


At the time of the merger, both UA and CO were converting their planes to their lie flat products and continued to refurbish their planes with their respective pre-merger cabins after the merger. UA had the 3-cabin IPTE configurations, and CO was installing the Diamond seat. UA started IPTE conversions earlier (2007) but it took several years to finish, most notably on the 772s. CO started a little bit later (2008 or 2009 maybe?) and was generally a little quicker than UA with the conversions, though CO planes were still being converted to lie flat Diamond seats post-merger too.

I don't think anything changed other than the rebranding of everything to BusinessFirst and GlobalFirst. I think the airline decided that the PMUA and PMCO lie flat business seats were similar *enough* that they could call them the same product and also have some flexibility with 3-class and 2-class planes.

Where it started getting murky was post merger when some sUA planes started getting the CO Diamond seat. When the sUA domestic 763s were converted to 2-class international, they got the Diamond seat and nose-to-tail CO style interior. Same with when the p.s. 757s went from 3-class to 2-class. I think the domestic 772s might have inconsistent bulkheads because some of them were always domestic while others were converted from the 3-class international configuration, though I could be wrong about that. I try and avoid that plane if I can help it.

They started installing slimlines and larger overhead bins on the Airbus fleet post-merger, but the bulkhead design and F seat stayed the same until when the new domestic F seat came out. The 737 deliveries post-merger had CO-style cabins complete with the checkered cloth seats in Y and boring lavender-tinted bulkheads, though they gradually switched to the more modern and distinct leather seats in Y. I'm not sure how many of the 737s have the new bulkhead design.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
77H
Posts: 1571
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:17 am

VC10er wrote:
I just flew UA to Ft Meyers Florida from EWR, on an A320. I have to say it was a perfect a flight as one could have domestically. Early departure and early arrival, AWESOME crew. I was in one of the new F seats, which I love (so far superior to the old 737-800’s which are real pieces of junk) the 739 F seat is better- but I really wish there was more consistency, so is it PLANNED to ultimately refurb the 737 pre-existing fleet? (sometime in the future?) And, yet why did the 737G get the new F seats of all 737s?
Only the United Club upstairs was disappointing. It’s so crowded and SO dated. Yeah, it has the new furniture but in a very dated, dark wood and worn interior with disgusting bathrooms! Really BAD for such a mega gateway- if you’re not flying Polaris.

The interiors had the old sUA bulkhead design, but they still looked good, and design wise, pretty close the the newest bulkhead design- silver & dark blue vs the solid medium blue-grey.

I did not fly CO much domestically, occasionally in international BF, but I don’t recall much WHEN CO upgraded from BF recliner chairs to the diamond lie flat seats- is that when the plain medium-grey blue (with the micro squiggles) bulkheads, galley walls etc were introduced fleet wide? Or were they already there, and consistent on the 737, 757, 767 & 777?
Then post merger, did UA change the mottled tan to that medium blue-grey as per CO’s fleet? (I guess I’m mixed up because while the livery was CO’s but name became United, the sUA fleet was still 3 class, and only part of sUA had new interiors that came with “shades of blue” livery.

What transpired over time? As Pentagram’s 3 class “Shades of Blue” was only partially done, were some sUA birds changed to Diamond seats with medium plain blue in the years before Polaris (or new narrow body interior design?)- I assume new ac (like 788/789) were delivered with the CO Diamond interiors?

In essence, if I am on a 757, 767 or 777 TODAY with Diamond seats with plain medium blue-grey bulkheads and galley walls, am I on an sCO bird, or were sUA birds changed to match CO too?— I realize that all but the 757s will ultimately be the new Polaris design, and all new 737MAX’s will have the brand new narrow body design. (As I’ve seen on refurbished “used” Airbuses)
Thanks- apologies for all the questions, but no news of any of this online, not even mention of the plan to build a brand new UC at EWR on another concourse roof!


Those “micro-squiggles” remind me of shaved hair on the sink/ground... Once it popped into my head I was never able to get it out of my head.

77H
 
VC10er
Posts: 4283
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:12 am

intotheair wrote:
VC10er wrote:
Perhaps the following will be a more simple way of putting it all: when did everything become the boring or monochromatic (imho) with the plain blue-grey (some could call periwinkle) bulkhead and galley walls? I assume it was CO? Basically so much was changing at pmUA, but I’m under the impression CO was much more consistent at time of merger.
-Was the monochromatic interiors selected and installed prior to merger at CO?
- About what year did CO select and install the Diamond seat, but changed nothing else?
-Obviously it continued post merger on new deliveries: but was it ever ALSO added to UA birds post merger, replacing either the silver & blue with metal grid, or mottled tan?


At the time of the merger, both UA and CO were converting their planes to their lie flat products and continued to refurbish their planes with their respective pre-merger cabins after the merger. UA had the 3-cabin IPTE configurations, and CO was installing the Diamond seat. UA started IPTE conversions earlier (2007) but it took several years to finish, most notably on the 772s. CO started a little bit later (2008 or 2009 maybe?) and was generally a little quicker than UA with the conversions, though CO planes were still being converted to lie flat Diamond seats post-merger too.

I don't think anything changed other than the rebranding of everything to BusinessFirst and GlobalFirst. I think the airline decided that the PMUA and PMCO lie flat business seats were similar *enough* that they could call them the same product and also have some flexibility with 3-class and 2-class planes.

Where it started getting murky was post merger when some sUA planes started getting the CO Diamond seat. When the sUA domestic 763s were converted to 2-class international, they got the Diamond seat and nose-to-tail CO style interior. Same with when the p.s. 757s went from 3-class to 2-class. I think the domestic 772s might have inconsistent bulkheads because some of them were always domestic while others were converted from the 3-class international configuration, though I could be wrong about that. I try and avoid that plane if I can help it.

They started installing slimlines and larger overhead bins on the Airbus fleet post-merger, but the bulkhead design and F seat stayed the same until when the new domestic F seat came out. The 737 deliveries post-merger had CO-style cabins complete with the checkered cloth seats in Y and boring lavender-tinted bulkheads, though they gradually switched to the more modern and distinct leather seats in Y. I'm not sure how many of the 737s have the new bulkhead design.


