Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
voxkel
Topic Author
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 9:17 pm

Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:30 am

Hi all,

I am a bit curious why UA is still flying the PW 77E on the ORD-HKG flight. This will become the longest 77E route after EWR-HKG switches to 77W in March. What is stopping UA from operating 77W on SFO-HKG-ORD-HKG-SFO, or something similar? I understand ORD doesn't have any UA 77W routes yet but can't the aircraft just swap routes at major international destinations like HKG or NRT such that the 77W can serve ORD on these flights?
 
User avatar
christao17
Posts: 925
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:14 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:35 am

Presumably, they have crunched the numbers and determined there are routes where the 77W or other planes besides the 77E would make more sense, financially or operationally. The ORD-HKG route may not justify so many seats.
More than a dozen years flying in and around Asia...
 
77H
Posts: 1561
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:37 am

My simple guess would be capacity. The 77W has almost 100 extra seats that would need to be filled. Additionally, the 77E operates the route just fine. My understanding is eventually the GE powered 77Es will eventually make their way to ORD which will provide for a bit more performance.

77H
 
jerseyewr777
Posts: 118
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 1:06 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:02 am

It's pretty simple! UA is putting them where they can fill the plane & at the end of the day make money!
 
sonicruiser
Posts: 921
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG

Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:11 am

christao17 wrote:
Presumably, they have crunched the numbers and determined there are routes where the 77W or other planes besides the 77E would make more sense, financially or operationally. The ORD-HKG route may not justify so many seats.


ORD-HKG is probably one of the last long-haul routes UA would have a hard time filling.
شما می توانید مردم را تحریم کنید ، اما نمی توانید سبک تحریم را اعمال کنید

You can sanction people, but you can't sanction style
 
Antarius
Posts: 2041
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG

Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:20 am

sonicruiser wrote:
christao17 wrote:
Presumably, they have crunched the numbers and determined there are routes where the 77W or other planes besides the 77E would make more sense, financially or operationally. The ORD-HKG route may not justify so many seats.


ORD-HKG is probably one of the last long-haul routes UA would have a hard time filling.


Then clearly either Munoz and team are dumb or lazy? I mean, if ORD-HKG could fill a 77W with high yields relative to other city pairs, one would suspect they would be using a 77W instead.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
dcajet
Posts: 4518
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG

Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:21 am

sonicruiser wrote:
christao17 wrote:
Presumably, they have crunched the numbers and determined there are routes where the 77W or other planes besides the 77E would make more sense, financially or operationally. The ORD-HKG route may not justify so many seats.


ORD-HKG is probably one of the last long-haul routes UA would have a hard time filling.


Filling a 77W, no problem. Doing it profitably? That is the question.
Keep calm and wash your hands.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 2252
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:31 am

The first derivative of the equation: pressure on yields from the CN3.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4761
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:16 am

You route the Airplane that does the JOB!! Not too much? And? hopefully, not to little. Just because you have one? (77W) Does Not mean you have to use one when a 77E can and Is doing the job. Makes no sense to do otherwise.
 
ual763
Posts: 1027
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:46 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:23 am

Yes, ORD-HKG could fill a 77W. Hell it filled a 744 for many many years. However, they can make more money with them from SFO at the moment. Same reason why the 747 was always more popular at SFO than it was at ORD. However, they just ordered 4 more B77Ws, so (maybe) we will see some of the new ones at ORD. In any case, I think we will see a lot more variety at ORD once the new global terminal and satellites are complete!
From flying to the NOTAM office
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2383
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:15 am

Freight volumes might also play a part. The 773ER is a renowned cargo carrier and there might well be better loads to and from the Newark fortress. Same goes for SFO and West Coast freight traffic.
 
danj555
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 7:16 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:07 pm

I'm guessing that they are happy with the numbers generated by the 772 and aren't feeling enough upward pressure to upgauge the plane.
 
blockski
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:16 pm

As of right now, all of UA’s 77W routes are either from EWR or SFO, correct? I suspect that operational element is part of the reason. Maybe as they add a few more frames, they bring it to ORD.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3114
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:21 pm

77H wrote:
My understanding is eventually the GE powered 77Es will eventually make their way to ORD which will provide for a bit more performance.

