Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1896
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:15 am

Didn’t UA swap IAH-CDG for SFO-CDG? That’s how I remember it at least.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4840
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:28 am

Hey all, planespotters has the seating in the B789 as C48Y204 total 252 up to N24974.
They then quote C48W21Y188 total 257 once W is added in. This is quoted for N24976 and N29977. Is this correct? And what was 975 and 978 onwards config?

Thanks!
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1733
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:33 am

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.


What? If there is a city pair with demand, the location of IAH certainly isn’t an issue. In the early 2000s, Continental Express flew to around 26 cities in Mexico alone. The whole Idea is to find a profitable city pairing and have an airframe to support it. When oil prices come back up, hopefully IAH to more Canadian cities like Edmonton comes back, etc. Continental tried Iah - Angola on the 777 just prior to the merger but there was too much risk for crews and the airframe.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2978
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:38 am

intotheair wrote:
Didn’t UA swap IAH-CDG for SFO-CDG? That’s how I remember it at least.


UA canceled IAH-CDG in September of 2012, SFO-CDG did not resume (UA operated this route before the merger) until late April 2013.

I just found the article from 2012

https://www.chron.com/business/article/ ... 689090.php
 
flyer56
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:46 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:49 am

intotheair wrote:
Didn’t UA swap IAH-CDG for SFO-CDG? That’s how I remember it at least.


UA was flying SFO-CDG back in the early 90s.
 
UAinAUS
Posts: 234
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:11 am

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:17 am

UAX Update:

CR2:
N910SW has returned to flying
N701BR has returned to flying
N456ZW has returned to flying
N439AW has returned to flying

CR2 Paint:
N457SW in EvoBlu livery
N900EV in EvoBlu livery
N945SW exited ROW in EvoBlu livery
N960SW entered ROW for paint

E145XR:
N12122 (ex-AX) exited the fleet, stored at IGM
 
codc10
Posts: 2899
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:41 am

Tough to compare IAH-CDG to IAH-AMS, though. The oil market and Shell make the IAH-AMS route historically lucrative. CDG doesn’t quite have the same local niche and connecting traffic flows elsewhere are reasonably duplicated at FRA/MUC.

If IAH-CDG were viable, I don’t think United would have hesitated to add it back in the last few years, under a new regime with no significant ties to the Smisek/Parker cat fight.
 
aircountry
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:43 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 3:11 am

mapletux wrote:
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.


There is government and NGO related traffic going to Washington as well as a large Nigerian population in Maryland. I'm also guessing that connections from other parts of the USA may look more appealing as there will be no back tracking.


Im sure you saw the link from the post is

Washington/Dulles – Lagos (3x weekly 787-8, starting May 2021)
That laid up 787-8 will now spend half the week going to Accra and the other half going to Lagos. Lagos looks a lot like Accra… only better. Instead of 430 PDEWs, Lagos had 625. And the list of markets with more than 10 looks even more attractive to United.

Origin PDEWs
New York/JFK 139.26
Houston/Intercontinental 69.07
Washington/Dulles 58.38
Atlanta 49.24
Chicago/O’Hare 35.42
Newark 30.13
Dallas/Fort Worth 29.84
Los Angeles 28.71
Boston 22.08
Baltimore 17.87
San Francisco 13.44
Full year 2019 ARC/BSP data via Cirium
Houston falling into the number two spot bodes well for United. Long ago, Continental began flying to Lagos from Houston for all that oil travel. But flying out of Dulles allows United to get East Coast flying and combine it with the Houston demand. It’s only three days a week, so it’s not a huge risk. Delta won’t like either of these.

Seems like UA HQ wont give IAH back for LOS just gave it back to IAD.
 
User avatar
Irehdna
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 12:40 am

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 3:36 am

ORD-BOM seemed like the logical choice (huge O&D), but weight restrictions due to a short runway at BOM probably was among the reasons DEL was chosen. The EWR flight is already restricted in the winter because of this.

BLR-SFO is longer but higher yielding, and thus can survive with blocked economy seats. BLR also has a much longer runway than BOM.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6193
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:17 am

[twoid][/twoid]
codc10 wrote:
Tough to compare IAH-CDG to IAH-AMS, though. The oil market and Shell make the IAH-AMS route historically lucrative. CDG doesn’t quite have the same local niche and connecting traffic flows elsewhere are reasonably duplicated at FRA/MUC.

If IAH-CDG were viable, I don’t think United would have hesitated to add it back in the last few years, under a new regime with no significant ties to the Smisek/Parker cat fight.


IAH-CDG depends on the Schlumberger contract which AF holds.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 12:04 pm

In more "normal" times, it seemed like the Zurich Star Alliance hub was not as utilized as much by United as I had thought it could be. I am assuming this is because of the massive number of connections offered via Frankfurt, but that place felt like it was getting overwhelmed the last couple of times I was there. Is Zurich placed so far East it doesn't serve as great a purpose in the network from the States?
 
x1234
Posts: 921
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:15 pm

Zurich and Switzerland in general has some wealthy O&D and UA/LH/LX prioritize connections via FRA, MUC and ZRH in that order with the most destinations to least. The terminals in ZRH and MUC are literally brand new, excellent for connections.
 
