Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
tphuang
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 2:14 pm

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.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3409
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 2:21 pm

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.


Yes, the 41XXs and 47XXs, they are Over Water equipped but are not ETOPS.....
4101
4102
4106
4107
4108
4171
4172
4173

4703
4704
4705
4709
4710
4711
4712
4713
4703
You are here.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3211
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 2:22 pm

752:
N14115 exited GYR maint 2699/18May, now in IAH
N13138 sked to exit GYR maint 2759/20May, heading to IAH

789:
N29978 sked first revenue flight 2816/21May IAD-DUB
 
ericm2031
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:46 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 6:22 pm

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.


I found the article, and it too was confusing. Sounds like they need to get some 76-seaters under scope or they will have too many.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 6:31 pm

Little sign of life today at EWR. UA running about 42 flights a day now instead of the typical 15.
 
Pi7472000
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 6:47 pm

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!!
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1036
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 6:51 pm

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!!


It’s a hub.....do you not see what’s going on in the world?
 
airplanedriver6
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:27 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 7:01 pm

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.

Apples and oranges.

UAL has said they will be converting the 76 seat E175s to a 70 seat config to comply with the scope section of the pilot contract in the event of significant furloughs. Note that United Express already flies some 175s in a 70 seat config so this is not a radical change.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4107
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Wed May 20, 2020 8:45 pm

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.
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1464
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:41 am

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.

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.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4107
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 3:42 am

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.

Certainly. EWR hardly looks like a UA hub operating 42 flights per day, when three months ago they were averaging that many flights per day. It'll be a very long time before most hub airports begin to look like hubs again. I fully expect to see some fairly significant impacts across the networks of every airline, but I have zero expectation of UA ceding any ground on their position in New York. They will lose whatever amount of money it takes to maintain their position, because their long term future is dependent on it. Their absence at JFK already puts them at a relative disadvantage to their competitors (albeit more a efficient arrangement), so they'll need to maintain their presence at all costs.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1881
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 4:32 am

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.


Listening to Scott Kirby on CNBC this morning, it certainly sounds like they’re planning on bouncing back aggressively in competing with the other airlines. Scott said he doesn’t want to furlough anybody and wants to work with unions on reducing hours instead, and it’s been clear in here that they are trying not to permanently retire any aircraft. He must really think demand is going to snap back pretty quickly and that United will be in a good position to compete against DL and AA.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
Max Q
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 4:42 am

Did UA take delivery of all 77W aircraft from Boeing ?
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2068
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 4:55 am

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).
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
Max Q
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 5:20 am

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?
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2068
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 6:36 am

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?


Yes, 22 777-322s for UAL. Seems like they're getting good use these days flying cargo in the bellies (primarily in the bellies anyway). I rode on one of them SFO to AUK about a year ago which was a good flight and the beginning of a great trip to New Zealand (great people, great country).

This spreadsheet might be useful to you; check on the different types across the bottom: https://sites.google.com/site/unitedfle ... t-tracking
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5574
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 7:11 am

FlyHossD wrote:
Max Q wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:

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



Thanks for that, is that 22 airframes altogether?


Yes, 22 777-322s for UAL. Seems like they're getting good use these days flying cargo in the bellies (primarily in the bellies anyway). I rode on one of them SFO to AUK about a year ago which was a good flight and the beginning of a great trip to New Zealand (great people, great country).

This spreadsheet might be useful to you; check on the different types across the bottom: https://sites.google.com/site/unitedfle ... t-tracking

I hope they flew you to AKL and not AUK! Looking forward to seeing more North American 777s and 787s in Auckland before too long.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1600
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 10:30 am

One think I was thinking of is how creative are airlines going to have to get to fill the LHR slots when the exemptions expire? Will we see UA LHR routes from cities that didn't have one in the past because, for example, UA may not need 6x daily from EWR? Will they move those around the hubs or perhaps a one off route?
 
Max Q
Posts: 8254
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 11:58 am

FlyHossD wrote:
Max Q wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:

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



Thanks for that, is that 22 airframes altogether?


Yes, 22 777-322s for UAL. Seems like they're getting good use these days flying cargo in the bellies (primarily in the bellies anyway). I rode on one of them SFO to AUK about a year ago which was a good flight and the beginning of a great trip to New Zealand (great people, great country).

This spreadsheet might be useful to you; check on the different types across the bottom: https://sites.google.com/site/unitedfle ... t-tracking



Thanks for the information
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
United1
Posts: 4153
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:00 pm

fun2fly wrote:
One think I was thinking of is how creative are airlines going to have to get to fill the LHR slots when the exemptions expire? Will we see UA LHR routes from cities that didn't have one in the past because, for example, UA may not need 6x daily from EWR? Will they move those around the hubs or perhaps a one off route?


I would imagine if travel is still depressed when the exceptions expire there will be an extension.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
tphuang
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:01 pm

atcsundevil wrote:
cosyr wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
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.

Certainly. EWR hardly looks like a UA hub operating 42 flights per day, when three months ago they were averaging that many flights per day. It'll be a very long time before most hub airports begin to look like hubs again. I fully expect to see some fairly significant impacts across the networks of every airline, but I have zero expectation of UA ceding any ground on their position in New York. They will lose whatever amount of money it takes to maintain their position, because their long term future is dependent on it. Their absence at JFK already puts them at a relative disadvantage to their competitors (albeit more a efficient arrangement), so they'll need to maintain their presence at all costs.


I would look at it this way. UA has been the most conservative airline amongst big 4 in terms of flying. That is not a surprise given it's dependence on international widebody flying and it's large debt load prior to start of this crisis. Due to its high TPAC exposure, it also got hit the earliest. Kirby has been very aggressive at lowering cash burn by basically cutting all expenses and not flying. It seems to me based on the recent 76 to 70 seater conversion, they are planning for a massive furlough of pilots after Sep 30. Probably bigger than DL and AA. We also know about the 30% reduction in M&A staff. And they were never as overstaffed as AA to begin with. So they must be doing this with the expectation that they will be a lot smaller coming out of this.

