airnorth
Posts: 341
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:25 pm

Okcflyer wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
Anybody know what the load is on the IAD-PEK 78X today?


100 open Y seats

But everything else was full? So that would be 237 passengers, (at least by my count from Seat Guru, not sure how accurate that is), and no center seats in Y....or one would assume at least. Sounds like everyone was flying Economy Plus.... Plus, with the extra space!
 
B1168
Posts: 504
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 7:45 pm

tjh8402 wrote:
B1168 wrote:
tjh8402 wrote:
A 78X doesn’t cost much more to operate than its smaller siblings correct? I wonder if, until the 788 and 789 get their Polaris and Premium plus cabins installed, there are premium routes where the Polaris hard product and W cabin bump up RASM enough to make it worth flying a 78x with those cabins and 50-100 Y seats blocked for longer range vs flying a full 788 or 789 with the old hard product.


For routes of 6000nm, little to no seats needs to be blocked if configured in current UA configuration. As aforementioned, 35t payload will be available, and that configuration only need about 315 pax to be taken care of. If not stuffed with excessive luggage (though probably will), the plane require no seat blocking.
A typical example on the accuracy of “Wikipedia range”, though. The 78X will not be able to load as much as a 788 if flying in that 6900nm poster written range.


I was more looking at how much longer than the 6000 nm seats full range the plane could fly with those seats blocked. Could a 78x with 75-100 Y seats blocked fly 6500-7000 nm and are there routes in UAs network that length with enough premium demand that would make it worthwhile to sub in a 78x with Polaris and W with those Y seats blocked?


I would suggest that you just retrofit a bunch of 787-9s if that demand exist. Blocking that many economy seats will be a considerable blow to the profit. Also, 787-9s have 48 business class seats while 787-10s only have 44. I know that 787-9 business seats doesn't have direct aisle access (per SeatGuru), but I think most passengers are okay with it.
The point is, for less economy capacity, just use a 789.
 
tjh8402
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 8:10 pm

B1168 wrote:
tjh8402 wrote:
B1168 wrote:

For routes of 6000nm, little to no seats needs to be blocked if configured in current UA configuration. As aforementioned, 35t payload will be available, and that configuration only need about 315 pax to be taken care of. If not stuffed with excessive luggage (though probably will), the plane require no seat blocking.
A typical example on the accuracy of “Wikipedia range”, though. The 78X will not be able to load as much as a 788 if flying in that 6900nm poster written range.


I was more looking at how much longer than the 6000 nm seats full range the plane could fly with those seats blocked. Could a 78x with 75-100 Y seats blocked fly 6500-7000 nm and are there routes in UAs network that length with enough premium demand that would make it worthwhile to sub in a 78x with Polaris and W with those Y seats blocked?


I would suggest that you just retrofit a bunch of 787-9s if that demand exist. Blocking that many economy seats will be a considerable blow to the profit. Also, 787-9s have 48 business class seats while 787-10s only have 44. I know that 787-9 business seats doesn't have direct aisle access (per SeatGuru), but I think most passengers are okay with it.
The point is, for less economy capacity, just use a 789.


Yes you lose 4 J seats but you get a much nicer hard product plus the W seating. Just was speculating/wondering if there were routes where the 78x’s better hard product could improve RASM enough to justify flying it as essentially a 788 or 789 with Polaris and W.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6464
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 9:06 pm

Based on the numbers upthread, 6500 nm with that many seats blocked off appears doable every day, but 7000 nm is probably too far. At the moment I can't think of any routes where it would make sense, though. UA's routes where the hard product is most critical are TATL.
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1369
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 9:49 pm

For fun is anyone able to compute what fuel a current spec A359 would have consumed for an equivalent cabin configuration and pax, bags and freight load, and "real world" flight profile?
 
tjh8402
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 10:05 pm

seabosdca wrote:
Based on the numbers upthread, 6500 nm with that many seats blocked off appears doable every day, but 7000 nm is probably too far. At the moment I can't think of any routes where it would make sense, though. UA's routes where the hard product is most critical are TATL.