CaliguyNYC
Posts: 1244
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:20 pm

Irehdna wrote:
ORD-BOM seemed like the logical choice (huge O&D), but weight restrictions due to a short runway at BOM probably was among the reasons DEL was chosen. The EWR flight is already restricted in the winter because of this.

BLR-SFO is longer but higher yielding, and thus can survive with blocked economy seats. BLR also has a much longer runway than BOM.


I can see UA having the following flights to India in the near future:
EWR-DEL/BOM and BLR (only if SFO-BLR works really well)
ORD -DEL/BOM
SFO-DEL/BLR

DEL is easier to launch then BOM because DEL’s catchment area is huge, DEL has multiple nonstop flights to all of india. BOM survives and gets new flights because of a more affluent VFR and business travel (that is a mix of corporates and independent businesses). Plus DEL is a bit out of the way for ME3, so not as appealing of choice as the ME3 is to BOM. Once the pandemic calm down, BOM will bounce back.
If these flights end up staying, the ME3 will really be hurt. Just getting the lower part of VFR can’t keep those US-DXB/AUH going.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:45 pm

CaliguyNYC wrote:
...
If these flights end up staying, the ME3 will really be hurt. Just getting the lower part of VFR can’t keep those US-DXB/AUH going.


I have a slightly different view. Euro JV partners will hurt the most. This is significant capacity increase without additional demand. Somebody has to fold. ME3 can sustain eating cost for a long time.
All posts are just opinions.
 
CaliguyNYC
Posts: 1244
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 3:42 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
CaliguyNYC wrote:
...
If these flights end up staying, the ME3 will really be hurt. Just getting the lower part of VFR can’t keep those US-DXB/AUH going.


I have a slightly different view. Euro JV partners will hurt the most. This is significant capacity increase without additional demand. Somebody has to fold. ME3 can sustain eating cost for a long time.


I think the EU airlines (the main ones) will be fine. It’s all about choice and the ecosystem. For instance, people who are star in SFO might want to go SFO-BLR nonstop but could only go one way nonstop because of price or full flight. The ME3 did well because nonstop India-US connectivity was super poor. The ME3 needed premium pax (mostly from India) to fly the nonstops to the US from the ME. And those pax mostly come from BOM, BLR and DEL. If you lose those, it is much harder to fill those flights. Add to that VA and BA no flying to Pakistan, and you are really seeing the ME3 lose its core premium demand (but clearly there will be pax who want/prefer to fly the ME3)
 
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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:06 pm

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 would not be surprised to see IAH-LOS in the future. If there is one thing I have learned, it is that UA is not afraid to launch a new destination from multiple hubs.
 
machbullet
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 11:36 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:11 pm

sldispatcher wrote:
In more "normal" times, it seemed like the Zurich Star Alliance hub was not as utilized as much by United as I had thought it could be. I am assuming this is because of the massive number of connections offered via Frankfurt, but that place felt like it was getting overwhelmed the last couple of times I was there. Is Zurich placed so far East it doesn't serve as great a purpose in the network from the States?


Glad I am not the only one who was wondering this.

ZRH always seemed underutilized for TATL connections but it was always a better connecting experience than FRA any day of the week.
 
IAHWorldflyer
Posts: 877
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 7:22 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:18 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
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 most part I agree with LAXDude, however the SYD-IAH flight worked well to cover what had been an unserved niche in the network: allowing easier connections for Australian passengers to the US East Coast. In 2018/19, I attended several trade shows to the East of Texas, and when at social gatherings, almost every Aussie in attendance that saw my badge saying I worked at a Houston company commented that "oh, that's where I transferred through", and usually followed up with something along the lines of " I'll never connect at LAX again if I can help it". The IAH-SYD route does not have anywhere near the O/D demand of California, but it provided a strong connecting opportunity.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:22 pm

machbullet wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
In more "normal" times, it seemed like the Zurich Star Alliance hub was not as utilized as much by United as I had thought it could be. I am assuming this is because of the massive number of connections offered via Frankfurt, but that place felt like it was getting overwhelmed the last couple of times I was there. Is Zurich placed so far East it doesn't serve as great a purpose in the network from the States?


Glad I am not the only one who was wondering this.

ZRH always seemed underutilized for TATL connections but it was always a better connecting experience than FRA any day of the week.


Well, UA did add SFO-ZRH a few years ago, and had planned to add ORD-ZRH this summer before COVID-19 smashed up the schedule. LX (metal-neutral JV partner) was adding IAD-ZRH this summer and beefing MIA-ZRH up from a 333 to a 77W. They had increased capacity to ORD on their own metal over the last few years as well. ZRH covers the main Western and Central European cities very well, but has much more limited offerings than FRA/MUC to Eastern Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and India.

Does anyone know how the costs of operating at ZRH compare to FRA/MUC? If they're anything like the rest of Switzerland in general, I'm guessing they're higher...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:24 pm

EssentialPowr wrote:
Continental tried Iah - Angola on the 777 just prior to the merger but there was too much risk for crews and the airframe.


Are you sure about this? I don't remember CO flying to Africa in the late 2000s (other than the planned EWR-CAI that I don't think ended up operating). UA/CO flew IAH-LOS for a while, but I was pretty sure that was after the merger.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:43 pm

CaliguyNYC wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
CaliguyNYC wrote:
...
If these flights end up staying, the ME3 will really be hurt. Just getting the lower part of VFR can’t keep those US-DXB/AUH going.


