Cointrin330
Topic Author
Posts: 1009
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 12:23 pm

Looks like UA has switched from a 767-400ER to the 767-300ER on this route, presumably to align with the Southern Hemisphere Fall/Winter season and to move the added capacity of the 767-400ER on TATL. I'm curious how EZE performs for UA out of Newark. It seems there are often a lot of empty seats in Economy and Argentina's economy is not performing all that well.

There is a long history with UA and EZE in the NYC area. Legacy United Airlines operated it nonstop from JFK for years, then moved the route, before the merger, to IAD, then shifted it to EWR, where it operated in 2013, before being axed along with the short lived EWR-IST route. Pre-merger CO meanwhile launched EZE in 2005, from IAH, initially with the 767-200ER, then transitioned to the 767-400ER and then the 777-200ER.

There are three daily flights on NYC-EZE (AA on the 772 from JFK, AR also from JFK on what is being retimed to a better operating schedule, on the A332) and UA.

What do folks think about UA and EZE from EWR?
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:31 pm

You can infer that UA found a better route for the 764, at least seasonally. That doesn't mean that EWR-EZE is among the best or among the worst of 764/763 routes. Without PRASM against trip cost (good luck getting that if you're not a UA exec or in Revenue Management) there's nothing intelligent to be said about 'how this route is doing,' nor about any other route.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 13726
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 3:04 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
You can infer that UA found a better route for the 764, at least seasonally. That doesn't mean that EWR-EZE is among the best or among the worst of 764/763 routes. Without PRASM against trip cost (good luck getting that if you're not a UA exec or in Revenue Management) there's nothing intelligent to be said about 'how this route is doing,' nor about any other route.


Route or routes. Remember that because of the long turn, deep South America routes take a ton of aircraft time. IINM when UA cut ORD-EZE in the early 00s they publicly blamed the utilization issue with what at the time was perhaps the highest-CASM widebody operated by a US carrier (3-class 763).
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
yulexpansion
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2019 3:08 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 3:11 pm

Cubsrule wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
You can infer that UA found a better route for the 764, at least seasonally. That doesn't mean that EWR-EZE is among the best or among the worst of 764/763 routes. Without PRASM against trip cost (good luck getting that if you're not a UA exec or in Revenue Management) there's nothing intelligent to be said about 'how this route is doing,' nor about any other route.


Route or routes. Remember that because of the long turn, deep South America routes take a ton of aircraft time. IINM when UA cut ORD-EZE in the early 00s they publicly blamed the utilization issue with what at the time was perhaps the highest-CASM widebody operated by a US carrier (3-class 763).


On the other hand, if you don't leave the aircraft on the ground for a red-eye back North, you can say good bye to nice PRASM. South America is a double edged sword.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 13726
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 3:15 pm

yulexpansion wrote:
Cubsrule wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
You can infer that UA found a better route for the 764, at least seasonally. That doesn't mean that EWR-EZE is among the best or among the worst of 764/763 routes. Without PRASM against trip cost (good luck getting that if you're not a UA exec or in Revenue Management) there's nothing intelligent to be said about 'how this route is doing,' nor about any other route.


Route or routes. Remember that because of the long turn, deep South America routes take a ton of aircraft time. IINM when UA cut ORD-EZE in the early 00s they publicly blamed the utilization issue with what at the time was perhaps the highest-CASM widebody operated by a US carrier (3-class 763).


On the other hand, if you don't leave the aircraft on the ground for a red-eye back North, you can say good bye to nice PRASM. South America is a double edged sword.


Right, but it requires a better margin to make sense. If EWR-EZE makes $10,000, it may make more sense to use the same aircraft to operate two Europe routes that make $7,000 each even though EWR-EZE is, standing alone, the most profitable of the three routes.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
PSAatSAN4Ever
Posts: 678
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 3:26 pm

Remember also the capacity of United's 767-400's and 767-300's:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/information.php

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

Interestingly, premium capacity is roughly the same between the 764 and one version of the 763. Looking at those two, Y is also roughly the same, but the big difference is Y+, with the 764 having significantly more.

Perhaps the factors of additional cargo capacity and more people willing to spend $$ for premium economy on TATL was enough for the bean counters to notice and order the switch.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 3:30 pm

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Remember also the capacity of United's 767-400's and 767-300's:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/information.php

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

Interestingly, premium capacity is roughly the same between the 764 and one version of the 763. Looking at those two, Y is also roughly the same, but the big difference is Y+, with the 764 having significantly more.

