Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
tphuang
Posts: 5202
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 05, 2020 9:37 pm

jayunited wrote:

But not to fear UA has 50 A321LXRs on order! I appreciate your point of view tphuang even if in some threads I may disagree with you or not like what you are sayin gone thing is clear you are well informed and know your stuff.

Thanks a lot. I also really appreciate your insight. Some of the most candid/insightful of anyone here regarding their employer.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3319
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 05, 2020 10:39 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
AA flies JFK to DUB on a 772 and PHL to DUB on an A332/333.


Off topic now, but AA never flew JFK-DUB on a 772 as far as I know. They flew it for a few years on a 752, but cut it last year in favor of starting DFW-DUB.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
CX747
Posts: 6251
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 05, 2020 10:53 pm

Revelation wrote:
CX747 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
UA has 50 A321XLR on order, along with this order bringing it to 21 78J and 38 789, so it can do either.

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_fleet


You are absolutely right in that regard. I also think when the A321s get delivered, we will be far from the current economic crisis. My overall point was that right now and for the foreseeable future, market fragmentation is dead. We will more than likely see airlines bring back certain flights, (CDG flying for example) but in a very different format. Rather than using 3 seperate 757/A321s on the route from three seperate airports, we will see consolidation into one CDG route, with one 787, that serves the market maybe three times a week. So where we used to see BOS-CDG, EWR-CDG and IAD-CDG, we may now see just EWR-CDG and that be flown 3 times a week. Less crew, less fuel and an attempt to maximize passenger loads. That trickle down effect could see three 737 flights replaced with 1 A321 and 3 E-190 flights replaced with 1 737 flight.

I'm not sure how that would work in practice though. My airport of choice for international travel is BOS. If I needed to get to CDG I'm not sure I'd expose myself to the road journey to EWR or a 2nd flight BOS-EWR to get to CDG. I'd prefer to wait for a once weekly CDG-BOS if the real concern is building up pax load to get a 787 full. BOS may still find with light loads they are better off just serving BOS-CDG with narrow body.


They may very well indeed do that BUT it leads to additional aircraft, crews, landing fees etc. In essence you need two crew of three pilots to get you from EWR/BOS-CDG. You will probably see a reduced BOS-EWR pattern. I'm just spitballing but maybe two daily BOS-EWR flights with a 737. 1000 and 1600. That lines you up for the 2200 EWR-LHR either way you slice it.

I completely understand not wanting to connect...I think that will actually see less competition occur. UA will dominate EWR but lose out at MIA, where AA truly becomes king of the roost. Airlines just won't have the finances to offer the flights and connections like before.

Slight deviation, before the crisis trying to get from EWR to Florida destinations was very easy and non-stop with United. It was next to impossible with AA as everything connected somewhere else. So, in that regard, I bet we see almost no presence at EWR for AA as things open up. Under great conditions, they couldn't or didn't want to make NJ-FL flights work. Why would they try to do it now?
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
FSDan
Posts: 3319
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 05, 2020 11:47 pm

tphuang wrote:
Lower capacity aircraft that have similar cost will over time beat the higher capacity aircraft.

The advantages that higher capacity aircraft have are:
1) lower cost
2) longer range
3) greater real estate for suites
4) cargo space

With A321XLR, it's CASM is really close to smaller capacity A330NEO and 787s. It's range is long enough to serve the TATL markets. And in terms of real estate, we now have suites on narrowbody that we didn't have before. So aside from cargo, there is really not much other benefits for higher capacity aircraft.


In a low demand environment this is certainly true. The smaller the aircraft, the better. But once demand picks back up, a 321XLR doesn't necessarily beat a 78J on a route that can comfortably support both flights. In that case, the more seats you can sell at a healthy price, the better.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5202
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 12:38 am

FSDan wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Lower capacity aircraft that have similar cost will over time beat the higher capacity aircraft.

The advantages that higher capacity aircraft have are:
1) lower cost
2) longer range
3) greater real estate for suites
4) cargo space

With A321XLR, it's CASM is really close to smaller capacity A330NEO and 787s. It's range is long enough to serve the TATL markets. And in terms of real estate, we now have suites on narrowbody that we didn't have before. So aside from cargo, there is really not much other benefits for higher capacity aircraft.


In a low demand environment this is certainly true. The smaller the aircraft, the better. But once demand picks back up, a 321XLR doesn't necessarily beat a 78J on a route that can comfortably support both flights. In that case, the more seats you can sell at a healthy price, the better.

