Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
SATexan
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 6:49 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:53 am

As a frequent traveller and a long time cheerleader for BLR-USA non-stop flights, I will confidently predict that both SEA-BLR on AA and SFO-BLR on UA will turn out fine for the respective airlines. Even when there were many that had argued otherwise based on O&D numbers I had maintained that these flights should be started based on the market dynamics, limited competition and corporate travel. However, like others have rightfully cautioned, something's gotta give. Indeed, there will be casualties; but they won't be the BLR flights.

One thing that I have emphasised over the years is that last minute fares to BLR are higher than to any other city in India. Last minute corporate travellers during peak months usually land in BOM or DEL before flying to BLR on a seperate ticket. It is expensive to fly into BLR! The flights are regularly sold out. Unlike MAA, DEL, CCU and especially HYD, BLR is not driven by VFR traffic; it is premium intensive. Further, multi-city routings are common between USA- India. It always happens that an IT executive lands in BLR and flies back out of HYD. Vice versa is also true. An account manager from BLR can land in Austin and fly back out of Denver. So the passenger demand to BLR is not cut-and-dried by the O&D numbers. Also, let's not ignore the Indian companies based in Bangalore. Their campuses and offices are opulent and shiny! For a huge tech market such as BLR, there will just be one flight from AA-the largest airline in the world (RPMs). AA does not operate any other flights to India. Hence AA along with AS will have a larger geographic area to feed their BLR flight.

UA on the other hand already operates multiple flights to India. Somehow they never started SFO-BLR. My guess is that they may have hesitated since the flight could possibly have operational challenges due to altitude, distance, Himalayas etc., But nonetheless, it is a good sized market with a premium component. So that should do well even with any operational challenges. But I am concerned that this flight may cannibalize their other India flights which were already carrying a lot of passengers to BLR.

However, UA's decision to start ORD-DEL is rather puzzling. It's a large market but a very competitive one. There are no major business ties to speak of. The yields weren't good when AA operated the route albeit in a premium heavy aircraft. UA already has four (including BLR) other flights to India which is already a lot of capacity in a post COVID world. I agree that DEL has historically been the "go to market" in India. But, just look around all across USA today, an overwhelming majority of Indians you see come from the Deccan Plateau and the coast surrounding it. Overserving DEL is not going to do any good to those passengers.

Finally, airlines such as Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa and Cathay were milking the SFO-BLR sector. Singapore is vulnerable since it is out of the way and relied heavily on its superior service. Lufthansa will lose some premium travellers on SFO-BLR and also will have to deal with a more extensive UA network to India.
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:55 am

RyanairGuru wrote:
jayunited wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
JNB-EWR and SFO-BLR will be non-stop, but will no doubt be weight restricted.

I guess time will tell whether they survive in a rebounding economy. At this stage United just want cash flow and so long as the routes cover the marginal cost of operation then it makes sense to fly them. In due course once demand returns it will become a question of whether it makes sense to tie up 3 frames to fly a ULH route with reduced earning potential due to blocked seats instead of 2-3 shorter routes.

As it is, I expect SFO-BLR will survive on the basis of corporate demand and to keep AA out of the market, but I could EWR-JNB being dropped to seasonal (notwithstanding being launched in Northern summer) as in summer it will probably make more money to operate multiple flights to Europe, whereas demand to South Africa peaks in winter when demand to Europe drops off a cliff so JNB (full but for weight restrictions) would make more money than secondary European destinations (practically empty).


United will have 71 787-8/9/10 in the fleet by the end of 2021. UA hasn't announced any 777 retirements, we have 30 77A/77Es in long term storage, the remaining 44 77A/77Es are either in service or short term storage at one of our hubs. If necessary UA could utilize either a 77E, 78X or 763 on flights to Europe from EWR.

Also I'm sure UA has already done the calculations we do have a lot of experience of operating 789s on ULH routes. JNB's elevation may present some challenges but UA believes the 789 can handle it and still turn a profit, time will tell if that is true.

Lastly why would EWR-JNB-EWR tie up 3 frames when the flight will only operate 1x daily? By my calculations if the flight leaves EWR at 8pm is should arrive in JNB around 6pm +1 day Monday. If that same frame leaves JNB Monday around 9pm it should arrive at EWR around 5am +1day Tuesday. If a 789 leaves EWR on a Sunday evening at 8pm that same frame is back in EWR Tuesday morning at 5am. United would need a frame to operate the Monday evening departure out of EWR. This means this route would only require 2 frames because the the Tuesday morning arrival from JNB could sit on the ground (more than enough time for maintenance to perform work) in EWR and be used for Tuesday nights departure back out to JNB.


You are absolutely correct that EWR-JNB is 2 frames (not sure why I was thinking 3).

Noting that, and giving it some more thought, I think that once "premium leisure" travel to Europe rebounds, which is unlikely now for 2021 but possible in 2022, I could see JNB being 3 or 4 times weekly in summer and daily in winter. This is the same as how United serve IAH/LAX-SYD, and the reasoning would be exactly the same.

By dropping IAH and LAX to Sydney from daily to 3/4 weekly, United effectively reduce Sydney from 3 daily flights to 2, which frees up capacity equivalent to 2 787s (2 frames required to operate SYD daily). Summer is low season to Australia, but peak season across the Atlantic and those frames can be used to great effect to add capacity in other markets.

An example would be flying to seasonal Europe destinations. Of course the likes of PMO isn't going to receive a 787, but they could (for example) be used to upgauge a market operated by a 767 in winter, which in turn frees up a 767 for new seasonal flying. Network planning is a bit of chess game, but those aircraft absolutely do help add capacity in other markets even if it isn't a one-for-one swap.