Perhaps the factors of additional cargo capacity and more people willing to spend $$ for premium economy on TATL was enough for the bean counters to notice and order the switch.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.

There are no more 767s with F. And they won’t be using the hi-J version... Also, no 764s have premium economy, or Polaris for that matter.
 
PSAatSAN4Ever
Posts: 678
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 3:35 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Remember also the capacity of United's 767-400's and 767-300's:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/information.php

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

Interestingly, premium capacity is roughly the same between the 764 and one version of the 763. Looking at those two, Y is also roughly the same, but the big difference is Y+, with the 764 having significantly more.

Perhaps the factors of additional cargo capacity and more people willing to spend $$ for premium economy on TATL was enough for the bean counters to notice and order the switch.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.

There are no more 767s with F. And they won’t be using the hi-J version... Also, no 764s have premium economy, or Polaris for that matter.


Then I gather seatguru is holding on to outdated information, especially in regards to the 764's. Someone will need to correct them, because that's the information they posted. What is your source on this?
 
United1
Posts: 3799
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 4:03 pm

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Remember also the capacity of United's 767-400's and 767-300's:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/information.php

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

Interestingly, premium capacity is roughly the same between the 764 and one version of the 763. Looking at those two, Y is also roughly the same, but the big difference is Y+, with the 764 having significantly more.

Perhaps the factors of additional cargo capacity and more people willing to spend $$ for premium economy on TATL was enough for the bean counters to notice and order the switch.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.

There are no more 767s with F. And they won’t be using the hi-J version... Also, no 764s have premium economy, or Polaris for that matter.


Then I gather seatguru is holding on to outdated information, especially in regards to the 764's. Someone will need to correct them, because that's the information they posted. What is your source on this?


SeatGurus map is accurate regarding the 764's configuration. Polaris is the branding for UAs J class irrespective of which hard product is onboard. The 764s still have the older B/E diamond seats in J and all have Economy Plus and regular Economy as well. You may be getting Economy Plus confused with Premium Plus which is UAs new Premium Economy class.

There are no more 763s with first class so that map is outdated on seatguru. All of the remaining 77Es with F class have those seats sold as J class so UA doesn't offer international first class any longer.

Polaris = business class regardless of which type of seat is installed
Premium Plus = Premium Economy (currently found on the 77W, Polarisized 77Es, 78X and Hi J 763s. fleets)
Economy Plus = fleet wide economy class product that offers extra legroom
Economy = Economy class
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
IAHWorldflyer
Posts: 762
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 4:08 pm

Just a small information point, but when I was in Buenos Aires in January, United was running a very extensive marketing campaign for the EZE-EWR flight, with large print ads on bus stops and kiosks throughout the more upscale areas of the city. Part of it was trying to let Argentinians know that EWR was indeed a NYC airport. My personal opinion is that UA probably sells most of their tickets for this route in the US, and was trying to increase Argentina based sales. There also is probably a factor that non-US based people know JFK as the airport for NYC, and that UA was having a more difficult time educating people that Newark is actually close to Manhattan.
 
TWA85
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 4:57 pm

Another thought to consider is the new Polaris configured 763 have a higher ratio of premium/business to economy seats (66% premium/business) compared to the 764 (45% premium/business). If UA is going to use the Polaris 763 on the route, they might be attempting to trade capacity for increased yields.
 
xxcr
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 6:37 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 6:06 pm

United1 wrote:
PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
There are no more 767s with F. And they won’t be using the hi-J version... Also, no 764s have premium economy, or Polaris for that matter.


Then I gather seatguru is holding on to outdated information, especially in regards to the 764's. Someone will need to correct them, because that's the information they posted. What is your source on this?


SeatGurus map is accurate regarding the 764's configuration. Polaris is the branding for UAs J class irrespective of which hard product is onboard. The 764s still have the older B/E diamond seats in J and all have Economy Plus and regular Economy as well. You may be getting Economy Plus confused with Premium Plus which is UAs new Premium Economy class.

There are no more 763s with first class so that map is outdated on seatguru. All of the remaining 77Es with F class have those seats sold as J class so UA doesn't offer international first class any longer.

Polaris = business class regardless of which type of seat is installed
Premium Plus = Premium Economy (currently found on the 77W, Polarisized 77Es, 78X and Hi J 763s. fleets)
Economy Plus = fleet wide economy class product that offers extra legroom
Economy = Economy class


Seatguru is extremely slow in updating the seatmaps for airlines. They are usually the last site that i'd use for seat reference. UA now offers the following classes when traveling.