2 xlr flights will give you roughly the same capacity but a better schedule.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 1:42 am

tphuang wrote:
FSDan wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Lower capacity aircraft that have similar cost will over time beat the higher capacity aircraft.

The advantages that higher capacity aircraft have are:
1) lower cost
2) longer range
3) greater real estate for suites
4) cargo space

With A321XLR, it's CASM is really close to smaller capacity A330NEO and 787s. It's range is long enough to serve the TATL markets. And in terms of real estate, we now have suites on narrowbody that we didn't have before. So aside from cargo, there is really not much other benefits for higher capacity aircraft.


In a low demand environment this is certainly true. The smaller the aircraft, the better. But once demand picks back up, a 321XLR doesn't necessarily beat a 78J on a route that can comfortably support both flights. In that case, the more seats you can sell at a healthy price, the better.

2 xlr flights will give you roughly the same capacity but a better schedule.

But more costs. 2 sets of crew, 2 sets of engines, separate airport and airway fees.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3319
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 1:52 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
tphuang wrote:
FSDan wrote:

In a low demand environment this is certainly true. The smaller the aircraft, the better. But once demand picks back up, a 321XLR doesn't necessarily beat a 78J on a route that can comfortably support both flights. In that case, the more seats you can sell at a healthy price, the better.

2 xlr flights will give you roughly the same capacity but a better schedule.

But more costs. 2 sets of crew, 2 sets of engines, separate airport and airway fees.


Yep, I expect the cost/benefit of one strategy vs the other would vary case by case. In some markets, schedule flexibility will be important enough that the extra cost of operating two flights is justified by higher premium revenues. In other cases, slots or other operational restrictions will give preference to the larger aircraft. Some markets would be a better fit for the 321XLR capacity-wise, while others like large leisure-oriented destinations would be better fits for the 787.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
United1
Posts: 4164
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 1:55 am

DL747400 wrote:
Can't help but wonder how and where UA is going to find the funds to pay for these new widebodies? :scratchchin:


Actually it's fairly easy to finance aircraft right now. At one point a week ago t-bonds were negative (meaning the holders paid the government for the privilege) so investors are searching for yield. Aircraft are a physical asset so it's almost always fairly simple to line up financing. From what I understand it's already done.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24332
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 2:18 am

CX747 wrote:
They may very well indeed do that BUT it leads to additional aircraft, crews, landing fees etc. In essence you need two crew of three pilots to get you from EWR/BOS-CDG. You will probably see a reduced BOS-EWR pattern. I'm just spitballing but maybe two daily BOS-EWR flights with a 737. 1000 and 1600. That lines you up for the 2200 EWR-LHR either way you slice it.

I completely understand not wanting to connect...I think that will actually see less competition occur. UA will dominate EWR but lose out at MIA, where AA truly becomes king of the roost. Airlines just won't have the finances to offer the flights and connections like before.

Slight deviation, before the crisis trying to get from EWR to Florida destinations was very easy and non-stop with United. It was next to impossible with AA as everything connected somewhere else. So, in that regard, I bet we see almost no presence at EWR for AA as things open up. Under great conditions, they couldn't or didn't want to make NJ-FL flights work. Why would they try to do it now?

My point of view is that of someone taking risk of the virus seriously. I wouldn't be flying anywhere unless I had a very strong reason to go. Then once I decide to go I would not want to expose myself to a second airport filled with mostly different pax and staff, then a second cabin filled with many different pax and staff, so I would insist on direct and would be prepared to pay through the nose for it. Yes, the airlines will have a tough time delivering services under the circumstances but that is an unavoidable reality. I'd actually prefer to drive to EWR rather than take an extra BOS-EWR hop since I have a lot more control over my environment in the car.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Nicknuzzii
Topic Author
Posts: 1152
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 2:55 am

Revelation wrote:
CX747 wrote:
They may very well indeed do that BUT it leads to additional aircraft, crews, landing fees etc. In essence you need two crew of three pilots to get you from EWR/BOS-CDG. You will probably see a reduced BOS-EWR pattern. I'm just spitballing but maybe two daily BOS-EWR flights with a 737. 1000 and 1600. That lines you up for the 2200 EWR-LHR either way you slice it.

