Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
EssentialBusDC
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

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

Sat Sep 26, 2020 10:18 pm

cosyr wrote:
jetblastdubai wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
I understand that it's just politics, but it undermines the program as a whole. SkyWest in particular seems to love picking up these routes, and usually under the UA code. It's easy money to pick off the routes because they're perfectly happy to run empty planes.


I'm not familiar with the working of the EAS program. Do the feds pick and choose the markets they think should benefit from EAS monies or it is the local governments that submit requests for EAS funds from the feds and the feds then respond accordingly?

I agree with you on the fact that some of these markets are definitely close enough to drive to a nearby city and aren't a good use of federal funds. To simply eliminate someone's "hour or hour and a half" drive to the next city over with established air service seems wasteful especially since people in more rural areas will more than likely have a car or some sort of ground transportation. Heck, when I lived downtown Chicago or in LA. my drive to the airport within the same city limits sometimes exceeded 90 minutes.

There are certainly some odd EAS routes, and some are unnecessary, but I think this one might be justified. I'm not that familiar with the area, but when I google Johnstown to PIT, it says 1hr 46+min, which is a bit of a long drive, but more importantly, if you live an hour east of Johnstown, you are 3 hours from PIT and even further from any other major airports, so from that perspective it could make sense.

An hour east of Johnstown puts you a little over an hour remaining to Harrisburg. Or about 25 mins remaining to State College. In between State College and Johnstown is Altoona (50 mins from Johnstown) which already has EAS service to PIT and BWI. Heck an hour southeast puts you less then two hours to IAD and BWI.
 
audidudi
Posts: 2439
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:35 pm

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

Sat Sep 26, 2020 11:12 pm

The next ex-CZ A319, N884UA, ex B-6207, is scheduled to ferry from XMN>NRT>ANC>GYR this weekend:

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n884ua
 
User avatar
JBo
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 7:23 am

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

Sat Sep 26, 2020 11:51 pm

RyanairGuru wrote:
jetblastdubai wrote:
atcsundevil wrote:
I understand that it's just politics, but it undermines the program as a whole. SkyWest in particular seems to love picking up these routes, and usually under the UA code. It's easy money to pick off the routes because they're perfectly happy to run empty planes.


I'm not familiar with the working of the EAS program. Do the feds pick and choose the markets they think should benefit from EAS monies or it is the local governments that submit requests for EAS funds from the feds and the feds then respond accordingly?

I agree with you on the fact that some of these markets are definitely close enough to drive to a nearby city and aren't a good use of federal funds. To simply eliminate someone's "hour or hour and a half" drive to the next city over with established air service seems wasteful especially since people in more rural areas will more than likely have a car or some sort of ground transportation. Heck, when I lived downtown Chicago or in LA. my drive to the airport within the same city limits sometimes exceeded 90 minutes.


I might be slightly off, and someone can correct me, but EAS was introduced at the same time as deregulation to quell the fears of legislators from rural areas who were concerned about loosing service in the deregulated market. Any airport with service at the time of deregulation was eligible for EAS if it was more than 2 hours (?) drive from a "hub". Note that the FAA use a different definition of hub, basically a major airport, so this doesn't mean a hub-and-spoke major airline operation. For example I'm fairly certain PIT is still a hub under the FAA definition.

Some of the markets in rural Pennsylvania, Maryland etc were always a bit tenuous, but the improvement in highway infrastructure since the 1970s means that driving times are shorter than they were when they entered the EAS program, and are therefore strictly speaking no longer eligible. The problem is that removing an airport from the program is a long and drawn out process, and everyone from the county agriculture commissioner to the state's US senators gets involved, possibly even the administration if it's a swing state (hello Pennyslvania). Hagerstown used some creative logic to argue why they should remain in the program, including (IIRC) trying to argue that the most common drive to IAD was down I80 and then US50, rather than the much more direct I70 and US15.

The flipside though is that when someone like SkyWest enters a market with reliable jet service connected to a major network carrier, markets that had daily passenger numbers in the single digits when served by a no-name airline flying unpressurized 9-19 seat props to an airport without obvious connections (other than self-connects to an LCC, such as WN at STL and BWI) have grown in passenger numbers to the point of no longer requiring subsidy.



PIT is classified by the FAA as a medium hub. The current qualifications for EAS set in 2012 require a community to either [A] maintain a minimum of 10 passenger enplanements per service day or [B] be located at least 175 miles from the nearest medium or large hub airport (per FAA classification). A 2015 act requires the DOT to negotiate a cost share for the subsidies with communities that are located within 40 miles of a small hub airport.

Per those requirements, Johnstown is only ~70 miles away from PIT, so they have to meet the enplanement requirements to qualify for subsidy.
I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3428
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

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

Sun Sep 27, 2020 1:03 am

jayunited wrote:
CALTECH wrote:
Oh yes they have resumed, Check again on # 913.....

'Day Of Induction: 0913/XMN/4C/Polaris Mod, 40 day span, ETR 05 NOV 20 08:00 '

2 of our former MCOQC Department guys are on it....

Now on 950, I do not show any Polaris Mod in it's latest visit documented, but in the A.M.M. it shows it having Polaris under it's effectivity. Trying to track when Polaris was accomplished.....



So far since the pandemic every aircraft except for N25910, and N28912 that has left XMN had done so without Polaris modification. And despite what the point guy article is saying there is no internal documentation suggesting that N30913 will exit XMN with Polaris/PE seats installed. But then again this is the weekend so I'll check again on Monday or Tuesday to see if there is an official internal update to the Polaris/PE shcedule.