DL just told their pilots yesterday that they expect to be running a little less than 75% of their pre-COVID schedule by end of 2021 and that yields will be garbage until 2022 and will be below 2019 levels until probably 2023/2024. Given the slow recovery of TPAC/TATL market vs domestic and Kirby's larger layoffs, I would expect UA to be bringing back flying even slower than that. my guess is that they will be running at most at 70% pre-COVID schedule by end of 2021 and probably 60 to 65% schedule by Q3 of 2021. They probably won't get back to pre-COVID size until 2025. I don't think any of this is unreasonable assumptions.

So just thinking of running a 65% schedule for fall of 2021, which stations come back sooner. I would think that the mid-continental domestic hubs (DEN/ORD) get brought back sooner, whereas the coastal ones that relies a lot on international flying will come back slower and require consolidation. That's probably why Kirby said he doesn't expect international flying out of LAX this year. My guess is they will consolidate on the west coastal international stuff to go through SFO for a while. Otherwise, what's going to happen to SFO? You can either run like a 60% schedule at SFO and LAX or a 70% schedule at SFO and 45% schedule at LAX. It seems like SFO is a far larger priority for them, so LAX will be under 100 flights a day for a long time imo. And on the east coastal, EWR is their main TATL, TPAC and Latin America hub on the east coast. Again, IAD will be smaller since nobody else is going to make a move there, but it's hard for me to imagine EWR not be a lot smaller given the reduction in 6+ hours international flying demand. With less international flying and reduction in really small RJs, I think it will lead to much fewer feed flights in short term. I don't remember how many flights EWR had pre-COVID but I think it's around 500 or more? I would be surprised if UA is runing more than 350 flights a day out of EWR by end of 2021. And it's going to be hard to get back to pre-COVID level of flights until international demand comes back close to pre-COVID level.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:17 pm

tphuang wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
cosyr wrote:
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.

Certainly. EWR hardly looks like a UA hub operating 42 flights per day, when three months ago they were averaging that many flights per day. It'll be a very long time before most hub airports begin to look like hubs again. I fully expect to see some fairly significant impacts across the networks of every airline, but I have zero expectation of UA ceding any ground on their position in New York. They will lose whatever amount of money it takes to maintain their position, because their long term future is dependent on it. Their absence at JFK already puts them at a relative disadvantage to their competitors (albeit more a efficient arrangement), so they'll need to maintain their presence at all costs.


I would look at it this way. UA has been the most conservative airline amongst big 4 in terms of flying. That is not a surprise given it's dependence on international widebody flying and it's large debt load prior to start of this crisis. Due to its high TPAC exposure, it also got hit the earliest. Kirby has been very aggressive at lowering cash burn by basically cutting all expenses and not flying. It seems to me based on the recent 76 to 70 seater conversion, they are planning for a massive furlough of pilots after Sep 30. Probably bigger than DL and AA. We also know about the 30% reduction in M&A staff. And they were never as overstaffed as AA to begin with. So they must be doing this with the expectation that they will be a lot smaller coming out of this.

DL just told their pilots yesterday that they expect to be running a little less than 75% of their pre-COVID schedule by end of 2021 and that yields will be garbage until 2022 and will be below 2019 levels until probably 2023/2024. Given the slow recovery of TPAC/TATL market vs domestic and Kirby's larger layoffs, I would expect UA to be bringing back flying even slower than that. my guess is that they will be running at most at 70% pre-COVID schedule by end of 2021 and probably 60 to 65% schedule by Q3 of 2021. They probably won't get back to pre-COVID size until 2025. I don't think any of this is unreasonable assumptions.

So just thinking of running a 65% schedule for fall of 2021, which stations come back sooner. I would think that the mid-continental domestic hubs (DEN/ORD) get brought back sooner, whereas the coastal ones that relies a lot on international flying will come back slower and require consolidation. That's probably why Kirby said he doesn't expect international flying out of LAX this year. My guess is they will consolidate on the west coastal international stuff to go through SFO for a while. Otherwise, what's going to happen to SFO? You can either run like a 60% schedule at SFO and LAX or a 70% schedule at SFO and 45% schedule at LAX. It seems like SFO is a far larger priority for them, so LAX will be under 100 flights a day for a long time imo. And on the east coastal, EWR is their main TATL, TPAC and Latin America hub on the east coast. Again, IAD will be smaller since nobody else is going to make a move there, but it's hard for me to imagine EWR not be a lot smaller given the reduction in 6+ hours international flying demand. With less international flying and reduction in really small RJs, I think it will lead to much fewer feed flights in short term. I don't remember how many flights EWR had pre-COVID but I think it's around 500 or more? I would be surprised if UA is runing more than 350 flights a day out of EWR by end of 2021. And it's going to be hard to get back to pre-COVID level of flights until international demand comes back close to pre-COVID level.


I think UA will be around 85-90% of it’s pre Covid schedule by the end of 2021. By that point the economy should be doing much better. The virus should be behind us but if not won’t it become a familiarity with everyone? Furthermore, for the very small group of people claiming they won’t fly until there is a vaccine, how long could they hold out?

UA has kept EWR pretty much steady in the number of flights per day at EWR at around 415 ish. Almost all of EWR’s growth comes from larger aircraft rather than regional jets. I myself also agree that UA won’t be running more than 350 flights a day from EWR. Maybe not even 300. But would other carriers be willing to come fill the void?
 