The same would apply with JNB IMO. Again, summer is low season to South Africa. Reducing from daily to 3/4 weekly would free up one additional frame which can be used to help add capacity across the Atlantic.

The beauty of these Southern Hemisphere markets is that they are a great place to add capacity in winter when demand drops significantly in other regions of the world.


I wonder how UA will time the flights. My days working at JFK tell me the flights may be timed the same as the old SAA JFK-JNB flight.

EWR-JNB Departing around 11:00-11:30am. Timed to meet the morning red eye passengers from the west coast.

Inbound EWR arrival around 7:00am to take advantage of the morning bank to the west coast, Florida and Canada.
 
B752OS
Posts: 1316
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:58 am

Who will be able to capture the important connecting traffic best to/from BLR? United? or American?
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:15 am

Ishrion wrote:
United's application for EWR-JNB: https://beta.regulations.gov/document/D ... -0182-0001

Proposes a launch date near or on March 27, 2021.

Schedule:
Depart EWR 8:45 pm Arrive JNB 5:45 pm the next day
Depart JNB at 8:00 pm Arrive EWR 5:45 am the next day


I don’t like the timing of the EWR-JNB departure. 8:45pm is right in the heart of Europe,DEL,BOM,CPT, rush hour traffic.

The EWR inbound is perfect for the connection passengers. Only problem is now this flight will be added to the morning inbound power bank of TLV,DEL,BOM,JNB,GRU.
 
RainerBoeing777
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:53 am

why not launch more routes to Houston? I think the last one was Sydney, even LAX and DEN have received new routes in recent years, because IAH does not :(
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG - UA
 
sand26391
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 11:47 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:32 am

^^ Oops! My bad, forgot to say the numbers are Bi-directional in nature! :‑)
 
airboss787
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:39 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:44 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
CONTACREW wrote:
N649DL wrote:

What are you talking about? The 777 that UA uses on the route to India out of EWR has a ton of J seats in a 2-2-2 configuration. My Brother-in-Law is Indian and my Dad and soon to be Step-Mom did the route in J back in 2017 and my Dad's seat overheated. Yet they moved him and kept going instead of diverting, but he did inhale some electrical fumes while sleeping. It was after that I put my foot down and said stop flying UA in general. Compensation was absolute crap by UA.

Not to mention the service on those India routes: Frankly seemed to suck and that's a long time to be put 14+ hours in a coffin seat and suffer long haul. AA's product seemed superior back in the day, IMHO.


Might want to educate yourself. UA flies the 77W to India from EWR and those are in a 1x2x1 configuration in J.


That is a very selective statement, for years all UA sent to India was their oldest 772s.


Till the 77Ws arrived, those were literally the only aircraft they could operate with the demand that was there on both the routes. As soon as the 77Ws were available on a sufficient scale, they moved the longer EWR-BOM to 777-300ERs and have now converted EWR-DEL as well.
Star Alliance Gold
 
N649DL
Posts: 1143
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 8:28 am

airboss787 wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
CONTACREW wrote:

Might want to educate yourself. UA flies the 77W to India from EWR and those are in a 1x2x1 configuration in J.


That is a very selective statement, for years all UA sent to India was their oldest 772s.


Till the 77Ws arrived, those were literally the only aircraft they could operate with the demand that was there on both the routes. As soon as the 77Ws were available on a sufficient scale, they moved the longer EWR-BOM to 777-300ERs and have now converted EWR-DEL as well.


The 777-224s from CO are among some of the oldest in the fleet, sorry to say. Starting delivery in 1997-1998, and yes, if they're not Polaris-Based yet, they're looking shabby in the 2-2-2 configuration.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8642
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:19 am

N649DL wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

That is a very selective statement, for years all UA sent to India was their oldest 772s.


Till the 77Ws arrived, those were literally the only aircraft they could operate with the demand that was there on both the routes. As soon as the 77Ws were available on a sufficient scale, they moved the longer EWR-BOM to 777-300ERs and have now converted EWR-DEL as well.


The 777-224s from CO are among some of the oldest in the fleet, sorry to say. Starting delivery in 1997-1998, and yes, if they're not Polaris-Based yet, they're looking shabby in the 2-2-2 configuration.


Sure :roll:

The oldest are exactly the same age of comparable 777-222ERs, but some are significantly younger as CO were taking delivery of 777s up until 2008.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
aircountry
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:43 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:26 am

LH658 wrote:
Why IAD - LOS over IAH - LOS?


I wonder why they picked IAD over IAH.....Houston have much larger Nigerian than Washington, DC and not to worry about the oil business up or down just number of Nigerian want to go home or visit family, friends and connection.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:40 am

sand26391 wrote:
^^ Oops! My bad, forgot to say the numbers are Bi-directional in nature! :‑)


Thank you for the confirmation. Your info is very invaluable.
 
splitterz
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:40 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:09 am

aircountry wrote:
LH658 wrote:
Why IAD - LOS over IAH - LOS?


I wonder why they picked IAD over IAH.....Houston have much larger Nigerian than Washington, DC and not to worry about the oil business up or down just number of Nigerian want to go home or visit family, friends and connection.


I’d imagine for government traffic and because Dulles can better connect than IAH for east coast traffic.
 
CaliguyNYC
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:30 am

behramjee wrote:
The annual point to point (p2p) market size demand for these above new routes in 2019 (round trip) were as follows:

IAD/LOS - 56,000
IAD/ACC - 72,000
ORD/DEL - 125,000
EWR/JNB - 134,000
SFO/BLR - 137,000

I feel out of the above routes, the highest yield and margins will come out of operating IAD-LOS-IAD along with p2p stimulation. ORD-DEL will be possibly be the most cut throat as it also has AI operating daily + numerous multiple daily one stop options via EU or Middle East.

Personally speaking, operating 3 weekly Houston-Lagos (60,000 annual p2p market size) would have been much better (from a P&L perspective) than daily Chicago-Delhi. Yes I know all these routes will also rely a lot on onward North America feed.


Interesting Data and points (and you always know more inside info than me) - that said, I will try and answer the 3X LOS/ACC vs 7X ORD-DEL point (based on my limited knowledge of US-Africa). Couple of things that probably work in favor of ORD-DEL - business and VFR mix (higher business on DEL route), business and VFR needing to go beyond ORD and BLR (so total traffic that could use the flight is probably higher than ACC/LOS). Sometimes people forget that Indian VFR lives in decent numbers outside of major cities. Finally, the Indian VFR crowd is now very diverse in length of stay in the US. You have a good check that has been in the US for over 40 years and is now retiring. These people ensure year round travel and are much less price sensitive than your typical recent immigrant. I just hope UA gets creative with timings. If the ORD flight arrived DEL in time for evening connections, it would give choice to even EWR people. While a 10pm departure from DEL is great, a 8pm arrival is not wrt onward connections. Let’s see.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9434
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 11:48 am

DL747400 wrote:
It isn't hard to imagine that UA will siphon most of the premium revenue via SFO. What is left for AA via SEA will not be sufficient to sustain SEA-BLR. Keep in mind that AA needs to service their more than USD $40 BILLION in debt they are now carrying.


AA's debt level isn't relevant to contribution margin of this (or any other) flight. In the short-term AA execs will want it to cover variable costs. They won't be able to tolerate it burning money with every flight very long. In the longer term they need to build a network that covers fully allocated costs - including costs of capital with a satisfactory return to shareholders. Debt service costs (even on $40 or $50 Billion of debt/lease obligations) are going to be small fractions of costs for labor or fuel.
 
CaliguyNYC
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:00 pm

SATexan wrote:
However, UA's decision to start ORD-DEL is rather puzzling. It's a large market but a very competitive one. There are no major business ties to speak of. The yields weren't good when AA operated the route albeit in a premium heavy aircraft. UA already has four (including BLR) other flights to India which is already a lot of capacity in a post COVID world. I agree that DEL has historically been the "go to market" in India. But, just look around all across USA today, an overwhelming majority of Indians you see come from the Deccan Plateau and the coast surrounding it. Overserving DEL is not going to do any good to those passengers.

Finally, airlines such as Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa and Cathay were milking the SFO-BLR sector. Singapore is vulnerable since it is out of the way and relied heavily on its superior service. Lufthansa will lose some premium travellers on SFO-BLR and also will have to deal with a more extensive UA network to India.


I agreed with a lot of what you said in your post except for one thing. The majority of Indians in the US are not from the Deccan area. Sorry that is not a fact. Tech workers, sure, recent immigrants in the last 10 years, maybe. But not overall and definitely not long term immigrants. Also, please don’t forget DEL (and its catchment area is huge) origin pax coming to the US. That traffic is much higher than BLR or HYD origin traffic. I would say the big change from the 70s, 80s, 90s has been BOM which was #1 for US-India traffic (including connections) due to mix of business/VFR and now DEL is by far #1 then BOM and then BLR (which was nothing pre 2000s). HYD would be next but yield makes flights hard and then MAA etc. Finally there are business ties between DEL and ORD when you look at both cities Plus their catchment areas. India is not just about tech in SF. ORD is a great place for indian business people to connect to the Midwest and DEL is a great place for ORD businesses to connect to northern India. Chicago has boomed with Indian immigrants over the last 25 years and is almost double the Indian pop of LA (big change from before). Shows you that Chicago has plenty of high skilled jobs which then usually means some connection to India.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10367
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:36 pm

sabby wrote:
BLR doesn't need "feeding". UA is clearly targeting BLR originating/terminating traffic, they can feed at SFO end if needed. I do agree LH will feel the burn. So far, Star alliance traffic were funneled via LH at FRA to both LH and UA.

And BA will feel the burn from the AA flight. But we're starting on a tangent now. There will always be people who prefer a 1-stop option too. Not everyone likes these ULH flights, especially people who can't afford a lie-flat seat. I agree that BLR doesn't need feeding. When I travel to BLR for work it's usually 1 of 2 stops in India (we have offices in various cities), and we use IndiGo for our domestic travel.
FriscoHeavy wrote:
Based on your response, you must not know. The SFO-SIN (westbound) was able to take a full load of passengers and about 7 tons of cargo on most days.

I meant to say SIN-LAX. Sorry, my mistake.
DylanHarvey wrote:
The Singapore flight was often 17 hours or more. And could still take a modest amount of cargo on a good day, Bangalore should be under 16 hours most of the time.

You might be right but here's SFO-DEL at 15+ hours most days.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /KSFO/VIDP
To BLR is at least another 1.5 hours. So pretty similar to LAX-SIN and slightly longer than SFO-SIN if my math is correct. However BLR-SFO can be flown Eastbound which improves performance by almost 1 hour and I be that is exactly what they will do. You can see them doing that from DEL on some days. Amazing.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /VIDP/KSFO
 
redrooster3
Posts: 388
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:37 pm

N649DL wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

That is a very selective statement, for years all UA sent to India was their oldest 772s.


Till the 77Ws arrived, those were literally the only aircraft they could operate with the demand that was there on both the routes. As soon as the 77Ws were available on a sufficient scale, they moved the longer EWR-BOM to 777-300ERs and have now converted EWR-DEL as well.


The 777-224s from CO are among some of the oldest in the fleet, sorry to say. Starting delivery in 1997-1998, and yes, if they're not Polaris-Based yet, they're looking shabby in the 2-2-2 configuration.