Playing around on GC map the ones that stick out the most might be SFO/LAX-Australia. The fact that so many routes are under 6k nm does show how much of a winner this plane could end up being for UA though. Have to imagine more will eventually be ordered (and that AA will eventually get some).
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 11:36 pm

airnorth wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
Anybody know what the load is on the IAD-PEK 78X today?


100 open Y seats

But everything else was full? So that would be 237 passengers, (at least by my count from Seat Guru, not sure how accurate that is), and no center seats in Y....or one would assume at least. Sounds like everyone was flying Economy Plus.... Plus, with the extra space!

Were those blocked for performance, or is it a byproduct of the 78X being a sub for a 788 that has 219 as opposed to 337 in the -10?
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2812
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 16, 2019 11:51 pm

Good news for the J passengers who are getting a proper Polaris seat surprise.
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 17, 2019 2:00 am

tjh8402 wrote:
B1168 wrote:
tjh8402 wrote:

I was more looking at how much longer than the 6000 nm seats full range the plane could fly with those seats blocked. Could a 78x with 75-100 Y seats blocked fly 6500-7000 nm and are there routes in UAs network that length with enough premium demand that would make it worthwhile to sub in a 78x with Polaris and W with those Y seats blocked?


I would suggest that you just retrofit a bunch of 787-9s if that demand exist. Blocking that many economy seats will be a considerable blow to the profit. Also, 787-9s have 48 business class seats while 787-10s only have 44. I know that 787-9 business seats doesn't have direct aisle access (per SeatGuru), but I think most passengers are okay with it.
The point is, for less economy capacity, just use a 789.


Yes you lose 4 J seats but you get a much nicer hard product plus the W seating. Just was speculating/wondering if there were routes where the 78x’s better hard product could improve RASM enough to justify flying it as essentially a 788 or 789 with Polaris and W.


I think the consideration is how to use a 789 and 78J together. How much do you gain if you swap a 78J for a 789 where the 789 leaves revenue behind as a result of taking over the old 78J route.
 
tealnz
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 17, 2019 2:04 am

SFO/LAX-Australia? Bit of a stretch guys. There's a big difference between a new 78J flying 6000nm still-air as a stand-in for a 788 and putting one on a 6000nm permanently. And LAX-SYD is 6500nm still-air. Route planners need to reckon on engines losing efficiency in service, airframes gaining weight and drag increasing - maybe 5% range loss for the worst aircraft in the fleet?

You're not persuaded? I keep saying it: NZ have explicitly said the 78J is not in the frame for their 77E replacement. They keep describing it as having effectively much the same range as their old 767s. They are looking at it for Asian routes out of Auckland. Sounds like a 5000nm aircraft in the real world.

Out of curiosity, does the 78J in UA configuration have the full set of crew rests in the crown?
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2772
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 17, 2019 3:03 am

Okcflyer wrote:
UA’s GE90 77E’s will just barely be able to fly EWR-HKG with 272 seats (Polaris confit) occasionally needing some seats blocked. This is a 7000nm route.

In order for the 78X to fly this, it would need roughly 10-ton more fuel for the exact same payload as the IAD-PEK flight, which had 16-ton to spare. Meaning, this same load could have been flown to HKG instead of PEK! Quite impressive although I agree it’s doubtful anyone will configure a 78X for premium heavy 225-250 seats needed to do this.

I agree with those claiming the current UA-configured 78X will be able to fly 6000nm with full pax and bags, which is the lion share of UA’s network. Versatile frame she is and imagine the opportunities after a couple of PIPs.


For what it's worth, EWR-HKG is going to a B77W with the S19 schedule. I do believe UA is planning on introducing a true W cabin to the rest of the wide-body fleet.

NH is the one airline that could consider the B78X if they decide to order this and it would work for them to premium destinations like FRA, LHR, and JFK in a 4-class configuration. Keep in mind that the B77Ws that fly to JFK (HND to JFK is 5900 nmi and slightly shorter to NRT) are the least dense and most premium of any B77W in service (current configuration: F8J68W24Y112). The range is advertised at 6430 nmi with 330 passengers, but NH wouldn't need more than 200 in 4 classes. The question would be cargo lift...could they still carry significant belly cargo AND fit all those J seats in, even reducing Y to 33" from 34"?

Had BA opted for crew rests in their B78Xs, they could also be premium-heavy.