THANK YOU SO MUCH! During those years I felt like I was being Gaslighted! Not only were the aircraft skitso, so many other things were going wrong between switching the computer software (can’t recall the names, I think one was “Shares?”). Still licking my wounds over losing the tulip, CO liveries with UNITED branding. Post merger years were really tough! At the time I was Global Services, and I really believe it helped insulate me from some of the bad crossed wires so many others were experiencing.
Fast forward to today, it’s a totally new and better airline coming together.
Actually, today I was on a 737-900 in First. She’s quite beautiful inside actually, the larger, more oval windows, better F seats (even though they are not “YET?” the new First seats) bigger bins, Sky Ceiling. The bulkheads and galley walls are now solid blue-grey (perhaps what you are calling lavender)- but I think it’s semantics and we are actually referring to the same color (but now solid, NO micro squiggly lines). It looked better because it looked brand new, but IMHO in dire need of style (unless they plan on the new FA uniforms taking the spotlight, because you wouldn’t want the bulkheads too styled if the FA’s are!)
- I actually love bold statements in general, but I am really trying hard to like the new uniforms I’ve seen. ESPECIALLY that purple patterned loose blouse with pants for women- at first I thought that lady on the right must be Tracy Reese (as I did not know what Tracy Reese looked like) standing next to her “creations”, then I noticed the woman in the picture had FA wings pinned on (barely noticeable) - I also then googled Tracy Reese and saw her picture: “nope, not the woman in UA press release!
The men’s uniform is not so bad (IMHO) but surprisingly styled given it’s Brooks Brothers. No pun intended, but I’m surprised there isn’t a thread devoted to the new United uniforms!
Thanks again
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3243
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:50 am

763:
N660UA now sked to exit HKG 2791/20Feb with Polaris

On Fleet Website, with the help of a forum reader, the Polaris Update page is a bit easier to read.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 1358414570
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 25001
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 8:52 am

Airline Weekly had a chart posted comparing International ASMs per hub.

Newark EWR 4,253,490,808
San Francisco SFO 3,626,753,434
Washington IAD 1,873,691,109
Chicago ORD 1,868,488,628
Houston IAH 1,339,710,660
Los Angeles LAX 660,415,644
Denver DEN 312,253,704

Overall UA has the most international ASMs of all US carriers at 14,029,291,851, while DL comes in at 12,362,221,412 and AA 10,960,174,085.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
jayunited
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:01 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Airline Weekly had a chart posted comparing International ASMs per hub.

Newark EWR 4,253,490,808
San Francisco SFO 3,626,753,434
Washington IAD 1,873,691,109
Chicago ORD 1,868,488,628
Houston IAH 1,339,710,660
Los Angeles LAX 660,415,644
Denver DEN 312,253,704

Overall UA has the most international ASMs of all US carriers at 14,029,291,851, while DL comes in at 12,362,221,412 and AA 10,960,174,085.


If UA continues to grow DEN domestically I think its only a matter of time before DEN's international ASMs overtakes LAX's international ASM.
Thats is not to say UA is de-hubbing LAX or reducing more international flying from LAX above what already had been discussed. I just think with all the domestic growth at DEN and expected future growth I can see UA adding more long haul international flights to augment the increase domestic flying and offer DEN O&D passengers more access to nonstop international long haul flights.
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:55 pm

jayunited wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
Airline Weekly had a chart posted comparing International ASMs per hub.

Newark EWR 4,253,490,808
San Francisco SFO 3,626,753,434
Washington IAD 1,873,691,109
Chicago ORD 1,868,488,628
Houston IAH 1,339,710,660
Los Angeles LAX 660,415,644
Denver DEN 312,253,704

Overall UA has the most international ASMs of all US carriers at 14,029,291,851, while DL comes in at 12,362,221,412 and AA 10,960,174,085.


If UA continues to grow DEN domestically I think its only a matter of time before DEN's international ASMs overtakes LAX's international ASM.
Thats is not to say UA is de-hubbing LAX or reducing more international flying from LAX above what already had been discussed. I just think with all the domestic growth at DEN and expected future growth I can see UA adding more long haul international flights to augment the increase domestic flying and offer DEN O&D passengers more access to nonstop international long haul flights.

Where to, though? They fly to LHR, FRA and NRT, I can't think of another European or Asian city that makes sense to link non stop from DEN. Maybe if they can grow to keep all 3 of those year round, that would boost numbers, but other than that, more Canada and Mexico? Having lived most of my life in DEN, I love to see it doing well, but I just don't see a lot more direct flights making sense.
 
blockski
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:16 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Airline Weekly had a chart posted comparing International ASMs per hub.

Newark EWR 4,253,490,808
San Francisco SFO 3,626,753,434
Washington IAD 1,873,691,109
Chicago ORD 1,868,488,628
Houston IAH 1,339,710,660
Los Angeles LAX 660,415,644
Denver DEN 312,253,704

Overall UA has the most international ASMs of all US carriers at 14,029,291,851, while DL comes in at 12,362,221,412 and AA 10,960,174,085.


I'm kinda amazed that IAD is just slightly larger than ORD!

Related, MWAA posted their year-end numbers for IAD and DCA airports: https://www.mwaa.com/sites/default/file ... report.pdf

They show a 9.4% increase in UA's domestic traffic at IAD for the year, and a 2.6% increase in their international traffic.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1628
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:00 pm

Looks like there's some action on N798UA PMUA 77E Polaris bird from Jan 1, looking to leave XMN on Feb 22.
 
audidudi
Posts: 2534
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:35 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:40 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
763:
N660UA now sked to exit HKG 2791/20Feb with Polaris

On Fleet Website, with the help of a forum reader, the Polaris Update page is a bit easier to read.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 1358414570

Might it be possible to move the 764 column to follow after the 763s and the 78X to follow the 789s? Just curious if there is a reason for the current format?
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3243
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:06 am

Good questions:
1.) 764 will possibly be the last to receive Polaris
2. Spacing to allow block of seating configurations.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3243
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:29 am

78X:
N12005 sked to enter new delivery Induction at IAD 2706/21Feb

763:
N662UA now sked to enter HKG 7234/21Feb, Polaris??, was on retire list
 
jayunited
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:27 am

cosyr wrote:
Where to, though? They fly to LHR, FRA and NRT, I can't think of another European or Asian city that makes sense to link non stop from DEN. Maybe if they can grow to keep all 3 of those year round, that would boost numbers, but other than that, more Canada and Mexico? Having lived most of my life in DEN, I love to see it doing well, but I just don't see a lot more direct flights making sense.