I completely understand not wanting to connect...I think that will actually see less competition occur. UA will dominate EWR but lose out at MIA, where AA truly becomes king of the roost. Airlines just won't have the finances to offer the flights and connections like before.

Slight deviation, before the crisis trying to get from EWR to Florida destinations was very easy and non-stop with United. It was next to impossible with AA as everything connected somewhere else. So, in that regard, I bet we see almost no presence at EWR for AA as things open up. Under great conditions, they couldn't or didn't want to make NJ-FL flights work. Why would they try to do it now?

My point of view is that of someone taking risk of the virus seriously. I wouldn't be flying anywhere unless I had a very strong reason to go. Then once I decide to go I would not want to expose myself to a second airport filled with mostly different pax and staff, then a second cabin filled with many different pax and staff, so I would insist on direct and would be prepared to pay through the nose for it. Yes, the airlines will have a tough time delivering services under the circumstances but that is an unavoidable reality. I'd actually prefer to drive to EWR rather than take an extra BOS-EWR hop since I have a lot more control over my environment in the car.


If you haven’t been exposed already you probably have better odds to be at the grocery store than on plane where social disgracing measures are being implemented.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 5:05 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
tphuang wrote:
FSDan wrote:

In a low demand environment this is certainly true. The smaller the aircraft, the better. But once demand picks back up, a 321XLR doesn't necessarily beat a 78J on a route that can comfortably support both flights. In that case, the more seats you can sell at a healthy price, the better.

2 xlr flights will give you roughly the same capacity but a better schedule.

But more costs. 2 sets of crew, 2 sets of engines, separate airport and airway fees.


In the US model of flying isn't frequency more important than efficiency? Otherwise much more domestic flying would be widebody.
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 7:06 am

MrHMSH wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
tphuang wrote:
2 xlr flights will give you roughly the same capacity but a better schedule.

But more costs. 2 sets of crew, 2 sets of engines, separate airport and airway fees.


In the US model of flying isn't frequency more important than efficiency? Otherwise much more domestic flying would be widebody.

That is true for domestic routes. International routes are still largely widebody, in part due to slot restrictions at other ports.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 7:21 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
But more costs. 2 sets of crew, 2 sets of engines, separate airport and airway fees.


In the US model of flying isn't frequency more important than efficiency? Otherwise much more domestic flying would be widebody.

That is true for domestic routes. International routes are still largely widebody, in part due to slot restrictions at other ports.


Might be the case for the really busy hubs, but then if demand warrants 2-3x A321XLR or 1 78X and there are no slot restrictions, surely they'd choose the multiple daily option?
 
jeffrey0032j
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:11 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 8:46 am

MrHMSH wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:

In the US model of flying isn't frequency more important than efficiency? Otherwise much more domestic flying would be widebody.

That is true for domestic routes. International routes are still largely widebody, in part due to slot restrictions at other ports.


Might be the case for the really busy hubs, but then if demand warrants 2-3x A321XLR or 1 78X and there are no slot restrictions, surely they'd choose the multiple daily option?

I don't think there are many more markets that are suitable which not already served by 757s, so mainly these XLRs will be for 757 replacements.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10633
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 11:25 am

MrHMSH wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:

In the US model of flying isn't frequency more important than efficiency? Otherwise much more domestic flying would be widebody.

That is true for domestic routes. International routes are still largely widebody, in part due to slot restrictions at other ports.


Might be the case for the really busy hubs, but then if demand warrants 2-3x A321XLR or 1 78X and there are no slot restrictions, surely they'd choose the multiple daily option?

It really depends on the route and how much the passenger profile is split between business, leisure, and connecting passengers. Depending on the destination multiple flights on smaller aircraft may not net you all that much because time zones often force those flights into narrow windows anyways. In O&D business heavy destinations having a flight that arrives an hour earlier might be very important, but a destination in which a lot of the passengers are connecting or leisure less so as long as flight is timed well with hub bank.

Also important to keep in mind that unlike many international airlines US airlines have multiple intercontinental hubs they can encourage connecting passengers through (by pricing).
 
tphuang
Posts: 5202
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 11:30 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
tphuang wrote:
FSDan wrote:

In a low demand environment this is certainly true. The smaller the aircraft, the better. But once demand picks back up, a 321XLR doesn't necessarily beat a 78J on a route that can comfortably support both flights. In that case, the more seats you can sell at a healthy price, the better.

