Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
UALifer
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:35 am

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

Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:57 pm

AmericanAir88 wrote:
Does anyone have the schedule for EWR in July? Are they planning on using a 787-10 for one of the EWR-LAX routes? Also, I am curious how EWR operations will look.


Domestic schedules were updated last night, so whatever is selling should be mostly accurate now.
 
hollywoodcory
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2016 3:29 am

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

Sat Jun 06, 2020 9:04 pm

Haven't had a chance to review the full month's schedule, but looks like UA is resuming ops to Canada but only to YYZ/YUL & YVR in July?
 
User avatar
Amwest2United
Posts: 283
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 11:36 am

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

Sat Jun 06, 2020 10:21 pm

AmericanAir88 wrote:
Does anyone have the schedule for EWR in July? Are they planning on using a 787-10 for one of the EWR-LAX routes? Also, I am curious how EWR operations will look.


2 - 752- CO Birds
1 - 767-300 30 BC
1 787-10
per day in July
Life is what happens to you while you making plans to live it!
 
AmericanAir88
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed May 27, 2020 8:59 pm

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

Sun Jun 07, 2020 3:18 am

Amwest2United wrote:
AmericanAir88 wrote:
Does anyone have the schedule for EWR in July? Are they planning on using a 787-10 for one of the EWR-LAX routes? Also, I am curious how EWR operations will look.


2 - 752- CO Birds
1 - 767-300 30 BC
1 787-10
per day in July


Just booked last night with a very friendly representative. I am on the 787-10. Its flight 410 that leaves at 8:30. It is weird that today, the flight was operated by a 738. The other days are a 787 though.

Thank you for this.
 
UAinAUS
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:11 am

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

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:48 am

UAX Update:

E175SC:
N607UX entered service with Skywest
N611UX entered service with Skywest
N622UX entered service with Skywest

E170:
N652RW has returned to flying

E145XR:
N12142 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11106 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11107 now parked at TYS
N17115 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N14180 exited fleet, stored at IGM

E145:
N15910 is now back in service
N11539 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N12569 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N26545 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N13553 exited fleet, stored at IGM
 
VC10er
Posts: 4273
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

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

Sun Jun 07, 2020 4:17 pm

I have to admit that I have not really been on a.net for a couple of months...it was just too sad for me. I missed 20 pages!

So, perhaps this was fully discussed; what are UNITED’s plans for the newly refurbished CRJ-550’s?

Thanks!
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
atrude777
Posts: 4424
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

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

Sun Jun 07, 2020 4:49 pm

UAinAUS wrote:

E145XR:
N12142 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11106 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11107 now parked at TYS
N17115 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N14180 exited fleet, stored at IGM

E145:
N15910 is now back in service
N11539 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N12569 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N26545 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N13553 exited fleet, stored at IGM


Are these E145's the ones at Trans States or what?

As I thought they were all going to Express Jet?

So are these pre COVID19 planned retirements, or COVID19 "Retirement" for 50 Seaters as Kirby had mentioned?

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
77H
Posts: 1570
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

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

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:45 pm

atrude777 wrote:
UAinAUS wrote:

E145XR:
N12142 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11106 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11107 now parked at TYS
N17115 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N14180 exited fleet, stored at IGM

E145:
N15910 is now back in service
N11539 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N12569 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N26545 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N13553 exited fleet, stored at IGM


Are these E145's the ones at Trans States or what?

As I thought they were all going to Express Jet?

So are these pre COVID19 planned retirements, or COVID19 "Retirement" for 50 Seaters as Kirby had mentioned?

Alex


It’s really a shame that UA has consistently drawn down ER4 frames over CR2 frames every time the fleet plan strategy calls for a reduction in 50 seaters. In the last few years UA has even gone as far as to reduce ER4 frames while adding CR2 frames.

I have no insight on the variance between operating costs between the 2 types, but from a pax comfort perspective, the ER4 is far superior to the CR2.

77H
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

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

Sun Jun 07, 2020 11:45 pm

I could not agree more. The CR2 love at United needs to end sooner rather than later.
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1483
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:50 am

77H wrote:
atrude777 wrote:
UAinAUS wrote:

E145XR:
N12142 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11106 has been transferred to ExpressJet, back in service
N11107 now parked at TYS
N17115 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N14180 exited fleet, stored at IGM

E145:
N15910 is now back in service
N11539 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N12569 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N26545 exited fleet, stored at IGM
N13553 exited fleet, stored at IGM


Are these E145's the ones at Trans States or what?

As I thought they were all going to Express Jet?

So are these pre COVID19 planned retirements, or COVID19 "Retirement" for 50 Seaters as Kirby had mentioned?

Alex


It’s really a shame that UA has consistently drawn down ER4 frames over CR2 frames every time the fleet plan strategy calls for a reduction in 50 seaters. In the last few years UA has even gone as far as to reduce ER4 frames while adding CR2 frames.

I have no insight on the variance between operating costs between the 2 types, but from a pax comfort perspective, the ER4 is far superior to the CR2.

77H

My guess would be lease terminations and amazing deals on the CR2's. I believe that ERJ's are more cost effective to operate, but if the price to acquire or lease is low enough, the price of oil shouldn't be enough of a factor.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4337
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:07 am

Classic example of United being cheap to a fault. The CR2 is horrible from a passenger experience.
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1483
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:37 am

jetmatt777 wrote:
Classic example of United being cheap to a fault. The CR2 is horrible from a passenger experience.

It is a bit confusing, when they spend the money to make CR5's. But I think they think the ER4's and CR2's are similar experience, as neither has F or true Y+. It is frustrating, as I've spoken to people who don't know anything about planes, but they particularly hated their CR2 experiences.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:23 am

It’s all about the windows and the window seat shoulder room.

I am encouraged that Kirby is headed towards getting rid of 50 seaters altogether but will be interesting to see the actual timetable.
 
77H
Posts: 1570
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 4:17 am

cosyr wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
Classic example of United being cheap to a fault. The CR2 is horrible from a passenger experience.