NRT is already year around and once FRA starts later this spring it also will be year around (though I think 4x weekly during part of the winter season). The only reason LHR is not operating year around is because UA doesn't have an available year around slot the slots we already have we need to operate existing flights year around hopefully soon UA will be able to secure a year around slot for DEN. As far as future international expansion from DEN on UA I can see UA in 2-4 years adding more European destinations even if they are seasonal to destinations like CDG, AMS, MUC. It may take a few more years (5-7 years) before we see another Asian destination but I think in time that will happen as well.
I don't expect any of it to happen overnight growing DEN will take years however the reason for my original comment is because DEN is much more than a O&D hub it is becoming a major connector hub for UA while LAX is basically an O&D hub for UA. When Kirby or Oscar speak about growing LAX they never speak of connections mostly they speak of capturing or recapturing O&D market share that was lost.. But when they talk about hubs like DEN, IAH,ORD SFO and IAD they not only talk about the O&D but also growing connections.
 
codc10
Posts: 2933
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:33 am

As DEN grows (both in terms of departures and the metro area), it will be able to support additional long haul service. This summer, UA will operate 500+ peak-day departures from DEN, and UA/LH will have 5 longhaul widebody departures. It's impressive growth, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect additional EU service in the next year or two, and perhaps a China route within the next 5.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6216
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:46 am

codc10 wrote:
As DEN grows (both in terms of departures and the metro area), it will be able to support additional long haul service. This summer, UA will operate 500+ peak-day departures from DEN, and UA/LH will have 5 longhaul widebody departures. It's impressive growth, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect additional EU service in the next year or two, and perhaps a China route within the next 5.


What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:48 am

I am a DEN homer as well (haven't lived there fulltime since I was 18 though) and I have trouble imagining a scenario where UA more than doubles its international operation at DEN to become larger than LAX. That would more or less mean 8-10 more North American destinations/flights and 3-4 more longhaul destinations/flights.

It's not too far fetched to think that UA might add another LH Group hub and DEN-LHR year round if it ever gets a slot in the winter. CDG and AMS are the biggest European destinations from DEN after London. There may be a market there, but it's probably still too small for UA to do without connections on both ends. As far as Canada and Latin America go, a lot of flights were cut even as DEN has been expanding like crazy in the last 2-3 years. As has been already said above, China (and Asia overall) is a bloodbath right now.

This is not to say that we won't see more international from UA at DEN – I think we will. But I have trouble envisioning a massive international expansion at DEN while LAX and other hubs remain stagnant.

LAX will always be a bigger international hub for UA than DEN. It's a much larger city on the coast, and despite what some may think, UA is never going to abandon it. They've expressed interest in expanding LAX too – the main constraint there right now is gate space.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
codc10
Posts: 2933
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:18 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
codc10 wrote:
As DEN grows (both in terms of departures and the metro area), it will be able to support additional long haul service. This summer, UA will operate 500+ peak-day departures from DEN, and UA/LH will have 5 longhaul widebody departures. It's impressive growth, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect additional EU service in the next year or two, and perhaps a China route within the next 5.


What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.


DEN has much better geography for connecting traffic than IAH, but even still, how do you know UA isn’t interested in IAH-China *in the next 5 years*?
 
jayunited
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:39 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.


It wasn't that long ago that people thought WN would run UA out of DEN and they may have if UA had continued on its downward trajectory.
When you listen to Kirby, Oscar and other executives talk about growing hubs growing connections adding more international flights they are not just looking at O&D PDEW it is an aggregated PDEW, the reason its an aggregate is do to connecting flights. Again to be clear UA is not adding international flights overnight at DEN it going to be a process that takes years. However as UA continues to expand DEN's reach by expanding and offering more connecting flights the PDEW each way grows because you are bringing in more people form across the mountain region, the plains, desert Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest. This doesn't just apply to DEN it applies to IAH as well. If UA was only focused on O&D at DEN I would say you're correct but the fact that UA is taking a 2 prong approach at DEN and at other hubs in terms of growing O&D and connections is what sets DEN apart from our LAX hub.

For both AA and DL, LAX is an O&D hub but it is also a huge connector hub for those airlines. Whereas UA's LAX is is quite the opposite, UA pushes a super majority of our West coast and international connections through SFO. LAX is for the most part an O&D hub for UA this also applies to our international flights the only international flight on UA out of LAX that has a high number of connectors is MEL. For all other international flights on UA 75%-80% sometimes more is O&D traffic. (Quick side bar this also explains why LAX-SYD was reduced to 3x weekly while IAH-SYD goes 4x weekly because UA pushed more connecting traffic to SYD through IAH and SFO not LAX.) LAX for now has more international ASM's than DEN I think in 4-6 years DEN will surpass LAX not just in terms of ASM's but the number of international flights. Starting this year UA will serve 2 European destinations from DEN, LAX is still stuck at LHR. There is a good chance in 2-4 years UA will launch seasonal service between DEN-AMS/CDG and/or MUC. There is zero chance of seeing any of these flights out of LAX, as far as I know UA isn't even exploring the option of adding LAX-FRA which should be a no brainer given the fact that these are both STAR hubs. UA's LAX hub serves a different purpose and for now the numbers don't work for UA to add LAX-FRA. Flip the coin and combine the O&D and connecting traffic now UA see's opportunity for DEN-FRA to work year around. Again I'm not saying UA is shrinking at LAX but at this particular point in time I don't see UA reversing course and turning LAX into a major connection hub I think UA is going to continue to focus LAX on the O&D market.

I get the skepticism, I was skeptic when Munoz, Kirby and others began talking about growing UA. But just looking back at what our DEN hub looked like just a few years ago, remembering the bankruptcy years when UA could not defend DEN (IIRC one UA executive said during the bankruptcy years it would be a waist of money to defend DEN) costingUA tons of market share. Coming from those dark days to where our DEN hub is at today, give it a few years, UA's DEN international ASM's and total over all long haul flights will surpass UA's LAX international ASM's and total overall long haul flights just because these hubs serve two completely different purposes in UA overall network. If UA was not growing DEN, DEN-LHR/FRA or NRT would not work. Speaking of NRT that flight when it started was supported by subsidies because we didn't have the traffic for it to stand alone. As matter of fact many people again thought DEN-NRT would disappear once the subsidies ended and it probably would have had UA not increase the connecting traffic the route needed to survive. Today there are no subsidies propping up DEN-NRT that flight is surviving solely off O&D and connecting traffic. It can be done but its going to take time to undue the damage UA inflicted upon itself starting back during if not before the bankruptcy years.
 