Pi7472000
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:22 pm

It seems so hard to even be predicting schedule levels for the fall and winter. If a second wave returns and the economy totally shuts down again except for essential services it seems we could have a repeat of April and May. I would hope they are taking those models into account. Even though a vaccine is not a cure, a safe effective vaccine seems to be what it may take to help UA to have better models to predict long term traffic patterns.
 
codc10
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:24 pm

tphuang wrote:
Kirby has been very aggressive at lowering cash burn by basically cutting all expenses and not flying. It seems to me based on the recent 76 to 70 seater conversion, they are planning for a massive furlough of pilots after Sep 30. Probably bigger than DL and AA. We also know about the 30% reduction in M&A staff. And they were never as overstaffed as AA to begin with. So they must be doing this with the expectation that they will be a lot smaller coming out of this.


Kirby has been 100% growth since he walked in the door, outpacing the rest of the industry, and most resources went into the domestic market, while continuing an international expansion program. So I don't think there's precedent to suggest United under Scott Kirby as CEO will suddenly turn into a conservative, "capacity discipline" manager in the post-COVID environment. He's already on the record saying he wants to position the company to "leapfrog" competitors during the recovery, and by that I assume he would be targeting AA, in the main... especially if AA finds itself in another reorganization.

As for the 76 to 70 seaters, here is the provision from the UPA:

1-C-1-h Effect of Furlough
If a Pilot on the Seniority List with an employment date prior to the date of signing of this
Agreement is placed on furlough, the Company shall convert all 76-Seat Aircraft for
operation as 70-Seat Aircraft. The number of such aircraft shall continue to be limited as
though they were being operated as 76-Seat Aircraft. The Company may again commence
operating such Aircraft as 76-Seat Aircraft effective on the date that the most junior Pilot
protected by the first sentence of this Section 1-C-1-h is recalled from furlough.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:38 pm

codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Kirby has been very aggressive at lowering cash burn by basically cutting all expenses and not flying. It seems to me based on the recent 76 to 70 seater conversion, they are planning for a massive furlough of pilots after Sep 30. Probably bigger than DL and AA. We also know about the 30% reduction in M&A staff. And they were never as overstaffed as AA to begin with. So they must be doing this with the expectation that they will be a lot smaller coming out of this.


Kirby has been 100% growth since he walked in the door, outpacing the rest of the industry, and most resources went into the domestic market, while continuing an international expansion program. So I don't think there's precedent to suggest United under Scott Kirby as CEO will suddenly turn into a conservative, "capacity discipline" manager in the post-COVID environment. He's already on the record saying he wants to position the company to "leapfrog" competitors during the recovery, and by that I assume he would be targeting AA, in the main... especially if AA finds itself in another reorganization.

As for the 76 to 70 seaters, here is the provision from the UPA:

1-C-1-h Effect of Furlough
If a Pilot on the Seniority List with an employment date prior to the date of signing of this
Agreement is placed on furlough, the Company shall convert all 76-Seat Aircraft for
operation as 70-Seat Aircraft. The number of such aircraft shall continue to be limited as
though they were being operated as 76-Seat Aircraft. The Company may again commence
operating such Aircraft as 76-Seat Aircraft effective on the date that the most junior Pilot
protected by the first sentence of this Section 1-C-1-h is recalled from furlough.


That is true, but Kirby has been doing what he thinks is the right move for UA. Back when he first started, he realized the problem with UA was lack of domestic network on connections, so he started the strategy of building up DEN/ORD/IAH. All of that worked out really well. This time, he has identified cash preservation and survival as the most important move for UA. His moves so far have imo shown that's the strategy for a while. And he has been the most conservative at adding back capacity. Saying many times that UA will only add back capacity when demand comes back. Which is why given the 76 to 70 seaters ( read the seniority list is about 2300 pilot up to the last contract date of Jan 23 2016), I'm thinking it's a good indication that UA is looking to have pilot staff of about 35% smaller. It's going to take a long time to recall/retrain all the pilots afterward.

If EWR was at 415 flights prior to COVID, then I'd be surprised if they are at 300 flights a day by end of 2021.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6120
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:47 pm

tphuang wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
cosyr wrote:

So just thinking of running a 65% schedule for fall of 2021, which stations come back sooner. I would think that the mid-continental domestic hubs (DEN/ORD) get brought back sooner, whereas the coastal ones that relies a lot on international flying will come back slower and require consolidation. That's probably why Kirby said he doesn't expect international flying out of LAX this year. My guess is they will consolidate on the west coastal international stuff to go through SFO for a while. Otherwise, what's going to happen to SFO? You can either run like a 60% schedule at SFO and LAX or a 70% schedule at SFO and 45% schedule at LAX. It seems like SFO is a far larger priority for them, so LAX will be under 100 flights a day for a long time imo. And on the east coastal, EWR is their main TATL, TPAC and Latin America hub on the east coast. Again, IAD will be smaller since nobody else is going to make a move there, but it's hard for me to imagine EWR not be a lot smaller given the reduction in 6+ hours international flying demand. With less international flying and reduction in really small RJs, I think it will lead to much fewer feed flights in short term. I don't remember how many flights EWR had pre-COVID but I think it's around 500 or more? I would be surprised if UA is runing more than 350 flights a day out of EWR by end of 2021. And it's going to be hard to get back to pre-COVID level of flights until international demand comes back close to pre-COVID level.


I think thats a pretty accurate synopsis. You didnt mention IAH and since its my home airport Ill comment on what I think is realistic.

-Non-Latin Long Haul flying limited to LHR, AMS, FRA, and NRT.
-All Latin destinations remain with the possible exception of some smaller Mexican routes
-Domestic flying will bounce back sooner but at lower levels than previous years. Domestic flying at DEN and ORD will probably come back a bit quicker.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7762
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:51 pm

fun2fly wrote:
One think I was thinking of is how creative are airlines going to have to get to fill the LHR slots when the exemptions expire? Will we see UA LHR routes from cities that didn't have one in the past because, for example, UA may not need 6x daily from EWR? Will they move those around the hubs or perhaps a one off route?