I have a slightly different view. Euro JV partners will hurt the most. This is significant capacity increase without additional demand. Somebody has to fold. ME3 can sustain eating cost for a long time.


I think the EU airlines (the main ones) will be fine. It’s all about choice and the ecosystem. For instance, people who are star in SFO might want to go SFO-BLR nonstop but could only go one way nonstop because of price or full flight. The ME3 did well because nonstop India-US connectivity was super poor. The ME3 needed premium pax (mostly from India) to fly the nonstops to the US from the ME. And those pax mostly come from BOM, BLR and DEL. If you lose those, it is much harder to fill those flights. Add to that VA and BA no flying to Pakistan, and you are really seeing the ME3 lose its core premium demand (but clearly there will be pax who want/prefer to fly the ME3)


Until COVID settles down corporate travel demand will be low, hopefully VFR premium demand will pick up. Y yields will be definitely up. What was pre-COVID-19 lowest Y fare from NYC-DEL/BOM? $454RT by China-3. $800RT was pretty standard. I would say now it will be close to $1500.

Are you expecting a significant jump in SFO-BLR PDEW? Probably not. Demand is constant and this is sudden jump in capacity. Someone has to lose. There are ME3 loyalists and ME3 will resort to their usual capacity dumping and/or price lowering techniques. UA cannot match ME3 glitz and glamour or predatory pricing.

I think we have been debating this forever, I want to see it in action. Sincerely my worry, if BLR oversold on their demand and UA or AA cannot make this work, forget about any US carrier trying non-stop to any Indian city other than BOM/DEL for one more decade.
All posts are just opinions.
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1733
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 6:19 pm

FSDan wrote:
EssentialPowr wrote:
Continental tried Iah - Angola on the 777 just prior to the merger but there was too much risk for crews and the airframe.


Are you sure about this? I don't remember CO flying to Africa in the late 2000s (other than the planned EWR-CAI that I don't think ended up operating). UA/CO flew IAH-LOS for a while, but I was pretty sure that was after the merger.


I stand corrected on location. Angola was a World Airways charter used by the oil and gas companies. The IAH - Lagos Nigeria was announced pre merger(?) and was flown with legacy CAL crews before it was discontinued.
 
CaliguyNYC
Posts: 1244
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 7:51 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
CaliguyNYC wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

I have a slightly different view. Euro JV partners will hurt the most. This is significant capacity increase without additional demand. Somebody has to fold. ME3 can sustain eating cost for a long time.


I think the EU airlines (the main ones) will be fine. It’s all about choice and the ecosystem. For instance, people who are star in SFO might want to go SFO-BLR nonstop but could only go one way nonstop because of price or full flight. The ME3 did well because nonstop India-US connectivity was super poor. The ME3 needed premium pax (mostly from India) to fly the nonstops to the US from the ME. And those pax mostly come from BOM, BLR and DEL. If you lose those, it is much harder to fill those flights. Add to that VA and BA no flying to Pakistan, and you are really seeing the ME3 lose its core premium demand (but clearly there will be pax who want/prefer to fly the ME3)


Until COVID settles down corporate travel demand will be low, hopefully VFR premium demand will pick up. Y yields will be definitely up. What was pre-COVID-19 lowest Y fare from NYC-DEL/BOM? $454RT by China-3. $800RT was pretty standard. I would say now it will be close to $1500.

Are you expecting a significant jump in SFO-BLR PDEW? Probably not. Demand is constant and this is sudden jump in capacity. Someone has to lose. There are ME3 loyalists and ME3 will resort to their usual capacity dumping and/or price lowering techniques. UA cannot match ME3 glitz and glamour or predatory pricing.

I think we have been debating this forever, I want to see it in action. Sincerely my worry, if BLR oversold on their demand and UA or AA cannot make this work, forget about any US carrier trying non-stop to any Indian city other than BOM/DEL for one more decade.


So agreed, we don’t how it will play out. I think most long haul flying now is break even or loss making (perhaps they lose less than keeping the fleet on the ground). It is precisely because of COVID that I feel ME3 are disadvantaged. Now it is all about nonstop flights and avoiding connecting in third countries. So when you look at the ME3 you see you get lower or no FF benefits from US airlines (yes I know you can get some), its at min a one/two stop flight, you risk connecting through the ME (some don’t care others do), etc. So you are just chipping away at available group of pax that are already low. I don’t think any of the ME3 has restarted SFO. I am seeing round trips on UA nonstop EWR-BOM at $700. The biggest threat to the ME3 has always been nonstops from the US (especially from fortress hubs with high O&D and FF base like SFO, EWR, ORD). AI DEL-SFO actually affected EY’s SFO flight. Finally UA, AA, DL have the data today (unlike before). They know exactly who is flying between these city pairs and which flights their key corporate clients want. Btw I don’t find J on EY or EK to be glitzy and glamorous. I like DL, I know what to expect and THE most important thing - they always take care of me and protect me when issues happen - as a business traveler in J the saving/protecting me is gold - a massage on a plane, who cares (An example of glitz).
 
Blockplus
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 3:55 pm

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

Sat Sep 12, 2020 10:04 pm

Los was discontinued after the currency crisis In Nigeria. United couldn’t get its money out and Shell business was having trouble after the us fracking industry picked up.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 1:34 am

CaliguyNYC wrote:
Finally UA, AA, DL have the data today (unlike before). They know exactly who is flying between these city pairs and which flights their key corporate clients want.


Hope you are correct and most likely you are. Cynic in me suspects bots doing SkyScanner searches, picked up by some data analytics company and every one going gung ho.
All posts are just opinions.
 
aircountry
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:43 pm

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 3:38 am

Blockplus wrote:
Los was discontinued after the currency crisis In Nigeria. United couldn’t get its money out and Shell business was having trouble after the us fracking industry picked up.


How did UA worked out with LOS for IAD instead IAH?
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 5:54 am

aircountry wrote:
Blockplus wrote:
Los was discontinued after the currency crisis In Nigeria. United couldn’t get its money out and Shell business was having trouble after the us fracking industry picked up.


How did UA worked out with LOS for IAD instead IAH?


Assuming you're asking why UA is choosing to launch IAD-LOS rather than bringing back IAH-LOS, there are probably a few factors:
1) The Washington, D.C. metro area has a large West African population, including plenty of Nigerians.
2) It's a shorter flight (read: lower trip costs).
3) It makes sense operationally - 3x weekly IAD-ACC + 3x weekly IAD-LOS on the same aircraft type ends up being close to a daily flight, with some downtime for maintenance.
4) Oil traffic (which would be the primary reason for a IAH-LOS flight) is likely to be less of a demand driver than VFR traffic for a while.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2978
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 1:29 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
I have a slightly different view. Euro JV partners will hurt the most. This is significant capacity increase without additional demand. Somebody has to fold. ME3 can sustain eating cost for a long time.



I'm not sure I agree with you on this one. I think this will hurt the ME3 more than Euro JV partners.

The ME3 has already changed the landscape by providing more convent connections to India through their Middle East hubs. With US carriers adding more nonstop flights to India and with UA now codesharing with Vistara, this isn't going to hurt LH. Lets just focus on SFO for a moment, AI launched 3x weekly SFO-DEL in 2015, they ultimately increased capacity to 10x weekly a few years later. EY which was operating daily SFO-AUH (with a ton of connections to India) is forced to drop the route in 2017 because they are now loosing money. Then in 2017 QR announced plans to launch DOH-SFO at some point in 2018 (although they never gave an exact launch date) and 2018 came and went and no QR at SFO, no QR at AFO in 2019 either. I think it was in 2018 that AI increase their service from daily to 10x weekly flights. Then came the announcement December 2019 UA would launch SFO-DEL daily service for the remainder of IATA winter, and 3x weekly IATA summer (3x weekly was because of a 789 shortage during IATA summer at the time but then COVID happened). The only ME3 airline whose service was not impacted at SFO was EK, although there was strong speculation back in 2018 that EK would downguage SFO from an A380 to a 77W.

If we only look at the West Coast of the US you can see how much of a disruption AI's presence has had by simply offering at first a 3x weekly nonstop SFO-DEL, then daily, then 10x weekly. Ever since AI's launch the ME3 on the West Coast have been forced to make adjustments from LAX, to SFO, to SEA. The demand for more nonstop flights to India from the US is there, the question is besides AI which US carrier is willing to take on this challenge and go after the ME3 by increasing the number of nonstop flights to India.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 4:18 pm

jayunited wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
I have a slightly different view. Euro JV partners will hurt the most. This is significant capacity increase without additional demand. Somebody has to fold. ME3 can sustain eating cost for a long time.



I'm not sure I agree with you on this one. I think this will hurt the ME3 more than Euro JV partners.


I am guessing Euro JV partners are carrying the lion's share of BLR-SFO traffic, even though EK may be the single largest percentage wise. There is a reason why LH operates a 8F/80J/32PE to BLR. How would LH fill its premium capacity after UA non-stop launch.

SFO-DEL was successful because DEL is connected to 30+ cities in India. This route even attracts international connections.

If I recall correctly Vistara operates one route from BLR to DEL That is not going to help UA.

Even on this thread, there are doubts about SEA's ability to support non-stop with $340Billion economy with two world's largest tech companies HQed there, but BLR with $220B economy says we don't need any feed. I just don't believe it. There are 40 cities around the world with higher GDP than BLR, those airports depend on connecting traffic. I doubt even LAX would make no feed required claim.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
CPS001
Posts: 249
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:05 pm

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 5:17 pm

While it is debatable whether India-US nonstops will affect EU carriers or ME3 more, keep in mind that the ME3 have been negotiating with Indian authorities for raising the bilateral seat numbers for quite a while. DXB and DOH seats have been maxed out by EK and QR (AUH has some slack but that is due to EY shrinking). If they are granted additional rights you can be sure that they would dump hundreds of additional seats on DEL/BOM/MAA/BLR/HYD. In that case, especially in the wake of Covid, India-US nonstops will only survive if they have some corporate contracts locked up, and the losers will be India-EU nonstops, especially the newer ones like DEL-WAW, BLR-MUC and MAA-CDG. In the last couple of years pre-covid quite a few new India-EU routes have been added, even outside DEL/BOM, and it can be argued that the artificial seat cap on ME3 played a big role in influencing these.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3230
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 8:19 pm

For what its worth LOS via IAD vs. IAH offers more connections to the east/upper midwest and has a shorter total distance for all markets except eastern/middle Texas.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 9:29 pm

Purely anecdotal speculation, but anyone monitoring seat maps noting load factors seem to be improving in September on your normally watched routes? Maybe I’m wishing too hard?
 
x1234
Posts: 921
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

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

Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:58 pm

Remember folks Delta flies JFK-LOS/ACC/DSS and ATL-LOS. Delta's ATL-LOS was tagged with IAH-ATL-LOS. O&D comes first and the majority of West Africans are in DC. Also ET (Ethiopian Airlines) flies from Togo to Newark.
 
VTORD
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 9:45 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:00 am

jayunited wrote:

I'm not sure I agree with you on this one. I think this will hurt the ME3 more than Euro JV partners.

EY which was operating daily SFO-AUH (with a ton of connections to India) is forced to drop the route in 2017 because they are now loosing money. Then in 2017 QR announced plans to launch DOH-SFO at some point in 2018 (although they never gave an exact launch date) and 2018 came and went and no QR at SFO, no QR at AFO in 2019 either. I think it was in 2018 that AI increase their service from daily to 10x weekly flights. Then came the announcement December 2019 UA would launch SFO-DEL daily service for the remainder of IATA winter, and 3x weekly IATA summer (3x weekly was because of a 789 shortage during IATA summer at the time but then COVID happened). The only ME3 airline whose service was not impacted at SFO was EK, although there was strong speculation back in 2018 that EK would downguage SFO from an A380 to a 77W.

If we only look at the West Coast of the US you can see how much of a disruption AI's presence has had by simply offering at first a 3x weekly nonstop SFO-DEL, then daily, then 10x weekly. Ever since AI's launch the ME3 on the West Coast have been forced to make adjustments from LAX, to SFO, to SEA. The demand for more nonstop flights to India from the US is there, the question is besides AI which US carrier is willing to take on this challenge and go after the ME3 by increasing the number of nonstop flights to India.

I agree with most of your reasoning about ME3 hurting more here but I would lean towards thinking that AI SFO-DEL was more of a final nail in the EY coffin rather than the primary cause. EY by that time had already been down the AB, 9W and AZ stake part not to mention the bottleneck created by the TSA pre-clearance at AUH. The sudden realignment of some US flights to morning departure and arrivals over the traditional evening one must have not helped the banks out of AUH either. I really think part of the reason that EK didn't hurt that much was sheer O&D volume between DXB-India and the fact that they stuck to feeding their 10:30ish bank out of DXB. Just my :twocents:

You raise an excellent question about which US carrier is willing to go the extra step and and go after ME3 India traffic. Me thinks DL needs to look at their BOM n/s once again. They pulled it pretty quick once COVID related cuts began to materialize. But with their impending T7 retirements, I am not sure what their options are outside of the A350.
 
VTORD
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 9:45 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:12 am

dtw2hyd wrote:

I am guessing Euro JV partners are carrying the lion's share of BLR-SFO traffic, even though EK may be the single largest percentage wise. There is a reason why LH operates a 8F/80J/32PE to BLR. How would LH fill its premium capacity after UA non-stop launch.

SFO-DEL was successful because DEL is connected to 30+ cities in India. This route even attracts international connections.

If I recall correctly Vistara operates one route from BLR to DEL That is not going to help UA.

But you are also assuming that US is fueling the lion's share of the EU3's traffic to BLR. We have to consider the possibility that EU can sustain BLR with a slight drop in US traffic. We may at the most be looking at a scenario where the likes of LH down gauge the aircraft from a 748. Keep in mind MUC-BLR was announced before COVID decided to crash the party.

dtw2hyd wrote:
Even on this thread, there are doubts about SEA's ability to support non-stop with $340Billion economy with two world's largest tech companies HQed there, but BLR with $220B economy says we don't need any feed. I just don't believe it. There are 40 cities around the world with higher GDP than BLR, those airports depend on connecting traffic. I doubt even LAX would make no feed required claim.

This I do agree with. Somewhat. I think (and I hope I am proven wrong) that the AA flight is looking really optimistic right now. Amazon is famously frugal about travel and other expenses. COVID19 has proved that it is possible to be productive while being remote. Companies will find out that they can save money by taking employees on semi-annual junkets v paying west coast building rents and non essential travel categories will expand.
 
lga31vfr
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:23 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:50 am

flyfresno wrote:
Per the press release, JNB-EWR will be "the only roundtrip, nonstop service from the United States to Johannesburg by a U.S carrier." Seems like a very specifically targeted statement...


yup. Unfortunately, there's not much DL can do other then eat crow. Having to fly JNB via CPT because they don't have the right plane puts them at a disadvantage. Just curious, other than the 77L, what plane can make JNB to ATL non stop, filled with cargo and people?
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:11 am

lga31vfr wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
Per the press release, JNB-EWR will be "the only roundtrip, nonstop service from the United States to Johannesburg by a U.S carrier." Seems like a very specifically targeted statement...


yup. Unfortunately, there's not much DL can do other then eat crow. Having to fly JNB via CPT because they don't have the right plane puts them at a disadvantage. Just curious, other than the 77L, what plane can make JNB to ATL non stop, filled with cargo and people?

This has nothing to do with the right plane. JNB-ATL is a route that goes over 17 hours in the winter, it is over an hour longer than JNB-JFK and JNB-EWR, closed to an hour and a half on bad days. The 77L is the only one that can make it, and it wasn’t easy, it stopped A LOT in Florida or SJU for fuel in the winter, in a Delta thread the average payload was stated to be about 32 to 35 tons. If you read more into the technical aspect if the temperature was to drop even just a degree that kid can multiple passengers or even metric tons of cargo. 400 to 500 nautical miles makes a huge difference on a performance marginal route like this. Filled with cargo and people was an over estimation, That’s 32 to 35 tons of payload would easily drop under 30 with a few degree temperature change or wind change which would mean not a full board of passengers. I think the high gross weight 346 could make it, and that is it. The highest yields are in the winter which also means the weather is the worst across the ocean and the Cape Town stop completely illuminates the chance for a fuel stop as the flight is around an hour shorter.
 
lga31vfr
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:23 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:24 am

DylanHarvey wrote:
lga31vfr wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
Per the press release, JNB-EWR will be "the only roundtrip, nonstop service from the United States to Johannesburg by a U.S carrier." Seems like a very specifically targeted statement...


yup. Unfortunately, there's not much DL can do other then eat crow. Having to fly JNB via CPT because they don't have the right plane puts them at a disadvantage. Just curious, other than the 77L, what plane can make JNB to ATL non stop, filled with cargo and people?

This has nothing to do with the right plane. JNB-ATL is a route that goes over 17 hours in the winter, it is over an hour longer than JNB-JFK and JNB-EWR, closed to an hour and a half on bad days. The 77L is the only one that can make it, and it wasn’t easy, it stopped A LOT in Florida or SJU for fuel in the winter, in a Delta thread the average payload was stated to be about 32 to 35 tons. If you read more into the technical aspect if the temperature was to drop even just a degree that kid can multiple passengers or even metric tons of cargo. 400 to 500 nautical miles makes a huge difference on a performance marginal route like this. Filled with cargo and people was an over estimation, That’s 32 to 35 tons of payload would easily drop under 30 with a few degree temperature change or wind change which would mean not a full board of passengers. I think the high gross weight 346 could make it, and that is it. The highest yields are in the winter which also means the weather is the worst across the ocean and the Cape Town stop completely illuminates the chance for a fuel stop as the flight is around an hour shorter.


thats very interesting. Thanks for that info. Sounds like the only way DL will fly NS to JNB will have to be out of JFK.\
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:33 am

lga31vfr wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
lga31vfr wrote:

yup. Unfortunately, there's not much DL can do other then eat crow. Having to fly JNB via CPT because they don't have the right plane puts them at a disadvantage. Just curious, other than the 77L, what plane can make JNB to ATL non stop, filled with cargo and people?

This has nothing to do with the right plane. JNB-ATL is a route that goes over 17 hours in the winter, it is over an hour longer than JNB-JFK and JNB-EWR, closed to an hour and a half on bad days. The 77L is the only one that can make it, and it wasn’t easy, it stopped A LOT in Florida or SJU for fuel in the winter, in a Delta thread the average payload was stated to be about 32 to 35 tons. If you read more into the technical aspect if the temperature was to drop even just a degree that kid can multiple passengers or even metric tons of cargo. 400 to 500 nautical miles makes a huge difference on a performance marginal route like this. Filled with cargo and people was an over estimation, That’s 32 to 35 tons of payload would easily drop under 30 with a few degree temperature change or wind change which would mean not a full board of passengers. I think the high gross weight 346 could make it, and that is it. The highest yields are in the winter which also means the weather is the worst across the ocean and the Cape Town stop completely illuminates the chance for a fuel stop as the flight is around an hour shorter.


thats very interesting. Thanks for that info. Sounds like the only way DL will fly NS to JNB will have to be out of JFK.\

Of course some things could be wrong, but hey none of us are perfect :) Yes, they could send the 359 NS with some restrictions from JNB to Atlanta, in the summer the 359 would do a bit better since its not a 17hr blocked flight at 5500AMSL, rather 15.5hrs. The CPT stop is mainly to maximize revenue because for a very minimal increase in time, they can take as much payload as they want. The 77L starts to carry more payload than the 359 at just past 6000nm IIRC, which is still impressive. the 77L can do some ridiculous things, but also as we know burns a lot more fuel.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1896
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:43 am

sldispatcher wrote:
Purely anecdotal speculation, but anyone monitoring seat maps noting load factors seem to be improving in September on your normally watched routes? Maybe I’m wishing too hard?


In my anecdotal experience, I flew SFO-DEN on the Sunday afternoon before Labor Day. That 739 was packed. Seemingly not an empty seat in sight. Both airports also seemed a little busier compared to when I last flew in June.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
flyfresno
Posts: 1068
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:49 am

lga31vfr wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
lga31vfr wrote:

yup. Unfortunately, there's not much DL can do other then eat crow. Having to fly JNB via CPT because they don't have the right plane puts them at a disadvantage. Just curious, other than the 77L, what plane can make JNB to ATL non stop, filled with cargo and people?