77H


:checkmark: ORD-PEK, ORD-HKG, and the early ORD-FRA flight are all moving over to the GE powered 77Es this summer.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3114
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:32 pm

blockski wrote:
As of right now, all of UA’s 77W routes are either from EWR or SFO, correct? I suspect that operational element is part of the reason. Maybe as they add a few more frames, they bring it to ORD.


Correct, currently all SFO and EWR.

However, if you look back at when UA first rolled the 77Ws out to EWR, it began on a very limited basis. Initially I believe it was just EWR-TLV with an SFO-TLV-SFO rotation to get the aircraft there. Then a little while later EWR-NRT switched to the 77W and the domestic rotation was dropped.

So it wouldn't be unprecedented for UA to operate just one or two international routes from ORD with the 77W. With the four additional orders, it wouldn't shock me to see ORD-HKG. However, it also wouldn't shock me if UA decided on other markets from SFO and EWR instead.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 415
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:35 pm

kind of a somewhat related question: Are the United 77Ws RR or GE90 engines? If RR, then wouldn't operating ORDHKG with a 77W also be a bit of a one-off, potentially causing issues with engine parts if they got into a maintenance situation?
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14045
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:38 pm

UA operates both PW and GE powered 777s, no RR.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
User avatar
prchan
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 1:16 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:38 pm

All 77Ws are GE90 powered
 
77H
Posts: 1561
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:17 am

Channex757 wrote:
Freight volumes might also play a part. The 773ER is a renowned cargo carrier and there might well be better loads to and from the Newark fortress. Same goes for SFO and West Coast freight traffic.


Freight LFs from Asia are in the high 90s to all of UA’s hubs. The other way is a different story, especially from the hubs east of the Rockies.

UA makes fleet planning decisions based on passenger loads, not cargo, save for a few exceptions. By and large the cargo division makes due with whatever aircraft is being planned to operate any given route. If belly capacity demand is higher than available capacity or payload UA can charge a premium which can, in many cases equal out to the same revenue potential as having more LD3 position to work with in the 77W.

77H
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2383
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:35 am

77H wrote:
Channex757 wrote:
Freight volumes might also play a part. The 773ER is a renowned cargo carrier and there might well be better loads to and from the Newark fortress. Same goes for SFO and West Coast freight traffic.


Freight LFs from Asia are in the high 90s to all of UA’s hubs. The other way is a different story, especially from the hubs east of the Rockies.

UA makes fleet planning decisions based on passenger loads, not cargo, save for a few exceptions. By and large the cargo division makes due with whatever aircraft is being planned to operate any given route. If belly capacity demand is higher than available capacity or payload UA can charge a premium which can, in many cases equal out to the same revenue potential as having more LD3 position to work with in the 77W.

77H

I absolutely agree, however my suggestion was based around the services being to and from HKG which is a hugely export driven market as well as a regional finance centre. The airport supports one of the few remaining airline freighter divisions that use 744F and 748F. On that basis I could see UAL wanting a piece of the pie, especially Just-In-Time priority freight to the USA.

If you have a choice of an aircraft with the capability to lift that mixture of traffic (freight and passenger) then it is going to be the 773ER all day long. Just as CX does and they run freighters too.
 
77H
Posts: 1561
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Mon Jan 21, 2019 4:00 am

Channex757 wrote:
77H wrote:
Channex757 wrote:
Freight volumes might also play a part. The 773ER is a renowned cargo carrier and there might well be better loads to and from the Newark fortress. Same goes for SFO and West Coast freight traffic.


Freight LFs from Asia are in the high 90s to all of UA’s hubs. The other way is a different story, especially from the hubs east of the Rockies.

UA makes fleet planning decisions based on passenger loads, not cargo, save for a few exceptions. By and large the cargo division makes due with whatever aircraft is being planned to operate any given route. If belly capacity demand is higher than available capacity or payload UA can charge a premium which can, in many cases equal out to the same revenue potential as having more LD3 position to work with in the 77W.