Rephrase your question: What market is better than NYC (for prospective passenger counts and avg fares) for flights to London? They have the power of the EWR hub. They're going to need to maintain EWR-LHR frequency to compete with AA/BA and DL/VS(?).
 
codc10
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 1:55 pm

tphuang wrote:
And he has been the most conservative at adding back capacity. Saying many times that UA will only add back capacity when demand comes back.


Has that actually proven to be the case (that UA is more conservative in adding back capacity than others)? It seems that, as of now, AA and DL are around 12-15% of original (pre-covid) capacity. July will be at a 25% schedule; that's already been guided. I can't see DL or AA being any more aggressive in this respect. Even Southwest is acknowledging the need for dramatic changes by the end of the year *if* demand does not return.

On the Wolfe call a few days ago, in response to a question about recovery, Nocella said they forecast the local markets in United hubs will be the earliest to return, suggesting United would like to quickly ramp service back up. I don't think aggressiveness of cutting in response to the pandemic necessarily signals a conservative approach to recovery. As it turns out, the 'worst-case-scenario' originally forecast (to great shock) by Kirby turned out to be even more optimistic than what ultimately played out. I also question the apparent conventional wisdom that United will return slower, and come out of the crisis comparatively smaller, than its direct competitors. Everything coming from United leadership suggests otherwise.
Last edited by codc10 on Thu May 21, 2020 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 11098
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 2:00 pm

United 737MAX9 N27526 positioned MWH-RNT, its first flight since 18 September last year when the aircraft positioned to MWH for storage

Image

https://twitter.com/AirportWebcams/stat ... 36609?s=20
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14103
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 2:02 pm

The thing about EWR that people are missing is that they assume UA's domestic operation exists to feed the International. It's the other way around. EWR is a mostly O&D domestic hub for UA and before them CO and before them PE. UA handles more domestic passengers from EWR than B6 and AA combined at EWR, Kennedy and LGA combined. They are slightly behind DL who has 32 million domestic passengers from EWR, Kennedy and LGA vs. UA's 30.5 million domestic passengers from just EWR. EWR has a higher percentage of O&D traffic vs. Kennedy (75.3% EWR, 70.1% Kennedy).

The EWR hub has for most of it's life been a domestic hub which served the large O&D market. Just look back at some of the old schedules:

http://www.departedflights.com/CO103094p33.html

http://www.departedflights.com/CO020187p17.html

http://www.departedflights.com/PE062685p37.html
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
tphuang
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 2:04 pm

codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
And he has been the most conservative at adding back capacity. Saying many times that UA will only add back capacity when demand comes back.


Has that actually proven to be the case (that UA is more conservative in adding back capacity than others)? It seems that, as of now, AA and DL are around 12-15% of original (pre-covid) capacity. July will be at a 25% schedule; that's already been guided. I can't see DL or AA being any more aggressive in this respect. Even Southwest is acknowledging the need for dramatic changes by the end of the year *if* demand does not return.

On the Wolfe call a few days ago, in response to a question about recovery, Nocella said they forecast the local markets in United hubs will be the earliest to return, suggesting United would like to quickly ramp service back up. I don't think aggressiveness in cutting in response to the pandemic necessarily signals a conservative approach to recovery. I also question the apparent conventional wisdom that United will return slower, and come out of the crisis comparatively smaller, than its direct competitors. Everything coming from United leadership suggests otherwise.


All the charts have shown that UA has cut the most and AA the least amongst the major carriers. AA is currently flying over 20% of their schedule and probably closer to 25% in June. DL is close to 20% for June and 25% for July. So by July, DL and UA will be flying close to the same portion of pre-COVID schedule. My guess is WN will be over 50% of their schedule by July/August. Again, I'm making estimations on their capacity next year based on their network breakdown and also their work force reduction. It's hard for me to see UA bringing capacity back sooner than DL based on their current moves.

Btw, I'm not criticizing UA for their cuts. what Kirby has done will save them from having to file BK. Coming into this, UA faced possibly the most adversity from this due to its high debt load, large widebody fleet and high exposure to international flying.
 
codc10
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 2:25 pm

tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
And he has been the most conservative at adding back capacity. Saying many times that UA will only add back capacity when demand comes back.


Has that actually proven to be the case (that UA is more conservative in adding back capacity than others)? It seems that, as of now, AA and DL are around 12-15% of original (pre-covid) capacity. July will be at a 25% schedule; that's already been guided. I can't see DL or AA being any more aggressive in this respect. Even Southwest is acknowledging the need for dramatic changes by the end of the year *if* demand does not return.

On the Wolfe call a few days ago, in response to a question about recovery, Nocella said they forecast the local markets in United hubs will be the earliest to return, suggesting United would like to quickly ramp service back up. I don't think aggressiveness in cutting in response to the pandemic necessarily signals a conservative approach to recovery. I also question the apparent conventional wisdom that United will return slower, and come out of the crisis comparatively smaller, than its direct competitors. Everything coming from United leadership suggests otherwise.


All the charts have shown that UA has cut the most and AA the least amongst the major carriers. AA is currently flying over 20% of their schedule and probably closer to 25% in June. DL is close to 20% for June and 25% for July. So by July, DL and UA will be flying close to the same portion of pre-COVID schedule. My guess is WN will be over 50% of their schedule by July/August. Again, I'm making estimations on their capacity next year based on their network breakdown and also their work force reduction. It's hard for me to see UA bringing capacity back sooner than DL based on their current moves.

Btw, I'm not criticizing UA for their cuts. what Kirby has done will save them from having to file BK. Coming into this, UA faced possibly the most adversity from this due to its high debt load, large widebody fleet and high exposure to international flying.


It will be interesting to see how things play out, and, as I've discussed in other threads, I don't think it's reasonable to extrapolate long-term strategies from crisis-mode April/May 2020 schedules. But if we are going to take representations of airline management at face value, it would appear (and this is demonstrated by track record) that this management team is far more growth-oriented than previous groups, evidenced by speaking publicly about attempting to regain market share during the COVID-19 recovery. I would expect United, under Scott Kirby, to be anything but conservative. That's really not in his DNA.
 