This has nothing to do with the right plane. JNB-ATL is a route that goes over 17 hours in the winter, it is over an hour longer than JNB-JFK and JNB-EWR, closed to an hour and a half on bad days. The 77L is the only one that can make it, and it wasn’t easy, it stopped A LOT in Florida or SJU for fuel in the winter, in a Delta thread the average payload was stated to be about 32 to 35 tons. If you read more into the technical aspect if the temperature was to drop even just a degree that kid can multiple passengers or even metric tons of cargo. 400 to 500 nautical miles makes a huge difference on a performance marginal route like this. Filled with cargo and people was an over estimation, That’s 32 to 35 tons of payload would easily drop under 30 with a few degree temperature change or wind change which would mean not a full board of passengers. I think the high gross weight 346 could make it, and that is it. The highest yields are in the winter which also means the weather is the worst across the ocean and the Cape Town stop completely illuminates the chance for a fuel stop as the flight is around an hour shorter.


thats very interesting. Thanks for that info. Sounds like the only way DL will fly NS to JNB will have to be out of JFK.\


I would be fascinated to see the O&D pax out of ATL as well as the number of pax originating in cities that have nonstop service to ATL but not JFK. It's only one way, but what would be the difference in total time JNB-CPT-ATL vs JNB-JFK-ATL?
 
klwright69
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 4:29 am

A problem UA had before with LOS was the inability to withdraw money from the country.
I suppose this is not a problem now.
Maybe it was just an excuse, as DL did not drop LOS like UA did from IAH a few years back.
That along with low oil prices, did the route in also as it was related.
 
CaliguyNYC
Posts: 1244
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:27 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 12:34 pm

CPS001 wrote:
While it is debatable whether India-US nonstops will affect EU carriers or ME3 more, keep in mind that the ME3 have been negotiating with Indian authorities for raising the bilateral seat numbers for quite a while. DXB and DOH seats have been maxed out by EK and QR (AUH has some slack but that is due to EY shrinking). If they are granted additional rights you can be sure that they would dump hundreds of additional seats on DEL/BOM/MAA/BLR/HYD. In that case, especially in the wake of Covid, India-US nonstops will only survive if they have some corporate contracts locked up, and the losers will be India-EU nonstops, especially the newer ones like DEL-WAW, BLR-MUC and MAA-CDG. In the last couple of years pre-covid quite a few new India-EU routes have been added, even outside DEL/BOM, and it can be argued that the artificial seat cap on ME3 played a big role in influencing these.


I will throw out a notion for people to tear down - we know India-US traffic is very large but nonstop flights are low given the traffic. I feel a big reason the US3 didn’t launch nonstops to india was driven by competition (yield) but also the need to fill US-EU hub to hub flights. First - competition is down and it is unlikely flights like EY’s SFO-AUH will come back anytime soon. So launch to stop them in the future. Second - India’s peak season is winter (there is still decent traffic to India in summer and of course Indians flying to EU and US in the summer). Also VFR to India is basically year round with peaks during the main US holidays (thanksgiving, Christmas, summer) and Indian holidays (Diwali, Christmas, summer - which for Bombay is April). So you get decent traffic flows outside of the main US-EU flows. Add to that the year round business traffic, and India is a great way to fill seats on the multiple dailes from US hubs to EU hubs with onwards to India. With Covid, US-EU flights will be down for a bit (hub flights will return first but many nonstop city pairs will not for quite some time). Plus people are avoiding connecting in third countries and VFR is being seen as a stable (even if not high earning) flight for airlines (look at VS flying UK-Pakistan). So take all of these together, and I think you have the right moment for UA to do what they did. Oh and finally, as many have said, AI really proved people want nonstops (AI for god’s sake). I give credit to UA for really driving market expansion after AI even if it does hurt LH. I think there is plenty of traffic for EU-India to survive with these new nonstops. Perhaps they get downgraded from 748s but they will survive.
 
toga998
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon May 25, 2020 8:09 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:37 pm

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... -nov-2020/

This seems like a pretty safe addition for the IAD hub, especially the EYW route.
 
DiscoverCSG
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:22 am

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:55 pm

jayunited wrote:
convent connections to India


Are you suggesting that UA's new India flights will be filled with nuns?
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 1:57 pm

DylanHarvey wrote:
lga31vfr wrote:
flyfresno wrote:
Per the press release, JNB-EWR will be "the only roundtrip, nonstop service from the United States to Johannesburg by a U.S carrier." Seems like a very specifically targeted statement...


yup. Unfortunately, there's not much DL can do other then eat crow. Having to fly JNB via CPT because they don't have the right plane puts them at a disadvantage. Just curious, other than the 77L, what plane can make JNB to ATL non stop, filled with cargo and people?

This has nothing to do with the right plane. JNB-ATL is a route that goes over 17 hours in the winter, it is over an hour longer than JNB-JFK and JNB-EWR, closed to an hour and a half on bad days. The 77L is the only one that can make it, and it wasn’t easy, it stopped A LOT in Florida or SJU for fuel in the winter, in a Delta thread the average payload was stated to be about 32 to 35 tons. If you read more into the technical aspect if the temperature was to drop even just a degree that kid can multiple passengers or even metric tons of cargo. 400 to 500 nautical miles makes a huge difference on a performance marginal route like this. Filled with cargo and people was an over estimation, That’s 32 to 35 tons of payload would easily drop under 30 with a few degree temperature change or wind change which would mean not a full board of passengers. I think the high gross weight 346 could make it, and that is it. The highest yields are in the winter which also means the weather is the worst across the ocean and the Cape Town stop completely illuminates the chance for a fuel stop as the flight is around an hour shorter.