All of them except 1 aircraft (N77014) have shiny new polaris seats and are among the newer models with slightly better performance versus subUA 777s.
Marry one of us, and you'll fly for free!
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:42 pm

airbazar wrote:
sabby wrote:
BLR doesn't need "feeding". UA is clearly targeting BLR originating/terminating traffic, they can feed at SFO end if needed. I do agree LH will feel the burn. So far, Star alliance traffic were funneled via LH at FRA to both LH and UA.

And BA will feel the burn from the AA flight. But we're starting on a tangent now. There will always be people who prefer a 1-stop option too. Not everyone likes these ULH flights, especially people who can't afford a lie-flat seat. I agree that BLR doesn't need feeding. When I travel to BLR for work it's usually 1 of 2 stops in India (we have offices in various cities), and we use IndiGo for our domestic travel.
FriscoHeavy wrote:
Based on your response, you must not know. The SFO-SIN (westbound) was able to take a full load of passengers and about 7 tons of cargo on most days.

I meant to say SIN-LAX. Sorry, my mistake.
DylanHarvey wrote:
The Singapore flight was often 17 hours or more. And could still take a modest amount of cargo on a good day, Bangalore should be under 16 hours most of the time.

You might be right but here's SFO-DEL at 15+ hours most days.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /KSFO/VIDP
To BLR is at least another 1.5 hours. So pretty similar to LAX-SIN and slightly longer than SFO-SIN if my math is correct. However BLR-SFO can be flown Eastbound which improves performance by almost 1 hour and I be that is exactly what they will do. You can see them doing that from DEL on some days. Amazing.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL ... /VIDP/KSFO

Yeah that’s is true, the 787 is no doubt very capable but ok some day’s we might see blocked seats. Leaving BLR at 3,000AMSL might be harder, I remember jayunited saying cargo gets jettisoned from the 89 out of Australia on hot days. I can’t help but think but think the slight edge the 359 has would help these routes, but 789s size is valuable now when demand isn’t crazy high.
 
IFlyVeryLittle
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Why United should establish a new TPA hub (or at least a focus city)

Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:52 pm

Beyond all the business reasons why a hub in TPA doesn't make sense, the design of the airport doesn't work as a hub. Not sure an operation of that size could hold to one airside terminal. If that turns out to be the case, it's not practical to ask passengers to ride the train back to the landside, ride a new train to a new airside AND rescreen through TSA. Right now, the airside TSA locations are very handy because you're only standing in line with a smaller segment of the airport's total passenger load -- a major advantage over the similarly designed MCO with landside TSA. Would TPA agree to redo that for one airline? Doubtful.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:07 pm

SATexan wrote:
However, UA's decision to start ORD-DEL is rather puzzling. It's a large market but a very competitive one. There are no major business ties to speak of. The yields weren't good when AA operated the route albeit in a premium heavy aircraft. UA already has four (including BLR) other flights to India which is already a lot of capacity in a post COVID world. I agree that DEL has historically been the "go to market" in India. But, just look around all across USA today, an overwhelming majority of Indians you see come from the Deccan Plateau and the coast surrounding it. Overserving DEL is not going to do any good to those passengers.

Finally, airlines such as Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa and Cathay were milking the SFO-BLR sector. Singapore is vulnerable since it is out of the way and relied heavily on its superior service. Lufthansa will lose some premium travellers on SFO-BLR and also will have to deal with a more extensive UA network to India.


I think AA's ORD-DEL flight failed because it was launched at the wrong time and the 77E certainly wasn't the right aircraft especially in the configuration AA utilized back then. ORD-DEL is a little bit further than EWR-DEL and UA's GE engined 77Es struggled on this route and were weight restricted daily and also had balance problems because of the high fuel load. I'm sure AA had the same problems as well.

However the 789 has proven to be a much more capable aircraft than the 77E and for UA the 789 has in some cases been the deciding factor between a route struggling to turn a profit or in some cases being unprofitable to being profitable with the 789. There are a few routes that come to mind where the 789 made the difference, UA's SYD flights and also UA's LAX-PVG flight. Also it is not all about the 789 another reason you are seeing UA growing the network in India is because late last year United and Vistara established a codeshare agreement. Even though UA and AI are in the same alliance United has decided not to work closely with Air India, instead choosing to partner with Vistara. Together with Vistara UA will be able to expand the reach of our network in India. As a result of the codeshare UA has expanded the network in India to over 20 additional destination, American did not have any of this going for them and this is why AA failed.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:35 pm

DylanHarvey wrote:
Yeah that’s is true, the 787 is no doubt very capable but ok some day’s we might see blocked seats. Leaving BLR at 3,000AMSL might be harder, I remember jayunited saying cargo gets jettisoned from the 89 out of Australia on hot days. I can’t help but think but think the slight edge the 359 has would help these routes, but 789s size is valuable now when demand isn’t crazy high.


You start to see performance penalties when the temperature hits 95F/97F or 35C/36C, at those temps you are holding off at least 3,000 LBS of cargo if not more.

Then there are days when UA has had to jettison all the cargo out of SYD but only when the temperature exceeds 105F or 107F / 40C or 41.6C. If we are looking at a full pax cabin and you are talking temperatures in this range or higher in most cases you can forget about taking the cargo out of SYD or MEL in some cases the non revs have to be pulled off the aircraft. There are days during the southern hemispheres summer where even though the dispatcher has padded the temperature, 2-4 degrees in the release it isn't enough. Sydney at 10:00 is already pushing 101F/102F and the captain 20 minutes before departure will have the dispatcher rerun the flight plan with a temp of 105F because the captain knows they are going to sit on the ground after push back waiting for the runway for another 20-30 minutes, and it blows everything out of the water.