This is what Seat guru needs....
Polaris- J seat on any long haul fleet
First-all domestic 2-class aircraft
Business- 752(PS flights) and Domestic 2-class planes that serve short haul international flights
Premium plus-Found on 77W, 78J---772(retrofitted) 763(retrofitted, and high J-config)
Economy Plus-Entire UA fleet
Economy-Entire UA fleet
 
Cointrin330
Topic Author
Posts: 1009
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:12 pm

IAHWorldflyer wrote:
Just a small information point, but when I was in Buenos Aires in January, United was running a very extensive marketing campaign for the EZE-EWR flight, with large print ads on bus stops and kiosks throughout the more upscale areas of the city. Part of it was trying to let Argentinians know that EWR was indeed a NYC airport. My personal opinion is that UA probably sells most of their tickets for this route in the US, and was trying to increase Argentina based sales. There also is probably a factor that non-US based people know JFK as the airport for NYC, and that UA was having a more difficult time educating people that Newark is actually close to Manhattan.


I go to Buenos Aires often. Those ads in Recoleta have been a fixture for some time.
 
DCAFlyer01
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 4:22 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:20 pm

American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.
 
dcajet
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:35 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
Looks like UA has switched from a 767-400ER to the 767-300ER on this route, presumably to align with the Southern Hemisphere Fall/Winter season and to move the added capacity of the 767-400ER on TATL. I'm curious how EZE performs for UA out of Newark. It seems there are often a lot of empty seats in Economy and Argentina's economy is not performing all that well.


The switch was effective 3/31 and will run until 10/30-31 when the new winter schedule kicks in. The higher capacity 764 are moved to the North Atlantic for the summer peak travel season. They will return to the EWR-EZE route with the winter schedule.

Certainly I can't speak to yields, but United does very well occupancy %-wise at EZE. The last month for which figures are available (Feb), United was #1 among all carriers operating at EZE, at a 95% average LF.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1417441

DCAFlyer01 wrote:
American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.


While it is true that AA dominates the Argentina-USA routes, DL does very well there too. In fact, on 3/31 the ATL-EZE route was upgauged - after a break for the southern summer - to the A333 one again. I am not aware of what "issues all the time" you are referring to. And, do not forget that DL101/110 may be the only daily flight with Delta's metal there, the airline codeshares with AR on the latter's daily JFK and twice daily MIA services.
"Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
 
dcajet
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:42 pm

IAHWorldflyer wrote:
Just a small information point, but when I was in Buenos Aires in January, United was running a very extensive marketing campaign for the EZE-EWR flight, with large print ads on bus stops and kiosks throughout the more upscale areas of the city. Part of it was trying to let Argentinians know that EWR was indeed a NYC airport. My personal opinion is that UA probably sells most of their tickets for this route in the US, and was trying to increase Argentina based sales. There also is probably a factor that non-US based people know JFK as the airport for NYC, and that UA was having a more difficult time educating people that Newark is actually close to Manhattan.


United has a very loyal FF base in Argentina; before UA's regional retrench in South America and posterior bankruptcy, UA used to be #1 in the market, circa 1994-96. Then AA took the leadership and has been that way ever since. That said, the Argentinian traveler still thinks of Kennedy as the NYC airport, so there is a bit of an education effort that UA is doing locally. The airline does not seem to have any trouble filling the flight.
"Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
 
Cointrin330
Topic Author
Posts: 1009
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 12:23 pm

DCAFlyer01 wrote:
American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.


Utter nonsense. AR is part of SkyTeam so DL has a partner there. The only difference is that DL has one flight a day at EZE. AA has four (peak season it climbs to 5 with 3 x MIA) and UA has 2.
 
SJPBR
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 12:56 pm

AA is dominant in GRU and EZE market, but UA has a very clever fleet utilization in these routes, changing gauge all the time optimizing loads and yield.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 1845
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 2:17 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
DCAFlyer01 wrote:
American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.


Utter nonsense. AR is part of SkyTeam so DL has a partner there. The only difference is that DL has one flight a day at EZE. AA has four (peak season it climbs to 5 with 3 x MIA) and UA has 2.


AA has 6.

1 x LAX
1 x DFW
3 x MIA
1 x JFK

All 777's and all usually full. The MIA route rotates -300ER's.
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3055
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 4:09 pm

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Remember also the capacity of United's 767-400's and 767-300's:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/information.php

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

Interestingly, premium capacity is roughly the same between the 764 and one version of the 763. Looking at those two, Y is also roughly the same, but the big difference is Y+, with the 764 having significantly more.