User avatar
AVENSAB727
Posts: 1386
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:02 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 5:57 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:


I think thats a pretty accurate synopsis. You didnt mention IAH and since its my home airport Ill comment on what I think is realistic.

-Non-Latin Long Haul flying limited to LHR, AMS, FRA, and NRT.
-All Latin destinations remain with the possible exception of some smaller Mexican routes
-Domestic flying will bounce back sooner but at lower levels than previous years. Domestic flying at DEN and ORD will probably come back a bit quicker.

Pretty spot on, but SYD resumes on 23 Oct, MUC on July 6.
Always look on the bright side of Life!
 
LGeneReese
Posts: 246
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2019 3:36 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 9:19 pm

AVENSAB727 wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
tphuang wrote:


I think thats a pretty accurate synopsis. You didnt mention IAH and since its my home airport Ill comment on what I think is realistic.

-Non-Latin Long Haul flying limited to LHR, AMS, FRA, and NRT.
-All Latin destinations remain with the possible exception of some smaller Mexican routes
-Domestic flying will bounce back sooner but at lower levels than previous years. Domestic flying at DEN and ORD will probably come back a bit quicker.

Pretty spot on, but SYD resumes on 23 Oct, MUC on July 6.

..... subject to change of course..... probably several changes.....
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24507
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 9:27 pm

Some color from VP of Flt Ops about demand and schedule outlook.

Many of you have written about a competitor who is adding 100 flights and you are asking about what we are doing. One metric I like to track is the TSA passenger throughput. You can see for yourself that traffic, unfortunately, is still incredibly low. On May 19 for example, only 190,477 passengers passed through TSA checkpoints compared to 2,312,727 on the same day last year. We are seeing very minor improvements, but the improvements are painfully slow. There were days in March and April where we saw fewer than 10,000 passengers fly on United aircraft. Yesterday we carried a total of 32,417 passengers with 28,043 revenue passengers, 1,008 positive space travelers and 3,366 NRSA travelers. Last year at this time we would have carried well over 500,000 passengers daily. The good news is that in July our schedule is planned to be down about 75% down vs. the 90% reduced schedule we will fly in May and June. We will seek to add flying back in a responsible way that allows us to add capacity where it makes sense, but also allows us to be laser focused on cost to reduce our daily cash burn.

.... basically don't look for UA to add blanket capacity. Focus on filing existing flying and minimizing cash burn is the priority.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
jayunited
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Thu May 21, 2020 9:36 pm

tphuang wrote:
All the charts have shown that UA has cut the most and AA the least amongst the major carriers. AA is currently flying over 20% of their schedule and probably closer to 25% in June. DL is close to 20% for June and 25% for July. So by July, DL and UA will be flying close to the same portion of pre-COVID schedule. My guess is WN will be over 50% of their schedule by July/August. Again, I'm making estimations on their capacity next year based on their network breakdown and also their work force reduction. It's hard for me to see UA bringing capacity back sooner than DL based on their current moves.

Btw, I'm not criticizing UA for their cuts. what Kirby has done will save them from having to file BK. Coming into this, UA faced possibly the most adversity from this due to its high debt load, large widebody fleet and high exposure to international flying.


I agree I think Kirby did what was necessary to save United Airlines from bankruptcy. There is no question heading into this crisis of the US3 and WN UA the most exposure with the largest international network and the smallest domestic network. Since a majority of our international network has been grounded UA had to be aggressive and cut domestic capacity down to 10% because the international traffic that we shuffled around the domestic network simply wasn't there. As a matter of fact for about 3 weeks DEN became UA largest hub.

Kirby is an aggressive guy, I don't expect him to back down from this challenge but the challenge he faces here at UA at this moment is how gain domestic marketshare utilizing the fleet we have. Even with both AA and DL announcing the retirement of small portion of their narrow-body fleet their remaining narrow-body fleet is still larger than UA's narrow-body fleet. I know Kirby wants to use this crisis to grow UA domestic footprint but how to get there using our current fleet is the problem he and his team have to figure out.

As far as our hubs go of our interior hubs (ORD, IAH, DEN) UA will look at growing the fastest is DEN. United does not want to loose ground to WN at DEN. Kirby has fought hard to grow DEN, when he joined UA DEN was around 320 departures that was during the summer. Last summer UA reached 500 daily departures during the summer. Kirby nows UA has to be ready for a fight. I think out of all our hubs UA biggest fight will be at DEN. Domestic growth is what fueled UA's growth at DEN, while other hubs depended on a mixture of international and domestic growth, UA growth at DEN was totally fuel by domestic traffic. Both LHR and FRA came about after UA was well on it way to 500 daily summer time flights. Domestic traffic will come back before international traffic getting DEN back in the game will be key.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3211
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 12:06 am

Looking at domestic services, I was thinking it would be great if UA could start a new hub if some airlines falter as UA has plenty of equipment and personnel. Many say UA has a hole in the SE, but I really don't see a golden hub opportunity anywhere. The closest choices would be FLL or MCO, but that would take an airline like Sprirt, Frontier or Jet Blue to get into real trouble. Possibly WN will reassess some of its focus cities. I would hope UA is keeping up on the possibilities of opportunities due to airline failures and/or reductions. Also, some of the LLCs are pretty quick to reassign aircraft and could be trying to pick off some markets.

Many thought there would be possible consolidation in the industry during this crisis, but it seems like its gone silent recently. Does anyone know if HA, JB, AS are more trouble than the Big 3/WN? Could the LLCs consolidate into one airline and become a major player? They all have Airbus equipment (Spirit/Frontier/Allegiant).
 
