redrooster3 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

United will run 25% of their July schedule. UA execs also noted that cancellations are done and booking have slightly improved.

This news, although not the 100% schedule operation that everybody wants, is still good and positive news. I cant find this information though so I hope you're right.

fun2fly wrote:

From that document for fleet planning purposes, it looks like the open 8x 789's and 8x 78J's will end the widebody expansion at the end of 2021 most likely until the A350's.

"In 2022, the Company does not expect to be required to take delivery of any new aircraft and expects that non-aircraft adjusted capital expenditures will not exceed $500 million."

I am encouraged to hear UA's new 25% number, it seems consistent with DL's adds and a good step for all involved to get back at it.

LGeneReese wrote:

fun2fly wrote:

From that document for fleet planning purposes, it looks like the open 8x 789's and 8x 78J's will end the widebody expansion at the end of 2021 most likely until the A350's.

"In 2022, the Company does not expect to be required to take delivery of any new aircraft and expects that non-aircraft adjusted capital expenditures will not exceed $500 million."

I am encouraged to hear UA's new 25% number, it seems consistent with DL's adds and a good step for all involved to get back at it.

What of the plan to acquire used 73Gs from WN and A319s from EasyJet? Are these projects now on hold or are they considered funded and continuing? All of these planes would be beneficial as replacements for older craft.

LGeneReese wrote:

fun2fly wrote:

From that document for fleet planning purposes, it looks like the open 8x 789's and 8x 78J's will end the widebody expansion at the end of 2021 most likely until the A350's.

"In 2022, the Company does not expect to be required to take delivery of any new aircraft and expects that non-aircraft adjusted capital expenditures will not exceed $500 million."

I am encouraged to hear UA's new 25% number, it seems consistent with DL's adds and a good step for all involved to get back at it.

What of the plan to acquire used 73Gs from WN and A319s from EasyJet? Are these projects now on hold or are they considered funded and continuing? All of these planes would be beneficial as replacements for older craft.

ordbosewr wrote:

The SEC filing does not specifically call out any of the types of capital expenditures. The reference to the 787's expected is not called out, but likely.
It may be that the $2B includes both widebody and narrowbody, I do not know.

tphuang wrote:

I just saw that UA is starting to remove seats from some of its RJ to be compliant with scope agreement. Does that mean we will see more CRJ550? Or is this a different type of conversion?

Blockplus wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I just saw that UA is starting to remove seats from some of its RJ to be compliant with scope agreement. Does that mean we will see more CRJ550? Or is this a different type of conversion?

2big possibilities I see. 1. They are preparing to furlough more pilots than Jan 2016 hire date ( that mandates removal of seats) or . The republic e170s are gonna disappear. As they are smaller and burn about as much as the 175 advanced even configured to 70 seats.

fun2fly wrote:

Two comments: "new" is the term they stated, not used or perhaps all used will be delivered in 2020/2021. Either way, capex will be down a lot.

N3340W wrote:

So it appears that N777UA is being dusted off for a flight tomorrow (5/20) SFO-EWR as UA711. Was this expected, or a surprise to those who follow the fleet status?

MIflyer12 wrote:

fun2fly wrote:

Two comments: "new" is the term they stated, not used or perhaps all used will be delivered in 2020/2021. Either way, capex will be down a lot.

The use of 'new' in that context is interesting. Given the commitments for used aircraft there could be more clarity. From Reuters, emphasis mine:

United, which is due to present at the Wolfe conference later on Tuesday, said its total adjusted capital expenditure for 2021 would be close to $2 billion versus around $4.5 billion this year, falling to below $500 million in 2022 when it does not expect to take delivery of any new aircraft. It is taking fully financed jet deliveries this year and next.

How about unfinanced aircraft for 2020-2021? Are they saying those are deferred, or that everything committed is financed?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN22V1Y9

fightforlove wrote:

I have a friend who's a United pilot on the 757/767, and he's getting laid-off. I think we can expect to see substantial cuts to the 757/767 fleets.

Pi7472000 wrote:

fightforlove wrote:

I have a friend who's a United pilot on the 757/767, and he's getting laid-off. I think we can expect to see substantial cuts to the 757/767 fleets.