748iDEN
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 2:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 20, 2019 8:23 pm

jayunited wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.


It wasn't that long ago that people thought WN would run UA out of DEN and they may have if UA had continued on its downward trajectory.
When you listen to Kirby, Oscar and other executives talk about growing hubs growing connections adding more international flights they are not just looking at O&D PDEW it is an aggregated PDEW, the reason its an aggregate is do to connecting flights. Again to be clear UA is not adding international flights overnight at DEN it going to be a process that takes years. However as UA continues to expand DEN's reach by expanding and offering more connecting flights the PDEW each way grows because you are bringing in more people form across the mountain region, the plains, desert Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest. This doesn't just apply to DEN it applies to IAH as well. If UA was only focused on O&D at DEN I would say you're correct but the fact that UA is taking a 2 prong approach at DEN and at other hubs in terms of growing O&D and connections is what sets DEN apart from our LAX hub.

For both AA and DL, LAX is an O&D hub but it is also a huge connector hub for those airlines. Whereas UA's LAX is is quite the opposite, UA pushes a super majority of our West coast and international connections through SFO. LAX is for the most part an O&D hub for UA this also applies to our international flights the only international flight on UA out of LAX that has a high number of connectors is MEL. For all other international flights on UA 75%-80% sometimes more is O&D traffic. (Quick side bar this also explains why LAX-SYD was reduced to 3x weekly while IAH-SYD goes 4x weekly because UA pushed more connecting traffic to SYD through IAH and SFO not LAX.) LAX for now has more international ASM's than DEN I think in 4-6 years DEN will surpass LAX not just in terms of ASM's but the number of international flights. Starting this year UA will serve 2 European destinations from DEN, LAX is still stuck at LHR. There is a good chance in 2-4 years UA will launch seasonal service between DEN-AMS/CDG and/or MUC. There is zero chance of seeing any of these flights out of LAX, as far as I know UA isn't even exploring the option of adding LAX-FRA which should be a no brainer given the fact that these are both STAR hubs. UA's LAX hub serves a different purpose and for now the numbers don't work for UA to add LAX-FRA. Flip the coin and combine the O&D and connecting traffic now UA see's opportunity for DEN-FRA to work year around. Again I'm not saying UA is shrinking at LAX but at this particular point in time I don't see UA reversing course and turning LAX into a major connection hub I think UA is going to continue to focus LAX on the O&D market.

I get the skepticism, I was skeptic when Munoz, Kirby and others began talking about growing UA. But just looking back at what our DEN hub looked like just a few years ago, remembering the bankruptcy years when UA could not defend DEN (IIRC one UA executive said during the bankruptcy years it would be a waist of money to defend DEN) costingUA tons of market share. Coming from those dark days to where our DEN hub is at today, give it a few years, UA's DEN international ASM's and total over all long haul flights will surpass UA's LAX international ASM's and total overall long haul flights just because these hubs serve two completely different purposes in UA overall network. If UA was not growing DEN, DEN-LHR/FRA or NRT would not work. Speaking of NRT that flight when it started was supported by subsidies because we didn't have the traffic for it to stand alone. As matter of fact many people again thought DEN-NRT would disappear once the subsidies ended and it probably would have had UA not increase the connecting traffic the route needed to survive. Today there are no subsidies propping up DEN-NRT that flight is surviving solely off O&D and connecting traffic. It can be done but its going to take time to undue the damage UA inflicted upon itself starting back during if not before the bankruptcy years.


Looks like a solid analysis however I think the time frame is shorter than people think. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we see a DEN-HKG/PVG/PEK in the near future along with a nonseasonal flight to LHR. Anything else in Europe seems like a stretch for UA metal.
 
aviator96
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:04 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:46 am

788:
N27903 schedule to exit AMA tomorrow UAL2752/21
772:
N212UA scheduled to enter AMA tomorrow UAL2753/21
N798UA scheduled to exit XMN Feb 22 UAL2692/22
N787UA scheduled to enter XMN Feb 23 UAL2737/23
763:
N662UA scheduled to enter HKG Feb 22 UAL2734/22
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6216
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:02 pm

748iDEN wrote:
jayunited wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.


It wasn't that long ago that people thought WN would run UA out of DEN and they may have if UA had continued on its downward trajectory.
When you listen to Kirby, Oscar and other executives talk about growing hubs growing connections adding more international flights they are not just looking at O&D PDEW it is an aggregated PDEW, the reason its an aggregate is do to connecting flights. Again to be clear UA is not adding international flights overnight at DEN it going to be a process that takes years. However as UA continues to expand DEN's reach by expanding and offering more connecting flights the PDEW each way grows because you are bringing in more people form across the mountain region, the plains, desert Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest. This doesn't just apply to DEN it applies to IAH as well. If UA was only focused on O&D at DEN I would say you're correct but the fact that UA is taking a 2 prong approach at DEN and at other hubs in terms of growing O&D and connections is what sets DEN apart from our LAX hub.

For both AA and DL, LAX is an O&D hub but it is also a huge connector hub for those airlines. Whereas UA's LAX is is quite the opposite, UA pushes a super majority of our West coast and international connections through SFO. LAX is for the most part an O&D hub for UA this also applies to our international flights the only international flight on UA out of LAX that has a high number of connectors is MEL. For all other international flights on UA 75%-80% sometimes more is O&D traffic. (Quick side bar this also explains why LAX-SYD was reduced to 3x weekly while IAH-SYD goes 4x weekly because UA pushed more connecting traffic to SYD through IAH and SFO not LAX.) LAX for now has more international ASM's than DEN I think in 4-6 years DEN will surpass LAX not just in terms of ASM's but the number of international flights. Starting this year UA will serve 2 European destinations from DEN, LAX is still stuck at LHR. There is a good chance in 2-4 years UA will launch seasonal service between DEN-AMS/CDG and/or MUC. There is zero chance of seeing any of these flights out of LAX, as far as I know UA isn't even exploring the option of adding LAX-FRA which should be a no brainer given the fact that these are both STAR hubs. UA's LAX hub serves a different purpose and for now the numbers don't work for UA to add LAX-FRA. Flip the coin and combine the O&D and connecting traffic now UA see's opportunity for DEN-FRA to work year around. Again I'm not saying UA is shrinking at LAX but at this particular point in time I don't see UA reversing course and turning LAX into a major connection hub I think UA is going to continue to focus LAX on the O&D market.