UA444
Posts: 2993
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 1:44 am

Only airlines I see going down the tubes are NK, G4 (good riddance), and AA going through a restructuring. AS is pretty strong financially last I checked, and B6 wasn’t doing terribly
 
tphuang
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 12:26 pm

I think UA's biggest challenge coming out of this is defending its hubs. Especially DEN, it will be in an uphill fight with WN who has all the money in the world to sustain a loss leading operation to gain market share. I would not be surprised if they buy out F9 to just get their gates at DEN. Remember, UA will also face WN pressure in the bay area, chicago and houston. UA's biggest challenge all across the country is a WN with a war chest of cash and very little debt.

When it comes to SE, I think FLL/MIA is not a great idea, but it will certainly be more open. AA I think will be a lot smaller at MIA given their weak financial position and slow return of deep south America flying. FLL will be quite open since both B6 and WN are likely to focus on bringing back other cities first. I don't think it makes sense for a legacy to build up at a primarily LCC airport. There will be plenty of space at MIA if they wanted to attempt it. I doubt they will. I don't see NK and F9 both remaining independent after this. Either they merge with each other or get taken over by WN or B6.

Does it really make sense for UA to buy an airline for narrowbody aircraft when used aircraft will be widely available at low cost from all the downsized airlines around the world?
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1600
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 12:54 pm

tphuang wrote:
I think UA's biggest challenge coming out of this is defending its hubs. Especially DEN, it will be in an uphill fight with WN who has all the money in the world to sustain a loss leading operation to gain market share. I would not be surprised if they buy out F9 to just get their gates at DEN. Remember, UA will also face WN pressure in the bay area, chicago and houston. UA's biggest challenge all across the country is a WN with a war chest of cash and very little debt.

When it comes to SE, I think FLL/MIA is not a great idea, but it will certainly be more open. AA I think will be a lot smaller at MIA given their weak financial position and slow return of deep south America flying. FLL will be quite open since both B6 and WN are likely to focus on bringing back other cities first. I don't think it makes sense for a legacy to build up at a primarily LCC airport. There will be plenty of space at MIA if they wanted to attempt it. I doubt they will. I don't see NK and F9 both remaining independent after this. Either they merge with each other or get taken over by WN or B6.

Does it really make sense for UA to buy an airline for narrowbody aircraft when used aircraft will be widely available at low cost from all the downsized airlines around the world?


I know it's only one O&D, but I'm booking a few trips on CLE>DEN and I'm a 1mm on UA so I rarely even look at WN, but this time I did. For both trips, WN is $198 and $240 RT each way and UA is $388 (plus an unreliable schedule in June still shows 4x daily). On some level, you need to be "close" on price and then also have a reliable schedule. Undoubtedly, UA will lose some share in the short term (Q2) primarily because they are not really flying vs. WN who is flying more. Come Q3, we'll see. I agree, UA will be in a dog fight in DEN.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 12:55 pm

A glimmer of hope for some junior United flight attendants.

Its no secret UA has a lot of senior FA's with 30, 40, 50 even 60 years seniority still working for the company. However many of those FA's have taken voluntary leave in fact out of more that 24,000 FA's at least 12,000 have taken voluntary leave. One of my long time friends has 28 years he has taken 6 months off and he has told me many of his senior (yes even with 28 years there are a ton of FA's with more seniority than him) coworkers are inquiring if they can extend their leave to a year or more they simply don't want to fly until this crisis is over.

At first I dismissed his claims but in a Business Insider article Kirbys mentioned UA may not have to furlough a single flight attendant because in a world where demand is down 50%, UA already has 50% of our FA's on voluntary leave. So perhaps UA is considering extending voluntary leave for FA's beyond 6 months. While this is may be good new for junior FA's, it's not good news for IAM represented employees. UA still has not reach any agreement with the IAM and that work group has one the lowest participation rates in any of UA's voluntary programs. According to Kirby furloughing employees would help get UA through this crisis but at the same time it would make a snap back difficult. But temporarily reducing IAM represented employees hours would save a lot of jobs and UA would restores those hours as demand returns. I still have a lot of friends at ORD on the ramp and C.S. I'm not sure they will go for this even if it means more people keeping their job. I'm also hearing the number of dispatchers facing furlough might drop do to retirements.

What is clear is this Kirby wants United Airlines ready to go as demand returns how does he achieve that goal while avoiding labor disputes is going to be key.

https://www.businessinsider.com/united- ... urs-2020-5
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1464
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 1:00 pm

tphuang wrote:
I think UA's biggest challenge coming out of this is defending its hubs. Especially DEN, it will be in an uphill fight with WN who has all the money in the world to sustain a loss leading operation to gain market share. I would not be surprised if they buy out F9 to just get their gates at DEN. Remember, UA will also face WN pressure in the bay area, chicago and houston. UA's biggest challenge all across the country is a WN with a war chest of cash and very little debt.

When it comes to SE, I think FLL/MIA is not a great idea, but it will certainly be more open. AA I think will be a lot smaller at MIA given their weak financial position and slow return of deep south America flying. FLL will be quite open since both B6 and WN are likely to focus on bringing back other cities first. I don't think it makes sense for a legacy to build up at a primarily LCC airport. There will be plenty of space at MIA if they wanted to attempt it. I doubt they will. I don't see NK and F9 both remaining independent after this. Either they merge with each other or get taken over by WN or B6.

Does it really make sense for UA to buy an airline for narrowbody aircraft when used aircraft will be widely available at low cost from all the downsized airlines around the world?

I've thought for a long time that if UA were ever to try a focus city (which they seem to have no interest in, so this is just spitballing) BNA would be a great opportunity. The city has been growing steadily, and property values continue to increase. Also for UA, it is equidistant between IAH and IAD. UA doesn't need a MIA type hub. They have IAH for Latin America. If they need a SE hub or focus city, it would serve as more of CLT type hub with domestic connections and a few flights to Europe based on O&D demand. I think UA should pursue it now, and start building a customer base there, like DL is doing in RDU.