Very sad!!! 767 was the most comfortable ride internationally at United!! I wonder if pilots became part time if that could save some jobs!! Many industries are moving to part time work to at least employ more people.

KlimaBXsst wrote:

codc10 wrote:

United disclosed that it confidentially settled with Boeing in the first quarter on compensation for the 737MAX delays. Wonder if this has anything to do with it.

Yes

fightforlove wrote:

I have a friend who's a United pilot on the 757/767, and he's getting laid-off. I think we can expect to see substantial cuts to the 757/767 fleets.

CriticalPoint wrote:

PRAirbus wrote:

United announced pilot furloughs and base closures and now are adding these planes? Wondering how UA fleet cuts compare to AA/DL.A sad Fall is approaching for US carriers...I suspect there will be another industry bailout

NO furloughs have been announced!!!!!

For god sakes people LISTEN TO THE ACTUAL EMPLOYEES

jayunited wrote:

ordbosewr wrote:

The SEC filing does not specifically call out any of the types of capital expenditures. The reference to the 787's expected is not called out, but likely.
It may be that the $2B includes both widebody and narrowbody, I do not know.

I would be shocked if UA restarted the Polaris/PE program before Q4 2021 at the earliest. Looking at the fleet except for the 3 PW 77Es that were scheduled to join the domestic fleet the only 77E frame without Polaris/PE is N77014. Of the 763 fleet only 7 frames still have the old diamond seats those frames can either be held in long term storage or retired (they are some of the oldest frames in the fleet). The 77Ws and 78Xs are being delivered with Polaris/PE installed this just leaves both the 788s and 789s. Of the 12 788s in the fleet only 4 have been reconfigured and of the 789s delivered prior to Q4 2019 only 2 have been reconfigured. Basically once the recovery starts UA could just leave the 764s, the 7 763 frames that have diamond seats and the one 77E in storage. By doing this UA could then assure passengers on any international flight operated by a 77W, 77E, 78X, and 763 that their flight would be on a Polaris equip aircraft. That leaves only the 788s/789s, UA could either isolate the Polaris/PE equip 788/9s to certain routes or let them all float around the system.

Looking at the narrow body fleet UA has done a great job with the A319 fleet with the exception of 14 frames the entire A319 fleet has been reconfigured with 12 brand new first class seats. The 14 frames still in the old configuration of 8 first class seats are all in storage. The entire 753 fleet has been reconfigured with 234 total seats. Only 11 RR powered 752 have been reconfigured with slimline seats, (not sure if those 11 frames are part of the 16 frames stored at airport locations or if they are part of the larger fleet stored at long term facilities like ROW, I simply don't feel like cross referencing the tail numbers).

Also I think construction on new United Clubs and Polaris lounges will cease until 2022 at the earliest, even at an airport like EWR where a UC is so desperately needed I think everything is on hold until our financial situation improves.

11C wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

PRAirbus wrote:

United announced pilot furloughs and base closures and now are adding these planes? Wondering how UA fleet cuts compare to AA/DL.A sad Fall is approaching for US carriers...I suspect there will be another industry bailout

NO furloughs have been announced!!!!!

For god sakes people LISTEN TO THE ACTUAL EMPLOYEES

Aren’t we always the last to know? Not being a smart ass, but it seems like Wall Street will have all their ducks in a row way before anything is disclosed.

FlyHossD wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

United 767 are going to stay around a while, they are paid for and have new seats. They are efficient at flying to Europe with their new Polaris interiors from Newark and Chicago. Eventually UA may do what AA is doing and buy more 787-8 to replace the 767-300ER fleet. Early 777 could certainly be leaving the UA fleet, but the 757 are the first toast if UA is going to burn beard.

How's the dispatch reliability of the UA 767-300s? I'm sure it's better now than it used to be pre-merger, but what is it now?

sadde wrote:

11C wrote:

Head has to be solidly in the sand to not see that 10/1 the effects of displacement bids will be felt and furloughs will begin. The 75/767 are largely junior at UA. Furloughs will therefore have an effect on pilots on those fleets in a disproportionate way.

jayunited wrote:

When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.

tphuang wrote:

I just saw that UA is starting to remove seats from some of its RJ to be compliant with scope agreement. Does that mean we will see more CRJ550? Or is this a different type of conversion?

strfyr51 wrote:

Okcflyer wrote:

The problem with the 764 is that it has too many unique attributes. Special gear based on 777 design. Special flight deck with 777 components and not used on another high volume 767. In UA’s case, the only CF6 on property. All of these increase execution risk and therefore cost. While the frame itself is efficient, it doesn’t fit within synergies of a large organization.