I get the skepticism, I was skeptic when Munoz, Kirby and others began talking about growing UA. But just looking back at what our DEN hub looked like just a few years ago, remembering the bankruptcy years when UA could not defend DEN (IIRC one UA executive said during the bankruptcy years it would be a waist of money to defend DEN) costingUA tons of market share. Coming from those dark days to where our DEN hub is at today, give it a few years, UA's DEN international ASM's and total over all long haul flights will surpass UA's LAX international ASM's and total overall long haul flights just because these hubs serve two completely different purposes in UA overall network. If UA was not growing DEN, DEN-LHR/FRA or NRT would not work. Speaking of NRT that flight when it started was supported by subsidies because we didn't have the traffic for it to stand alone. As matter of fact many people again thought DEN-NRT would disappear once the subsidies ended and it probably would have had UA not increase the connecting traffic the route needed to survive. Today there are no subsidies propping up DEN-NRT that flight is surviving solely off O&D and connecting traffic. It can be done but its going to take time to undue the damage UA inflicted upon itself starting back during if not before the bankruptcy years.


Looks like a solid analysis however I think the time frame is shorter than people think. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we see a DEN-HKG/PVG/PEK in the near future along with a nonseasonal flight to LHR. Anything else in Europe seems like a stretch for UA metal.


Yeah, no.

DEN has very little O&D to those markets and there is no need. SFO covers those markets just fine and DEN doesn't add anything geographically that SFO doesn't possess. Sure there are some markets DEN has that SFO doesn't, but they are either also served by ORD and/or EWR (which has flights to those cities) or they are so insignificant in Asia O&D that they don't matter. At least IAH has significant O&D and high fares to places like PVG. DEN doesn't have that.

Wasting precious China slots on DEN is a nonstarter.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6216
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:07 pm

codc10 wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
codc10 wrote:
As DEN grows (both in terms of departures and the metro area), it will be able to support additional long haul service. This summer, UA will operate 500+ peak-day departures from DEN, and UA/LH will have 5 longhaul widebody departures. It's impressive growth, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect additional EU service in the next year or two, and perhaps a China route within the next 5.


What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.


DEN has much better geography for connecting traffic than IAH, but even still, how do you know UA isn’t interested in IAH-China *in the next 5 years*?


Because you don't need it. The SFO/EWR/ORD combo works just fine and they have the geography and the large O&D. DEN literally adds nothing here. IAH at least has high O&D and decent fares to PVG which DEN does not. China fares are in the dirt right now anyway and its slot controlled. Thats why UA has already stated that if they were going to launch another China flight, it would be a 2nd EWR-PVG not a new flight from IAH or anywhere else.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6216
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:17 pm

jayunited wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.


It wasn't that long ago that people thought WN would run UA out of DEN and they may have if UA had continued on its downward trajectory.
When you listen to Kirby, Oscar and other executives talk about growing hubs growing connections adding more international flights they are not just looking at O&D PDEW it is an aggregated PDEW, the reason its an aggregate is do to connecting flights. Again to be clear UA is not adding international flights overnight at DEN it going to be a process that takes years. However as UA continues to expand DEN's reach by expanding and offering more connecting flights the PDEW each way grows because you are bringing in more people form across the mountain region, the plains, desert Southwest, and the Pacific Northwest. This doesn't just apply to DEN it applies to IAH as well. If UA was only focused on O&D at DEN I would say you're correct but the fact that UA is taking a 2 prong approach at DEN and at other hubs in terms of growing O&D and connections is what sets DEN apart from our LAX hub.

For both AA and DL, LAX is an O&D hub but it is also a huge connector hub for those airlines. Whereas UA's LAX is is quite the opposite, UA pushes a super majority of our West coast and international connections through SFO. LAX is for the most part an O&D hub for UA this also applies to our international flights the only international flight on UA out of LAX that has a high number of connectors is MEL. For all other international flights on UA 75%-80% sometimes more is O&D traffic. (Quick side bar this also explains why LAX-SYD was reduced to 3x weekly while IAH-SYD goes 4x weekly because UA pushed more connecting traffic to SYD through IAH and SFO not LAX.) LAX for now has more international ASM's than DEN I think in 4-6 years DEN will surpass LAX not just in terms of ASM's but the number of international flights. Starting this year UA will serve 2 European destinations from DEN, LAX is still stuck at LHR. There is a good chance in 2-4 years UA will launch seasonal service between DEN-AMS/CDG and/or MUC. There is zero chance of seeing any of these flights out of LAX, as far as I know UA isn't even exploring the option of adding LAX-FRA which should be a no brainer given the fact that these are both STAR hubs. UA's LAX hub serves a different purpose and for now the numbers don't work for UA to add LAX-FRA. Flip the coin and combine the O&D and connecting traffic now UA see's opportunity for DEN-FRA to work year around. Again I'm not saying UA is shrinking at LAX but at this particular point in time I don't see UA reversing course and turning LAX into a major connection hub I think UA is going to continue to focus LAX on the O&D market.

I get the skepticism, I was skeptic when Munoz, Kirby and others began talking about growing UA. But just looking back at what our DEN hub looked like just a few years ago, remembering the bankruptcy years when UA could not defend DEN (IIRC one UA executive said during the bankruptcy years it would be a waist of money to defend DEN) costingUA tons of market share. Coming from those dark days to where our DEN hub is at today, give it a few years, UA's DEN international ASM's and total over all long haul flights will surpass UA's LAX international ASM's and total overall long haul flights just because these hubs serve two completely different purposes in UA overall network. If UA was not growing DEN, DEN-LHR/FRA or NRT would not work. Speaking of NRT that flight when it started was supported by subsidies because we didn't have the traffic for it to stand alone. As matter of fact many people again thought DEN-NRT would disappear once the subsidies ended and it probably would have had UA not increase the connecting traffic the route needed to survive. Today there are no subsidies propping up DEN-NRT that flight is surviving solely off O&D and connecting traffic. It can be done but its going to take time to undue the damage UA inflicted upon itself starting back during if not before the bankruptcy years.