2 xlr flights will give you roughly the same capacity but a better schedule.

But more costs. 2 sets of crew, 2 sets of engines, separate airport and airway fees.


The CASM calculation Leeham performed were total operating costs including all of that and cost of the air frames themselves. A321XLR were basically about the same as 787-8 and A330-800. So it will be higher than 78J, but that's where the additional flexibility and better schedule come in. You can see right now with lack of demand, having A321 is a lot better than having a bunch of parked widebodies depreciating in value. Domestically, we are basically just down to a couple of HNL routes, DL on JFK-LAX and UA's EWR-LAX/SFO routes where wide usage of widebodies are more profitable. We will see how it is for TATL.

Basically, the original idea that UA will go without A321XLR does not make any sense unless they are willing to abandon a lot of markets.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10633
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 11:34 am

tphuang wrote:
[
Basically, the original idea that UA will go without A321XLR does not make any sense unless they are willing to abandon a lot of markets.

There was never any idea that UA will go without A321XLRs (which they have on order). It was always a question of whether UA would get the A321XLR or wait for whatever Boeing was going to offer for MOM (pre-Max grounding). UA/CO, after all, has been a heavy TATL 757 user (especially in the past) and it was always expected they would be a big MoM customer in the future.

That doesn’t mean 787s don’t have a place in their fleet though, or that UA has no need to order any more for the future (they can always replace older 777s if no expansion desired).
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2086
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 12:30 pm

jfk777 wrote:
United 767 are going to stay around a while, they are paid for and have new seats. They are efficient at flying to Europe with their new Polaris interiors from Newark and Chicago. Eventually UA may do what AA is doing and buy more 787-8 to replace the 767-300ER fleet. Early 777 could certainly be leaving the UA fleet, but the 757 are the first toast if UA is going to burn beard.


How's the dispatch reliability of the UA 767-300s? I'm sure it's better now than it used to be pre-merger, but what is it now?
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5202
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 12:48 pm

Polot wrote:
tphuang wrote:
[
Basically, the original idea that UA will go without A321XLR does not make any sense unless they are willing to abandon a lot of markets.

There was never any idea that UA will go without A321XLRs (which they have on order). It was always a question of whether UA would get the A321XLR or wait for whatever Boeing was going to offer for MOM (pre-Max grounding). UA/CO, after all, has been a heavy TATL 757 user (especially in the past) and it was always expected they would be a big MoM customer in the future.

That doesn’t mean 787s don’t have a place in their fleet though, or that UA has no need to order any more for the future (they can always replace older 777s if no expansion desired).

I was originally responding to someone saying United will not have a321xlr which I found to be quite ludicrous.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2866
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 1:00 pm

FlyHossD wrote:
How's the dispatch reliability of the UA 767-300s? I'm sure it's better now than it used to be pre-merger, but what is it now?


The dispatch reliability of our 763s is nil because the entire fleet is grounded.

Based on the summer international schedule UA has released thus far the 763s probably won't return to the skies until our IATA-winter schedule goes into effect in late October 2020.
 
MBASS
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 5:14 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 1:41 pm

I have a trip in July, where a 763 is scheduled to fly the domestic part out of EWR. I guess the 763’s are being put to service on domestic instead of international?
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10633
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 2:19 pm

MBASS wrote:
I have a trip in July, where a 763 is scheduled to fly the domestic part out of EWR. I guess the 763’s are being put to service on domestic instead of international?

More than likely the aircraft type will change. I don’t believe any of the summer schedules are fully finalized and still have remnants of pre-covid plans in them.
 
Cedar
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2017 1:07 am

Re: United orders 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 3:04 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

Yes there will be layoffs but no one knows a number.....Forbes sure as hell doesn’t. They got their number from websites with bad info including this one. So writing that 1/3 of the pilots are facing lay-off is irresponsible.


The number is known, both at United and within Treasury. The CARES Act loan applications due 4/30/20 - which UA has submitted - had to show projected headcount through the end of the year. Do you want to bet money that United and Treasury are leak-proof? I wouldn't.


I have no don’t the number is known. The point is until something is announced we can’t claim United is laying off pilots.


I highly suggest people look at reports from all angles of media before making generalizations & claims. Not to mention, listen to actual employees who work there. Reports in the media are purposely made vague, for click bait. and more viewing. And their so called "sources" are not always the best.