Okcflyer wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
Anybody know what the load is on the IAD-PEK 78X today?


100 open Y seats


That looks as though it would have been a full flight on the original B788 equipment (219 seats). As for the claim that the UA B78X is 337 seats, that is wrong since SeatGuru counted W class wrong (21 W seats, not 40); the configuration of a UA B78X is: J44-W21-Y+54-Y199.
 
sincx
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 5:01 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 17, 2019 4:35 am

I wonder whether this means UA can upgauge the 788/9 running the second daily SFO-PVG to the 78J if there's demand. If the 78J can do 6,000 nm with 90 seats blocked, full load seems possible (but still pushing it a little) for 5,345 nm.

And the 78J seems a no-brainer for upgauging the 788/9 running SFO-HND, again assuming sufficient demand.
 
JustSomeDood
Posts: 377
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:05 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 17, 2019 5:32 am

sincx wrote:
I wonder whether this means UA can upgauge the 788/9 running the second daily SFO-PVG to the 78J if there's demand. If the 78J can do 6,000 nm with 90 seats blocked, full load seems possible (but still pushing it a little) for 5,345 nm.

And the 78J seems a no-brainer for upgauging the 788/9 running SFO-HND, again assuming sufficient demand.


I wouldn't characterize this IAD-PEK 78J flight as seat blocking in the traditional sense (trading seats for range). From jayunited's data, the bird was flying off at 17 tons below MTOW, there was plenty of room on board for either more fuel or more payload if they so chose (they didn't cos this flight was a sub-in to a 788). If nothing else, this flight brings a lot of data on how effectively a 78J can act as a 77E replacement for UA, and from the looks of it, it looks like a more effective one than speculated here.
 
ronmk1986
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:56 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 17, 2019 6:39 am

I was a bit surprised to find UA uses their B787-10 in IAD-PEK route, as I was guessing UA may try utilising their B787-10s in other transpacific routes like EWR-NRT or EWR-PEK first.

Who are the primary customers of UA’s IAD-PEK route? Diplomats?

I’m pretty sure the customer demographic in this route will be vastly different than UA’s other PEK flights from SFO or ORD.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1224
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:15 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:

NH is the one airline that could consider the B78X if they decide to order this and it would work for them to premium destinations like FRA, LHR, and JFK in a 4-class configuration. Keep in mind that the B77Ws that fly to JFK (HND to JFK is 5900 nmi and slightly shorter to NRT) are the least dense and most premium of any B77W in service (current configuration: F8J68W24Y112). The range is advertised at 6430 nmi with 330 passengers, but NH wouldn't need more than 200 in 4 classes. The question would be cargo lift...could they still carry significant belly cargo AND fit all those J seats in, even reducing Y to 33" from 34"?

NH ordered three and announced that they'll be in regional config (with long haul products though) already.

ronmk1986 wrote:
I was a bit surprised to find UA uses their B787-10 in IAD-PEK route, as I was guessing UA may try utilising their B787-10s in other transpacific routes like EWR-NRT or EWR-PEK first.

Who are the primary customers of UA’s IAD-PEK route? Diplomats?

I’m pretty sure the customer demographic in this route will be vastly different than UA’s other PEK flights from SFO or ORD.

Easy, it's only two flights and most likely a maintenance swap than anything else.

Michael
 
Swadian
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:05 am

Okcflyer wrote:
UA’s GE90 77E’s will just barely be able to fly EWR-HKG with 272 seats (Polaris confit) occasionally needing some seats blocked. This is a 7000nm route.

In order for the 78X to fly this, it would need roughly 10-ton more fuel for the exact same payload as the IAD-PEK flight, which had 16-ton to spare. Meaning, this same load could have been flown to HKG instead of PEK! Quite impressive although I agree it’s doubtful anyone will configure a 78X for premium heavy 225-250 seats needed to do this.

I agree with those claiming the current UA-configured 78X will be able to fly 6000nm with full pax and bags, which is the lion share of UA’s network. Versatile frame she is and imagine the opportunities after a couple of PIPs.


JAL has 788 with only 161 seats and 77W with only 244 seats, so ordering the 78X could potentially cover their entire network. Their longest flight is only JFK-TYO, well within 78X range.
John Wang, Founder and President of Inland Streamliner.
 