You're comparing apples and oranges with NRT. Japan is a very high fare market and UA and NH have a tie up that allows for connections on both ends. Thats not hard to make successful. Same goes with FRA. You have hubs on both ends with JV venture partners. Its not hard to make successful. DEN-LHR has enough O&D that with a few connections, it works fine.

What does DEN offer for a flight to AMS that isn't covered by SFO, ORD, IAH, IAD, and EWR? There are no partners at hub partners at AMS to connect and DEN doesn't have much O&D there. As for CDG, Id find it hard to believe they would launch it before bringing IAH back and I don't think they'll bring IAH back. Again, DEN doesn't bring many new connections that SFO, ORD, IAD, and EWR don't already cover and the O&D is much smaller than IAH.

They may launch DEN-MUC. That wouldn't surprise me.

DEN-China is such a nonstarter but Ive already commented on it.

DEN's international growth has been extremely low risk. Its all centered around partner hubs. DEN is very profitable because domestic flying is profitable, DEN has a huge domestic O&D market, and DEN serves a lot of very high fare markets in the Western Plains and Rockies. Its obviously an extremely key hub for UA. However, long haul flying isn't really DEN's thing. Its international O&D is small except for a few places like Mexico, Canada, and the UK. And even given all the domestic connections available, its not bringing anything that can't be covered by one of the other long haul hubs.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
codc10
Posts: 2933
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:50 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
codc10 wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:

What? How is DEN-China going to work if they aren't even interested in IAH-China (a much larger market) and China fares are bottomed out?

Also, DEN-AMS is not a big market either and DEN-CDG isn't flown from IAH which again is a much bigger market.


DEN has much better geography for connecting traffic than IAH, but even still, how do you know UA isn’t interested in IAH-China *in the next 5 years*?


Because you don't need it. The SFO/EWR/ORD combo works just fine and they have the geography and the large O&D. DEN literally adds nothing here. IAH at least has high O&D and decent fares to PVG which DEN does not. China fares are in the dirt right now anyway and its slot controlled. Thats why UA has already stated that if they were going to launch another China flight, it would be a 2nd EWR-PVG not a new flight from IAH or anywhere else.


I completely agree that in the current climate, there's no basis for a nonstop DEN-China (indeed any additional US-China) service. As it is now, the current level of service may prove to be unsustainable.

Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different. Potential consolidation on the China side, changes to the Chinese economy, and flux with the HNA group could very well change the market dynamics in 2025 and beyond. Only time will tell...
 
User avatar
AVENSAB727
Posts: 1402
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:02 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:58 pm

codc10 wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
codc10 wrote:

DEN has much better geography for connecting traffic than IAH, but even still, how do you know UA isn’t interested in IAH-China *in the next 5 years*?


Because you don't need it. The SFO/EWR/ORD combo works just fine and they have the geography and the large O&D. DEN literally adds nothing here. IAH at least has high O&D and decent fares to PVG which DEN does not. China fares are in the dirt right now anyway and its slot controlled. Thats why UA has already stated that if they were going to launch another China flight, it would be a 2nd EWR-PVG not a new flight from IAH or anywhere else.


I completely agree that in the current climate, there's no basis for a nonstop DEN-China (indeed any additional US-China) service. As it is now, the current level of service may prove to be unsustainable.

Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different. Potential consolidation on the China side, changes to the Chinese economy, and flux with the HNA group could very well change the market dynamics in 2025 and beyond. Only time will tell...

I believe it was also said that United plans on growing IAH to 600-700+ departures during the next 2 years, I found the article that said that, but you have to pay to access it. So if there is any truth to this, looks like DEN and IAH will have 700+ departures.
Last edited by AVENSAB727 on Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Always look on the bright side of Life!
 
FSDan
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:58 pm

codc10 wrote:
Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different.


That's the first I've heard about UA wanting to make DEN a 700+ departures/day operation... Was that disseminated internally? Barring significant growth at IAH or ORD, that would make DEN UA's biggest hub in terms of departures.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:12 pm

FSDan wrote:
codc10 wrote:
Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different.


That's the first I've heard about UA wanting to make DEN a 700+ departures/day operation... Was that disseminated internally? Barring significant growth at IAH or ORD, that would make DEN UA's biggest hub in terms of departures.

Wow! Really! 700 each at IAH/DEN/ORD would be a great start for UA domestically
UA DL LH NW AA WN
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4382
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:24 pm

FSDan wrote:
codc10 wrote:
Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different.


That's the first I've heard about UA wanting to make DEN a 700+ departures/day operation... Was that disseminated internally? Barring significant growth at IAH or ORD, that would make DEN UA's biggest hub in terms of departures.


I’ve never heard that number. What UA has said is they want DEN to be the ATL of the West. I take that to mean function, and not necessarily a copy/paste of the ATL DL operation.

I think we could see 550-600 someday, but I wouldn’t expect much more than that.
 
codc10
Posts: 2933
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:32 pm

FSDan wrote:
codc10 wrote:
Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different.


That's the first I've heard about UA wanting to make DEN a 700+ departures/day operation... Was that disseminated internally? Barring significant growth at IAH or ORD, that would make DEN UA's biggest hub in terms of departures.


With more gates, UA would definitely want to eclipse the 700 mark at ORD, but more gates are way in the future. For now, the capacity growth will be upgauging smaller equipment.

jetmatt777 wrote:
FSDan wrote:
codc10 wrote:
Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different.


That's the first I've heard about UA wanting to make DEN a 700+ departures/day operation... Was that disseminated internally? Barring significant growth at IAH or ORD, that would make DEN UA's biggest hub in terms of departures.


I’ve never heard that number. What UA has said is they want DEN to be the ATL of the West. I take that to mean function, and not necessarily a copy/paste of the ATL DL operation.

I think we could see 550-600 someday, but I wouldn’t expect much more than that.


It's a long-term plan that's been discussed with pilots informally at various meet-and-greets. 4-5% annual departures growth at DEN over the next 5 years gets the airport into the 600s for peak days. UA has been growing DEN faster than that over the past few years, and while that growth rate won't be sustained, it's been successful thus far. It's really not that far off. Right now, UA is gate-constrained at banks, so expansion will first come at existing banks, and when more gets are maxed in existing pushes, I think the company will start to beef up other banks.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4382
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:42 pm

codc10 wrote:
FSDan wrote:
codc10 wrote:
Five or more years from now, however, with United looking to build DEN to a 700+ departure/day primarily connecting hub, the business case could well be different.