The 789 is a very capable aircraft, and it does have its limits, but it still performs a hell of a lot better than the 77E. :D
 
iadbudd
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:36 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:56 pm

cityshuttle wrote:
alfa164 wrote:
cityshuttle wrote:
Very nice adds. Will be interesting to see how DL replies on JNB / CPT ... and if AA might also consider South Africa, but then from which hub ... MIA ?


UA is taking over the Star Alliance traffic as South African fades and, possibly, ultimately fails completely - especially on long haul routes.

I could see DL adding JFK-JNB/CPT as traffic to South Africa regains strength. They do seem to be at a disadvantage without the 787, however.


Not too sure if the SAA flight can be considered *A traffic (yes, they are a member) since they flew to JFK. In another thread I had already suggested they should have switched to EWR instead to enable UA connections.

So now with UA taking over that route and offering connections via EWR it can be called a better *A routing than what SAA offered to JFK.

Also a great replacement of SAA’s routes from ACC / LOS to the US as the long haul network by SAA won’t come back anytime soon, if at all.

The routes to India will be interesting to watch in regards to AA and AI competition. But UA should do fine here.


SAA Star alliance feed was strongest at IAD with UA feeding pax all day long to them for their 1745 departure to ACC-JNB. arrival from JNB-ACC was 0630 and connected perfectly with the 0830 and 1230 departure bank of UA flights.
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:16 pm

iadbudd wrote:
cityshuttle wrote:
alfa164 wrote:

UA is taking over the Star Alliance traffic as South African fades and, possibly, ultimately fails completely - especially on long haul routes.

I could see DL adding JFK-JNB/CPT as traffic to South Africa regains strength. They do seem to be at a disadvantage without the 787, however.


Not too sure if the SAA flight can be considered *A traffic (yes, they are a member) since they flew to JFK. In another thread I had already suggested they should have switched to EWR instead to enable UA connections.

So now with UA taking over that route and offering connections via EWR it can be called a better *A routing than what SAA offered to JFK.

Also a great replacement of SAA’s routes from ACC / LOS to the US as the long haul network by SAA won’t come back anytime soon, if at all.

The routes to India will be interesting to watch in regards to AA and AI competition. But UA should do fine here.


SAA Star alliance feed was strongest at IAD with UA feeding pax all day long to them for their 1745 departure to ACC-JNB. arrival from JNB-ACC was 0630 and connected perfectly with the 0830 and 1230 departure bank of UA flights.


Yes the Star Alliance feed at IAD was strong but believe me the feed was stronger at JFK. JetBlue was taking a large portion of the connection traffic from the SAA 203 arrival. The interline belt at T4 was always filled with connecting interline bags to MCO, FLL, BUF, ROC,TPA,SFO and BOS for B6. You also had lots of connection bags to AC Jazz flights to YYZ.
 
VTORD
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 9:45 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:22 pm

CaliguyNYC wrote:
ORD is a great place for indian business people to connect to the Midwest and DEL is a great place for ORD businesses to connect to northern India. Chicago has boomed with Indian immigrants over the last 25 years and is almost double the Indian pop of LA (big change from before). Shows you that Chicago has plenty of high skilled jobs which then usually means some connection to India.

This is an important point. A lot of midwest based manufacturing businesses have a significant presence in India (most notably Cummins just south of IND), pharma and the polymers space that come to my mind. TCS for e.g., has a huge contract with Nielsen in Schaumburg and I haven't kept abreast but Infosys is supposed to be rolling out a campus in Indy. Not to mention IU/Purdue traffic to ORD particularly with DL pulling the IND-CDG flight for now.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 455
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:44 pm

jayunited wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
Yeah that’s is true, the 787 is no doubt very capable but ok some day’s we might see blocked seats. Leaving BLR at 3,000AMSL might be harder, I remember jayunited saying cargo gets jettisoned from the 89 out of Australia on hot days. I can’t help but think but think the slight edge the 359 has would help these routes, but 789s size is valuable now when demand isn’t crazy high.


You start to see performance penalties when the temperature hits 95F/97F or 35C/36C, at those temps you are holding off at least 3,000 LBS of cargo if not more.

Then there are days when UA has had to jettison all the cargo out of SYD but only when the temperature exceeds 105F or 107F / 40C or 41.6C. If we are looking at a full pax cabin and you are talking temperatures in this range or higher in most cases you can forget about taking the cargo out of SYD or MEL in some cases the non revs have to be pulled off the aircraft. There are days during the southern hemispheres summer where even though the dispatcher has padded the temperature, 2-4 degrees in the release it isn't enough. Sydney at 10:00 is already pushing 101F/102F and the captain 20 minutes before departure will have the dispatcher rerun the flight plan with a temp of 105F because the captain knows they are going to sit on the ground after push back waiting for the runway for another 20-30 minutes, and it blows everything out of the water.

The 789 is a very capable aircraft, and it does have its limits, but it still performs a hell of a lot better than the 77E. :D

Valuable information as always. And yes the 77E was a pioneer in it’s time, but the time is now for the Dreamliner and the Airbus. How much of a difference would it make if UA had taken The higher thrust GENx? They have 72 or 73k on the 89 now right?
 
HouStrategies
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:39 pm

Re: Why United should establish a new TPA hub (or at least a focus city)

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:31 pm

catiii wrote:
HouStrategies wrote:
catiii wrote:

No, YOU said:



If "much more expensive" is a proxy for where they are choosing, that's not the case. In fact, a recent NY Times article in the last 7 days noted that 45% of those leaving from the tri-state went to Broward/Dade/Palm Beach Counties. That would leave 55% of those leaving for the entirety of the rest of Florida, to include Orlando, Jacksonville, Sarasota, Fort Myers, Naples, and the panhandle outside of Tampa.


Maybe some northerners live outside NYC? ;-) UA already has a strong presence in NYC and will certainly capture plenty of them that move anywhere going back and forth to NYC. But there is also the potential migration of many others across a wide swath of the northern cold belt to Florida, and the overall strong growth rate in the Tampa MSA implies they will attract a lot of them. And, did I mention that MIA and FLL are already saturated with competition?


Where is the data though that shows that “northerners” are choosing TPA over Palm Beach/Broward/Dade Counties?

A link to a Wikipedia page about relative growth in the Tampa MSA isn’t dispositive of that claim.


NYT quote: "In Miami-Dade, Pinellas, and Hillsborough counties, much of the annual gain was at higher price points. Brokers say that many of those moving to Florida are coming from northern cities." Those second two are around Tampa. They are choosing both. My only claim is that MIA and FLL are saturated with competition, and that TPA is a more open opportunity.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/real ... orida.html
 
blockski
Posts: 756
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: Why United should establish a new TPA hub (or at least a focus city)

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:47 pm

izbtmnhd wrote:
The demographics don’t really matter. The problem posted at the beginning of this thread still stands:

The only value TPA would bring as a UA hub would be to serve as a LATAM/SA gateway. So why would UA compete against itself at IAH?


Yep. The idea that TPA would make a good SE hub is completely unsupported. Draw a 500 mile circle around TPA, and most of the area is water. That's not the case if you draw a 500 mile circle around CLT or ATL.

So, if TPA can't work well as a domestic connector for intra-SE traffic, then the only remaining hub business case has to be for Caribbean, Central and South American traffic - and that case is much weaker.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3491
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:54 pm

jayunited wrote:
I don't want to go too deep on this topic on this thread because the last thing I want to do is drag this thread off course. My purpose was to simply provide an update for N16008 the only UA grounded 787, and to see if anyone knew whether or not repairs had begun especially since it has been about two weeks since that frame last took to the skies.


Boeing just arrived EWR 9/11, along with 3 trucks full of stuff. Sounds like Boeing will do the repair. No repair started yet. Other maintenance has been performed.
You are here.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:58 pm

CALTECH wrote:
jayunited wrote:
I don't want to go too deep on this topic on this thread because the last thing I want to do is drag this thread off course. My purpose was to simply provide an update for N16008 the only UA grounded 787, and to see if anyone knew whether or not repairs had begun especially since it has been about two weeks since that frame last took to the skies.


Boeing just arrived EWR 9/11, along with 3 trucks full of stuff. Sounds like Boeing will do the repair. No repair started yet. Other maintenance has been performed.


Thank you for the update, that is great news.
 
airboss787
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:39 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:11 pm

N649DL wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

That is a very selective statement, for years all UA sent to India was their oldest 772s.


Till the 77Ws arrived, those were literally the only aircraft they could operate with the demand that was there on both the routes. As soon as the 77Ws were available on a sufficient scale, they moved the longer EWR-BOM to 777-300ERs and have now converted EWR-DEL as well.


The 777-224s from CO are among some of the oldest in the fleet, sorry to say. Starting delivery in 1997-1998, and yes, if they're not Polaris-Based yet, they're looking shabby in the 2-2-2 configuration.


But that wasn't my point. Even then, the point was that they did not have a choice up until a few years ago. That was the only aircraft capable of handling the distance and demand on the route. You were almost guaranteed a Polaris configured even on the 77Es for about a year now. Now both routes are guaranteed Polaris and the new SFO-BLR route whenever it starts will also have guaranteed Polaris.

The European airlines and Asian airlines were notorious for sending inferior products to India but even that has changed now for the most part. United has been pretty good about sending updated aircraft to India.
Star Alliance Gold
 
jayunited
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:21 pm

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
why not launch more routes to Houston? I think the last one was Sydney, even LAX and DEN have received new routes in recent years, because IAH does not :(




UA merged with CO how many years ago? For the most part ORD has been the forgotten about hub the only new international flights we had since the merger were on 752s to DUB, SNN, and EDI and 2 of those destinations were canceled before COVID ever hit. UA never launched a new long haul international destination on a widebody from ORD until this year, and UA merged with CO in May of 2010.

Ten years of no new widebodies, ten years of no new international flights on a widebody, ten years of waiting, hoping our day would come. Every time UA announced new international routes I would always read the comment section on Flying Together because although people at ORD were happy, they were also sad. There would always be multiple comments "what about ORD". I want to feel pity for IAH but the truth is I don't because it is about time UA shows ORD some love.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8995
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:34 pm

airboss787 wrote:
United has been pretty good about sending updated aircraft to India.


Do you have any data to support your claim?

How many times young 77Es were sent or How many times Polaris configured 77Es were sent to India.

Point is you cannot change a passengers real experience with hypothetical scenarios.

Yes UA is sending brand-new planes to India now. No argument there.
All posts are just opinions.
 
Scoots71
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:13 pm

Re: Why United should establish a new TPA hub (or at least a focus city)

Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:37 pm

blockski wrote:
izbtmnhd wrote:
The demographics don’t really matter. The problem posted at the beginning of this thread still stands:

The only value TPA would bring as a UA hub would be to serve as a LATAM/SA gateway. So why would UA compete against itself at IAH?


Yep. The idea that TPA would make a good SE hub is completely unsupported. Draw a 500 mile circle around TPA, and most of the area is water. That's not the case if you draw a 500 mile circle around CLT or ATL.

So, if TPA can't work well as a domestic connector for intra-SE traffic, then the only remaining hub business case has to be for Caribbean, Central and South American traffic - and that case is much weaker.


This. Florida hubs are best only for tourism or for Caribbean, Central and South America.

When you start looking at major SE cities that could fill the gap for UA geographically, you start to run out of options. All of the major cities that make sense geographically already have strongholds (BNA-WN could challenge, ATL-DL, CLT-AA). From a pure geographic standpoint for a domestic intra-SE connector, infrastructure and demand notwithstanding the only major cities left are BHM, MEM (only about 550 mi to IAH and ORD), RDU (too close to IAD). Outside of those markets, you are starting to get too close to the other UA hubs.

UA has a rough go to improve the SE service offerings.
 
Pinto
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:30 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:54 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
United has been pretty good about sending updated aircraft to India.


Do you have any data to support your claim?

How many times young 77Es were sent or How many times Polaris configured 77Es were sent to India.

Point is you cannot change a passengers real experience with hypothetical scenarios.

Yes UA is sending brand-new planes to India now. No argument there.


EWR - BOM has been a 77W for a while and that is definitely Polaris.
 
airboss787
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:39 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:13 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
United has been pretty good about sending updated aircraft to India.


Do you have any data to support your claim?

How many times young 77Es were sent or How many times Polaris configured 77Es were sent to India.

Point is you cannot change a passengers real experience with hypothetical scenarios.

Yes UA is sending brand-new planes to India now. No argument there.


As mentioned N77014 is the only 77E with no Polaris. That has been to DEL only 7 times in the last 1 year. As you should know, BOM has been on the 77W for a few years now, since 2018.

I don't know where you got your point about passenger experience. Nobody is talking about that. And that is definitely not anyone's point here.

Your last point is what I am talking about and we agree. So that's cool.
Star Alliance Gold
 
andrew1996
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2020 6:41 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:19 pm

Does UA have enough 789s to launch the new routes without cutting flights on its pre-covid schedule? Does this mean that we will see some pre-covid flights cut? I remember the 789s were stretched pretty thin before the pandemic and they are launching even more routes now and the 789 routes will require 2+ frames to maintain a daily frequency. For example, to serve SIN and SYD UA uses 3-4 frames to sustain double daily each so these frames get used up fast. Any guesses what routes UA will cut if the 789s are stretched thin?
 
catiii
Posts: 3871
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: Why United should establish a new TPA hub (or at least a focus city)

Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:23 pm

HouStrategies wrote:
[

NYT quote: "In Miami-Dade, Pinellas, and Hillsborough counties, much of the annual gain was at higher price points. Brokers say that many of those moving to Florida are coming from northern cities." Those second two are around Tampa. They are choosing both. My only claim is that MIA and FLL are saturated with competition, and that TPA is a more open opportunity.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/real ... orida.html


Nothing you have provided though has validated that more northerners are choosing the TPA area, or that TPA is "more open to opportunity" competitively.
 
machbullet
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 11:36 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:40 pm

avi8 wrote:
Quick question. I was looking at Flightradar24 and noticed that, during the evening bank at IAH, there were 39 flights operated by E175 aircraft. That’s more than half of the destinations served during that specific bank. Is the utilization of the E175 being capitalized as much as possible because of the pandemic? How does that compare to other UA hubs?


Glad I'm not the only one wondering this
 
machbullet
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 11:36 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:41 pm

andrew1996 wrote:
Does UA have enough 789s to launch the new routes without cutting flights on its pre-covid schedule? Does this mean that we will see some pre-covid flights cut? I remember the 789s were stretched pretty thin before the pandemic and they are launching even more routes now and the 789 routes will require 2+ frames to maintain a daily frequency. For example, to serve SIN and SYD UA uses 3-4 frames to sustain double daily each so these frames get used up fast. Any guesses what routes UA will cut if the 789s are stretched thin?


COVID is a great opportunity for airlines to try new things and get rid of what didn't work, it seems like that is exactly what we are seeing
 
DC8FanJet
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 9:25 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:45 pm

andrew1996 wrote:
Does UA have enough 789s to launch the new routes without cutting flights on its pre-covid schedule? Does this mean that we will see some pre-covid flights cut? I remember the 789s were stretched pretty thin before the pandemic and they are launching even more routes now and the 789 routes will require 2+ frames to maintain a daily frequency. For example, to serve SIN and SYD UA uses 3-4 frames to sustain double daily each so these frames get used up fast. Any guesses what routes UA will cut if the 789s are stretched thin?


United has continued to take delivery of 789s, latest just a couple of weeks ago. More are still due. Should have enough.
 
machbullet
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 11:36 pm

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:45 pm

Ishrion wrote:
More detailed launch dates, but not the exact ones:

SFO-BLR May 2021
EWR-JNB March 2021
ORD-DEL December 2020
IAD-ACC May 2021
IAD-LOS May 2021
ORD-KOA and OGG-EWR June 2021

https://crankyflier.com/2020/09/10/unit ... long-haul/


I hope 2021 goes by faster than 2020 because that feels like a long time away. At least sensible heads prevail at UA for not trying to launch these next month.
 
User avatar
readytotaxi
Posts: 7904
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:09 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 7:58 pm

If the economy in SA continues its downward trend that EWR-JNB in six months time might not transpire.
you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
Growing older, but not up.
 
Pinto
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:30 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 8:00 pm

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
why not launch more routes to Houston? I think the last one was Sydney, even LAX and DEN have received new routes in recent years, because IAH does not :(


Geographically IAH is too far south or west for most new routes. EWR/ORD/IAD can do US-Europe turns and only need 1 frame per flight per day and are better suited for people connecting.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6352
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 8:13 pm

Pinto wrote:
RainerBoeing777 wrote:
why not launch more routes to Houston? I think the last one was Sydney, even LAX and DEN have received new routes in recent years, because IAH does not :(


Geographically IAH is too far south or west for most new routes. EWR/ORD/IAD can do US-Europe turns and only need 1 frame per flight per day and are better suited for people connecting.