Stick a fork in most 777HDs (mid 90’s). Those only make sense on Hawaii service from IAH/ORD/DEN/SFO (maxed with cargo).

The 753 is a similar story. Good economics when flying. Stranger. Not worth the time and effort without a large 752 fleet as well.

I think most interesting will be what happens on the narrow bodies. Retirements will happen, especially as MAX’s are delivered. *What* retires first will be most interesting. Early IAE powered Airbuses? Early CFM 737’s? Will the A319/737 size stick around in numbers (Meaning A320’s / 738’s retired) or will the smallest get the whack.

In the booming economy, the small incremental cost of the 738/A320 was considered trivial and easily covered by revenue management practices.

With a contracted market, those 5-6% cost savings can add up, and I’ve always wonder if the engine maintenance factor was properly accounted for. Due to their lower trust, they don’t deteriorate as quickly (fuel savings) and can last longer before overhaul. I suppose in large fleets those smaller birds for the longest time engines off the heavier-worked frames.

you could be right however? I suspect that you're wrong. the 737-700's and maybe non ETOPS 737's might be leaving if any are. the A319;s all have the range to fly conus to HNL and all over the Americas. North to south. they can be the backbone of the returning passenger traffic domestically until we need larger airplanes on a daily basis.

airmec7 wrote:

All 737’s are ETOPS and no 319 is over water certified. Only a small handful of 320 are over water certified.

CALTECH wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

Okcflyer wrote:

The problem with the 764 is that it has too many unique attributes. Special gear based on 777 design. Special flight deck with 777 components and not used on another high volume 767. In UA’s case, the only CF6 on property. All of these increase execution risk and therefore cost. While the frame itself is efficient, it doesn’t fit within synergies of a large organization.

Stick a fork in most 777HDs (mid 90’s). Those only make sense on Hawaii service from IAH/ORD/DEN/SFO (maxed with cargo).

The 753 is a similar story. Good economics when flying. Stranger. Not worth the time and effort without a large 752 fleet as well.

I think most interesting will be what happens on the narrow bodies. Retirements will happen, especially as MAX’s are delivered. *What* retires first will be most interesting. Early IAE powered Airbuses? Early CFM 737’s? Will the A319/737 size stick around in numbers (Meaning A320’s / 738’s retired) or will the smallest get the whack.

In the booming economy, the small incremental cost of the 738/A320 was considered trivial and easily covered by revenue management practices.

With a contracted market, those 5-6% cost savings can add up, and I’ve always wonder if the engine maintenance factor was properly accounted for. Due to their lower trust, they don’t deteriorate as quickly (fuel savings) and can last longer before overhaul. I suppose in large fleets those smaller birds for the longest time engines off the heavier-worked frames.

you could be right however? I suspect that you're wrong. the 737-700's and maybe non ETOPS 737's might be leaving if any are. the A319;s all have the range to fly conus to HNL and all over the Americas. North to south. they can be the backbone of the returning passenger traffic domestically until we need larger airplanes on a daily basis.

All 737s are ETOPS.
No A-319/320 are ETOPS.

airmec7 wrote:

All 737’s are ETOPS and no 319 is over water certified. Only a small handful of 320 are over water certified.

Do not see any Airbus aircraft ETOPS certified.
All 737s are ETOPS as you stated.

ericm2031 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I just saw that UA is starting to remove seats from some of its RJ to be compliant with scope agreement. Does that mean we will see more CRJ550? Or is this a different type of conversion?

Care to elaborate? All the CRJ700s were planned to be converted to G7 CRJ550 except for some OO birds to that are needed for ASE and MMH. But there are some strong signs on both the OO and YV earnings calls that G7 is struggling financially and this is currently on hiatus.

codc10 wrote:

CALTECH wrote:

strfyr51 wrote:

you could be right however? I suspect that you're wrong. the 737-700's and maybe non ETOPS 737's might be leaving if any are. the A319;s all have the range to fly conus to HNL and all over the Americas. North to south. they can be the backbone of the returning passenger traffic domestically until we need larger airplanes on a daily basis.