Don't know what else to say but # 913 was updated that it is receiving Polaris. It is in MX updates as inducted for Mx Ck and Polaris Mod. Even in TOCS.

Usually the AMM is updated as acft get modded, it is the Bible for parts. # 950 was showing a effectivity with Polaris, will look into it some more. Check if the E.A. for Polaris has been complied with. Maybe the gun was jumped, but that would not be the way it is supposed to be updated.
You are here.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24791
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

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

Sun Sep 27, 2020 1:12 am

Regarding Polaris mods --- here is update I posted bit back. Yes 913 is planned to convert

787 Polaris refurbs
As you all know, due to the current situation, many projects were brought to a halt. As we wrap our arms around spend to reduce our cash burn, we took a close look at all the projects and related material inventory which we already have in-house.
In the case of the 787 Polaris project, after stopping the project and reducing the spend in 2020, we determined that we already have three ship sets of materials in stock. A/C 910, 912 and 913 were in storage and would require heavy checks to continue service, so to avoid the overhaul with the old interior components, the decision was made to implement the Polaris modification during their checks and bring additional aircraft into the new configuration.
The configuration difference between the old configuration at 219 seats versus the new configuration at 243 seats further emphasized the need for standardization. A/C 910 and 912 were brought out of storage and sent into XMN in early June, and A/C 913 should start sometime later this year. We don't expect any additional Polaris refurbishments in the near term, but will continue to look for opportunities to advance key projects where we can make the business case to justify the additional spending.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Ishrion
Posts: 3042
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

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

Sun Sep 27, 2020 2:21 pm

United's two new Hawaii routes are loaded: https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... june-2021/

Chicago O’Hare to Kona eff 03JUN21 4 weekly 787-8
UA066 ORD1015 – 1435KOA 788 x123
UA067 KOA1705 – 0610+1ORD 788 x123

Newark to Kahului eff 03JUN21 4 weekly 767-300ER
UA042 EWR0810 – 1305OGG 763 x123
UA043 OGG1440 – 0610+1EWR 763 x123
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Sun Sep 27, 2020 10:09 pm

Ishrion wrote:
United/SkyWest has been selected to provide EAS to Victoria, Texas, from IAH.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... 20454-0131


This will be a resumption (of sorts...). CO Express used to fly this route on Saab 340s.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Sun Sep 27, 2020 11:13 pm

Looks like two 789s could be delivered this week.

N25982 and N23983

It looks like one will go to IAD and the other to ORD for induction.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3428
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

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

Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:48 pm

Correspondence with UAL XMN, #913 is getting Polaris Mod....
You are here.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6194
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

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

Mon Sep 28, 2020 2:50 pm

FSDan wrote:
Ishrion wrote:
United/SkyWest has been selected to provide EAS to Victoria, Texas, from IAH.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... 20454-0131


This will be a resumption (of sorts...). CO Express used to fly this route on Saab 340s.


If only we could get back ACT and TYR...
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Mon Sep 28, 2020 6:59 pm

CALTECH wrote:
Correspondence with UAL XMN, #913 is getting Polaris Mod....


I just found it I was looking in the wrong place. You are right 913 is getting Polaris/PE.......

This was just announced the pilots have accepted the agreement there will be no pilot layoffs at UAL before June 2021.

United is still working with other unions to try and get the involuntary number down even further.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Mon Sep 28, 2020 10:37 pm

[quote][/quote]Breaking Internal News: Now hearing rumors United Airlines and PAFCA are in serious negotiations to avoid involuntary furloughs. As a result of progress being made United Airlines has granted a one month reprieve to all dispatchers who would have been effected by the involuntary furlough scheduled to go into effect on October 1st.

If no agreement is reach between UA and PAFCA, dispatchers would then face involuntary furloughs on Octover 30th but I am hearing both sides are serious about getting a deal done.

It seems as if Kirby is really trying to avoid involuntary furloughs.

ALPA was first (no pilot involuntary furloughs before June 2021), now it looks like PAFCA might reach an agreement with United Airlines. Lets see if the IAM, Teamsters, and the AFA are willing to come back to the table either today or tomorrow and try to negotiate a last minute an agreement or an at least a reprieve (so they can then negotiate an agreement) that saves thousands of jobs.
 
User avatar
KVH68
Posts: 265
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 4:09 am

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

Mon Sep 28, 2020 11:10 pm

Many IBT represented mechanics got their last pay check dated 9/30.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 12:20 am

jayunited wrote:
Breaking Internal News: Now hearing rumors United Airlines and PAFCA are in serious negotiations to avoid involuntary furloughs. As a result of progress being made United Airlines has granted a one month reprieve to all dispatchers who would have been effected by the involuntary furlough scheduled to go into effect on October 1st.

If no agreement is reach between UA and PAFCA, dispatchers would then face involuntary furloughs on Octover 30th but I am hearing both sides are serious about getting a deal done.

It seems as if Kirby is really trying to avoid involuntary furloughs.

ALPA was first (no pilot involuntary furloughs before June 2021), now it looks like PAFCA might reach an agreement with United Airlines. Lets see if the IAM, Teamsters, and the AFA are willing to come back to the table either today or tomorrow and try to negotiate a last minute an agreement or an at least a reprieve (so they can then negotiate an agreement) that saves thousands of jobs.


There is certainly some reduction in pay/hours that would be acceptable to UA to delay furloughs but that may not be acceptable to a majority of the craft voting on such a deal.

Has anybody or source posted details of the pilot agreement?
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:07 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
There is certainly some reduction in pay/hours that would be acceptable to UA to delay furloughs but that may not be acceptable to a majority of the craft voting on such a deal.

Has anybody or source posted details of the pilot agreement?



The pilots are a done deal, and it was acceptable to the majority the exact details of the agreement have not been made public (as far as I know). I have seen part of the deal it not only covers involuntary furloughs, it also covers the 76 seaters, provides pay rate protection, deadheading, CARE Act (if there is another round), and believe it or not a proposed pay raise should UA hit certain triggers consecutively. In my opinion the deal is fare to both sides but I will not post the agreement here, if someone else wishes to do so that is fine but I will not. The main point here is the deal means 2850 pilots who would have been furloughed in 2 days now have some job security until June 2021.

I think PAFCA seeing the deal UA made with ALPA has decided to give it another try to see if they can come to an agreement that will save 195 dispatchers from involuntary furlough. We will just have to wait and see how this plays out.

All I can say is if the deal with the pilots is any indication of where Kirby head is at, it does seem as though he is not interested in locking specific groups into a long term COVID contract like all union groups were after UA exited bankruptcy.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 4:18 am

The Republic pilot deal was:

Captain guarantee reduced to 45 hours monthly; FO, 32. From a guarantee of 75.

That's ~43% of pay guaranteed for FOs. Anybody think a majority in any UA craft will accept that 43% is fair and vote to adopt?
 
jumpseat67
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 3:07 pm

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:20 am

jayunited wrote:
Breaking Internal News: Now hearing rumors United Airlines and PAFCA are in serious negotiations to avoid involuntary furloughs. As a result of progress being made United Airlines has granted a one month reprieve to all dispatchers who would have been effected by the involuntary furlough scheduled to go into effect on October 1st.

If no agreement is reach between UA and PAFCA, dispatchers would then face involuntary furloughs on Octover 30th but I am hearing both sides are serious about getting a deal done.

It seems as if Kirby is really trying to avoid involuntary furloughs.

ALPA was first (no pilot involuntary furloughs before June 2021), now it looks like PAFCA might reach an agreement with United Airlines. Lets see if the IAM, Teamsters, and the AFA are willing to come back to the table either today or tomorrow and try to negotiate a last minute an agreement or an at least a reprieve (so they can then negotiate an agreement) that saves thousands of jobs.


The one month "reprieve" is ANP (authorized NO PAY)
The adjusted date is October 31, which is the end of a two week pay period.
An AIP was reached between The Company and PAFCA, however no details have been provided thus far.
 
jumpseat67
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 3:07 pm

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:33 am

jayunited wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
There is certainly some reduction in pay/hours that would be acceptable to UA to delay furloughs but that may not be acceptable to a majority of the craft voting on such a deal.

Has anybody or source posted details of the pilot agreement?



The pilots are a done deal, and it was acceptable to the majority the exact details of the agreement have not been made public (as far as I know). I have seen part of the deal it not only covers involuntary furloughs, it also covers the 76 seaters, provides pay rate protection, deadheading, CARE Act (if there is another round), and believe it or not a proposed pay raise should UA hit certain triggers consecutively. In my opinion the deal is fare to both sides but I will not post the agreement here, if someone else wishes to do so that is fine but I will not. The main point here is the deal means 2850 pilots who would have been furloughed in 2 days now have some job security until June 2021.

I think PAFCA seeing the deal UA made with ALPA has decided to give it another try to see if they can come to an agreement that will save 195 dispatchers from involuntary furlough. We will just have to wait and see how this plays out.

All I can say is if the deal with the pilots is any indication of where Kirby head is at, it does seem as though he is not interested in locking specific groups into a long term COVID contract like all union groups were after UA exited bankruptcy.


155 Dispatchers received "RIF" (reduction in force) letters not the 195 you state. 193 Dispatchers received original WARN letters.

IF a vote does take place on a TA for PAFCA based on an AIP, I do not see it passing. You would need 21% of Dispatcher's not getting furloughed to agree to a "reduction in hours" which translates to a "pay cut". I do not foresee "Senior" Membership agreeing to something like this. What is the incentive? I assure you the PAFCA agreement will not have the "sweeteners" that the ALPA agreement had. Why? Because the Company does not have to. I am not Senior nor am I Junior, I received a WARN letter and would not agree to a reduction of any kind, even if it meant saving my own job...on principle alone.
 
UAinAUS
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:11 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 10:10 am

UAX Update:

E145XR:
N34111 (ex-AX) exited fleet, stored at IGM
N21130 (ex-AX) exited fleet, stored at IGM

E145:
N48901 exited fleet, stored IGM
N14916 exited fleet, stored IGM
N17984 exited fleet, stored IGM
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1981
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 11:20 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
The Republic pilot deal was:

Captain guarantee reduced to 45 hours monthly; FO, 32. From a guarantee of 75.

That's ~43% of pay guaranteed for FOs. Anybody think a majority in any UA craft will accept that 43% is fair and vote to adopt?


If they're doing only 43% (or less) of the work then why wouldn't that be fair? No one likes making less money and they really don't like losing a job completely but reality needs to sink in. Most of the work in the industry is gone for the short term and companies simply can't spend more on labor or equipment when there isn't enough revenue coming in to cover those expenses.
 
codc10
Posts: 2907
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 11:42 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
The Republic pilot deal was:

Captain guarantee reduced to 45 hours monthly; FO, 32. From a guarantee of 75.

That's ~43% of pay guaranteed for FOs. Anybody think a majority in any UA craft will accept that 43% is fair and vote to adopt?


Roughly what the bottom 1/3 of pilots (likeliest to be furloughed) at UAL are getting with this deal, which passed at 58%, along with a number of other changes. Note that it’s a % of *minimum* pay; in many cases take-home pay was more than the MPG. Tough times.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:42 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
The Republic pilot deal was:

Captain guarantee reduced to 45 hours monthly; FO, 32. From a guarantee of 75.