United has announced & communicated to employees a "plan" for Oct 1st if travel demand remains at zero - and potential plans moving forward. This is UA communicating openly with employees. Basically managing expectations so people are not shocked and can plan appropriately.
The plan is not written in stone, and is dependant on how travel rebounds as stated by UA. So the plan is likely to change.

I'm sure many of you have predictions on how travel rebounds - but the decisions will all be based on actual numbers and facts.

Cedar
 
Cedar
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2017 1:07 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 3:09 pm

jayunited wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:
How's the dispatch reliability of the UA 767-300s? I'm sure it's better now than it used to be pre-merger, but what is it now?


The dispatch reliability of our 763s is nil because the entire fleet is grounded.

Based on the summer international schedule UA has released thus far the 763s probably won't return to the skies until our IATA-winter schedule goes into effect in late October 2020.


So you think they will return? - I though they would expedite retirement of these.

Cedar
 
AA94
Posts: 752
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 5:29 pm

Cedar wrote:
So you think they will return? - I though they would expedite retirement of these.
Cedar


It depends on how long the crisis lasts, but I don't think they'll be retired wholesale. There might be a targeted retirement of some frames (due for HMV? older aircraft?) where it makes sense, but I think UA still needs an aircraft more capable than the 752 but not as large as the 787.

I think the 764 is probably going to get sold up the river right away, along with the PW 757s.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3319
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 8:12 pm

tphuang wrote:
Basically, the original idea that UA will go without A321XLR does not make any sense unless they are willing to abandon a lot of markets.


:checkmark: As an example, the 321XLR will be perfect for EWR-Secondary UK markets where UA (and CO before them) has long had a presence.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3319
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 06, 2020 8:20 pm

AA94 wrote:
I think UA still needs an aircraft more capable than the 752 but not as large as the 787.


I agree. Especially given they only have 12 of the smaller 787-8s.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
fightforlove
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 19, 2020 8:36 pm

I have a friend who's a United pilot on the 757/767, and he's getting laid-off. I think we can expect to see substantial cuts to the 757/767 fleets.
 
Pi7472000
Posts: 200
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2018 3:26 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 19, 2020 8:46 pm

fightforlove wrote:
I have a friend who's a United pilot on the 757/767, and he's getting laid-off. I think we can expect to see substantial cuts to the 757/767 fleets.



Very sad!!! 767 was the most comfortable ride internationally at United!! I wonder if pilots became part time if that could save some jobs!! Many industries are moving to part time work to at least employ more people.
 
United1
Posts: 4164
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 19, 2020 9:13 pm

Pi7472000 wrote:
fightforlove wrote:
I have a friend who's a United pilot on the 757/767, and he's getting laid-off. I think we can expect to see substantial cuts to the 757/767 fleets.



Very sad!!! 767 was the most comfortable ride internationally at United!! I wonder if pilots became part time if that could save some jobs!! Many industries are moving to part time work to at least employ more people.


The 767-300s are supposedly staying in the fleet.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
usa330300
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:29 pm

Re: United orders 7 787-10s

Tue May 19, 2020 9:34 pm

KlimaBXsst wrote:
codc10 wrote:
United disclosed that it confidentially settled with Boeing in the first quarter on compensation for the 737MAX delays. Wonder if this has anything to do with it.


Yes

Please expound. Need some more background on the inner workings of the agreement.
 
sdh9
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:13 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 19, 2020 10:20 pm

fightforlove wrote:
I have a friend who's a United pilot on the 757/767, and he's getting laid-off. I think we can expect to see substantial cuts to the 757/767 fleets.


There have been no announcements about pilot furloughs at United.
 
11C
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:25 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Tue May 19, 2020 10:39 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
PRAirbus wrote:
United announced pilot furloughs and base closures and now are adding these planes? Wondering how UA fleet cuts compare to AA/DL.A sad Fall is approaching for US carriers...I suspect there will be another industry bailout


NO furloughs have been announced!!!!!

For god sakes people LISTEN TO THE ACTUAL EMPLOYEES


Aren’t we always the last to know? Not being a smart ass, but it seems like Wall Street will have all their ducks in a row way before anything is disclosed.
 
sadde
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 8:46 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 20, 2020 1:43 am

11C wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
PRAirbus wrote:
United announced pilot furloughs and base closures and now are adding these planes? Wondering how UA fleet cuts compare to AA/DL.A sad Fall is approaching for US carriers...I suspect there will be another industry bailout


NO furloughs have been announced!!!!!