While Id love to expand IAH internationally, Im realistic about it. Any new destinations from IAH would probably be in Latin America. I would be happy just to keep what we had outside of that (LHR, NRT, AMS, FRA, and MUC). NZ could cover the South Pacific just fine for us so I dont know that SYD needs to come back.

Long term Id be happy to forgo sexy long haul route expansion in favor building up the domestic network.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
9252fly
Posts: 1134
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:19 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 8:29 pm

readytotaxi wrote:
If the economy in SA continues its downward trend that EWR-JNB in six months time might not transpire.


A lot of travel is foreign inbound and with the economy struggling, it's likely to create further demand as the local Rand currency depreciates. South Africa is a popular holiday destination and I don't foresee that changing. The locals that travel with continue to do so, just maybe a little less. Business traffic will continue as usual as long as the country is still deemed to be the industrial powerhouse of the continent.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3414
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:09 pm

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
why not launch more routes to Houston? I think the last one was Sydney, even LAX and DEN have received new routes in recent years, because IAH does not :(


You must be talking only about international. On the domestic side, pre-COVID UA had launched (or was planning on launching) various new IAH domestic routes over the last few years: BOI, ONT, CAK, and BDL come to mind, and even post-COVID SkyWest moved their PIB/MEI EAS service from DFW on AA to IAH on UA.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3414
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:13 pm

avi8 wrote:
Quick question. I was looking at Flightradar24 and noticed that, during the evening bank at IAH, there were 39 flights operated by E175 aircraft. That’s more than half of the destinations served during that specific bank. Is the utilization of the E175 being capitalized as much as possible because of the pandemic? How does that compare to other UA hubs?


Even pre-COVID, IAH was becoming quite E75-heavy (which is wayyy better than being ER4-heavy, which is was a decade ago). Even some fairly major routes. I believe IAH-DCA generally had a mix of 5x daily E70/E75s + 3x daily 319/320/73G/738.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:38 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
While Id love to expand IAH internationally, Im realistic about it. Any new destinations from IAH would probably be in Latin America. I would be happy just to keep what we had outside of that (LHR, NRT, AMS, FRA, and MUC). NZ could cover the South Pacific just fine for us so I dont know that SYD needs to come back.

Long term Id be happy to forgo sexy long haul route expansion in favor building up the domestic network.



I agree. I don't think IAH-SYD will return until IATA winter 2022 at the earliest (being very optimistic you don't want to take all their hope away).

Both SFO and LAX have strong O&D markets to Australia whereas IAH was around 85% dependent on connections daily. With VA potentially sidelined (internationally) for the next few years I think once Australia reopens all airlines may see a bump in yields especially if there is strong demand. VA's absence will remove a lot of capacity from the U.S. - Australia market. I'm not sure UA is going to want to throw IAH back into the mix right out of the gate. If I'm going to give my honest (non-optimistic) opinion I don't see IAH-SYD returning until IATA winter 2024. In all honesty UA can make SFO/LAX work with a 789 (LAX year around, and SFO April-October) and a 77W (SFO November-March). Also I think UA would want to bring back LAX-MEL and SFO-MEL before IAH-SYD. One last thing is if there is an opportunity for UA to jump on SFO-BNE (even if it is seasonal) I think UA would go after that opportunity before bringing back IAH-SYD.

Like you said the first thing UA has to focus on especially at our interior hubs (ORD, DEN, IAH) is rebuilding the domestic network. Before IAH-SYD can ever return the domestic network has to be rebuilt, because without a strong domestic network IAH-SYD would have never been possible to begin with.
 
wn676
Posts: 1759
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:33 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:30 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
United has been pretty good about sending updated aircraft to India.


Do you have any data to support your claim?

How many times young 77Es were sent or How many times Polaris configured 77Es were sent to India.

Point is you cannot change a passengers real experience with hypothetical scenarios.

Yes UA is sending brand-new planes to India now. No argument there.


Hopefully I can provide a little more clarity. As already mentioned, BOM switched to the 77W in late 2018. DEL started receiving more Polaris-equipped 772s in the latter half of last year which was coincidentally around the same time that UA had completed a meaningful number of retrofits on the -224s (I believe about a third of that fleet was complete at the start of 3Q). Also remember that operations were suspending through the middle half of last year. Combine those two factors and it’s not hard to see why only a small percentage of those flights were on Polaris-equipped aircraft.

One other point is that prior to the new Polaris seat being introduced, the 772s sent to BOM and DEL always had the newer and (as I’m sure most will agree) better J configuration compared to their sUA counterparts with the perplexing 2-4-2 layout. Before anyone points it out I know there are performance and other considerations that drove that decision as well, but if we’re really going to compare old/dated J cabins, it’s worth at least mentioning.
Last edited by wn676 on Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Tiny, unreadable text leaves ample room for interpretation.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3819
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Updated: UA plans EWR-JNB/OGG, IAD-ACC/LOS, ORD-DEL/KOA, SFO-BLR

Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:39 pm

EWR-OGG and ORD-KOA are the real surprises if you ask me. As for JNB, I expect that to be EWR-CPT-JNB (JNB being too high to make it nonstop).

As for SFO-BLR, it should be noted that Kingfisher Airlines had actually ordered five A345s, which would have been for routes like BLR to SFO. The computer industry wanted that route.

As for equipment guesses: EWR-OGG on the B764, IAD to Africa is on the B788, ORD-DEL is on the B77W, ORD-KOA is on the B772 (non-ER), and EWR-JNB and SFO-BLR are on the B789. I would not be surprised if all EWR-SFO flying became internationally-equipped planes only.

But what kind of restriction would exist on JNB-EWR?

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