All 737s are ETOPS.
No A-319/320 are ETOPS.

airmec7 wrote:

All 737’s are ETOPS and no 319 is over water certified. Only a small handful of 320 are over water certified.

Do not see any Airbus aircraft ETOPS certified.
All 737s are ETOPS as you stated.

Some 320s have rafts for EOW operations in the Caribbean but no ETOPS.

jayunited wrote:

sadde wrote:

11C wrote:

Head has to be solidly in the sand to not see that 10/1 the effects of displacement bids will be felt and furloughs will begin. The 75/767 are largely junior at UA. Furloughs will therefore have an effect on pilots on those fleets in a disproportionate way.

When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.

The 767s were not junior at all depending on the hub a pilot needed a good 13-15 years of seniority to get on the 767. The 764s were not junior at all a 764 pilot was paid the same hourly rate at a 777 pilot. For pilots who loved international flying but did not want to fly long haul and ultra long haul routes the 763 and 764 fleet were their go to fleet types especially the 764s simple because of the pay. It was always interesting walking through pilot crew scheduling anytime there was an open 764 trip pilots were all over it some trying to drop their 763 line to pick up a 764 line.

JFKalumni wrote:

tphuang wrote:

CX747 wrote:

You certainly can replace a 757/767 with a 787 and do it profitably. Instead of 3 daily EWR-LHR 757 flights, you now have 1 787 flight. All the pax and cargo go on that one flight. That's it, you want to go to Heathrow from Newark, then you get one United option. Maybe you don't even get it daily flight, just three times a week. Not multiple evening departures etc.

UA and other airlines have already done this to an extent. UA is grounding all their 757s. So, you need a route done next week? It is either a 737, 777 or 787. No more 757, so in essence, no more A321 need for right now. You either get it done with a 737 OR you figure out how to do it with a 787.

Not every route has as much demand as EWR-LHR. There are a lot of routes right now like EWR-MAD, where UA probably can't fill daily 787 year round. But if they had A321, they might be able to do it. Lower capacity aircraft that have similar cost will over time beat the higher capacity aircraft.

The advantages that higher capacity aircraft have are:
1) lower cost
2) longer range
3) greater real estate for suites
4) cargo space

With A321XLR, it's CASM is really close to smaller capacity A330NEO and 787s. It's range is long enough to serve the TATL markets. And in terms of real estate, we now have suites on narrowbody that we didn't have before. So aside from cargo, there is really not much other benefits for higher capacity aircraft.

Selling 20 J seats + 140 Y/Y+ seats is a lot easier than selling 40 J seats + 250 Y/Y+ seats.

This same theory works upchain also.
- A380 is no longer needed with 77W + A35J around
- 78X long term will replace 77W, not 77X.

You have a good argument but right now the cargo capacity is keeping many of these airlines afloat. There are many flights where the cargo paid for the entire trip and everything else was pure profit.

EWR-MAD is perfect for a 757 or an A321. Question is are you willing to leave 5 PMC pallets of valuable freight on the ground to right size every aspect of the flight ?

tphuang wrote:

ericm2031 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I just saw that UA is starting to remove seats from some of its RJ to be compliant with scope agreement. Does that mean we will see more CRJ550? Or is this a different type of conversion?

Care to elaborate? All the CRJ700s were planned to be converted to G7 CRJ550 except for some OO birds to that are needed for ASE and MMH. But there are some strong signs on both the OO and YV earnings calls that G7 is struggling financially and this is currently on hiatus.

It was my ignorance. Looks like this is related to pilot contract and furlough.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Little sign of life today at EWR. UA running about 42 flights a day now instead of the typical 15.

Pi7472000 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Little sign of life today at EWR. UA running about 42 flights a day now instead of the typical 15.

Will EWR be considered a hub over the next year or a focus city? I know they seem to be leaving LAX, except for hubs, which is sad as they were always the airline I flew all over the world out of LAX in the 1990s and 2000s. Hope they can come back to LAX and make it the hub it once was!!

ericm2031 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I just saw that UA is starting to remove seats from some of its RJ to be compliant with scope agreement. Does that mean we will see more CRJ550? Or is this a different type of conversion?