That's the first I've heard about UA wanting to make DEN a 700+ departures/day operation... Was that disseminated internally? Barring significant growth at IAH or ORD, that would make DEN UA's biggest hub in terms of departures.


With more gates, UA would definitely want to eclipse the 700 mark at ORD, but more gates are way in the future. For now, the capacity growth will be upgauging smaller equipment.

jetmatt777 wrote:
FSDan wrote:

That's the first I've heard about UA wanting to make DEN a 700+ departures/day operation... Was that disseminated internally? Barring significant growth at IAH or ORD, that would make DEN UA's biggest hub in terms of departures.


I’ve never heard that number. What UA has said is they want DEN to be the ATL of the West. I take that to mean function, and not necessarily a copy/paste of the ATL DL operation.

I think we could see 550-600 someday, but I wouldn’t expect much more than that.


It's a long-term plan that's been discussed with pilots informally at various meet-and-greets. 4-5% annual departures growth at DEN over the next 5 years gets the airport into the 600s for peak days. UA has been growing DEN faster than that over the past few years, and while that growth rate won't be sustained, it's been successful thus far. It's really not that far off. Right now, UA is gate-constrained at banks, so expansion will first come at existing banks, and when more gets are maxed in existing pushes, I think the company will start to beef up other banks.


Given my experience on the ground in DEN I’m not sure DEN is even ready for the 500+ summer schedule this year. United isn’t even gaining any gates in the near future. After the east and west b con construction United will still have 69 gates as we are trading UAX gates for mainline gates.
 
codc10
Posts: 2933
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:21 pm

jetmatt777 wrote:
Given my experience on the ground in DEN I’m not sure DEN is even ready for the 500+ summer schedule this year. United isn’t even gaining any gates in the near future. After the east and west b con construction United will still have 69 gates as we are trading UAX gates for mainline gates.


No kidding... even with the use of some City gates on A and C, and getting back the B gates currently OOS for pad replacement, it's going to be a madhouse.

I understand some UAX 50-seater ops will be on the east side of A (old Great Lakes operation), too. With shortened connection times owing to the new schedule, it's going to be quite a hike for some pax from the high B gates to A.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4382
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:28 pm

codc10 wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
Given my experience on the ground in DEN I’m not sure DEN is even ready for the 500+ summer schedule this year. United isn’t even gaining any gates in the near future. After the east and west b con construction United will still have 69 gates as we are trading UAX gates for mainline gates.


No kidding... even with the use of some City gates on A and C, and getting back the B gates currently OOS for pad replacement, it's going to be a madhouse.

I understand some UAX 50-seater ops will be on the east side of A (old Great Lakes operation), too. With shortened connection times owing to the new schedule, it's going to be quite a hike for some pax from the high B gates to A.


The UAX contractor is currently a sinking ship. They routinely have planes sitting on the line for 15-20 minutes before a crew can park it. It’s a matter of time before UA is forced to insource this work just to regain some sense of operational security.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:10 am

LAXdude1023 wrote:
You're comparing apples and oranges with NRT. Japan is a very high fare market and UA and NH have a tie up that allows for connections on both ends. Thats not hard to make successful. Same goes with FRA. You have hubs on both ends with JV venture partners. Its not hard to make successful. DEN-LHR has enough O&D that with a few connections, it works fine.

What does DEN offer for a flight to AMS that isn't covered by SFO, ORD, IAH, IAD, and EWR? There are no partners at hub partners at AMS to connect and DEN doesn't have much O&D there. As for CDG, Id find it hard to believe they would launch it before bringing IAH back and I don't think they'll bring IAH back. Again, DEN doesn't bring many new connections that SFO, ORD, IAD, and EWR don't already cover and the O&D is much smaller than IAH.

They may launch DEN-MUC. That wouldn't surprise me.

DEN-China is such a nonstarter but Ive already commented on it.

DEN's international growth has been extremely low risk. Its all centered around partner hubs. DEN is very profitable because domestic flying is profitable, DEN has a huge domestic O&D market, and DEN serves a lot of very high fare markets in the Western Plains and Rockies. Its obviously an extremely key hub for UA. However, long haul flying isn't really DEN's thing. Its international O&D is small except for a few places like Mexico, Canada, and the UK. And even given all the domestic connections available, its not bringing anything that can't be covered by one of the other long haul hubs.


I would agree with you 100% if UA wasn't growing DEN or if UA was done with DEN growth. Nothing that I posted will take place in 2019,2020, I suspect the next international European destination UA adds from DEN wont happen till spring 2021 and that is contingent upon DEN continued growth.
Using NRT as an example is not comparing apples to oranges because there was no market for a DEN-NRT flight back when UA launched the route. The route wasn't even on UA's radar and the only reason the route was launched was because Denver offered to heavily subsidize the flight because they wanted nonstop access to Asia. When that route was launced you could count the daily O&D customers on two hands and the connections didn't really exist because UA had shrunk DEN's operation size down to the point where there were only about 250-290 daily flights. DEN-NRT-DEN for at least the first nine months to a year was the nonrev savior flight out of NRT on UA especially after the demise of SEA-NRT-SEA. The only reason NRT survived is because Denver (the city and surburbs) started to grow UA added flights specifically to two banks. The bank of flights before NRT's departure and the bank after NRT's arrival into DEN. The reason UA is launching DEN-FRA isn't only because its JV, we've been in a JV with LH for years and yet for years UA was satisfied with letting LH do all the heavy lifting. The reason why UA is adding DEN-FRA year around is first and foremost UA is growing and secondly UA is growing DEN. If UA wasn't growing and if UA wasn't growing DEN there wouldn't be a DEN-FRA or seasonal DEN-LHR (which UA wants to make year around). Adding these flight gives UA customers more choice and more access to one stop connections instead of two stop connections. UA's operation at DEN has come a long way and UA isn't done growing DEN domestically. I could be wrong and if I am I'll eat crow but I think there will be more international long haul seasonal flights out of DEN especially to Europe on UA in 2-5 years.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1456
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:58 am

How many daily flights are the UA hubs out for Summer 2019?
 
aviator96
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:04 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 23, 2019 4:37 am

Not a good night (Feb 22) for the 763's due to maintenance issues...
Most came from a fleet campaign directive (FCD) to install another protective breathing equipment (PBE) in the rear of the aircraft.