It is a bit confusing, when they spend the money to make CR5's. But I think they think the ER4's and CR2's are similar experience, as neither has F or true Y+. It is frustrating, as I've spoken to people who don't know anything about planes, but they particularly hated their CR2 experiences.


I personally find the 1-2 layout of the ER4 superior to the 2-2 layout of the CR2. Seems like many passengers familiar with both types have a similar opinion. Moreover, the cabin ceiling seems a little bit higher in the ER4 than the CR2 and in my experience, found cabin interiors of the ER4s to be in better shape than the CR2s, AW’a newly refurbished ones that are quite nice.

And last but not least, as an aviation enthusiast who grabs a window whenever possible, the ER4 has windows positioned in such a way that an adult can readily look out the window without inducing rapid onset scoliosis. The same cannot be said for the CR2.

77H
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24790
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 5:21 am

A bit more insight as to why UA is growing its schedule so slow.

Per Inflight townhall last week:

While travel demand is slowly increasing, we’re still only operating a small fraction of our original schedule. Many of you have asked about why we aren’t increasing flying faster to locations that are opening up (like Florida and Texas). While we’re eager to add flying to the schedule, we also need to be able to operate the route profitably, or atleast not lose even more money doing it. We have a highly skilled team in revenue management and network planning who are closely watching bookings, travel demand and customers willingness to travel. As soon as it’s clear that there is enough demand to justify operating a route, we’ll be quick to add flying. On the international side, you’ll see we are currently focused on hubs that have historically strong international flying demand, which are our coastal hubs versus a mid-continent hub. For our mid-continent hubs, we’ll continue focusing on domestic connectivity that is required to support further restoration of our flying.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
tphuang
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 11:38 am

LAXintl wrote:
A bit more insight as to why UA is growing its schedule so slow.

Per Inflight townhall last week:

While travel demand is slowly increasing, we’re still only operating a small fraction of our original schedule. Many of you have asked about why we aren’t increasing flying faster to locations that are opening up (like Florida and Texas). While we’re eager to add flying to the schedule, we also need to be able to operate the route profitably, or atleast not lose even more money doing it. We have a highly skilled team in revenue management and network planning who are closely watching bookings, travel demand and customers willingness to travel. As soon as it’s clear that there is enough demand to justify operating a route, we’ll be quick to add flying. On the international side, you’ll see we are currently focused on hubs that have historically strong international flying demand, which are our coastal hubs versus a mid-continent hub. For our mid-continent hubs, we’ll continue focusing on domestic connectivity that is required to support further restoration of our flying.


This seems like the difference between AA and UA. UA is making capacity decisions based on the forward bookings/demands they see. AA is making capacity decisions based on demand they hope to see. And in June, it worked out well for AA in that bookings came back faster in Texas/Florida. Now that every ULCC is adding back capacity, that means a bigger portion of bookings will go to them. Unless demand really jumps, I don't see how this leap in capacity will work out again for AA.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 12:32 pm

tphuang wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
A bit more insight as to why UA is growing its schedule so slow.

Per Inflight townhall last week:

While travel demand is slowly increasing, we’re still only operating a small fraction of our original schedule. Many of you have asked about why we aren’t increasing flying faster to locations that are opening up (like Florida and Texas). While we’re eager to add flying to the schedule, we also need to be able to operate the route profitably, or atleast not lose even more money doing it. We have a highly skilled team in revenue management and network planning who are closely watching bookings, travel demand and customers willingness to travel. As soon as it’s clear that there is enough demand to justify operating a route, we’ll be quick to add flying. On the international side, you’ll see we are currently focused on hubs that have historically strong international flying demand, which are our coastal hubs versus a mid-continent hub. For our mid-continent hubs, we’ll continue focusing on domestic connectivity that is required to support further restoration of our flying.


This seems like the difference between AA and UA. UA is making capacity decisions based on the forward bookings/demands they see. AA is making capacity decisions based on demand they hope to see. And in June, it worked out well for AA in that bookings came back faster in Texas/Florida. Now that every ULCC is adding back capacity, that means a bigger portion of bookings will go to them. Unless demand really jumps, I don't see how this leap in capacity will work out again for AA.



I absolutely agree with you tphuang, I could care less that AA will fly 55% of there pre-COVID schedule in July if they are loosing money doing it. The recovery can not be about keeping up with the Joneses it has to be about stemming the tide and survival. United has to stay on top if its finances, and I like the approach UA's revenue management team is taking. United has to continue to work to keep our daily cash burn rate heading in the right direction. Delta's hopes to reach zero cash burn by years end, hopefully UA can reach zero by the end of January or February 2021. If United simply focused on the short term (leisure travelers) it could end up costing us overall. I would rather UA loose a few leisure customers and focus on preserving cash and reducing our losses instead of taking on every ULCC/LCC and UA ends up in bankruptcy. This is recovery is going to take time and right now the LCCs and ULCCs have the advantage because the recovery for now is mostly in the domestic leisure market. United's time will come, we as employees just need to be patience, the last thing United needs to do is try and rush this recovery.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4338
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 7:22 pm

The fleet changes, fleet status, and repaint status posts at the start of this thread have been updated.

There is also a post dedicated to keeping track of stored mainline aircraft.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:07 pm

77H wrote:
cosyr wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
Classic example of United being cheap to a fault. The CR2 is horrible from a passenger experience.

It is a bit confusing, when they spend the money to make CR5's. But I think they think the ER4's and CR2's are similar experience, as neither has F or true Y+. It is frustrating, as I've spoken to people who don't know anything about planes, but they particularly hated their CR2 experiences.


I personally find the 1-2 layout of the ER4 superior to the 2-2 layout of the CR2. Seems like many passengers familiar with both types have a similar opinion. Moreover, the cabin ceiling seems a little bit higher in the ER4 than the CR2 and in my experience, found cabin interiors of the ER4s to be in better shape than the CR2s, AW’a newly refurbished ones that are quite nice.

And last but not least, as an aviation enthusiast who grabs a window whenever possible, the ER4 has windows positioned in such a way that an adult can readily look out the window without inducing rapid onset scoliosis. The same cannot be said for the CR2.

77H


:checkmark: +1

I was sad when DL consolidated 50-seaters down to just CR2s rather than ER4s as well. It's all about the windows for me.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
joeblow10
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:58 pm

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

Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:24 pm

tphuang wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
A bit more insight as to why UA is growing its schedule so slow.

Per Inflight townhall last week:

While travel demand is slowly increasing, we’re still only operating a small fraction of our original schedule. Many of you have asked about why we aren’t increasing flying faster to locations that are opening up (like Florida and Texas). While we’re eager to add flying to the schedule, we also need to be able to operate the route profitably, or atleast not lose even more money doing it. We have a highly skilled team in revenue management and network planning who are closely watching bookings, travel demand and customers willingness to travel. As soon as it’s clear that there is enough demand to justify operating a route, we’ll be quick to add flying. On the international side, you’ll see we are currently focused on hubs that have historically strong international flying demand, which are our coastal hubs versus a mid-continent hub. For our mid-continent hubs, we’ll continue focusing on domestic connectivity that is required to support further restoration of our flying.


This seems like the difference between AA and UA. UA is making capacity decisions based on the forward bookings/demands they see. AA is making capacity decisions based on demand they hope to see. And in June, it worked out well for AA in that bookings came back faster in Texas/Florida. Now that every ULCC is adding back capacity, that means a bigger portion of bookings will go to them. Unless demand really jumps, I don't see how this leap in capacity will work out again for AA.


I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: it’s a chicken and the egg problem. UA and DL run the risk of cutting so deep, that they won’t see the demand come in. Conversely, as you said, AA and the ULCC run the risk of having too much capacity and running even more unprofitably, until they subtract demand.

So far - I would argue the latter is paying off. Maybe not for AA, but anecdotally from data points from myself and friends, the NKs and WNs of the world are running “full” capped planes and adding flights. There was a point in May and early this month I couldn’t even build an MCO-SEA itinerary on UA and even on DL because of seat caps. At least now there are 1-2 options, but that is nothing in comparison to what others are offering.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:00 am

joeblow10 wrote:
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: it’s a chicken and the egg problem. UA and DL run the risk of cutting so deep, that they won’t see the demand come in. Conversely, as you said, AA and the ULCC run the risk of having too much capacity and running even more unprofitably, until they subtract demand.

So far - I would argue the latter is paying off. Maybe not for AA, but anecdotally from data points from myself and friends, the NKs and WNs of the world are running “full” capped planes and adding flights. There was a point in May and early this month I couldn’t even build an MCO-SEA itinerary on UA and even on DL because of seat caps. At least now there are 1-2 options, but that is nothing in comparison to what others are offering.



Airlines like DL and UA are playing it smartly they know they can't take on LCCs and ULCCs head on and win, not in this COVID environment. Right now domestically leisure traffic is slowly coming back but more aggressively than business traffic and international traffic. I think the 1-2 domestic options both DL and UA offer is better than no options at all. However trying and take on NK, F9, and/or WN head on in this environment would be suicided. Again like you and others have pointed out I'm not sure what AA is doing but both DL and UA are taking the right approach. Heading into summer 2020 they will capture some leisure traffic but just enough where they are not loosing money. Whereas AA flying 55% will probably do more harm to their bottom line than good.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4337
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:08 am

Too early to say who's approach is the right one. The question is, can United add capacity back fast enough if needed? I'm hearing of the company requesting voluntary furloughs (COLA) to return ahead of the scheduled date. Just the other day, for the first time in months, I received a work email advertising overtime. If demand does "snap" back United's aggressive cuts will be too deep to ramp up quick enough. That's where AA and WN will have a large advantage, they can absorb demand and convert it into operating income instantly. American is operating double the flights and carrying double the traffic.

There are two distinct strategies and I think you are calling United the winner way too early.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:29 am

You can't compare UA to WN. UA does not have that much cash. And also, UA is far more exposed to the reduction in LH international travel than any other airlines. And it also has most hubs on coastal areas where demand is coming back the slowest.

July isn't going to be a repeat of second half of May to first half of June for AA. ULCCs are really ramping up capacity to take advantage of price sensitive customers coming back. Is this really an area UA should aggressively compete in? Out of EWR in July, I see UA offering more flights to most leisure destinations than its competitions. That's not like June where UA I think really did cut too much and didn't have enough capacity to capture the demand.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4337
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:34 am

Sure they have different models - but they also have incredible amounts of overlap in the domestic market, one which WN is salivating to capture more of UA's share. If UA can't adapt then they will suffer on the domestic front to what WN is putting out there. We aren't talking about G4 flying old folks to vegas and college kids to south beach. This is an airline with significant capacity in some of UA's largest markets. Losing to WN will be a serious blow to UA's attempt to shore up domestic flying over the past few years.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24790
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:40 am

Here are a couple of stories that might be of interest.

Brett Snyder takes look at why the US3 differs so much. His take on UA is that its hubs are disadvantaged due to uneven recovery in the U.S with their coastal hotspot locations, it's bigger international flying dependence (with a network built for such feed), and also owning the largest collection of premium widebody fleet which are less useful today.

American Bets on United’s Network Disadvantage and Delta’s Conservative Nature to Leap Ahead
https://crankyflier.com/2020/06/08/unit ... advantage/

Another story is by Skift looking at how airlines view summer recovery differently and also looks at AA vs UA and similarly points out different hub structures, seat mix, and exposure to returning markets like Florida where United is far undersized compared to AA

American and United Diverge on Summer Recovery Expectations
https://skift.com/2020/06/04/american-a ... ectations/
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 12:18 pm

jetmatt777 wrote:
Too early to say who's approach is the right one. The question is, can United add capacity back fast enough if needed? I'm hearing of the company requesting voluntary furloughs (COLA) to return ahead of the scheduled date. Just the other day, for the first time in months, I received a work email advertising overtime. If demand does "snap" back United's aggressive cuts will be too deep to ramp up quick enough. That's where AA and WN will have a large advantage, they can absorb demand and convert it into operating income instantly. American is operating double the flights and carrying double the traffic.

There are two distinct strategies and I think you are calling United the winner way too early.


But are they carrying the traffic at a profitable rate? Just yesterday UA put out a really great article on Flying Together that directly address this issue. With so many employees looking at AA and asking why will AA fly 55% while UA domestically will only be at 30%? The answer comes down to profitability, UA will fly some routes where we know we can make a profit. UA is focusing on preserving cash because it is expensive to fly aircraft and it is not simply about carrying traffic it is about carrying traffic profitability. Is AA simply carry traffic just to carry traffic or is AA carrying traffic profitably? In this environment where we are seeing price sensitive leisure customers return we will have to wait for the Q2 and Q3 report to see if AA's move is paying dividends or if it is costing them money. AA's cost are just as high if not higher than UA's cost, taking on ULCCs and LCCs is a gamble.

Another issue the article touched on is what happens after October 1st. Even in this COVID environment there is still an ebb and flow to leisure traffic, right now as we enter into summer there is going to be a nice spike domestically because most international destinations still have some type of restriction in place. But what happens in October when leisure demand drops? If the US remains open and I think we will even if there is a second wave, children will be back in school (either in person or online), and for Americans who manage to keep their job they will be back at work (either in person or work from home). If UA spends money now in a dog fighting for price sensitive domestic leisure traffic and we do not see a return on that investment UA would have wasted a ton of money and for what. If UA and DL wants to survive all 12 rounds of this figuratively speaking boxing match then they have to be smart. It may seem like we are loosing valuable market share but keep in mind most leisure travelers are not loyal to any one particular airline, their wallet dictates which airline they fly, COVID-19 has not changed this reality. I think airlines like UA and DL are willing to take the hit this summer and conserve cash (get the burn rate down) so they have the resources necessary to fight come summer 2021 which is probably when the REAL recovery begins.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3233
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 3:40 pm

I totally understand UA's approach, but am somewhat concerned about aircraft assignments and cost of adding flights.

Generally UA has been heavily flying smaller domestic mainline aircraft (below chart). That could be totally appropriate with low loads, but providing more seats would allow UA to spread passengers (improved social distancing) out and maybe prevent UA from having to advise passengers when the LF gets to 70% that they can change flights w/o cost. I know cash is the most important thing now, but the incremental cost of moving flights from 319s to 320s or 73G to 738/739 must be very low (minimal higher fuel and landing fees plus extra FA that are already on the payroll).

I don't have capability or time to view all flights, but many seat maps out of my home airport SAN (where departures are few) show full seat maps, knowing middle seats and some F seats may be blocked, all windows and aisles can be shown as taken. At departure, I understand UA is carrying a higher percentage of non-revenue travel due to depressed revenue passengers, so revenue passengers per flight is a bit hard to figure. For good employee relations, if larger aircraft were flown, it could allow non-revenue passengers from getting bumped with a LF over 70%.

Airbus fleet flying today
319: 32 flying, 43.2% of fleet
320: 31 flying, 32% of fleet

737 fleet flying today
73G: 10 flying, 25% of fleet
738: 20 flying, 14.2% of fleet
739: 14 flying, 9.5% of fleet

757 fleet flying today
752: 3 flying, 5.9% of fleet (these all have lie flats)
753: 7 flying, 33.3% of fleet

As for added flying, at this point I'm sure UA is looking at incremental costs as that's all that matters vs. having an aircraft parked for the day. Incremental costs only include fuel and landing fees plus only direct crew, labor at stations and maintenance cost to operate the flight vs. having it parked. With low fuel costs and crews/station personnel already on payroll, I wonder what the break-even incremental cost is today. It could be as low as 50% lower than fully allocated costs which include fixed advertising/rentals/administration/lease/interest/depreciation/insurance costs.

Obviously covering (and adding) flights with the right equipment is a very labor intensive process as all flights are under constant review and I'm assuming UA is doing the right thing even though I'd like to see more upgauging.
 
User avatar
UPlog
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:45 am

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:49 pm

jayunited wrote:
Just yesterday UA put out a really great article on Flying Together that directly address this issue. With so many employees looking at AA and asking why will AA fly 55% while UA domestically will only be at 30%? The answer comes down to profitability, UA will fly some routes where we know we can make a profit. UA is focusing on preserving cash because it is expensive to fly aircraft and it is not simply about carrying traffic it is about carrying traffic profitability. Is AA simply carry traffic just to carry traffic or is AA carrying traffic profitably? In this environment where we are seeing price sensitive leisure customers return we will have to wait for the Q2 and Q3 report to see if AA's move is paying dividends or if it is costing them money. AA's cost are just as high if not higher than UA's cost, taking on ULCCs and LCCs is a gamble.


For benefit of others below is the article:

As states and municipalities begin to reopen, United is restoring nonstop service to places customers want to go. Whether visiting family, going on vacation, or conducting business, many customers have told us they are considering flying again. In response, United is reinstating flights at over 150 of its U.S. and Canadian destinations, including the resumption of approximately 140 previously suspended nonstop routes. While overall capacity will continue to be significantly lower year-over-year due to the effects of COVID-19, July domestic capacity will be down 70% year-over-year, an improvement from June, which was down 87% from 2019.
If you get questions:
◘ While it’s encouraging to see U.S. domestic demand begin to creep back toward former levels, we are still seeing softness in demand across the board, particularly for domestic flying.
◘ We are not alone in a taking a more conservative approach – Delta’s schedule looks a lot like ours this July.
◘ Flying airplanes is expensive – and it’s more critical now than ever for us to conserve costs and fly as profitably as we can so we can remain flexible and bounce back when demand returns.
◘ But there’s a lot more to flying profitably than just filling seats – we have to be able to offer those seats to customers for a price they’re willing to pay and in a way that compensates us for the cost of operating our schedule.
◘ We continue to fly more international flights than any major U.S. airline, and we’ve been able to resume as much international flying as we have largely because of our aggressive and successful cargo business.
◘ The bottom line: We would rather fly a reduced schedule, save cash and set ourselves up for long-term success than operate an inflated schedule that costs us money and risks our ability to preserve as many jobs as we possibly can on October 1 and beyond.



Personally I believe UA is doing well by being conservative with focus on minimizing cash burn. Also like others mentioned UA's hub locations vis-a-vis COVID19 hotspots, and its exposure to international flying and feed also certainly plays roles on how it rebuilds flying.
I fly your boxes
 
User avatar
CPS001
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:05 pm

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:06 pm

Is United blocking seats for social distancing? On a B737 on an itinerary next week, all the B and E seats are unavailable, but on an E175 all 4 across are available.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
atrude777
Posts: 4424
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 6:55 pm

CPS001 wrote:
Is United blocking seats for social distancing? On a B737 on an itinerary next week, all the B and E seats are unavailable, but on an E175 all 4 across are available.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


They are not "blocking" middle seats from being sold, but they are holding the middle seats from being assigned.

UA is only "holding" middle seats on aircraft with middle seats, and the first row of F and Last Row of Economy on 2 Class Aircraft, and Front row and last row of Economy on 1 Class Cabin Aircraft.

Since there is no middle seats on 175 and 1 Cabin aircraft, there is no middle seats to block/hold.

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
User avatar
CPS001
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:05 pm

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 7:27 pm

atrude777 wrote:
CPS001 wrote:
Is United blocking seats for social distancing? On a B737 on an itinerary next week, all the B and E seats are unavailable, but on an E175 all 4 across are available.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


They are not "blocking" middle seats from being sold, but they are holding the middle seats from being assigned.

UA is only "holding" middle seats on aircraft with middle seats, and the first row of F and Last Row of Economy on 2 Class Aircraft, and Front row and last row of Economy on 1 Class Cabin Aircraft.

Since there is no middle seats on 175 and 1 Cabin aircraft, there is no middle seats to block/hold.

Alex
Thanks.
 
bigb
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 8:07 pm

tphuang wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
A bit more insight as to why UA is growing its schedule so slow.

Per Inflight townhall last week:

While travel demand is slowly increasing, we’re still only operating a small fraction of our original schedule. Many of you have asked about why we aren’t increasing flying faster to locations that are opening up (like Florida and Texas). While we’re eager to add flying to the schedule, we also need to be able to operate the route profitably, or atleast not lose even more money doing it. We have a highly skilled team in revenue management and network planning who are closely watching bookings, travel demand and customers willingness to travel. As soon as it’s clear that there is enough demand to justify operating a route, we’ll be quick to add flying. On the international side, you’ll see we are currently focused on hubs that have historically strong international flying demand, which are our coastal hubs versus a mid-continent hub. For our mid-continent hubs, we’ll continue focusing on domestic connectivity that is required to support further restoration of our flying.


This seems like the difference between AA and UA. UA is making capacity decisions based on the forward bookings/demands they see. AA is making capacity decisions based on demand they hope to see. And in June, it worked out well for AA in that bookings came back faster in Texas/Florida. Now that every ULCC is adding back capacity, that means a bigger portion of bookings will go to them. Unless demand really jumps, I don't see how this leap in capacity will work out again for AA.


You have no idea what booking numbers are looking at AA to make that kind of judgement. Something else you are failing to consider is different markets which AA has increased its flights to and from and domestic network infrastructure vs United international heavy network. Just like UA seeing increased demand at its coastal hubs, AA is already seeing that demand in and out of Texas, Florida, and the SE states with AA has a stronghold shared with DL. I think the leap of capacity will work in AA's favor.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 10:36 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Here are a couple of stories that might be of interest.

Brett Snyder takes look at why the US3 differs so much. His take on UA is that its hubs are disadvantaged due to uneven recovery in the U.S with their coastal hotspot locations, it's bigger international flying dependence (with a network built for such feed), and also owning the largest collection of premium widebody fleet which are less useful today.

American Bets on United’s Network Disadvantage and Delta’s Conservative Nature to Leap Ahead
https://crankyflier.com/2020/06/08/unit ... advantage/

Another story is by Skift looking at how airlines view summer recovery differently and also looks at AA vs UA and similarly points out different hub structures, seat mix, and exposure to returning markets like Florida where United is far undersized compared to AA

American and United Diverge on Summer Recovery Expectations
https://skift.com/2020/06/04/american-a ... ectations/


I think the experts are dramatically over-analyzing the situation. They're stuck on pre-crisis talking points. They need to wipe the slate clean over what used to be the strengths and weaknesses of each carrier. Instead they're analyzing this as if the previous structural advantages and limitations still hold. That era is gone for good. All carriers have more than enough physical capability to operate a larger network that consists of the right equipment. UA operating a fraction of their narrowbody fleet isn't because of a pre-crisis network that proportionally offered more international capacity. It's not because of regional demand differences in traffic that AA is running more capacity than UA at ORD, and that capacity is to diverse cities such as LAX, SEA, PDX, AUS, MCO, MSY, ATL, DCA, and LGA. It isn't regional differences to explain why IAH is a ghost town compared to DFW. It's ironic to even talk about UA's former international capacity percentage because it was no secret that UA was actively building a larger domestic network in response to the sound belief that UA was smaller domestically they they should have been. And so now the loss and reset of all traffic, international included, is a reason that UA cut their network so deeply and isn't bringing it back as quickly? The connection doesn't exist. The opposite is more reasonable. This is UA's opportunity to correct the imbalance and gain their "natural share".