77H

I absolutely agree, however my suggestion was based around the services being to and from HKG which is a hugely export driven market as well as a regional finance centre. The airport supports one of the few remaining airline freighter divisions that use 744F and 748F. On that basis I could see UAL wanting a piece of the pie, especially Just-In-Time priority freight to the USA.

If you have a choice of an aircraft with the capability to lift that mixture of traffic (freight and passenger) then it is going to be the 773ER all day long. Just as CX does and they run freighters too.


UA absolutely has a piece of the pie in terms of the HKG origin freight market. UA has the most robust operation into/out of HKG of any US carrier and is no lightweight in terms of overall TPAC marketshare. Just like passenger travel, there is always more than one way to get to EWR/ORD from HKG. Not only do you have the nonstop flights but you have the SFO gateway as well as interlining options via places like HNL.

77H
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2383
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Mon Jan 21, 2019 4:22 am

77H wrote:

UA absolutely has a piece of the pie in terms of the HKG origin freight market. UA has the most robust operation into/out of HKG of any US carrier and is no lightweight in terms of overall TPAC marketshare. Just like passenger travel, there is always more than one way to get to EWR/ORD from HKG. Not only do you have the nonstop flights but you have the SFO gateway as well as interlining options via places like HNL.

77H

The important part of my reply was Just-In-Time. That's freight that needs guaranteed availability, not just a vague promise to deliver. It literally needs to run to the hour. For that to work there does need to be a certain amount of guaranteed space and the 773ER is one way of being able to accept contracts like that. I've seen it in practice and it's caused quite a lot of hair loss and ulcers for freight supervisors!
 
77H
Posts: 1561
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:54 am

Channex757 wrote:
77H wrote:

UA absolutely has a piece of the pie in terms of the HKG origin freight market. UA has the most robust operation into/out of HKG of any US carrier and is no lightweight in terms of overall TPAC marketshare. Just like passenger travel, there is always more than one way to get to EWR/ORD from HKG. Not only do you have the nonstop flights but you have the SFO gateway as well as interlining options via places like HNL.

77H

The important part of my reply was Just-In-Time. That's freight that needs guaranteed availability, not just a vague promise to deliver. It literally needs to run to the hour. For that to work there does need to be a certain amount of guaranteed space and the 773ER is one way of being able to accept contracts like that. I've seen it in practice and it's caused quite a lot of hair loss and ulcers for freight supervisors!


I’m not really sure what “just-in-time” freight is but UA already offers expedited, service-guaranteed capacity on every flight in it’s system, on every aircraft type. Most carriers also offer “allotments” or “block-space agreements” which is capacity that is set aside for regular business.

Again, there is no need for the 77W to enter into one of these agreements, relative to the 77E. Those selling capacity would only offer as much payload or capacity as historical data would suggest.

77H
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2383
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Why isn't UA Replacing 77E with 77W (or similar) on ORD-HKG?

Mon Jan 21, 2019 9:37 am

Just-In-Time is a business practice that is almost ubiquotous these days. Companies no longer operate with massive stock holdings. When items need to be imported (for instance complex electronics made in Hong Kong and used at a factory in the USA) Just In Time is when the purchaser arranges for it to arrive on the unloading dock just in time to be used in the production process.

If a shipment is delayed or re-routed, it can mean an entire factory or even a company is brought to a halt. That's why, instead of millions of dollars worth of stock held as a buffer a freight contract is placed with ironclad guarantees for that delivery to the client Just In Time. To reliably operate services like that, an A350-1000 or even better the 773ER is ideal as there's plenty of space down below for surge volumes and passenger loads can even be traded to free up cargo volume and mass.

That old story about Sir Tim and the Emirates 773ER fleet is very true. They can indeed be flown profitably as freighters with any passenger load being the icing on the cake. It is simply the best aircraft to fly highest priority cargo into and (especially) out of HKG.

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