Perhaps the factors of additional cargo capacity and more people willing to spend $$ for premium economy on TATL was enough for the bean counters to notice and order the switch.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.



The down gauge would be normal during the northern summer seasons. UA traffic is based more on the US-Argentina passengers. Thus during winter there would be fewer people going from US. That capacity normally moves from north/south to east west every year.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3055
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 4:30 pm

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:
Remember also the capacity of United's 767-400's and 767-300's:

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/United_Airlines/information.php

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

Interestingly, premium capacity is roughly the same between the 764 and one version of the 763. Looking at those two, Y is also roughly the same, but the big difference is Y+, with the 764 having significantly more.

Perhaps the factors of additional cargo capacity and more people willing to spend $$ for premium economy on TATL was enough for the bean counters to notice and order the switch.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.

There are no more 767s with F. And they won’t be using the hi-J version... Also, no 764s have premium economy, or Polaris for that matter.


Then I gather seatguru is holding on to outdated information, especially in regards to the 764's. Someone will need to correct them, because that's the information they posted. What is your source on this?


UA 767-300 v3 & UA 767-400 do have similar Polaris Busness & Y seating.
 
dcajet
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 4:40 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
DCAFlyer01 wrote:
American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.


Utter nonsense. AR is part of SkyTeam so DL has a partner there. The only difference is that DL has one flight a day at EZE. AA has four (peak season it climbs to 5 with 3 x MIA) and UA has 2.


AA has 6.

1 x LAX
1 x DFW
3 x MIA
1 x JFK

All 777's and all usually full. The MIA route rotates -300ER's.


LAX is a 787-9, actually, The LAX-EZE route has surpassed expectations, even when international travel is down 5% from Argentina.

There are a few changes coming up with the AA schedule in Argentina, beginning in June:

* MIA-COR launches with 4x w
* DFW-EZE downgauges seasonally to a 787-8, reverting back to the 77E in October.
* The 77W used daily on one of the MIA-EZE runs will be redeployed on the new MIA-LAX-HND flight, with EZE-MIA reverting to all 77E flights. I am not sure if the 77W returns for the summer peak travel season.
"Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
 
Cointrin330
Topic Author
Posts: 1009
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 6:19 pm

dcajet wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:

Utter nonsense. AR is part of SkyTeam so DL has a partner there. The only difference is that DL has one flight a day at EZE. AA has four (peak season it climbs to 5 with 3 x MIA) and UA has 2.


AA has 6.

1 x LAX
1 x DFW
3 x MIA
1 x JFK

All 777's and all usually full. The MIA route rotates -300ER's.


LAX is a 787-9, actually, The LAX-EZE route has surpassed expectations, even when international travel is down 5% from Argentina.

There are a few changes coming up with the AA schedule in Argentina, beginning in June:

* MIA-COR launches with 4x w
* DFW-EZE downgauges seasonally to a 787-8, reverting back to the 77E in October.
* The 77W used daily on one of the MIA-EZE runs will be redeployed on the new MIA-LAX-HND flight, with EZE-MIA reverting to all 77E flights. I am not sure if the 77W returns for the summer peak travel season.


Oops, yes, forgot about LAX-EZE.
 
dcajet
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 8:12 pm

PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.


Are there any 763ERs left with the old F/C/Y+/Y Config left? From United.com it seems like there are none left; they are either the real Polaris J, the old ex CO-style businessfirst seat (the same as the 787-8 & 9) and the 763 with the new extended Polaris cabin used for selected Euro flights such as LHR.

Specifically to your question, it seems like except for the larger Polaris-cabin aircraft, United is sending all other versions of the 763ER to EZE, as the capacity overall is the same (30/184).

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ua979
"Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
 
United1
Posts: 3799
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 8:24 pm

dcajet wrote:
PSAatSAN4Ever wrote:

I don't know which version of the 763 UA is using for EWR-EZE, but I doubt it is the version with F, simply because the 764 doesn't offer that at all.

In answer to the question about profitability, I would conclude that because this downgauge only affects the back of the plane, (a) it is profitable enough to continue, and (b) it is definitely seasonal for coach passengers, being easily swapped in and out with European routes. And while UA must compete with AA and AR at JFK, UA can also offer connections from its EWR hub in addition to serving the NYC/NNJ metro area.


Are there any 763ERs left with the old F/C/Y+/Y Config left? From United.com it seems like there are none left; they are either the real Polaris J, the old ex CO-style businessfirst seat (the same as the 787-8 & 9) and the 763 with the new extended Polaris cabin used for selected Euro flights such as LHR.

Specifically to your question, it seems like except for the larger Polaris-cabin aircraft, United is sending all other versions of the 763ER to EZE, as the capacity overall is the same (30/184).

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ua979


None of the 763ERs have F class any longer. The last one was converted a few months ago to a Polaris 30J/46Y+/138Y configuration.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
VC10er
Posts: 3943
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Sun Apr 07, 2019 8:58 pm

I know those aircraft spend a lot of time on the ground at EZE and GRU. In the 90’s I did do the tag on UA: JFK-EZE-Montevideo (why did UA end that tag?)
UA also used to tag GIG after GRU, but the ease of that tag ended after 9/11 (from JFK, we only had to sit while folks deplaned, and others pax from other UA flights boarded) “sometimes” that GRU to GIG was quite full.
I know CO served GIG nonstop on a DC-10 (I think, I did that flight once)
How many daylight flights are there from Deep South America? VARIG had one I believe. It was a day killer, but also less energy zapping than the RedEyes.
I’m sure I will be told how stupid it would be: but if UA has multiple aircraft grounded for over 12 hours, wouldn’t one have a chance?
Like: EZE to GIG to EWR daylight. Then UA could maybe squeeze in a EWR-GIG flight filled with pax from 2 big cities.
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
dcajet
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Mon Apr 08, 2019 12:32 am

VC10er wrote:
Like: EZE to GIG to EWR daylight. Then UA could maybe squeeze in a EWR-GIG flight filled with pax from 2 big cities.


No one from Buenos Aires would take a one stop, out of the way route to NYC, adding at least 4-5 hours to the trip and a daytime flight to boot that no one wants to take. Keep in mind Bs Aires is the larger market of the two. And even if United were given 5th freedom rights on the EZE-GIG sector, would UA want to compete with AR/AU/JJ & G3 and Emirates to boot?

Didn't UA drop EWR-GIG a while back?
"Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5617
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

Mon Apr 08, 2019 1:54 am

dcajet wrote:
VC10er wrote:
Like: EZE to GIG to EWR daylight. Then UA could maybe squeeze in a EWR-GIG flight filled with pax from 2 big cities.


No one from Buenos Aires would take a one stop, out of the way route to NYC, adding at least 4-5 hours to the trip and a daytime flight to boot that no one wants to take. Keep in mind Bs Aires is the larger market of the two. And even if United were given 5th freedom rights on the EZE-GIG sector, would UA want to compete with AR/AU/JJ & G3 and Emirates to boot?

Didn't UA drop EWR-GIG a while back?


Yeah. No one would take a route like that unless the fares were well below the threshold of profitability.
    Next flight: IAH-GRU/GIG-IAH on UA in J.
     
    EarlyLateORD
    Posts: 111
    Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 11:34 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 08, 2019 2:15 am

    I believe I have done US/Canada to EZE on every available carrier over the past 10 years. Most recently EZE-EWR on UA.

    -The EZE-EWR UA flight was full, which is normal for January. A lot of traffic connecting onwards to Chicago on my particular flight. The exCO 764 Polaris class sucked super-tight seating, uncomfortable nights sleep. Heavy turbulence, normal for summer. I had previously done IAH-EZE on CO, it was jammed full. As well as EZE-IAD on PMUA. Goofy flight, terrible cabin, dated 763. IAD is just not a good connecting airport. EWR is a better fit.

    -DL does a lot better now with the AR codeshare. They switched to the 333 to provide more reliability as it can be more easily serviced by AR crews if there is an issue. I would say DL is the least known of the US carriers. They ran it with the 764 for ages. No one in BsAs knows where Atlanta is....

    -AA is still doing well, but they suffered a bit during their cost cutting/bankruptcy era. No wine in Y class, etc. ORD is gone. MIA is still a gold mine. Not sure how JFK is doing. DFW seems to have more of a US point of sale, MIA/JFK, Argentina point of sale. I always see alot of hunting groups on the DFW-EZE flight, dove hunters I think. I also did MIA-MVD recently, the J product is actually really nice in my opinion. Spacious no frills bed.

    -AC, I haven't done this flight on the 789, I did it on the 777 with the stopover in SCL. Seems like it took forever...

    Good luck to UA, I hope they can bring EZE-ORD back.

    Adam
     
    SJOtoLIR
    Posts: 2901
    Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:41 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 08, 2019 2:39 am

    Cointrin330 wrote:
    how EZE performs for UA out of Newark.


    UA EWR-EZE; both ways performance.

    Filter period……….Passengers….Available seats….Load factor
    July 2018...………….10 791...……….14 640...………….74%
    August 2018...………10 742...……….14 880...………….72%
    September 2018...….10 612...……….13 920...………….76%

    Source: US Department of Transportation. Bureau of transportation statistics website.
    "Goin' up to the spirit in the sky"
     
    upperdeckfan
    Posts: 848
    Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:59 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:22 am

    A good piece of UA's EWR-EZE is traffic from/to the northern east coast and some cities farther west such as Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, etc where EWR is more convenient to connect than IAH.
    748,744,742,741,772,773,762,763,
    764, 789, 732,733,735,737,738,739,
    752, 722, 717,74M,DC10,DC9,M82,
    M83, M87, M88,310,319,320,321,332,
    333, 343, 346,359,388,L1011,CR2,
    CR7, CR9,CRK, E175,E190,ATR42,
    DSH8, CS1,CS3
     
    C010T3
    Posts: 1956
    Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:48 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:54 am

    United (still as Continental) dropped EWR-GIG right after 9/11 and never resumed it.
     
    Cointrin330
    Topic Author
    Posts: 1009
    Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:47 am

    dcajet wrote:
    VC10er wrote:
    Like: EZE to GIG to EWR daylight. Then UA could maybe squeeze in a EWR-GIG flight filled with pax from 2 big cities.


    No one from Buenos Aires would take a one stop, out of the way route to NYC, adding at least 4-5 hours to the trip and a daytime flight to boot that no one wants to take. Keep in mind Bs Aires is the larger market of the two. And even if United were given 5th freedom rights on the EZE-GIG sector, would UA want to compete with AR/AU/JJ & G3 and Emirates to boot?

    Didn't UA drop EWR-GIG a while back?


    United has never operated EWR-GIG. Continental did operate EWR-GIG, initially with a DC10-30 and then a 767-400ER but the route was axed immediately after 9/11 and never resumed.
     
    dcajet
    Posts: 3760
    Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:08 pm

    With international arrivals into Argentina 15% up YoY, the NYC-BUE route has been seeing high LFs, and more so this Easter week. Just a snaphsot of the 3 non stops arrivals from the NYC area to EZE from this morning:

    -AR 1301: 272 PAX - 100% - A330-223 (LV-FNJ). - Codeshare with Delta Air Lines
    -AA 953: 268 PAX - 98,17% - B777-223(ER) (N776AN).
    -UA 979: 178 PAX - 83,18% - B767-322(ER) (N663UA).
    "Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
     
    Catarrento
    Posts: 1
    Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:52 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:36 pm

    Mia - Eze on AA is only two per day. The third is only run in high season—Dec-Feb
     
    kondoo
    Posts: 21
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2016 4:34 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Sun Apr 21, 2019 2:05 am

    DCAFlyer01 wrote:
    American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.



    Let's remember that the only reason UA added EWREZE was because the VPs at Network Planning (many ex-AA) knew how well AA did on that route. They are no genius, just had insider info.
     
    N649DL
    Posts: 473
    Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:21 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:20 am

    kondoo wrote:
    DCAFlyer01 wrote:
    American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.



    Let's remember that the only reason UA added EWREZE was because the VPs at Network Planning (many ex-AA) knew how well AA did on that route. They are no genius, just had insider info.


    Actually it was because UA thought EWR would be a better fit for the route post merger and moved it from IAD. IAD-EZE I don't think had anything wrong with it, it was that EWR had more feed going into it. Then UA dropped EWR-EZE and brought it back fairly recently.
     
    Cointrin330
    Topic Author
    Posts: 1009
    Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Sun Apr 21, 2019 12:15 pm

    kondoo wrote:
    DCAFlyer01 wrote:
    American owns Argentina. I would never consider UA or DL. DL has issues all the time and with only 1 flight a day they have no wiggle room for any MX issues.



    Let's remember that the only reason UA added EWREZE was because the VPs at Network Planning (many ex-AA) knew how well AA did on that route. They are no genius, just had insider info.


    The history of UA service to EZE from NYC is long. The route operated from JFK from the early 1990s until the early 2000s, when it was shifted to IAD. Post merger with CO, UA moved it back to the Greater NY area and operated it from EWR for one season, 2013, but dropped it due to Argentina's economic crisis at that time.

    UA has 2 x daily flights from EZE (one to IAH and the other to EWR) using 772ER (IAH) and 767-400/300ER (EWR). Delta has a single daily flight (1 x A330) to ATL, and AA has 2 x daily to MIA (3 in peak northern hemisphere winter), 1 x daily to DFW, 1 x daily to JFK, and 4 x weekly to LAX. DL can rely on AR (SkyTeam partner) should there be irrops.

    I wouldn't say UA added the route strictly because AA makes money on it and the UA execs that came from AA knew it. Argentina is a popular destination for tourists, the NYC market is a large enough one to support 2 to 3 daily flights, and EWR is UA's premier international gateway in the biggest O&D market on the planet.
     
    dcajet
    Posts: 3760
    Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:08 pm

    Cointrin330 wrote:
    AA has 2 x daily to MIA (3 in peak northern hemisphere winter), 1 x daily to DFW, 1 x daily to JFK, and 4 x weekly to LAX.
    .


    And 4x w MIA-COR beginning on 6/6/19.
    "Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
     
    cessnadriver33
    Posts: 1
    Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:53 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 22, 2019 12:27 pm

    dcajet wrote:
    With international arrivals into Argentina 15% up YoY, the NYC-BUE route has been seeing high LFs, and more so this Easter week. Just a snaphsot of the 3 non stops arrivals from the NYC area to EZE from this morning:

    -AR 1301: 272 PAX - 100% - A330-223 (LV-FNJ). - Codeshare with Delta Air Lines
    -AA 953: 268 PAX - 98,17% - B777-223(ER) (N776AN).
    -UA 979: 178 PAX - 83,18% - B767-322(ER) (N663UA).


    How do you see daily flight loads to EZE? Is it possible to compare over longer periods of time?
     
    dcajet
    Posts: 3760
    Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:35 pm

    cessnadriver33 wrote:
    dcajet wrote:
    With international arrivals into Argentina 15% up YoY, the NYC-BUE route has been seeing high LFs, and more so this Easter week. Just a snaphsot of the 3 non stops arrivals from the NYC area to EZE from this morning:

    -AR 1301: 272 PAX - 100% - A330-223 (LV-FNJ). - Codeshare with Delta Air Lines
    -AA 953: 268 PAX - 98,17% - B777-223(ER) (N776AN).
    -UA 979: 178 PAX - 83,18% - B767-322(ER) (N663UA).


    How do you see daily flight loads to EZE? Is it possible to compare over longer periods of time?


    For daily stats you need access to Aeropuertos Argentinos 2000 systems. For longer periods of time, including YoY comparisons, try the ANAC: https://datos.anac.gob.ar/estadisticas/
    "Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
     
    x1234
    Posts: 300
    Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:38 pm

    dcajet, can you give me the load factor on Air New Zealand AKL-EZE flight?
     
    dcajet
    Posts: 3760
    Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:44 pm

    x1234 wrote:
    dcajet, can you give me the load factor on Air New Zealand AKL-EZE flight?


    I can tell you that yesterday's flight was operated by ZK-OKB, arrived at the gate 14 minutes before its scheduled time and had 277 passengers on board, out of 312 available seats.
    "Unattended children will be given espresso and a free kitten"
     
    User avatar
    STT757
    Posts: 13791
    Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:24 pm

    Cointrin330 wrote:
    dcajet wrote:
    VC10er wrote:
    Like: EZE to GIG to EWR daylight. Then UA could maybe squeeze in a EWR-GIG flight filled with pax from 2 big cities.


    No one from Buenos Aires would take a one stop, out of the way route to NYC, adding at least 4-5 hours to the trip and a daytime flight to boot that no one wants to take. Keep in mind Bs Aires is the larger market of the two. And even if United were given 5th freedom rights on the EZE-GIG sector, would UA want to compete with AR/AU/JJ & G3 and Emirates to boot?

    Didn't UA drop EWR-GIG a while back?


    United has never operated EWR-GIG. Continental did operate EWR-GIG, initially with a DC10-30 and then a 767-400ER but the route was axed immediately after 9/11 and never resumed.


    UA did operate JFK-GRU-GIG, before shutting down the JFK international operations. CO flew EWR-GIG-CNF, first with the DC-10 and later with the 764. The flight was moved to IAH.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
     
    mia
    Posts: 864
    Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:40 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:32 pm

    xxcr wrote:
    Seatguru is extremely slow in updating the seatmaps for airlines. They are usually the last site that i'd use for seat reference. UA now offers the following classes when traveling.



    Really? The last place you look? Whats the first and second? Genuinely curious.
    "Like all great travelers, I have seen more than I remember, and remember more than I have seen."
     
    Judge1310
    Posts: 302
    Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:55 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Mon Apr 22, 2019 8:51 pm

    mia wrote:
    xxcr wrote:
    Seatguru is extremely slow in updating the seatmaps for airlines. They are usually the last site that i'd use for seat reference. UA now offers the following classes when traveling.



    Really? The last place you look? Whats the first and second? Genuinely curious.


    Giving it a go here, but the actual airline's website would be the best primary source (if the airline is actually gives a darn about its website). Seatguru is only good for getting others' perception of seats and nominal seat descriptions.
     
    SJPBR
    Posts: 90
    Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 11:54 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:30 am

    STT757 wrote:
    Cointrin330 wrote:
    dcajet wrote:

    No one from Buenos Aires would take a one stop, out of the way route to NYC, adding at least 4-5 hours to the trip and a daytime flight to boot that no one wants to take. Keep in mind Bs Aires is the larger market of the two. And even if United were given 5th freedom rights on the EZE-GIG sector, would UA want to compete with AR/AU/JJ & G3 and Emirates to boot?

    Didn't UA drop EWR-GIG a while back?


    United has never operated EWR-GIG. Continental did operate EWR-GIG, initially with a DC10-30 and then a 767-400ER but the route was axed immediately after 9/11 and never resumed.


    UA did operate JFK-GRU-GIG, before shutting down the JFK international operations. CO flew EWR-GIG-CNF, first with the DC-10 and later with the 764. The flight was moved to IAH.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


    Latter it was IAD-GRU-GIG.
     
    tpaewr
    Posts: 682
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2001 9:01 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:03 am

    VC10er wrote:
    I know those aircraft spend a lot of time on the ground at EZE and GRU. In the 90’s I did do the tag on UA: JFK-EZE-Montevideo (why did UA end that tag?)
    UA also used to tag GIG after GRU, but the ease of that tag ended after 9/11 (from JFK, we only had to sit while folks deplaned, and others pax from other UA flights boarded) “sometimes” that GRU to GIG was quite full.
    I know CO served GIG nonstop on a DC-10 (I think, I did that flight once)
    How many daylight flights are there from Deep South America? VARIG had one I believe. It was a day killer, but also less energy zapping than the RedEyes.
    I’m sure I will be told how stupid it would be: but if UA has multiple aircraft grounded for over 12 hours, wouldn’t one have a chance?
    Like: EZE to GIG to EWR daylight. Then UA could maybe squeeze in a EWR-GIG flight filled with pax from 2 big cities.




    You are correct CO launched EWR-GIG with a DC-10-30. While it did not remain such long, but it actually started out as a day light departure from EWR, and the typical red eye back from GIG.

    The route struggled with the less popular timing. It was the first long haul to see the 767-400 in a gambit improve the bottom line. In the end as noted 9/11 killed the route and the tag CO added to CNF.
     
    mia
    Posts: 864
    Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 1:40 am

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:19 pm

    Except I do not have time to goto the airline's websites and find the seat maps, wherever they decide to publish them. I have NEVER gone to seat guru and found erroneous layouts. Airlines do not normally change seat configs.

    Judge1310 wrote:
    mia wrote:
    xxcr wrote:
    Seatguru is extremely slow in updating the seatmaps for airlines. They are usually the last site that i'd use for seat reference. UA now offers the following classes when traveling.



    Really? The last place you look? Whats the first and second? Genuinely curious.


    Giving it a go here, but the actual airline's website would be the best primary source (if the airline is actually gives a darn about its website). Seatguru is only good for getting others' perception of seats and nominal seat descriptions.
    "Like all great travelers, I have seen more than I remember, and remember more than I have seen."
     
    Judge1310
    Posts: 302
    Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:55 pm

    Re: UA EWR-EZE Route Performance

    Tue Apr 23, 2019 8:26 pm

    mia wrote:
    Except I do not have time to goto the airline's websites and find the seat maps, wherever they decide to publish them. I have NEVER gone to seat guru and found erroneous layouts. Airlines do not normally change seat configs.

    Judge1310 wrote:
    mia wrote:

    Really? The last place you look? Whats the first and second? Genuinely curious.


    Giving it a go here, but the actual airline's website would be the best primary source (if the airline is actually gives a darn about its website). Seatguru is only good for getting others' perception of seats and nominal seat descriptions.


    So then how do you book your tickets or choose seats and such?
    And yes, Seat Guru DOES have erroneous info at times. Whatevs... :roll:

    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