What this comes down to isn't pre-crisis networks. This comes down to the strategy formulated and the decisions made post-crisis. Granted, some of those decisions are likely affected by internal physical issues that either prevent or limit the capacity actions than can be taken, but outsiders won't know all that, and this isn't the argument being made anyway. Just as much as I thought AA and WN didn't cut deeply enough right away in the very short-term, I'd say at this point it looks like DL and UA ceded the prime recovery opportunity to WN and AA by cutting too much this far out. As more and more people travel, there's often only two carriers to go with. If UA wants to sit this recovery out, that's their choice, but it doesn't take much revenue to turn more capacity into a marginal profit. With the substantial fixed costs of employees being paid to sit around and twiddle their thumbs, the cheap variable costs with today's cheap fuel means that demand doesn't have to be large to reduce the cash burn. And there's plausible reasons for internally getting it wrong. For example, if UA is looking at their own demand profiles, it's tough to make the decision to increase capacity. However, there appears to be a significant "build it and they will come" situation going on. The analysis needs to be from an industry-wide demand perspective. From that perspective, demand is coming back more than what UA and DL are preparing for. And this is where being the first mover (or never mover) is better. If UA and DL came back now, there's a good chance the market will be flooded again. So I don't doubt that coming back more quickly now might not be lucrative for UA, but that is a self-inflicted wound, and it's not because of their pre-crisis network.
 
Super80DFW
Posts: 868
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:03 pm

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

Tue Jun 09, 2020 10:52 pm

tphuang wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
A bit more insight as to why UA is growing its schedule so slow.

Per Inflight townhall last week:

While travel demand is slowly increasing, we’re still only operating a small fraction of our original schedule. Many of you have asked about why we aren’t increasing flying faster to locations that are opening up (like Florida and Texas). While we’re eager to add flying to the schedule, we also need to be able to operate the route profitably, or atleast not lose even more money doing it. We have a highly skilled team in revenue management and network planning who are closely watching bookings, travel demand and customers willingness to travel. As soon as it’s clear that there is enough demand to justify operating a route, we’ll be quick to add flying. On the international side, you’ll see we are currently focused on hubs that have historically strong international flying demand, which are our coastal hubs versus a mid-continent hub. For our mid-continent hubs, we’ll continue focusing on domestic connectivity that is required to support further restoration of our flying.


This seems like the difference between AA and UA. UA is making capacity decisions based on the forward bookings/demands they see. AA is making capacity decisions based on demand they hope to see. And in June, it worked out well for AA in that bookings came back faster in Texas/Florida. Now that every ULCC is adding back capacity, that means a bigger portion of bookings will go to them. Unless demand really jumps, I don't see how this leap in capacity will work out again for AA.


You sure have some heavily negative options about AA without any idea of what AA's bookings actually look like. Over the last couple weeks, AA has been carrying 3 times the amount of passengers daily that UA is.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 12:12 am

Super80DFW wrote:
tphuang wrote:
LAXintl wrote:
A bit more insight as to why UA is growing its schedule so slow.

Per Inflight townhall last week:

While travel demand is slowly increasing, we’re still only operating a small fraction of our original schedule. Many of you have asked about why we aren’t increasing flying faster to locations that are opening up (like Florida and Texas). While we’re eager to add flying to the schedule, we also need to be able to operate the route profitably, or atleast not lose even more money doing it. We have a highly skilled team in revenue management and network planning who are closely watching bookings, travel demand and customers willingness to travel. As soon as it’s clear that there is enough demand to justify operating a route, we’ll be quick to add flying. On the international side, you’ll see we are currently focused on hubs that have historically strong international flying demand, which are our coastal hubs versus a mid-continent hub. For our mid-continent hubs, we’ll continue focusing on domestic connectivity that is required to support further restoration of our flying.


This seems like the difference between AA and UA. UA is making capacity decisions based on the forward bookings/demands they see. AA is making capacity decisions based on demand they hope to see. And in June, it worked out well for AA in that bookings came back faster in Texas/Florida. Now that every ULCC is adding back
capacity, that means a bigger portion of bookings will go to them. Unless demand really jumps, I don't see how this leap in capacity will work out again for AA.


You sure have some heavily negative options about AA without any idea of what AA's bookings actually look like. Over the last couple weeks, AA has been carrying 3 times the amount of passengers daily that UA is.


They have been burning cash at 50% faster than UA this quarter and 25 to 30% faster than DL. And they have the weakest cash position of any airline. And now, WN and ULCCs have all added back a lot of capacity for second half of June and July. That means those mostly leisure travelers are going to be very low yielding.

Just take a look at G4's investor update today to see how much cash a well run airline will still be burning when booking is 40% of normal levels. And AA definitely is not at 40% of its normal booking levels.

Keep in mind that while AA may have been carrying 2.5 to 3 times the amount of passengers UA is, it's certainly not getting that much total revenue. Stuff like cargo revenue and loyalty programs will be about the same between the two airlines and they are going to be a larger portion of total revenue than before. Also keep in mind that the extra customers AA are carrying are going to be a lot lower yielding than UA's passengers, since AA is essentially fighting LCCs/ULCCs for price sensitive customers.
 
Super80DFW
Posts: 868
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:03 pm

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:06 am

tphuang wrote:
Super80DFW wrote:
tphuang wrote:

This seems like the difference between AA and UA. UA is making capacity decisions based on the forward bookings/demands they see. AA is making capacity decisions based on demand they hope to see. And in June, it worked out well for AA in that bookings came back faster in Texas/Florida. Now that every ULCC is adding back
capacity, that means a bigger portion of bookings will go to them. Unless demand really jumps, I don't see how this leap in capacity will work out again for AA.


You sure have some heavily negative options about AA without any idea of what AA's bookings actually look like. Over the last couple weeks, AA has been carrying 3 times the amount of passengers daily that UA is.


They have been burning cash at 50% faster than UA this quarter and 25 to 30% faster than DL. And they have the weakest cash position of any airline. And now, WN and ULCCs have all added back a lot of capacity for second half of June and July. That means those mostly leisure travelers are going to be very low yielding.

Just take a look at G4's investor update today to see how much cash a well run airline will still be burning when booking is 40% of normal levels. And AA definitely is not at 40% of its normal booking levels.