Most of UA's hubs are in large and prosperous cities, but Houston has struggled with the ups and downs of Oil in the last decade, and CLE was a city struggling to maintain the level of business that made it a logical hub in the 80's to early 90's when it was conceived (much the way MEM, CVG and STL have declined.) BNA would be a bet in the growth of a new area of the country, so UA doesn't get left out, since they don't have much of a foothold in North Carolina, another growing area of the country. Someday, it could work out the way that IAD is beginning to. Northern Virginia is becoming to DC, what Northern NJ is to NYC, a self-sustaining more affluent market, not whole dependent on the entire metro area with which it is associated.
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1464
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 1:05 pm

fun2fly wrote:
tphuang wrote:
I think UA's biggest challenge coming out of this is defending its hubs. Especially DEN, it will be in an uphill fight with WN who has all the money in the world to sustain a loss leading operation to gain market share. I would not be surprised if they buy out F9 to just get their gates at DEN. Remember, UA will also face WN pressure in the bay area, chicago and houston. UA's biggest challenge all across the country is a WN with a war chest of cash and very little debt.

When it comes to SE, I think FLL/MIA is not a great idea, but it will certainly be more open. AA I think will be a lot smaller at MIA given their weak financial position and slow return of deep south America flying. FLL will be quite open since both B6 and WN are likely to focus on bringing back other cities first. I don't think it makes sense for a legacy to build up at a primarily LCC airport. There will be plenty of space at MIA if they wanted to attempt it. I doubt they will. I don't see NK and F9 both remaining independent after this. Either they merge with each other or get taken over by WN or B6.

Does it really make sense for UA to buy an airline for narrowbody aircraft when used aircraft will be widely available at low cost from all the downsized airlines around the world?


I know it's only one O&D, but I'm booking a few trips on CLE>DEN and I'm a 1mm on UA so I rarely even look at WN, but this time I did. For both trips, WN is $198 and $240 RT each way and UA is $388 (plus an unreliable schedule in June still shows 4x daily). On some level, you need to be "close" on price and then also have a reliable schedule. Undoubtedly, UA will lose some share in the short term (Q2) primarily because they are not really flying vs. WN who is flying more. Come Q3, we'll see. I agree, UA will be in a dog fight in DEN.

I have seen similar things. We have a wedding in September to (hopefully) attend in DC. WN from ALB to BWI was $49 each way, and UA wanted $240 round trip for Basic Economy to IAD. Not outrageous, but still more than double. I know that's not apples to apples between BWI and IAD, but I was cross shopping it, so they should factor that in.
 
codc10
Posts: 2834
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 1:09 pm

Growing a new hub organically is an expensive undertaking, requiring considerable appetite for losses, even in a good economy. No way is it in the cards for any of the US3 over the next 2-3 years.

Scott Kirby has been very hub-centric in his time at United, and there's no reason to think he won't resume his prior (successful) strategy of growing United's mid-continent hubs, which are still generally smaller than their equivalents at AA/DL.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14103
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 1:27 pm

tphuang wrote:
I think UA's biggest challenge coming out of this is defending its hubs. Especially DEN, it will be in an uphill fight with WN who has all the money in the world to sustain a loss leading operation to gain market share. I would not be surprised if they buy out F9 to just get their gates at DEN. Remember, UA will also face WN pressure in the bay area, chicago and houston. UA's biggest challenge all across the country is a WN with a war chest of cash and very little debt.

When it comes to SE, I think FLL/MIA is not a great idea, but it will certainly be more open. AA I think will be a lot smaller at MIA given their weak financial position and slow return of deep south America flying. FLL will be quite open since both B6 and WN are likely to focus on bringing back other cities first. I don't think it makes sense for a legacy to build up at a primarily LCC airport. There will be plenty of space at MIA if they wanted to attempt it. I doubt they will. I don't see NK and F9 both remaining independent after this. Either they merge with each other or get taken over by WN or B6.

Does it really make sense for UA to buy an airline for narrowbody aircraft when used aircraft will be widely available at low cost from all the downsized airlines around the world?


UA, and before them CO, and WN have had a somewhat complimentary relationship.. I point to during the merger of UA and CO they choose to give the 18 EWR slots that belonged to pre merger UA to WN. Also they choose to lease their two gates at Dallas Love Field to WN. WN left IAH, and recently left EWR. They aren't really adversaries. Recently, before COVID, UA pulled back their CLE flying from DCA and LGA. The DCA slots UA decided to use to increase EWR-DCA frequencies. We never figured out what they were planning for the five LGA slots they were using for CLE. I would not be shocked if they discussed a lease to WN.

In Denver UA and WN seem to co-exist very well, UA stated it had become it's most profitable hub even in the face of WN's exponential growth. In terms of future growth at DEN I think UA made out like a bandit with the City of Denver adding new gates as well as acquiring a dozen or so on concourse A. In Houston there seemed to be a possible competitive face off as WN got the city of Houston to build a FIS at Hobby airport. UA and Jeff Smisek in particular made a huff. But in the end it didn't turn out to be much of anything, WN launched some new International routes, but ended up dropping most. The one's they still fly don't have much of an effect on UA's operation at IAH.

WN and UA co-exist in Chicago, Denver, Oakland/ San Francisco, Houston and Baltimore/Washington. I would look for WN to grow in LGA.

I think B6 probably has the most to fear from WN. WN has pretty much been pushing B6 out of LGB, they're the number 1 carrier at MCO and they handle twice as many passengers from LGA than B6. If AA were to sell some assets, such as slots in the NYC market, look for WN.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
User avatar
UPlog
Posts: 556
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:45 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 3:01 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Some color from VP of Flt Ops about demand and schedule outlook.