Swadian
Posts: 538
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:09 am

tealnz wrote:
SFO/LAX-Australia? Bit of a stretch guys. There's a big difference between a new 78J flying 6000nm still-air as a stand-in for a 788 and putting one on a 6000nm permanently. And LAX-SYD is 6500nm still-air. Route planners need to reckon on engines losing efficiency in service, airframes gaining weight and drag increasing - maybe 5% range loss for the worst aircraft in the fleet?

You're not persuaded? I keep saying it: NZ have explicitly said the 78J is not in the frame for their 77E replacement. They keep describing it as having effectively much the same range as their old 767s. They are looking at it for Asian routes out of Auckland. Sounds like a 5000nm aircraft in the real world.

Out of curiosity, does the 78J in UA configuration have the full set of crew rests in the crown?


There is no evidence to suggest a 78J will "lose" range, "gain" weight, or "increase" drag over X years of service. If anything, PIPs on existing frames could increase range. I think the poster meant SFO-SYD will be too far for the 78X, but most other US3 routes would do just fine.
John Wang, Founder and President of Inland Streamliner.
 
tealnz
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:30 am

Of course it will. The engine guys on here could tell you all about how engines lose efficiency in service, starting with blade tip clearance worsening and contamination on airfoils and surfaces. Airframe moisture accumulation adds weight. Repairs add weight. Loads on control surfaces cause degradation in aerodynamics. Read about it: https://tinyurl.com/y2jnfhqr
Yes you can put engines and airframes in the workshop and recover most of the weight or drag losses. But an in-surface fleet will have a number of aircraft delivering significantly less than nominal performance. It's certainly not specific to the 78J.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2772
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:52 am

Swadian wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
UA’s GE90 77E’s will just barely be able to fly EWR-HKG with 272 seats (Polaris confit) occasionally needing some seats blocked. This is a 7000nm route.

In order for the 78X to fly this, it would need roughly 10-ton more fuel for the exact same payload as the IAD-PEK flight, which had 16-ton to spare. Meaning, this same load could have been flown to HKG instead of PEK! Quite impressive although I agree it’s doubtful anyone will configure a 78X for premium heavy 225-250 seats needed to do this.

I agree with those claiming the current UA-configured 78X will be able to fly 6000nm with full pax and bags, which is the lion share of UA’s network. Versatile frame she is and imagine the opportunities after a couple of PIPs.


JAL has 788 with only 161 seats and 77W with only 244 seats, so ordering the 78X could potentially cover their entire network. Their longest flight is only JFK-TYO, well within 78X range.


JL effectively fired Boeing as a supplier though and decided to go with Airbus for the first time. Their B77W fleet will be replaced with the A35K.
 
tvarad
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:37 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Mon Feb 18, 2019 3:27 am

Looking at the maps for the two round trips, it looks like UA has used different routes. For example, on the 15 Feb PEK-IAD return run, it was a more traditional one looping over the pacific seaboard and over Alaska/Canada whereas on the 17th Feb run it was a polar route exiting out of Siberia (?) and re-entering via Canada. Could this be due to route experimenting or optimizing given prevailing conditions?
 
sabby
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:11 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:07 am

tvarad wrote:
Looking at the maps for the two round trips, it looks like UA has used different routes. For example, on the 15 Feb PEK-IAD return run, it was a more traditional one looping over the pacific seaboard and over Alaska/Canada whereas on the 17th Feb run it was a polar route exiting out of Siberia (?) and re-entering via Canada. Could this be due to route experimenting or optimizing given prevailing conditions?

Possibly due to jetstreams according to that particular day.
 
KICT
Posts: 815
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sat Feb 23, 2019 7:12 pm


Landing in PEK.
People are saying. Believe me.
 
sincx
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2016 5:01 pm

Re: United B78X IAD-PEK

Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:20 pm

The 787-10 is now a semi-regular on this route. I wonder why. Is UA short a 788 due to maintenance? UA operations decided this is a good route on which to test the 787-10? (If so, personally I won't have picked a route to mainland China for this.) Loads are light so there's no need for the extra seats.

Thursday: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /KIAD/ZBAA
Yesterday: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /KIAD/ZBAA

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