Keep in mind that while AA may have been carrying 2.5 to 3 times the amount of passengers UA is, it's certainly not getting that much total revenue. Stuff like cargo revenue and loyalty programs will be about the same between the two airlines and they are going to be a larger portion of total revenue than before. Also keep in mind that the extra customers AA are carrying are going to be a lot lower yielding than UA's passengers, since AA is essentially fighting LCCs/ULCCs for price sensitive customers.


You don't know any of that to be a fact, you're simply hoping it to be true. You don't know what percentage of AA's, or UA's business for that matter, comes from elite driven high dollar revenue.
 
codc10
Posts: 2907
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:23 am

Super80DFW wrote:
You don't know what percentage of AA's, or UA's business for that matter, comes from elite driven high dollar revenue.


This is true, but what I can tell you with certainty that the "elite driven high dollar revenue" isn't flying right now, and substantially won't until corporations begin to relax travel policies (in nearly all cases, it hasn't happened yet).
 
tphuang
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 2:54 am

Super80DFW wrote:

You don't know any of that to be a fact, you're simply hoping it to be true. You don't know what percentage of AA's, or UA's business for that matter, comes from elite driven high dollar revenue.


i got no stake in the game here.

Just taking a look at the challenges facing legacy airlines right now. G4, a mostly domestic airline that relies on leisure travel and flies minimally out of areas most affect by COVID, is saying they are getting basically under 40% of their regular revenue flying over 70 to 85% of their pre-COVID schedule. So for them, they are getting about 50% of their regular revenue per flight. It's 50% due to a combination a lower LF (probably 60% vs 90% regularly in peak summer month) and lower fares from having to attract price sensitive customers.

Now if you are a legacy, there is a lot of fixed cost involved. Let's say you can cut 20% of total costs and the remaining 80% is split between fixed costs and variable costs like fuel, maintenance, more salaries from more hours by front line cabin crew, landing fees, contracting costs. You will probably need to be getting 40% of a regular revenue on a flight to justify the additional flying. And now yield is down not only due to lower load factor, but also more connection itineraries, less business travel and more bargain hunters. Obviously, the more flights you add, the less likely you will reach the threshold of covering the cost of flight. That's why you see UA and DL being a lot more cautious adding back flights.

This is from LAXIntl a few days ago
"As of Wednesday, at the employee townhall event, Scott Kirby said bookings were down 92% compared to same first week in June 2019.

UA also summarised that May ended with 88% decline in bookings and 94% decline in revenue from them."
A couple of things here. Notice how the decline in revenue is greater than the decline in bookings? That means UA is still getting lower yield on itineraries than it did a year ago even with the reduced schedule.

So 2 data points here.
UA - 94% decline in revenue from bookings and 88% decline in bookings. So 6% revenue from 12% bookings. That's 50% off in revenue per booking. That could be a reflection in just having fewer international business class fares or less high yielding business travelers, but that's a tough reality facing all the legacy airlines.
G4 - 50% less cash coming in per flight than a year ago. over 60% decline in booking revenues.

Let's just put it this way, if AA is getting 25% of its regular booking right now, they would be overachieving expectations. And that still would not bring their burn rate below DL or UA got down to.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:30 pm

Super80DFW wrote:
You don't know any of that to be a fact, you're simply hoping it to be true. You don't know what percentage of AA's, or UA's business for that matter, comes from elite driven high dollar revenue.


No one can say with 100% certainty but looking at the market this recovery is being driven by leisure travelers. Also no one is saying UA's approach is right approach overall. Instead what people are saying is UA originally may have cut to much capacity but flying 30% domestically in July is the right approach for an airline like UA. Why are we saying this first you have to look at UA's cost and like it or not AA's cost mirrors UA's. In normal times UA could take on ULCCs and LCCs and fend them off. This is why airlines like AA, DL and UA all created some form of basic economy. If an airline like NK offered for instance ORD-MCO at $69 dollars each way, while UA may not match the fare dollar for dollar, UA may offer 10-15 basic economy seats on each of our flights at $89 dollars each way. We know $89 dollars is not the actual cost of the seat but without basic economy UA runs the risk of loosing passengers to NK.

In normal times an airline like UA could afford to sell a limited number of seats at a lost but still make money overall on the flight, however these are not normal times. For sure UA could take on ULCCs and LCCs we could fill up our planes with passengers paying $69 dollar fares. For people not in revenue management who may simply focus on load factors, a high load factors would make it appear as though UA is further along in the recovery than we actually are. At $69 dollars UA would lose money while NK would be laughing all the way to the bank. Right now ULCCs and LCCs have the advantage because the recovery is being driven by leisure passengers and we are not in normal times where an airlines like AA, DL and UA can directly take on airlines like NK, F9, or even WN and win. In normal times airlines like AA, DL, and UA could use basic economy to their advantage but now filling a A320 for example with basic economy fares would make our load factors look great but UA would be committing financial suicide. Airlines like UA can't rush this recovery, the recovery pendulum will not swing in our favor until business travel starts to come back and international travel resumes on a larger scale than where were are right now. Until then airlines like UA have to focus on survival and reducing our daily cash burn rate not fighting for price sensitive leisure customers.
 
factsonly
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:54 pm

It seems UA is fine tuning some TATL flying this week.

- IAD - BRU has (temporarily) moved to IAD - AMS.
- ORD - AMS has a 2nd service several days this week.

As a result UA has five AMS flights on 11 June, 2020:

- UA 2775 IAD-AMS-IAD Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner N29978 United Airlines Cargo (previously IAD-BRU)
- UA 70 EWR-AMS-EWR Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner N14011 United Airlines (daily pax service)
- UA 2810 ORD-AMS-ORD Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner N12010 United Airlines Cargo (3x weekly)
- UA 2800 ORD-AMS-ORD Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner N91007 United Airlines Cargo (extra service 9, 10, 11 June)
- UA 2768 SFO-AMS-SFO Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner N13954 United Airlines Cargo (3x weekly)
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1981
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 8:51 pm

factsonly wrote:
As a result UA has five AMS flights on 11 June, 2020:


It seems like AMS gets quite a bit more of cargo traffic that other cities of similar or even larger size. I'm not familiar with the manufacturing scene around the Netherlands but is AMS some sort of central cargo staging region or is a lot of this cargo going into Europe from the US?