For god sakes people LISTEN TO THE ACTUAL EMPLOYEES


Aren’t we always the last to know? Not being a smart ass, but it seems like Wall Street will have all their ducks in a row way before anything is disclosed.

Head has to be solidly in the sand to not see that 10/1 the effects of displacement bids will be felt and furloughs will begin. The 75/767 are largely junior at UA. Furloughs will therefore have an effect on pilots on those fleets in a disproportionate way.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7353
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 20, 2020 2:19 am

FlyHossD wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
United 767 are going to stay around a while, they are paid for and have new seats. They are efficient at flying to Europe with their new Polaris interiors from Newark and Chicago. Eventually UA may do what AA is doing and buy more 787-8 to replace the 767-300ER fleet. Early 777 could certainly be leaving the UA fleet, but the 757 are the first toast if UA is going to burn beard.


How's the dispatch reliability of the UA 767-300s? I'm sure it's better now than it used to be pre-merger, but what is it now?


United would not operate a fleet of planes with terrible dispatch reliability to London with their Polaris passengers. 787 with Polaris seats would be better, until that is possible the Polaris 767 are going to carry the load, best 767 around.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2866
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 20, 2020 1:15 pm

sadde wrote:
11C wrote:
Head has to be solidly in the sand to not see that 10/1 the effects of displacement bids will be felt and furloughs will begin. The 75/767 are largely junior at UA. Furloughs will therefore have an effect on pilots on those fleets in a disproportionate way.


When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.

The 767s were not junior at all depending on the hub a pilot needed a good 13-15 years of seniority to get on the 767. The 764s were not junior at all a 764 pilot was paid the same hourly rate at a 777 pilot. For pilots who loved international flying but did not want to fly long haul and ultra long haul routes the 763 and 764 fleet were their go to fleet types especially the 764s simple because of the pay. It was always interesting walking through pilot crew scheduling anytime there was an open 764 trip pilots were all over it some trying to drop their 763 line to pick up a 764 line.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8048
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 20, 2020 1:23 pm

jayunited wrote:
When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.


You ask some good questions. I'll suggest it's not years of seniority, but how many years of seniority to take you xx% above the bottom, when furloughs are looming.

For example, how many years does a UA pilot need at present to ensure (s)he's not in the bottom 30%?
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 20, 2020 2:50 pm

jayunited wrote:
sadde wrote:
11C wrote:
Head has to be solidly in the sand to not see that 10/1 the effects of displacement bids will be felt and furloughs will begin. The 75/767 are largely junior at UA. Furloughs will therefore have an effect on pilots on those fleets in a disproportionate way.


When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.

The 767s were not junior at all depending on the hub a pilot needed a good 13-15 years of seniority to get on the 767. The 764s were not junior at all a 764 pilot was paid the same hourly rate at a 777 pilot. For pilots who loved international flying but did not want to fly long haul and ultra long haul routes the 763 and 764 fleet were their go to fleet types especially the 764s simple because of the pay. It was always interesting walking through pilot crew scheduling anytime there was an open 764 trip pilots were all over it some trying to drop their 763 line to pick up a 764 line.


It’s not to say all 767 pilots at UA are junior, but it was possible to be awarded 757/767/764 FO in new hire class at United over the last couple of years. Similarly, I wouldn’t read anything into the future of the UA 767/757 fleet because a pilot on that fleet is getting “furloughed” - at UA furloughs are done by pure seniority without regard to fleet. Just to illustrate, DL May have to furlough 80%+ of the current A220 FOs even though that fleet is expanding- those pilots are “too junior” in relation to the entire pilot group.

All that being said Junior is a term of relativity- how you compare to the other people in your cohort. Junior in base means your work Christmas, junior on fleet means displacement or downgrade, junior at the airline (at a legacy, probably 5-10 years) means possible furlough. All relative to the group you are analyzing.
Boiler Up!
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3222
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 20, 2020 3:06 pm

JFKalumni wrote:
tphuang wrote:
CX747 wrote:

You certainly can replace a 757/767 with a 787 and do it profitably. Instead of 3 daily EWR-LHR 757 flights, you now have 1 787 flight. All the pax and cargo go on that one flight. That's it, you want to go to Heathrow from Newark, then you get one United option. Maybe you don't even get it daily flight, just three times a week. Not multiple evening departures etc.