That's ~43% of pay guaranteed for FOs. Anybody think a majority in any UA craft will accept that 43% is fair and vote to adopt?



What does Republic Airways deal with their pilots have to do with the deal United reach with ALPA?
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 1:55 pm

codc10 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
The Republic pilot deal was:

Captain guarantee reduced to 45 hours monthly; FO, 32. From a guarantee of 75.

That's ~43% of pay guaranteed for FOs. Anybody think a majority in any UA craft will accept that 43% is fair and vote to adopt?


Roughly what the bottom 1/3 of pilots (likeliest to be furloughed) at UAL are getting with this deal, which passed at 58%, along with a number of other changes. Note that it’s a % of *minimum* pay; in many cases take-home pay was more than the MPG. Tough times.



The pilots at the bottom of the seniority list who were facing furlough will see the largest reduction in MPG while senior pilots will sacrifice the least.

Hell United is offing 665 pilots(in seniority order) who are over the age of 50 with more than 10 years, 50 hours a month and full benefits to just stay home.

And if you are a junior pilot there are still ways to make additional money, there are still pilots across every fleet type (that is still flying) giving up trips. Is it as plentiful as it was in 2019? No of course not but there are still ways to make additional money as a pilot during this tough times.

Look at the United deal on its own merits. Don't compare the deal United made with ALPA to a deal Republic Airways made with their pilots who I think (correct me if I'm wrong) are represented by the Teamsters.
 
codc10
Posts: 2907
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 3:09 pm

jayunited wrote:
codc10 wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
The Republic pilot deal was:

Captain guarantee reduced to 45 hours monthly; FO, 32. From a guarantee of 75.

That's ~43% of pay guaranteed for FOs. Anybody think a majority in any UA craft will accept that 43% is fair and vote to adopt?


Roughly what the bottom 1/3 of pilots (likeliest to be furloughed) at UAL are getting with this deal, which passed at 58%, along with a number of other changes. Note that it’s a % of *minimum* pay; in many cases take-home pay was more than the MPG. Tough times.



The pilots at the bottom of the seniority list who were facing furlough will see the largest reduction in MPG while senior pilots will sacrifice the least.

Hell United is offing 665 pilots(in seniority order) who are over the age of 50 with more than 10 years, 50 hours a month and full benefits to just stay home.

And if you are a junior pilot there are still ways to make additional money, there are still pilots across every fleet type (that is still flying) giving up trips. Is it as plentiful as it was in 2019? No of course not but there are still ways to make additional money as a pilot during this tough times.

Look at the United deal on its own merits. Don't compare the deal United made with ALPA to a deal Republic Airways made with their pilots who I think (correct me if I'm wrong) are represented by the Teamsters.


I must be missing the part of my post where I am critical of the deal the pilots reached... the post I am responding to suggests UAL pilots wouldn't agree to a deal that cuts MPG by a similar number. My point is they did, albeit narrowly (I would say a tighter vote than most initially expected), with the junior pilots taking the biggest cut as most of the bottom third were staring at 10/1 furlough.

If we want to discuss merits of the deal, then that's a different story. Just like any agreement between management and the pilots, there is good and bad for both sides. I think it's notable that the company was ironclad-firm on no scope "givebacks" beyond the already-existing 76 -> 70 seat provision in the UPA. I am happy to go into those issue, too, but that's not what I was responding to.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1300
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:33 pm

I know I brought this up once before but once again I’m seeing fuller and fuller flights. Does anyone have access to LF’s by hub?
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 11:27 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
I know I brought this up once before but once again I’m seeing fuller and fuller flights. Does anyone have access to LF’s by hub?


For the month of September up to 9/28/2020

DEN: 254 daily departures, 68.8% LF
IAH: 221 daily departures, 61.3% LF
ORD: 304 daily departures, 55.6% LF
IAD: 127 daily departures, 45.9% LF
EWR: 117 daily departures, 44.8% LF
SFO: 111 daily departures, 40.3% LF
LAX: 45 daily departures, 61.8% LF

**The daily departures are passenger service flights only it does not include cargo only flight.***

DEN has been the star for UA all summer long. At one point DEN was the largest hubs in term of total daily departures but UA quickly beefed up ORD. In terms of LF's there have been days in the month of September were both DEN and IAH have had multiple daily LF's over 75%, and ORD had had a few days over 62% LF.

While LAX may look strange at just 45 daily departures, we have to keep in mind pre-COVID UA at LAX was averaging around 125-140 daily departures. Compared to ORD which was averaging over 600 daily departures. So when we put LAX into perspective 45 daily departures in the middle of a pandemic I think that hub is right where it should be. The two hubs where COVID is clearly holding UA back both in terms of daily departures and LF's are EWR and SFO.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1300
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Tue Sep 29, 2020 11:38 pm

jayunited wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
I know I brought this up once before but once again I’m seeing fuller and fuller flights. Does anyone have access to LF’s by hub?


For the month of September up to 9/28/2020

DEN: 254 daily departures, 68.8% LF
IAH: 221 daily departures, 61.3% LF
ORD: 304 daily departures, 55.6% LF
IAD: 127 daily departures, 45.9% LF
EWR: 117 daily departures, 44.8% LF
SFO: 111 daily departures, 40.3% LF
LAX: 45 daily departures, 61.8% LF

**The daily departures are passenger service flights only it does not include cargo only flight.***

DEN has been the star for UA all summer long. At one point DEN was the largest hubs in term of total daily departures but UA quickly beefed up ORD. In terms of LF's there have been days in the month of September were both DEN and IAH have had multiple daily LF's over 75%, and ORD had had a few days over 62% LF.

While LAX may look strange at just 45 daily departures, we have to keep in mind pre-COVID UA at LAX was averaging around 125-140 daily departures. Compared to ORD which was averaging over 600 daily departures. So when we put LAX into perspective 45 daily departures in the middle of a pandemic I think that hub is right where it should be. The two hubs where COVID is clearly holding UA back both in terms of daily departures and LF's are EWR and SFO.


Thank you so much for this post. While there is no doubt EWR and SFO are underperforming I think it’s also important to look at what UA is flying. Why is EWR-LAX/SFO running almost all wide bodies? This is in addition to over 10 daily long-haul flights from EWR.

Furthermore, UA is running a ton of high business type routes from EWR and only adding more capacity in October. EWR-STL 3x a day? EWR-CVG 2x daily, in addition to DL and G4? I completely understand this is what used to work for EWR but it doesn’t seem to be working now (unless UA got some corporate customers back that I am not aware of).
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 1:00 am

Nicknuzzii wrote:

Thank you so much for this post. While there is no doubt EWR and SFO are underperforming I think it’s also important to look at what UA is flying. Why is EWR-LAX/SFO running almost all wide bodies? This is in addition to over 10 daily long-haul flights from EWR.

Furthermore, UA is running a ton of high business type routes from EWR and only adding more capacity in October. EWR-STL 3x a day? EWR-CVG 2x daily, in addition to DL and G4? I completely understand this is what used to work for EWR but it doesn’t seem to be working now (unless UA got some corporate customers back that I am not aware of).


Don't take this the wrong way but you've asked these exact questions before and the answer is still the same.

UA is running widebodies on EWR-LAX/SFO primarily to move cargo between the both coast. The majority of UA's cargo only flights operate out of EWR, SFO and LAX. After those 3 hubs it is ORD, IAD and IAH in terms of international cargo only flights. When you have multiple 77Ws arriving at SFO/LAX from Australia, New Zealand, and/or Asia (via GUM, ICN or NRT) with 14 PMC's or a 789 with 11 PMC's going to an east coast destination the quickest way to move that cargo is on a widebody. The same is true in the opposite direction leaving out of EWR heading west.

And just FYI in addition to passenger service widebodies UA also operates cargo only widebodies between LAX-EWR and LAX-IAD that is just how much cargo UA is moving into and out of LAX. (Where UA lags at LAX in terms of passenger service UA cargo has more than stepped up to the plate to fill the void with cargo only flights.) UA will also upguage narrowbody flights out of LAX to ORD, DEN, and IAH to facilitate the movement of cargo.

Then we have SFO, UA operates passenger service widebodies to EWR/IAD/IAH/andORD daily and multiple times each week UA will upguage a 737 operating SFO-DEN to a 77A to move cargo.

United is still operating over 1,000 cargo only flight per month.

The 10 daily long haul international flights at EWR you are referring to many of them resumed as cargo only flights early on in pandemic (again this has been discussed on this thread before). Over the summer (August and September) UA opened up these cargo only flights to passengers as a way to increase revenue but most of those flights for all intents and purposes are still operating solely to move cargo with the passengers serving as the cherry on top.

You bring up EWR-STL/CVG saying it is to much capacity, but operating a 50 seat CRJ-550 on these routes is hardly over capacity even with 10 first class seats onboard. Having a morning and an evening departure to CVG doesn't come close to over capacity the same is true of STL with a morning, afternoon and evening departure. Just doing some random searches during the month of October some of those flights in SHARES are already showing 5-7 first class seats already sold and looking at coach (again random searches using SHARES not United.com seat maps) there are flights showing only 5 open seats in coach to these two destinations.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 3428
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 4:20 am

jayunited wrote:
CALTECH wrote:
Correspondence with UAL XMN, #913 is getting Polaris Mod....


I just found it I was looking in the wrong place. You are right 913 is getting Polaris/PE.......

This was just announced the pilots have accepted the agreement there will be no pilot layoffs at UAL before June 2021.

United is still working with other unions to try and get the involuntary number down even further.


Don't think a agreement will fly with TechOps. Lots of talk, because of history, Full Pay To The Last Day.
This crap needs to end quicker and let us get back to it.
In January, United was looking everywhere for used aircraft to beef up the fleet.....
You are here.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6194
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 4:35 am

jayunited wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
I know I brought this up once before but once again I’m seeing fuller and fuller flights. Does anyone have access to LF’s by hub?


For the month of September up to 9/28/2020

DEN: 254 daily departures, 68.8% LF
IAH: 221 daily departures, 61.3% LF
ORD: 304 daily departures, 55.6% LF
IAD: 127 daily departures, 45.9% LF
EWR: 117 daily departures, 44.8% LF
SFO: 111 daily departures, 40.3% LF
LAX: 45 daily departures, 61.8% LF

**The daily departures are passenger service flights only it does not include cargo only flight.***

DEN has been the star for UA all summer long. At one point DEN was the largest hubs in term of total daily departures but UA quickly beefed up ORD. In terms of LF's there have been days in the month of September were both DEN and IAH have had multiple daily LF's over 75%, and ORD had had a few days over 62% LF.

While LAX may look strange at just 45 daily departures, we have to keep in mind pre-COVID UA at LAX was averaging around 125-140 daily departures. Compared to ORD which was averaging over 600 daily departures. So when we put LAX into perspective 45 daily departures in the middle of a pandemic I think that hub is right where it should be. The two hubs where COVID is clearly holding UA back both in terms of daily departures and LF's are EWR and SFO.


The mid-continent hubs really holding it together. Makes sense to focus there especially given domestic flying is whats going to keep us going for a while.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
jayunited
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 1:49 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
The mid-continent hubs really holding it together. Makes sense to focus there especially given domestic flying is whats going to keep us going for a while.



United is holding its own against WN and F9 at DEN at least LF wise. (Any UA employee who has access to the SSD can look at LF's by hub you can even look at monthly LF by each station UA serves).

Kirby in a recent interview did highlight DEN as being UA's most profitable hub during this pandemic. Seeing that UA is up against an ULCC (F9) and for lack of a better description LCC (WN) and still somehow managing 68.8% LF for the month of September I think shows UA has learned and is continuing to learn how to compete against these carriers and hold its ground, this is why I'm not particularly concerned about B6 at EWR.

Domestically WN is the 800LBS gorilla and UA is going head to head with WN at DEN in the middle of a pandemic. ORD and IAH is different in my opinion because WN serves totally different airports MDW and HOU. It's not the same as DEN where UA and WN are both grinding it out at the same location. B6 is not WN and looking at the few weeks OAG report what I've noticed is although B6 has launched every destination announced from EWR, every OAG report I've noticed B6 continues to reduce frequency at EWR do to a lack of demand to/from NYC. Once the NYC is fully reopened and the trip-state area is back, I think we are going to see UA take the lessons learned at DEN competing against WN and F9 go after B6 at EWR and not back down.

Back in May and June when UA was only operating 10% of the airline and WN was expanding at DEN not cutting flights like UA there were a lot of post on a.netters wondering if UA could hold its own at DEN in the face of WN and F9. Given the circumstances I think UA has done a great job defending itself at DEN, we laid low in May and June but once demand show the slightest signs of life at DEN UA was quick to respond and increased capacity accordingly. I think we will see the same thing at EWR, UA is just treading water, waiting for a sign that demand is returning. Then UA will bring EWR back to life and bring all the lessons learned at DEN to EWR to combat B6.

For people thinking this is going to be a cake walk for B6 at EWR against UA simple because UA hasn't responded to B6's expansion, I'm afraid those people haven't been paying close attention to what UA has done at DEN in the face of stiff competition.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1300
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 2:06 pm

There is no doubt UA will hold their own at EWR. But I do think it’s important to look at how much they are getting attacked. Prior to March NK was running about 13-15 departures a day from EWR. But now if we look at the November schedule there is 29 flights (Not going to happen). The markets NK has added also are not 100% leisure oriented. We have seen them begin EWR-BOS/CLE/AUS and expand in other markets. This will for sure hurt UA a little bit.

If we look at what B6 has done at EWR we will see they have a similar strategy to NK. They added mostly leisure routes but EWR-LAX/SFO/AUS/PHX also came online. While sure there is a large amount of leisure traffic to all these destinations there is also a lot of business ties. B6 has 60 flights in the schedule for EWR next June. That’s not a small number.

Furthermore with UA returning to JFK there will 100% be repercussions. B6 might add a flight on EWR-LAX/SFO or in my opinion DL might come to play. DL could easily and successfully launch EWR-LAX/SEA. This would stir the pot a little bit.
 
TrafficCop
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:00 pm

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 4:17 pm

Three 789's delivered.

3983 delivered to IAD yesterday 9/29. Flight 2703.
3984 delivered to IAD today 9/30. Flight 2705.
3982 delivered to ORD today 9/30. Flight 2704.

That should make it 12 of 35 789's in Polaris configuration and only three more 789's to go. For now..
 
gdavis003
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:59 am

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 10:35 pm

Anyone have any idea why this UAX flight is showing up with a 13** number and not a typical 5*** number? It came to BHM as SKW/UA1345 then turned back to IAH as SKW/UA1346. It shows on UA flight status page as a scheduled flight too so it's not just a ferry. Just wondered why it had a 13** which seems abnormal for a UAX flight operated by SKW. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SKW1345
 
AA94
Posts: 757
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 10:45 pm

gdavis003 wrote:
Anyone have any idea why this UAX flight is showing up with a 13** number and not a typical 5*** number? It came to BHM as SKW/UA1345 then turned back to IAH as SKW/UA1346. It shows on UA flight status page as a scheduled flight too so it's not just a ferry. Just wondered why it had a 13** which seems abnormal for a UAX flight operated by SKW. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SKW1345


It's an extra section. A portion of the 13XX flight range is designated for UAX/SkyWest extra sections.
 
gdavis003
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:59 am

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

Wed Sep 30, 2020 11:04 pm

AA94 wrote:
gdavis003 wrote:
Anyone have any idea why this UAX flight is showing up with a 13** number and not a typical 5*** number? It came to BHM as SKW/UA1345 then turned back to IAH as SKW/UA1346. It shows on UA flight status page as a scheduled flight too so it's not just a ferry. Just wondered why it had a 13** which seems abnormal for a UAX flight operated by SKW. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SKW1345


It's an extra section. A portion of the 13XX flight range is designated for UAX/SkyWest extra sections.


Interesting. This seems like a one off scheduled flight, as they switched it from the usual Mesa ERJ145 to Skywest CRJ200. So it would be because it was a late shift and there wasn't a typical SkyWest flight number available?
 
NewYork1K
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon May 07, 2018 10:54 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 12:27 am

gdavis003 wrote:
AA94 wrote:
gdavis003 wrote:
Anyone have any idea why this UAX flight is showing up with a 13** number and not a typical 5*** number? It came to BHM as SKW/UA1345 then turned back to IAH as SKW/UA1346. It shows on UA flight status page as a scheduled flight too so it's not just a ferry. Just wondered why it had a 13** which seems abnormal for a UAX flight operated by SKW. https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SKW1345


It's an extra section. A portion of the 13XX flight range is designated for UAX/SkyWest extra sections.


Interesting. This seems like a one off scheduled flight, as they switched it from the usual Mesa ERJ145 to Skywest CRJ200. So it would be because it was a late shift and there wasn't a typical SkyWest flight number available?


It was ExpressJet until today, when ExpressJet ended its operations. SkyWest is doing 50 seat out of IAH for now, with Commutair opening its ERJ base soon.
 
gdavis003
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:59 am

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 1:02 am

NewYork1K wrote:
gdavis003 wrote:
AA94 wrote:

It's an extra section. A portion of the 13XX flight range is designated for UAX/SkyWest extra sections.


Interesting. This seems like a one off scheduled flight, as they switched it from the usual Mesa ERJ145 to Skywest CRJ200. So it would be because it was a late shift and there wasn't a typical SkyWest flight number available?


It was ExpressJet until today, when ExpressJet ended its operations. SkyWest is doing 50 seat out of IAH for now, with Commutair opening its ERJ base soon.


That makes sense. Was getting my ASH (Mesa) and my ASQ (formerly ExpressJet) mixed up
 
User avatar
JBo
Posts: 1773
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 7:23 am

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:47 am

NewYork1K wrote:
gdavis003 wrote:
AA94 wrote:

It's an extra section. A portion of the 13XX flight range is designated for UAX/SkyWest extra sections.


Interesting. This seems like a one off scheduled flight, as they switched it from the usual Mesa ERJ145 to Skywest CRJ200. So it would be because it was a late shift and there wasn't a typical SkyWest flight number available?


It was ExpressJet until today, when ExpressJet ended its operations. SkyWest is doing 50 seat out of IAH for now, with Commutair opening its ERJ base soon.


Probably just makes sense for OO to operate those flights under the old EV flight numbers so long as they don't conflict with any of their other flight numbers. Flight numbers on the ticketing/pax side probably aren't changing one way or another, but if they can make the dispatch flight numbers match they might as well.
I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
 
UAinAUS
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:11 am

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 5:16 am

UAX Update:

E145XR:
N18120 (ex-AX) exited fleet, stored IGM
N11127 (ex-AX) exited fleet, stored IGM

E145:
N14904 exited fleet, stored IGM
N14977 exited fleet, stored IGM
N15983 exited fleet, stored IGM

CR5:
N653CA entered revenue service with GoJet (EvoBlu livery)
N537GJ entered revenue service with GoJet (EvoBlu livery)
Total 35 in Fleet now

CR2:
N919SW exited ROW in EvoBlu livery
N916EV (ex-DL, 2003 build) entered UAX revenue service with SkyWest (EvoBlu livery)

**ExpressJet last revenue flights have been completed. The remainder of their fleet will be stored or transferred to C5.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 3042
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:01 pm

United's daily EWR-JNB has been approved:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0182-0003
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 1981
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:09 pm

Ishrion wrote:
United's daily EWR-JNB has been approved:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D= ... -0182-0003


Other than HND, or 5th freedom for a foreign carrier, when is the last time a route was not approved by the DOT?
 
onwFan
Posts: 476
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:02 am

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:18 pm

iadadd wrote:
mah584jr wrote:
DTWLAX wrote:
UA may have already driven AI out of ORD.
As per the OAG thread, AI is discontinuing DEL-ORD from April 2021.
I realize it is a few months away and AI may change schedules later but I will not be surprised if AI is out of ORD.


Looks like they are dropping IAD as well.


0% surprised if true. IAD clearly has a large market, but ME3 were successful in not down-gauging despite AI's entrance in 2017. IAD won't work for them until they develop a codeshare with UA and that's probably not gonna happen anytime soon

Also, can't imagine the 788 flying ~15 hours is too pretty in terms of performance

None of AI’s US flights are loaded for S21 yet, and all their US flights are available for W20. So it is definitely not the case that they are dropping one route or the other. Not sure if there is anything to read into..

Both UA and AI are making money on the non-stop repatriation flights currently. When the created ‘bubble’ between India and the US disappears and connectors start entering the market again, there is no way that UA will stay on all of EWR-DEL, EWR-BOM, SFO-DEL, ORD-DEL and SFO-BLR.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:57 pm

portola2727 wrote:
LHUSA wrote:
portola2727 wrote:
Just a thought, but could UA's 787s potentially fly LAX-SIN in the future if they can upgrade the software?


They already flew them in the past. The flight was quickly moved up to SFO as the second daily SFO-SIN.

Sorry, I should have been more clear, but I was wondering if UA could relaunch the service once T9 comes online at LAX.


I'd guess the range improvement would make the LAX-SIN route more feasible, but then UA would have to weigh the benefit of the increased schedule options they have via SFO by offering a late morning and a night flight vs splitting it back to 1 SFO-SIN flight + 1 LAX-SIN flight (with far, far fewer connections available over LAX). Or, if they wanted to add LAX-SIN in addition to keeping 2x daily SFO-SIN flights, they would have to decide that the profit potential on LAX-SIN was greater than all the other places they could send those two 789 frames.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
andrew1996
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2020 6:41 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:03 pm

FSDan wrote:
portola2727 wrote:
LHUSA wrote:

They already flew them in the past. The flight was quickly moved up to SFO as the second daily SFO-SIN.

Sorry, I should have been more clear, but I was wondering if UA could relaunch the service once T9 comes online at LAX.


I'd guess the range improvement would make the LAX-SIN route more feasible, but then UA would have to weigh the benefit of the increased schedule options they have via SFO by offering a late morning and a night flight vs splitting it back to 1 SFO-SIN flight + 1 LAX-SIN flight (with far, far fewer connections available over LAX). Or, if they wanted to add LAX-SIN in addition to keeping 2x daily SFO-SIN flights, they would have to decide that the profit potential on LAX-SIN was greater than all the other places they could send those two 789 frames.



I forgot the stats but LAX was launched after UA 1 was launched because LAX was the most popular transit option to/from SFO to/from SIN and that's why a direct LAX route was launched. I don't know if it was ever the majority of all passengers on UA1 but it may have been pretty close to a large majority number. I think the stat is public somewhere where I read about it once somewhere online. At least pre-covid, I think they could add a 3rd flight to SIN that is like 3-5X weekly out of LAX to SIN to supplement double daily out of SIN so that the SFO-SIN sector can focus more on transit passengers from across North America while LAX is O&D and transit options to most major US cities like EWR and ORD etc. The USA-SIN market is a very fragmented market ue to lack of non-stops where it is served by so many carriers because there is business demand but not really any non-stop flights until very recently. For example, BR's double daily SIN 77W flight is filled with transit passengers from across North America (particularly Canada too) otherwise 1 daily flight is likely enough since O&D SIN-TPE passengers have plenty of other choices, including budget airline choices for a quick 4 hours hop. I have flown the SIN-TPE sector and aside from tour groups occasionally on that flight flying between SIN and TPE its usually transit passengers. CX has also been a long time player in the USA-SIN market.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3340
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:11 pm

andrew1996 wrote:
FSDan wrote:
portola2727 wrote:
Sorry, I should have been more clear, but I was wondering if UA could relaunch the service once T9 comes online at LAX.


I'd guess the range improvement would make the LAX-SIN route more feasible, but then UA would have to weigh the benefit of the increased schedule options they have via SFO by offering a late morning and a night flight vs splitting it back to 1 SFO-SIN flight + 1 LAX-SIN flight (with far, far fewer connections available over LAX). Or, if they wanted to add LAX-SIN in addition to keeping 2x daily SFO-SIN flights, they would have to decide that the profit potential on LAX-SIN was greater than all the other places they could send those two 789 frames.



I forgot the stats but LAX was launched after UA 1 was launched because LAX was the most popular transit option to/from SFO to/from SIN and that's why a direct LAX route was launched. I don't know if it was ever the majority of all passengers on UA1 but it may have been pretty close to a large majority number. I think the stat is public somewhere where I read about it once somewhere online.


Quite possibly true, but that was also before SQ flew LAX-SIN nonstop at daily+ frequency I believe...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24791
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:17 pm

I saw a note in Flight Ops update about the October schedule that was interesting to put things in perspective.

Q. How many scheduled pilot block hours were there in October?
A. 234,941, or 37.8% of the number in October 2019
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
andrew1996
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2020 6:41 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:58 pm

FSDan wrote:
andrew1996 wrote:
FSDan wrote:

I'd guess the range improvement would make the LAX-SIN route more feasible, but then UA would have to weigh the benefit of the increased schedule options they have via SFO by offering a late morning and a night flight vs splitting it back to 1 SFO-SIN flight + 1 LAX-SIN flight (with far, far fewer connections available over LAX). Or, if they wanted to add LAX-SIN in addition to keeping 2x daily SFO-SIN flights, they would have to decide that the profit potential on LAX-SIN was greater than all the other places they could send those two 789 frames.



I forgot the stats but LAX was launched after UA 1 was launched because LAX was the most popular transit option to/from SFO to/from SIN and that's why a direct LAX route was launched. I don't know if it was ever the majority of all passengers on UA1 but it may have been pretty close to a large majority number. I think the stat is public somewhere where I read about it once somewhere online.


Quite possibly true, but that was also before SQ flew LAX-SIN nonstop at daily+ frequency I believe...


SQ LAX-SIN has no Y Class so that opens a market to UA already. I think UA may be stronger though on US point of sale and all the US corporate traffic so they likely wouldn't have much issue competing with SQ to get J class either. SQ's non-stop is probably also targeting wealthy travellers/corporate to ASEAN, India and Western Australia and these are markets UA is not really involved in (aside from India)
 
andrew1996
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2020 6:41 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:58 pm

andrew1996 wrote:
FSDan wrote:
andrew1996 wrote:


I forgot the stats but LAX was launched after UA 1 was launched because LAX was the most popular transit option to/from SFO to/from SIN and that's why a direct LAX route was launched. I don't know if it was ever the majority of all passengers on UA1 but it may have been pretty close to a large majority number. I think the stat is public somewhere where I read about it once somewhere online.


Quite possibly true, but that was also before SQ flew LAX-SIN nonstop at daily+ frequency I believe...


SQ LAX-SIN has no Y Class (Pre-COVID)so that opens a market to UA already. I think UA may be stronger though on US point of sale and all the US corporate traffic so they likely wouldn't have much issue competing with SQ to get J class either. SQ's non-stop is probably also targeting wealthy travellers/corporate to ASEAN, India and Western Australia and these are markets UA is not really involved in (aside from India)
 
tphuang
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

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

Thu Oct 01, 2020 9:05 pm

these long haul routes to singapore really relies on those expensive last minute J ticket to work. With business travel down, how many businesses are willing to spend $10k on J fares to send their employees non-stop to Singapore? With all these lower fare Asian carriers around keeping 1-stop pricing low, UA is not going to be able to do non-stop from continental USA to SIN for a few years.

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