Regardless, it's nice to see that there's some sort of commerce that the airlines can take advantage of in this environment.
 
User avatar
adamblang
Posts: 1263
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 5:47 pm

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:56 pm

Interesting article on the cargo operation: https://www.stattimes.com/news/doing-ev ... air-cargo/
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:53 pm

jetblastdubai wrote:
I'm not familiar with the manufacturing scene around the Netherlands but is AMS some sort of central cargo staging region or is a lot of this cargo going into Europe from the US?


This is only part of the picture, but in normal times AMS handles a huge amount of fresh flowers from all over the world. High value, time-sensitive cargo. I'd assume there's also a ton of other import/export goods for which AMS is a logical EU gateway.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1618
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

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

Wed Jun 10, 2020 11:05 pm

FSDan wrote:
jetblastdubai wrote:
I'm not familiar with the manufacturing scene around the Netherlands but is AMS some sort of central cargo staging region or is a lot of this cargo going into Europe from the US?


This is only part of the picture, but in normal times AMS handles a huge amount of fresh flowers from all over the world. High value, time-sensitive cargo. I'd assume there's also a ton of other import/export goods for which AMS is a logical EU gateway.


Seems like UA hired the right guy if they had 1,100 cargo flights in one month...wow.
 
UA444
Posts: 2998
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

When did UA retire their 737-222?

Thu Jun 11, 2020 6:55 am

When did UA retire their original 737-222s they bought new from Boeing in 1968-69? I know they retired the 737-200 completely Halloween 2001 due to 9/11, but those were the old FL 737-291s. By then the -222s were gone. I assumed they were retired in 1998 but I saw a photo of N9015U that said it was retired in 2000, which surprised me. That would be 32 years of service.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: When did UA retire their 737-222?

Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:26 pm

Play with planespotters.net to see disposition of individual 737-222s in their database. You'll need a login to see the 737-222s specifically among the 737-200s.

https://www.planespotters.net/airline/United-Airlines
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:30 pm

fun2fly wrote:
Seems like UA hired the right guy if they had 1,100 cargo flights in one month...wow.


United hired Jan Krems from KLM he is president of UA Cargo and Jan in turn hired Jacques Leijssenaar another KLMer to be vice president of UA Cargo. They also hired a former LH cargo executive (I can't think of his name right now) to come over and join UA Cargo's executive team.

Before UA brought these guys on, UA Cargo was a joke at best. Not to keep referring to bankruptcy but the damage done during and after bankruptcy to this company was staggering and UA Cargo was no exception. I'm sure when Jan Krems left KLM for UA people probably thought he was nuts, however, some people thrive on a challenge, it is what they live for and what Jan saw was UA had the most widebodies out of the US3 and we were under utilizing them below the wing. Jan has put together a team at UA Cargo that has really brought back UA Cargo from the brink, and during this crisis UA Cargo has really stepped up to the plate and it is because we have people who understand CARGO running the show.
 
MO11
Posts: 1508
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 5:07 pm

Re: When did UA retire their 737-222?

Thu Jun 11, 2020 1:36 pm

UA444 wrote:
When did UA retire their original 737-222s they bought new from Boeing in 1968-69? I know they retired the 737-200 completely Halloween 2001 due to 9/11, but those were the old FL 737-291s. By then the -222s were gone. I assumed they were retired in 1998 but I saw a photo of N9015U that said it was retired in 2000, which surprised me. That would be 32 years of service.



I show N9015U last flight was 3/25/98. For many of the airplanes, there was a long period between the retirement date, and the date the airplane was disposed, making some of the website data less accurate. I would guess late 1998 for the -222s, and late 2001 for the -291s/-2A1s.
 
ericm2031
Posts: 1410
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:46 am

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

Thu Jun 11, 2020 2:32 pm

jayunited wrote:
fun2fly wrote:
Seems like UA hired the right guy if they had 1,100 cargo flights in one month...wow.


United hired Jan Krems from KLM he is president of UA Cargo and Jan in turn hired Jacques Leijssenaar another KLMer to be vice president of UA Cargo. They also hired a former LH cargo executive (I can't think of his name right now) to come over and join UA Cargo's executive team.

Before UA brought these guys on, UA Cargo was a joke at best. Not to keep referring to bankruptcy but the damage done during and after bankruptcy to this company was staggering and UA Cargo was no exception. I'm sure when Jan Krems left KLM for UA people probably thought he was nuts, however, some people thrive on a challenge, it is what they live for and what Jan saw was UA had the most widebodies out of the US3 and we were under utilizing them below the wing. Jan has put together a team at UA Cargo that has really brought back UA Cargo from the brink, and during this crisis UA Cargo has really stepped up to the plate and it is because we have people who understand CARGO running the show.


Interesting. Might also explain why so many flights to AMS...
 
nonrevelite
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 2:44 pm

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

Thu Jun 11, 2020 2:57 pm

jetblastdubai wrote:
factsonly wrote:
As a result UA has five AMS flights on 11 June, 2020:


It seems like AMS gets quite a bit more of cargo traffic that other cities of similar or even larger size. I'm not familiar with the manufacturing scene around the Netherlands but is AMS some sort of central cargo staging region or is a lot of this cargo going into Europe from the US?

Regardless, it's nice to see that there's some sort of commerce that the airlines can take advantage of in this environment.


United’s ground handler in BRU shut down.
Airlines : 6E 9W AA AC AI AM AQ AT B6 BA BR CI CM CO CX EA EK ET EY FL GF GF HA HP HX JQ K2 K6 KA KE KL KU LO MA MH N7 NH NW OV OZ PE PI QF QR RJ SG TG TK UA UH UL US VS WN YT ZK
Aircraft : Over 60 types including the B-17
Airports : Over 150

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