Care to elaborate? All the CRJ700s were planned to be converted to G7 CRJ550 except for some OO birds to that are needed for ASE and MMH. But there are some strong signs on both the OO and YV earnings calls that G7 is struggling financially and this is currently on hiatus.

Web500sjc wrote:

jayunited wrote:

sadde wrote:

When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.

The 767s were not junior at all depending on the hub a pilot needed a good 13-15 years of seniority to get on the 767. The 764s were not junior at all a 764 pilot was paid the same hourly rate at a 777 pilot. For pilots who loved international flying but did not want to fly long haul and ultra long haul routes the 763 and 764 fleet were their go to fleet types especially the 764s simple because of the pay. It was always interesting walking through pilot crew scheduling anytime there was an open 764 trip pilots were all over it some trying to drop their 763 line to pick up a 764 line.

It’s not to say all 767 pilots at UA are junior, but it was possible to be awarded 757/767/764 FO in new hire class at United over the last couple of years. Similarly, I wouldn’t read anything into the future of the UA 767/757 fleet because a pilot on that fleet is getting “furloughed” - at UA furloughs are done by pure seniority without regard to fleet. Just to illustrate, DL May have to furlough 80%+ of the current A220 FOs even though that fleet is expanding- those pilots are “too junior” in relation to the entire pilot group.

All that being said Junior is a term of relativity- how you compare to the other people in your cohort. Junior in base means your work Christmas, junior on fleet means displacement or downgrade, junior at the airline (at a legacy, probably 5-10 years) means possible furlough. All relative to the group you are analyzing.

Pi7472000 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Little sign of life today at EWR. UA running about 42 flights a day now instead of the typical 15.

Will EWR be considered a hub over the next year or a focus city? I know they seem to be leaving LAX, except for hubs, which is sad as they were always the airline I flew all over the world out of LAX in the 1990s and 2000s. Hope they can come back to LAX and make it the hub it once was!!

atcsundevil wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Little sign of life today at EWR. UA running about 42 flights a day now instead of the typical 15.

Will EWR be considered a hub over the next year or a focus city? I know they seem to be leaving LAX, except for hubs, which is sad as they were always the airline I flew all over the world out of LAX in the 1990s and 2000s. Hope they can come back to LAX and make it the hub it once was!!

Downgrading EWR would effectively mean abandoning the New York market. There is a 0% chance that happens. LAX is a totally different situation. United controls EWR, and that will have to be pried from their cold, dead hands.

cosyr wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

Will EWR be considered a hub over the next year or a focus city? I know they seem to be leaving LAX, except for hubs, which is sad as they were always the airline I flew all over the world out of LAX in the 1990s and 2000s. Hope they can come back to LAX and make it the hub it once was!!

Downgrading EWR would effectively mean abandoning the New York market. There is a 0% chance that happens. LAX is a totally different situation. United controls EWR, and that will have to be pried from their cold, dead hands.

I feel like the definition of hub and focus city will change for all airlines for the next two years. I don't see UA ceding any market share to AA and DL. If demand picks up faster than their current plans, UA will expand LAX at a similar pace.

cosyr wrote:

atcsundevil wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

Will EWR be considered a hub over the next year or a focus city? I know they seem to be leaving LAX, except for hubs, which is sad as they were always the airline I flew all over the world out of LAX in the 1990s and 2000s. Hope they can come back to LAX and make it the hub it once was!!

Downgrading EWR would effectively mean abandoning the New York market. There is a 0% chance that happens. LAX is a totally different situation. United controls EWR, and that will have to be pried from their cold, dead hands.

I feel like the definition of hub and focus city will change for all airlines for the next two years. I don't see UA ceding any market share to AA and DL. If demand picks up faster than their current plans, UA will expand LAX at a similar pace.

Max Q wrote:

Did UA take delivery of all 77W aircraft from Boeing ?

FlyHossD wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Did UA take delivery of all 77W aircraft from Boeing ?

Yes. I believe the last delivery was about 2 or 3 months ago (N2352U).

Max Q wrote:

FlyHossD wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Did UA take delivery of all 77W aircraft from Boeing ?

Yes. I believe the last delivery was about 2 or 3 months ago (N2352U).

Thanks for that, is that 22 airframes altogether?