The JNB-EWR will often push a solid 16 1/2 hours. We did CPT-EWR and the flight time was 16:10. JNB-EWR is a 172 miles further. All I'm saying is that the JNB-EWR flight is no slough in terms of requirements. I'm happy to see the 787-9 can do it.

Cheers
Whatever
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:07 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
lga31vfr wrote:

yup. Unfortunately, there's not much DL can do other then eat crow. Having to fly JNB via CPT because they don't have the right plane puts them at a disadvantage. Just curious, other than the 77L, what plane can make JNB to ATL non stop, filled with cargo and people?

This has nothing to do with the right plane. JNB-ATL is a route that goes over 17 hours in the winter, it is over an hour longer than JNB-JFK and JNB-EWR, closed to an hour and a half on bad days. The 77L is the only one that can make it, and it wasn’t easy, it stopped A LOT in Florida or SJU for fuel in the winter, in a Delta thread the average payload was stated to be about 32 to 35 tons. If you read more into the technical aspect if the temperature was to drop even just a degree that kid can multiple passengers or even metric tons of cargo. 400 to 500 nautical miles makes a huge difference on a performance marginal route like this. Filled with cargo and people was an over estimation, That’s 32 to 35 tons of payload would easily drop under 30 with a few degree temperature change or wind change which would mean not a full board of passengers. I think the high gross weight 346 could make it, and that is it. The highest yields are in the winter which also means the weather is the worst across the ocean and the Cape Town stop completely illuminates the chance for a fuel stop as the flight is around an hour shorter.


The JNB-EWR will often push a solid 16 1/2 hours. We did CPT-EWR and the flight time was 16:10. JNB-EWR is a 172 miles further. All I'm saying is that the JNB-EWR flight is no slough in terms of requirements. I'm happy to see the 787-9 can do it.

Cheers

That’s good actually. Anything above 15-16 from JNB is no slouch. The 789 and 359 Are phenomenal aircraft. Although CPT is sea level which helps cause you guys can get 254t from there, can anyone help with what the 789 is limited to MTOW wise out of JNB.
 
hohd
Posts: 938
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 1:03 am

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:38 pm

As an earlier poster suggested, this is BLR's moment to make SFO-BLR flight successful and I hope UA makes it, other wise it could be a long time before someone considers BLR again.. BLR has lower VFR than DEL, BOM, and even HYD and perhaps the same VFR as MAA, so initially this route could struggle as business travel may not recover for a year at least.
 
subramak1
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 10:21 pm

Re: United New Route Announcement 9/9/2020

Mon Sep 14, 2020 2:41 pm

VTORD wrote:
Irehdna wrote:
SFO-BLR. A route first rumoured by KF and AI in the mid 2000s but not official until nearly 15 years later. Congrats to UA! Curious to see if AI US flights can survive into 2021; they have competition on every route now.

AI will (most likely) reduce frequency on SFO but it will be interesting to see what impact this has on EK


AI's target market is quite different than what UA would serve. I don't expect AI to reduce frequencies. AI does an excellent job of connecting points in US to secondary destinations India conveniently. UA cannot offer this either in BLR or DEL. AI because the connecting plane is in their own metal does not require pick up and check in of bags again in DEL. Anyone who has had to recheck in Bags in India from INTL to domestic knows how painful it is. So Nope, if the economy recovers - there is space for both carriers. The airlines impacted by UA's entry into BLR would be BA and LH, BA operate an A350 to BLR today which is their top of the line product and LH operate a B748.

Subu
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:19 pm

CaliguyNYC wrote:
I will throw out a notion for people to tear down - we know India-US traffic is very large but nonstop flights are low given the traffic. I feel a big reason the US3 didn’t launch nonstops to india was driven by competition (yield) but also the need to fill US-EU hub to hub flights. First - competition is down and it is unlikely flights like EY’s SFO-AUH will come back anytime soon. So launch to stop them in the future. Second - India’s peak season is winter (there is still decent traffic to India in summer and of course Indians flying to EU and US in the summer). Also VFR to India is basically year round with peaks during the main US holidays (thanksgiving, Christmas, summer) and Indian holidays (Diwali, Christmas, summer - which for Bombay is April). So you get decent traffic flows outside of the main US-EU flows. Add to that the year round business traffic, and India is a great way to fill seats on the multiple dailes from US hubs to EU hubs with onwards to India. With Covid, US-EU flights will be down for a bit (hub flights will return first but many nonstop city pairs will not for quite some time). Plus people are avoiding connecting in third countries and VFR is being seen as a stable (even if not high earning) flight for airlines (look at VS flying UK-Pakistan). So take all of these together, and I think you have the right moment for UA to do what they did. Oh and finally, as many have said, AI really proved people want nonstops (AI for god’s sake). I give credit to UA for really driving market expansion after AI even if it does hurt LH. I think there is plenty of traffic for EU-India to survive with these new nonstops. Perhaps they get downgraded from 748s but they will survive.


To summarize
COVID19 is rationalizing routes in true sense, no funneling unnecessary traffic through preferred hub and calling it efficient.
COVID19 busted the premium traffic myth, if there is no capacity dumping even Y yields can be decent and routes can survive without front cabin being full.
AI survived without any partners' help, it is UA's turn to survive without partners.
Just don't tell LH or SQ.
All posts are just opinions.

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