Many of you have written about a competitor who is adding 100 flights and you are asking about what we are doing. One metric I like to track is the TSA passenger throughput. You can see for yourself that traffic, unfortunately, is still incredibly low. On May 19 for example, only 190,477 passengers passed through TSA checkpoints compared to 2,312,727 on the same day last year. We are seeing very minor improvements, but the improvements are painfully slow. There were days in March and April where we saw fewer than 10,000 passengers fly on United aircraft. Yesterday we carried a total of 32,417 passengers with 28,043 revenue passengers, 1,008 positive space travelers and 3,366 NRSA travelers. Last year at this time we would have carried well over 500,000 passengers daily. The good news is that in July our schedule is planned to be down about 75% down vs. the 90% reduced schedule we will fly in May and June. We will seek to add flying back in a responsible way that allows us to add capacity where it makes sense, but also allows us to be laser focused on cost to reduce our daily cash burn.

.... basically don't look for UA to add blanket capacity. Focus on filing existing flying and minimizing cash burn is the priority.


I would agree.

Now is not the time to add flying for sake of market share or simply to say you have X number of flights.

Focus needs to be on keeping the red ink to a minimum and survival long term.


Related with pulled down schedules anyone known how hub banks and connectivity is working today?
Obviously banks are much smaller and presume far fewer.
I fly your boxes
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24507
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 4:46 pm

UPlog wrote:
Related with pulled down schedules anyone known how hub banks and connectivity is working today?
Obviously banks are much smaller and presume far fewer.


Yes the hub banks have been reshaped. For example ORD basically has two primary banks with the May schedule - around 915am and 530pm to consolidate connecting traffic flow.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1881
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 5:05 pm

STT757 wrote:
UA, and before them CO, and WN have had a somewhat complimentary relationship.. I point to during the merger of UA and CO they choose to give the 18 EWR slots that belonged to pre merger UA to WN. Also they choose to lease their two gates at Dallas Love Field to WN. WN left IAH, and recently left EWR. They aren't really adversaries. Recently, before COVID, UA pulled back their CLE flying from DCA and LGA. The DCA slots UA decided to use to increase EWR-DCA frequencies. We never figured out what they were planning for the five LGA slots they were using for CLE. I would not be shocked if they discussed a lease to WN.

In Denver UA and WN seem to co-exist very well, UA stated it had become it's most profitable hub even in the face of WN's exponential growth. In terms of future growth at DEN I think UA made out like a bandit with the City of Denver adding new gates as well as acquiring a dozen or so on concourse A. In Houston there seemed to be a possible competitive face off as WN got the city of Houston to build a FIS at Hobby airport. UA and Jeff Smisek in particular made a huff. But in the end it didn't turn out to be much of anything, WN launched some new International routes, but ended up dropping most. The one's they still fly don't have much of an effect on UA's operation at IAH.

WN and UA co-exist in Chicago, Denver, Oakland/ San Francisco, Houston and Baltimore/Washington. I would look for WN to grow in LGA.

I think B6 probably has the most to fear from WN. WN has pretty much been pushing B6 out of LGB, they're the number 1 carrier at MCO and they handle twice as many passengers from LGA than B6. If AA were to sell some assets, such as slots in the NYC market, look for WN.


"Co-exist" is a very kind way of saying "fierce competitors."

I don't really understand how you arrive at your conclusion. UA's weakness is the domestic market, which happens to be WN's greatest strenght. WN is a substantial competitor in virtually all of UA's hub markets. They have by far the least debt out of the big four, and they are best poised to bounce back the soonest as domestic travel is going to come back first. WN would love to eat UA's lunch at their hubs. They certainly were doing that for some time in places like DEN when management was asleep at the wheel for years.

Once travel demand returns, I expect UA to aggressively fight to keep and grow its domestic market share in its hub markets. WN and others that are stronger domestically could gobble it up pretty quickly if UA flinches. Good thing UA has a great management team.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
UALifer
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:35 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 5:51 pm

UPlog wrote:
Related with pulled down schedules anyone known how hub banks and connectivity is working today?
Obviously banks are much smaller and presume far fewer.


Banks aren't actually that much smaller, just significantly fewer.

ORD has two banks - 75-80 departures each
DEN has two banks - 65-70 departures each
IAH has two banks - 60-65 departures each
SFO has two banks - 30-35 departures each
IAD has one bank - 65-70 departures
LAX and EWR don't have connecting banks (and didn't really before this either)
 
User avatar
adamblang
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 5:47 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, & Livery Thread - 2020

Fri May 22, 2020 6:07 pm

intotheair wrote:
STT757 wrote:
UA, and before them CO, and WN have had a somewhat complimentary relationship.

In Denver UA and WN seem to co-exist very well, UA stated it had become it's most profitable hub even in the face of WN's exponential growth.

WN and UA co-exist in Chicago, Denver, Oakland/ San Francisco, Houston and Baltimore/Washington. I would look for WN to grow in LGA.


"Co-exist" is a very kind way of saying "fierce competitors."


By my count Southwest serves 90 stations in the 50 U.S. states while United serves 238. So yes Southwest and United compete head-to-head getting folks between Denver and Los Angles or between Chicago and Houston. But there's a lot of places they don't compete:

  • Anybody trying to travel to/from small/medium-sized cities in the U.S. doesn't have Southwest as an option
  • Anybody who's interested in status on an airline who ever needs to visit a small/medium-sized city is going to have to think hard about flying Southwest in markets Southwest does serve
  • Southwest isn't competing for passengers who care about premium cabins, lounges, or things like that
  • Southwest isn't a threat when it comes to anybody flying to international destinations that aren't resort Caribbean or Latin America destinations

Even though Southwest is the largest U.S. airline by domestic passengers transported, there are massive swaths of the market they don't compete for at all. American and Delta, however, are fighting over all of those market segments.

In the Kirby era, we've seen all sorts of small-market stations added, all of which Southwest doesn't serve, many of which American and Delta don't serve, which I assume is an effort to insulate United against competition and bolster the value proposition of "United should be your airline of choice because it can get you anywhere better than anyone else can."

Is Southwest a competitor? Absolutely. Is it the most direct competitor? No.

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