UAL 70 EWR-AMS N648UA 110 minutes delayed.
-Initially operated by N673UA, but had to be changed to N648UA due to multiple issues on N673UA. Once N648UA got to the gate, it was determined that PBE had to be installed in the rear of aircraft.
UAL 956 EWR-GVA N655UA 135 minutes delayed.
-Delayed due to installation of required PBE in the rear of aircraft.
UAL 14 EWR-LHR N674UA 240 minutes delayed.
-Delayed due to installation of required PBE in the rear of aircraft.
UAL 19 EWR-MXP N647UA 120 minutes delayed.
-Delayed due to late arrival from IAH because boarding door would not close on departure from IAH. Plane swapped in IAH from N643UA to N647UA. Once arrived, additional delay due to installation of required PBE in the cockpit.
UAL 962 EWR-TXL N675UA 395 minutes delayed.
-Initial aircraft was N669UA and initial delay was due to installation of required PBE in the rear of aircraft, however upon taxi out there was hydraulic system issue and flight returned to gate (left engine hydraulic pump would not shut off) . Aircraft swapped to N670UA. Upon arrival of 6670, at 10:10 pm MX discovered the #1 tire had low pressure and decided to hold off boarding for an hour. At this time the flight crew timed out and a new crew wouldn't be able to arrive until 12:00 am local. N670UA was then swapped for N675UA. Flight attendants proceeded to time out as well.
UAL 23 EWR-DUB N660UA 145 minutes delayed.
-Delayed due to a pack issue which required fixing. Boarding delayed due to the need of a ground cart for A/C.
UAL 51 EWR-MAD N663UA 150 minutes delayed.
-Delay due to installation of required PBE in the rear of aircraft.
UAL 946 IAD-AMS N677UA 20 minutes delayed.
-Initially N657UA, but had to be swapped to N667UA due to the left engine EGT blank on primary and standby display. 6667 then required installation of PBE in the rear of aircraft.
UAL 129 IAH-GIG N643UA 605 minutes delayed.
-Door 1L (boarding door) had issues arming.
UAL 102 IAH-MUC N664UA 85 minutes delayed.
-Delay due to late inbound flight, plus installation of required PBE in the rear of aircraft.
UAL 987 ORD-CDG N655UA 115 minutes delayed.
-Delay due to original aircraft N642UA needing a nose cowl replacement. Swapped for N655UA, but 6455 needed installation of required PBE in the rear of aircraft.
 
David_itl
Posts: 6436
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 23, 2019 11:31 am

Interesting see United going year-round 767 on EWR-MAN (mix of 763 and 764 in summer, 763 in winter) finally replacing 757s.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4283
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 23, 2019 12:19 pm

What is a “PBE in the rear” mean?
(Depending on the acronym that could sound naughty)
Aviator96; Of all the delays mentioned above, and some very significant time wise) is there a common thread that links them? Such as all these aircraft are old and often have maintenance issues?
And while it sounds terrible for UA are those delays consistent with other similar sized airlines, or something more unique to UA vs DL or AA, etc.
Thanks
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
aviator96
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:04 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:05 pm

VC10er wrote:
What is a “PBE in the rear” mean?
(Depending on the acronym that could sound naughty)
Aviator96; Of all the delays mentioned above, and some very significant time wise) is there a common thread that links them? Such as all these aircraft are old and often have maintenance issues?
And while it sounds terrible for UA are those delays consistent with other similar sized airlines, or something more unique to UA vs DL or AA, etc.
Thanks


PBE is short for protective breathing equipment (more info in links: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2012-10-30/protective-breathing-equipment-helps-pilots-breathe https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=d718193748e8a58f6fa227ad4019a1a4&r=SECTION&n=14y3.0.1.1.7.11.2.26). This was mandated by the FAA in a fleet campaign directive, FCD (I'm not familiar with what that is, but I assume it is similar to an Airworthiness Directive). I don't believe this is the AD that required the maintenance of the PBE, as this is a one-time AD, but I can imagine it would be something similar http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/b88e646b403ad51f8625780f00549599/$FILE/2011-01-09.pdf. "In rear of the aircraft" I gather they had to install a new one in the aft galley for the flight attendants.

In answer to if there is a common thread among the delays, it would be the PBE installation. It was unfortunate that many aircraft had to undergo this maintenance at the same time. And there is no denying that the 763's are on the older side, but from what I've seen, they don't require maintenance that much more than any other type in the fleet. I just think UA got unlucky last night.

With regards to the other airlines, I am unsure. I would imagine that there 763's were also effected by the FCD and other maintenance issues that are part of operating an older aircraft.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4283
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:26 am

aviator96 wrote:
VC10er wrote:
What is a “PBE in the rear” mean?
(Depending on the acronym that could sound naughty)
Aviator96; Of all the delays mentioned above, and some very significant time wise) is there a common thread that links them? Such as all these aircraft are old and often have maintenance issues?
And while it sounds terrible for UA are those delays consistent with other similar sized airlines, or something more unique to UA vs DL or AA, etc.
Thanks


PBE is short for protective breathing equipment (more info in links: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2012-10-30/protective-breathing-equipment-helps-pilots-breathe https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=d718193748e8a58f6fa227ad4019a1a4&r=SECTION&n=14y3.0.1.1.7.11.2.26). This was mandated by the FAA in a fleet campaign directive, FCD (I'm not familiar with what that is, but I assume it is similar to an Airworthiness Directive). I don't believe this is the AD that required the maintenance of the PBE, as this is a one-time AD, but I can imagine it would be something similar http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/b88e646b403ad51f8625780f00549599/$FILE/2011-01-09.pdf. "In rear of the aircraft" I gather they had to install a new one in the aft galley for the flight attendants.

In answer to if there is a common thread among the delays, it would be the PBE installation. It was unfortunate that many aircraft had to undergo this maintenance at the same time. And there is no denying that the 763's are on the older side, but from what I've seen, they don't require maintenance that much more than any other type in the fleet. I just think UA got unlucky last night.

With regards to the other airlines, I am unsure. I would imagine that there 763's were also effected by the FCD and other maintenance issues that are part of operating an older aircraft.


Got it! Thanks for all the information and extra effort. I want you to know that I really appreciate it!
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos