Just reading some of the comments here about onboard social distancing. If you really think having a middle seat free between you on a flight makes it oh so much safer, then i really don't understand where you have been for the last few month, but it clearly wasn't listening to any of the science.

Back to the thread...…..

UAL777UK wrote:

Just reading some of the comments here about onboard social distancing. If you really think having a middle seat free between you on a flight makes it oh so much safer, then i really don't understand where you have been for the last few month, but it clearly wasn't listening to any of the science.

Back to the thread...…..

It's not just specifically about an empty middle seat or specifically about wearing masks, or about HEPA filters etc. It's all those things taken together that help reduce risk. One other material benefit about keeping middle seats open is that you're by default limiting the number of passengers on board - and that is definitely a huge risk mitigation - you can't tell me that the probability of catching the virus is not significantly reduced with 60 people in the same metal tube versus 100.

panamair wrote:

UAL777UK wrote:

Just reading some of the comments here about onboard social distancing. If you really think having a middle seat free between you on a flight makes it oh so much safer, then i really don't understand where you have been for the last few month, but it clearly wasn't listening to any of the science.

Back to the thread...…..

It's not just specifically about an empty middle seat or specifically about wearing masks, or about HEPA filters etc. It's all those things taken together that help reduce risk. One other material benefit about keeping middle seats open is that you're by default limiting the number of passengers on board - and that is definitely a huge risk mitigation - you can't tell me that the probability of catching the virus is not significantly reduced with 60 people in the same metal tube versus 100.

But is it reduced by 40%? I don't think it's necessarily a linear relationship. Of course, the greatest risk mitigation of all is not traveling, so we all must decide where we fall on that spectrum.

Got a interesting group 2 ferry out of GYR scheduled for today...N37513 a 737MAX9 scheduled GYR-MCO as UA2708. Lets hope she makes it!!

codc10 wrote:

panamair wrote:

UAL777UK wrote:

Just reading some of the comments here about onboard social distancing. If you really think having a middle seat free between you on a flight makes it oh so much safer, then i really don't understand where you have been for the last few month, but it clearly wasn't listening to any of the science.

Back to the thread...…..

It's not just specifically about an empty middle seat or specifically about wearing masks, or about HEPA filters etc. It's all those things taken together that help reduce risk. One other material benefit about keeping middle seats open is that you're by default limiting the number of passengers on board - and that is definitely a huge risk mitigation - you can't tell me that the probability of catching the virus is not significantly reduced with 60 people in the same metal tube versus 100.

But is it reduced by 40%? I don't think it's necessarily a linear relationship. Of course, the greatest risk mitigation of all is not traveling, so we all must decide where we fall on that spectrum.

I will fall on the DL/WN part of the spectrum for now. If it’s the same price as UA/AA and arguably UA has the lightest schedule at the moment, I might as well.

UA881 ORD-HND service finally takes off next Monday July 6th. For now UA will utilize a 789 on the route.

For years UA881 was ORD-NRT.


Also today Monday June 29 UA is ferrying a MAX9 from GYR to MCO. Tail number N37513 (nose number 7513) is scheduled to ferry as UA2708 GYR-MCO. Not sure what the reasoning is behind this ferry.

redrooster3 wrote:

Got a interesting group 2 ferry out of GYR scheduled for today...N37513 a 737MAX9 scheduled GYR-MCO as UA2708. Lets hope she makes it!!

Any idea why she's flying to MCO today, the same day as the MAX Recertification flights begin?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n37513

https://simpleflying.com/the-boeing-737 ... on-flight/

jayunited wrote:

UA881 ORD-HND service finally takes off next Monday July 6th. For now UA will utilize a 789 on the route.

For years UA881 was ORD-NRT.

Not sure what the point is. U.S. citizens still barred from entry into Japan.

https://www.mofa.go.jp/ca/fna/page4e_001053.html

Sure carry some cargo, but certainly not sustainable based on human customer demand.

audidudi wrote:

redrooster3 wrote:

Got a interesting group 2 ferry out of GYR scheduled for today...N37513 a 737MAX9 scheduled GYR-MCO as UA2708. Lets hope she makes it!!

Any idea why she's flying to MCO today, the same day as the MAX Recertification flights begin?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n37513

https://simpleflying.com/the-boeing-737 ... on-flight/

MCO has a maintenance base there so probably for maintenance of some sort. Hope caltech can answer that

audidudi wrote:

redrooster3 wrote:

Got a interesting group 2 ferry out of GYR scheduled for today...N37513 a 737MAX9 scheduled GYR-MCO as UA2708. Lets hope she makes it!!

Any idea why she's flying to MCO today, the same day as the MAX Recertification flights begin?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n37513

https://simpleflying.com/the-boeing-737 ... on-flight/

I'd assume it is maintenance related given the maintenance base at MCO. I know AA has moved a few of their MAXs to TUL over the past week or so.

redrooster3 wrote:

audidudi wrote:

redrooster3 wrote:

Got a interesting group 2 ferry out of GYR scheduled for today...N37513 a 737MAX9 scheduled GYR-MCO as UA2708. Lets hope she makes it!!

Any idea why she's flying to MCO today, the same day as the MAX Recertification flights begin?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n37513

https://simpleflying.com/the-boeing-737 ... on-flight/

MCO has a maintenance base there so probably for maintenance of some sort. Hope caltech can answer that

Logically This will be the initial test aircraft for the MCAS hardware and software updates...

Based on the luck of the MAX, picking an aircraft ending in 13?

calpsafltskeds wrote:

Based on the luck of the MAX, picking an aircraft ending in 13?

Definitely cannot disagree with you on that point.

In August, United plans to resume more long-haul routes:

- Chicago to Brussels and Frankfurt
- Houston to Lima
- Newark to Brussels, Munich, São Paulo, and Zurich
- San Francisco to London and Papeete

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... -schedule/

Ishrion wrote:

In August, United plans to resume more long-haul routes:

- Chicago to Brussels and Frankfurt
- Houston to Lima
- Newark to Brussels, Munich, São Paulo, and Zurich
- San Francisco to London and Papeete

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... -schedule/

It’s also interesting they will bring EWR to more than 230 flights. This seems like a reaction to all the LCC expansion there.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

In August, United plans to resume more long-haul routes:

- Chicago to Brussels and Frankfurt
- Houston to Lima
- Newark to Brussels, Munich, São Paulo, and Zurich
- San Francisco to London and Papeete

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... -schedule/

It’s also interesting they will bring EWR to more than 230 flights. This seems like a reaction to all the LCC expansion there.

Why is it interesting last time I checked EWR was still a UA hub no different than IAD, IAH, ORD, DEN, SFO, and LAX. Which by the way UA plans on increasing flights out of these hubs as well in August. When the July schedule goes into effect UA is doubling the number of flights out of ORD, DEN, and IAH. Is it really that unbelievable to see UA apply that same plan to EWR in August?
Keep in mind until the final schedule update comes out UA has its full pre-COVID schedule open for sale and finalizes the schedule based on the level of demand they are seeing.

The tai-state region is one of the most populated regions in the US, and this region has just started its road to recovery especially when compared to Texas, Georgia, Florida, and Arizona which opened up weeks ago (now having to press the pause button). If the trip-state region is able to control the virus and keep their numbers headed in the right direction there could be a sizable uptick in domestic travel from the region. However, if the virus comes roaring back then UA will have to pull back the schedule, but this increase is about UA rebuilding its hub and responding to projected demand.

Quick side note: UA plans to resume service to Hawaii from DEN, IAH, and ORD, UA also plans on resuming LIH and ITO flights from either SFO or LAX. I'm not sure Hawaii will be able to handle the influx of tourist while keeping the virus under control. It will be interesting to see what action the governor takes in the coming weeks or if Hawaiian officials will just throw their hands up.

It's interesting that UA is only adding 350 flights for August from July. This is indeed a pretty cautious increase compared to what DL had announced 2 weeks ago. The big change since DL announcement is that the recent COVID surge has entered everyone's mind again. I wonder if UA was planning a large increase before and decided to put the brakes on due to the events of past week.

If UA wants to be moderately aggressive they can really put up a fight in LA now that AA is pulling down a lot.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

If UA wants to be moderately aggressive they can really put up a fight in LA now that AA is pulling down a lot.

After stripping the 787 from LAX it will be interesting to see how UA reacts internationally to AA's downsizing. Kirby is in no way interested in burning cash, more now than ever, so LAX might not be the apple of his eye for now.

Nicknuzzii wrote:

If UA wants to be moderately aggressive they can really put up a fight in LA now that AA is pulling down a lot.

LAX is a cash cow for no one (among the US3). Better to focus on strengths at this time.

A little surprised to see PPT come back so early, or even at all. I figured this would be a route that would probably not survive, but glad it did.

Awesome news for us at United!

Is 3rd of August the date the schedule goes into effect?

I am in Shares, and using 3AUG and it's still showing the old schedule...

Alex

Thinking about AA's LAX changes today, can you imagine if United announced something similar? There would be a complete meltdown!

atrude777 wrote:

Awesome news for us at United!

Is 3rd of August the date the schedule goes into effect?

I am in Shares, and using 3AUG and it's still showing the old schedule...

Alex

Probably will be filed this weekend with the usual schedule update.

toga998 wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

If UA wants to be moderately aggressive they can really put up a fight in LA now that AA is pulling down a lot.

After stripping the 787 from LAX it will be interesting to see how UA reacts internationally to AA's downsizing. Kirby is in no way interested in burning cash, more now than ever, so LAX might not be the apple of his eye for now.

I certainly don't think UA will add any LAX longhaul for now, and its LAX-PVG was driven primarily by corporate contract (Disney, IIRC), so that has a chance of staying. AA appears to be committed to the remaining LAX longhaul markets, which compete with UAL (TYO, SYD, LHR).

tphuang wrote:

It's interesting that UA is only adding 350 flights for August from July. This is indeed a pretty cautious increase compared to what DL had announced 2 weeks ago. The big change since DL announcement is that the recent COVID surge has entered everyone's mind again. I wonder if UA was planning a large increase before and decided to put the brakes on due to the events of past week.

UA's press release seems to be all over the place. https://hub.united.com/2020-07-01-unite ... 05172.html

"United plans to add more than 350 daily flights from its U.S. hubs in August"
"Adding more than 600 daily flights to more than 200 airports across the United States"

Unless I'm reading that wrong, those seem to be 2 different numbers for the same statement.

On the internal version of the press release, it says the schedule is available online, which it isn't yet.

I also noticed it lists LAX-SAL and LAX-GUA, which wasn't flown before, unless they plan to take this over from Avianca

ericm2031 wrote:

I also noticed it lists LAX-SAL and LAX-GUA, which wasn't flown before, unless they plan to take this over from Avianca

Yes, bit odd but these long discontinued routes are both back 2x weekly effective August.

Suspect UA noted that IAH-GUA/SAL flights are heavily fed from LA basin, so might make sense to offer nonstop service.

LAXintl wrote:

ericm2031 wrote:

I also noticed it lists LAX-SAL and LAX-GUA, which wasn't flown before, unless they plan to take this over from Avianca

Yes, bit odd but these long discontinued routes are both back 2x weekly effective August.

Suspect UA noted that IAH-GUA/SAL flights are heavily fed from LA basin, so might make sense to offer nonstop service.

Noticed that too... interesting adds. Also, the August schedule would appear to have less Micronesia flying (such as Island Hopper at monthly service)?

Ishrion wrote:

In August, United plans to resume more long-haul routes:

- Chicago to Brussels and Frankfurt
- Houston to Lima
- Newark to Brussels, Munich, São Paulo, and Zurich
- San Francisco to London and Papeete

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... -schedule/

They must have confidence that Europe will reduce restrictions on Americans entering the Schengen zone. Given that NY, CT, NJ have created metrics that dictate which states will automatically add or come off the 14-Quarantine list, if Europe were to do something similar, the US would almost certainly be banned, as our cases are on the rise and hitting new daily highs.

cosyr wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

In August, United plans to resume more long-haul routes:

- Chicago to Brussels and Frankfurt
- Houston to Lima
- Newark to Brussels, Munich, São Paulo, and Zurich
- San Francisco to London and Papeete

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... -schedule/

They must have confidence that Europe will reduce restrictions on Americans entering the Schengen zone. Given that NY, CT, NJ have created metrics that dictate which states will automatically add or come off the 14-Quarantine list, if Europe were to do something similar, the US would almost certainly be banned, as our cases are on the rise and hitting new daily highs.

These were created with the impression Europe would be continuing the ban.

jayunited wrote:

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

In August, United plans to resume more long-haul routes:

- Chicago to Brussels and Frankfurt
- Houston to Lima
- Newark to Brussels, Munich, São Paulo, and Zurich
- San Francisco to London and Papeete

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... -schedule/

It’s also interesting they will bring EWR to more than 230 flights. This seems like a reaction to all the LCC expansion there.

Why is it interesting last time I checked EWR was still a UA hub no different than IAD, IAH, ORD, DEN, SFO, and LAX. Which by the way UA plans on increasing flights out of these hubs as well in August. When the July schedule goes into effect UA is doubling the number of flights out of ORD, DEN, and IAH. Is it really that unbelievable to see UA apply that same plan to EWR in August?
Keep in mind until the final schedule update comes out UA has its full pre-COVID schedule open for sale and finalizes the schedule based on the level of demand they are seeing.

The tai-state region is one of the most populated regions in the US, and this region has just started its road to recovery especially when compared to Texas, Georgia, Florida, and Arizona which opened up weeks ago (now having to press the pause button). If the trip-state region is able to control the virus and keep their numbers headed in the right direction there could be a sizable uptick in domestic travel from the region. However, if the virus comes roaring back then UA will have to pull back the schedule, but this increase is about UA rebuilding its hub and responding to projected demand.

Quick side note: UA plans to resume service to Hawaii from DEN, IAH, and ORD, UA also plans on resuming LIH and ITO flights from either SFO or LAX. I'm not sure Hawaii will be able to handle the influx of tourist while keeping the virus under control. It will be interesting to see what action the governor takes in the coming weeks or if Hawaiian officials will just throw their hands up.

The current plan is to mandate testing for all arriving visitors. Those with negative tests would be allowed to hit the ground running out of the state. I believe those who haven’t been tested prior to arrival or have positive tests, would be quarantined.

Below is a Hawaii News Now article on the subject:
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2020/06/3 ... h-testing/

One potentially big issue I see with the current plan Hawaii has is that it is entirely possible for someone who hasn’t been tested or has a positive test to infect those who pre-tested negative.

77H

tphuang wrote:

It's interesting that UA is only adding 350 flights for August from July. This is indeed a pretty cautious increase compared to what DL had announced 2 weeks ago. The big change since DL announcement is that the recent COVID surge has entered everyone's mind again. I wonder if UA was planning a large increase before and decided to put the brakes on due to the events of past week.

When the August schedule goes into effect UA should be operating around 1,850 daily flights. According to an article from The Points Guy DL plans to operate around 2,00 daily flights in August. I think operating 40% of our pre-COVID schedule in August is right where UA should be. Kirby has made it clear UA is not trying to keep up with AA we are focusing on conserving cash bringing down the daily burn rate. Again UA may have to pull back the schedule a bit if cases start to rise especially in the tri-state area but for now come August UA together with UAX should be operating between 1,800 to 1,850 daily flights.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/airlines- ... ases-rise/

jayunited wrote:

tphuang wrote:

It's interesting that UA is only adding 350 flights for August from July. This is indeed a pretty cautious increase compared to what DL had announced 2 weeks ago. The big change since DL announcement is that the recent COVID surge has entered everyone's mind again. I wonder if UA was planning a large increase before and decided to put the brakes on due to the events of past week.

When the August schedule goes into effect UA should be operating around 1,850 daily flights. According to an article from The Points Guy DL plans to operate around 2,00 daily flights in August. I think operating 40% of our pre-COVID schedule in August is right where UA should be. Kirby has made it clear UA is not trying to keep up with AA we are focusing on conserving cash bringing down the daily burn rate. Again UA may have to pull back the schedule a bit if cases start to rise especially in the tri-state area but for now come August UA together with UAX should be operating between 1,800 to 1,850 daily flights.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/airlines- ... ases-rise/

I think there was some conflicting report. Looks like UA is adding 25000 flights for the month, which is close to 800 flights a day. That seems pretty reasonable. Given the current environment, I don't think it makes sense to add more.

AA and UA's philosophy on this will be in full display this month. AA is going to ramp up to something like 50+% domestic schedule just as demand is flattering out (UA and several other airlines have indicated this). We will see what the burn rate looks like when the earning calls come. I don't think it will be a pretty sight for AA.

tphuang wrote:

I think there was some conflicting report. Looks like UA is adding 25000 flights for the month, which is close to 800 flights a day. That seems pretty reasonable. Given the current environment, I don't think it makes sense to add more.

AA and UA's philosophy on this will be in full display this month. AA is going to ramp up to something like 50+% domestic schedule just as demand is flattering out (UA and several other airlines have indicated this). We will see what the burn rate looks like when the earning calls come. I don't think it will be a pretty sight for AA.

UA is adding 25,000 flights in August that is on top of what is being added in July, It is not to be confused with UA flying 25,000 flights for the month of August. The 25,000 flights are an addition to what we are adding in July which is how we get to 40% of our pre-covid schedule. Pre-COVID UA together with UAX in August of 2019 was operating over 4,900 daily flights, 800 flights a day is not 40% of 4,900. If we adjust for the international schedule which will still lag the domestic schedule UA should be operating around 1,800 to 1,850 flights a day for the month of August 2020.

Looks like the August domestic schedule was loaded a few hours ago...covers 8/3-9/7

United is sitting on their cash pile and are not just flying for the sake of flying. Their moves are calculated and as Kirby is getting his feet in the water as CEO he cannot be seen making stupid moves. United is like the Truculent Turtle. WN and the other LCC;s have a totally different operating model .

audidudi wrote:

redrooster3 wrote:

Got a interesting group 2 ferry out of GYR scheduled for today...N37513 a 737MAX9 scheduled GYR-MCO as UA2708. Lets hope she makes it!!

Any idea why she's flying to MCO today, the same day as the MAX Recertification flights begin?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n37513

https://simpleflying.com/the-boeing-737 ... on-flight/

Getting them ready for return to service. Maintenance, updates and EA's will all be done at MCO Maintenance on the ones already delivered.

A bit of insight to the operation.

Average revenue passengers on our flights:
During the last week, we averaged around 63,000 revenue passengers on board our aircraft.
Revenue load factors on United:
We have averaged between 60 and 63% revenue load factors over the past week. Keep in mind this revenue load factor is on a massively reduced schedule, but the numbers are improving slightly.
Extra section and up-gauged flights to avoid high load factors:
Over the past several days we have added only a few extra sections but we continue to upgauge flights to avoid high load factors. We upgauged between 70 and 98 flights daily over the last week.

Starting July 3rd UA will once again resume serving single serve liquor minis. UA continued to serve beer and individual bottles of wine throughout this crisis but starting tomorrow liquor service resumes. Coffee and tea will once again be offered, but it seems like for now domestically UA will limit coffee and tea service to flight that are scheduled to depart before 0945. International flights will be fully provisioned with coffee, hot chocolate and tea as will all premium transcontinental flights. Lastly and most importantly ICE is back, no more hot drinks. United will once again provision ALL flights with ice. It is my understanding that originally FA's thought it was a good idea to remove the ice just to limit contact and most passengers when this pandemic hit steered clear of ice or anything that wasn't sealed. But now do to overwhelming customer demand all aircraft will be provisioned with ice. However UA is advising all FA's to please ask the customer if they want ice and not just assume they do.

I have not taken an international flight since this pandemic began so I'm not sure if liquor service was pulled from international economy. But if it was UA starting tomorrow will once again offer free beer in a can and individual bottles of wine in economy class on all international flights and the mid-flight snack is back.

Its not all good news though starting July 15th there will be a minor change to Polaris and premium cabin provisioning.
International Polaris UA will remove the day blanked but leave the duvet.
Transcontinental and flights to Hawaii and HNL-GUM UA will remove the duvet but leave the day blanket.

I'm guessing UA is trying to save money by cutting their daily laundry bill. I for one am always cold on an airplane if I'm in coach I alway have a coat or jacket and if I'm in Polaris I love the duvet the day blanket was never thick enough to keep me warm. But I know people who hate the duvet (its to hot for them) but love the day blanket because it allowed for some air flow. Starting July 15th customers will no longer have a choice, hopefully this decision is temporary and not permanent. Hopefully customers will complain enough that UA is forced to reverse course as our financial situation improves.

UAX Update:

E175SC:
N616UX now flying Skywest

E170:
The following frames have all returned to flying: 632, 637, 641, 645, 855, 856, 858, 861, 864, 979

CR7:
N514MJ is now parked at IAD

CR5:
The following frames are now returned to flying: 535, 538, 539
Correction on Fleet Site: N504GJ is flying, but N506GJ is still parked

E145:
The following frames have exited the fleet (stored at IGM): N19554, N15555, N18556, N18557

CR2:
N461AW has returned to flying
N679SA has returned to flying
N947SW has been parked at TUS
N971SW has been parked at CKB
N864AS has been parked at TUS
N910SW still parked, ferried to CKB

windy95 wrote:

audidudi wrote:

redrooster3 wrote:

Got a interesting group 2 ferry out of GYR scheduled for today...N37513 a 737MAX9 scheduled GYR-MCO as UA2708. Lets hope she makes it!!

Any idea why she's flying to MCO today, the same day as the MAX Recertification flights begin?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n37513

https://simpleflying.com/the-boeing-737 ... on-flight/

Getting them ready for return to service. Maintenance, updates and EA's will all be done at MCO Maintenance on the ones already delivered.

Like windy95 wrote, re-wiring systems, separating wires from wire bundles, fuel tank inspections, lots of engineers on site and MX inspections.

# 7513 still has that new aircraft smell.

CALTECH wrote:

windy95 wrote:

audidudi wrote:

Any idea why she's flying to MCO today, the same day as the MAX Recertification flights begin?

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n37513

https://simpleflying.com/the-boeing-737 ... on-flight/

Getting them ready for return to service. Maintenance, updates and EA's will all be done at MCO Maintenance on the ones already delivered.

Like windy95 wrote, re-wiring systems, separating wires from wire bundles, fuel tank inspections, lots of engineers on site and MX inspections.

# 7513 still has that new aircraft smell.

Only one newer.. 7514.. neither of those had a chance to fly passengers very long before grounding.
7515-7530 Are actually built but undelivered.

With the imminent rearrangement of the fleet can it be assumed that the 77E will receive an expedited retirement date and a solid future for the A350 order? International travel will, hopefully, be back to normal by 2027, and its fuel efficiency will be a good excuse to bring them onboard.

Prior to COVID-19 was UA flying a less dense 787 on the SFO-SIN route or were they weight-restricting the aircraft for the flight?

They were flying a regular 787-9. They only have 2 cpnfigs of the 787-9 , one with the new Polaris and the old however the difference in total seats is under 8 i think. Originally they held seat however the last flew times I looked pre-COVID they weren't holding any.

Covid hit during the winter season. Chances are seats were being blocked for weight due to headwinds. This flight can be a nasty one during the winter. I have a Captain friend that blocked a 18:05 SFO-SIN, granted this was gate to gate.

When working Ops in SFO, this flight would get restricted frequently, but manage to get almost everyone on a fair share of the time. Usually with some bummed cans underneath, per the crews request.

There is only a 5 seat difference in the 787-9 configs

UA857 wrote:

Prior to COVID-19 was UA flying a less dense 787 on the SFO-SIN route or were they weight-restricting the aircraft for the flight?

There are only two configurations of 787-9's (Polaris updated cabin) and the old BusinessFirst seat. There are no less dense/more densely configured UA 787 cabins across the fleet 8/9/10. I do not know about weight penalties on SFO-SIN, but the short lived LAX-SIN flight UA operated did take penalties on the way out of LAX.

I took this flight on Jan 2019. The seat map showed a full flight.
DLP

dlphoenix wrote:

I took this flight on Jan 2019. The seat map showed a full flight.
DLP

That does not necessarily mean it was full. Some seats may have been blocked.

Yes, it might have been full. Depends on the day and conditions.

What “imminent rearrangement of the fleet” are you referring to?
And 2027? Really? We’re discussing 2027?
The airline could potentially cease to exist in 7 months.

KFTG wrote:

What “imminent rearrangement of the fleet” are you referring to?
And 2027? Really? We’re discussing 2027?
The airline could potentially cease to exist in 7 months.

I’m not sure which claim is more outlandish.

toga998 wrote:

With the imminent rearrangement of the fleet can it be assumed that the 77E will receive an expedited retirement date and a solid future for the A350 order? International travel will, hopefully, be back to normal by 2027, and its fuel efficiency will be a good excuse to bring them onboard.

Sure......maybe......let’s see how tomorrow goes.