UA and other airlines have already done this to an extent. UA is grounding all their 757s. So, you need a route done next week? It is either a 737, 777 or 787. No more 757, so in essence, no more A321 need for right now. You either get it done with a 737 OR you figure out how to do it with a 787.


Not every route has as much demand as EWR-LHR. There are a lot of routes right now like EWR-MAD, where UA probably can't fill daily 787 year round. But if they had A321, they might be able to do it. Lower capacity aircraft that have similar cost will over time beat the higher capacity aircraft.

The advantages that higher capacity aircraft have are:
1) lower cost
2) longer range
3) greater real estate for suites
4) cargo space

With A321XLR, it's CASM is really close to smaller capacity A330NEO and 787s. It's range is long enough to serve the TATL markets. And in terms of real estate, we now have suites on narrowbody that we didn't have before. So aside from cargo, there is really not much other benefits for higher capacity aircraft.

Selling 20 J seats + 140 Y/Y+ seats is a lot easier than selling 40 J seats + 250 Y/Y+ seats.

This same theory works upchain also.
- A380 is no longer needed with 77W + A35J around
- 78X long term will replace 77W, not 77X.


You have a good argument but right now the cargo capacity is keeping many of these airlines afloat. There are many flights where the cargo paid for the entire trip and everything else was pure profit.

EWR-MAD is perfect for a 757 or an A321. Question is are you willing to leave 5 PMC pallets of valuable freight on the ground to right size every aspect of the flight ?



lets not automatically state cargo pays for flights. cargo falls the same as passengers, freight forwarders want the cheapest option, and will drive down costs, especially to Europe where the capacity and routings are available beyond need.

as for downgrading to a narrow-body on your example, considering UA is a pax airline first, they can do that and you can still fly cargo to the likes of LIS/BCN/GVA and truck to final destination.
 
sadde
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 8:46 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Wed May 20, 2020 7:35 pm

Web500sjc wrote:
jayunited wrote:
sadde wrote:


When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.

The 767s were not junior at all depending on the hub a pilot needed a good 13-15 years of seniority to get on the 767. The 764s were not junior at all a 764 pilot was paid the same hourly rate at a 777 pilot. For pilots who loved international flying but did not want to fly long haul and ultra long haul routes the 763 and 764 fleet were their go to fleet types especially the 764s simple because of the pay. It was always interesting walking through pilot crew scheduling anytime there was an open 764 trip pilots were all over it some trying to drop their 763 line to pick up a 764 line.


It’s not to say all 767 pilots at UA are junior, but it was possible to be awarded 757/767/764 FO in new hire class at United over the last couple of years. Similarly, I wouldn’t read anything into the future of the UA 767/757 fleet because a pilot on that fleet is getting “furloughed” - at UA furloughs are done by pure seniority without regard to fleet. Just to illustrate, DL May have to furlough 80%+ of the current A220 FOs even though that fleet is expanding- those pilots are “too junior” in relation to the entire pilot group.

All that being said Junior is a term of relativity- how you compare to the other people in your cohort. Junior in base means your work Christmas, junior on fleet means displacement or downgrade, junior at the airline (at a legacy, probably 5-10 years) means possible furlough. All relative to the group you are analyzing.



Agree with this. Seniority will determine furloughs, not fleet.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2086
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United exercises options for 7 787-10s

Thu May 21, 2020 5:19 pm

jayunited wrote:
When you say the 757s and 767s are junior at UA I'm not sure I fully understand what you are comparing them to. Are you comparing them to the 777 and 787s or are you comparing them to the A320/19 and 737s? Also when is a junior person no longer consider junior? Personally I (although not a pilot) no longer considered myself junior once I hit 10 years seniority.

The 767s were not junior at all depending on the hub a pilot needed a good 13-15 years of seniority to get on the 767. The 764s were not junior at all a 764 pilot was paid the same hourly rate at a 777 pilot. For pilots who loved international flying but did not want to fly long haul and ultra long haul routes the 763 and 764 fleet were their go to fleet types especially the 764s simple because of the pay. It was always interesting walking through pilot crew scheduling anytime there was an open 764 trip pilots were all over it some trying to drop their 763 line to pick up a 764 line.


Longevity and Seniority are not the same thing. For example, if a pilot was hired 10 years ago and no more pilots were hired, that (same) pilot would be junior - indeed, the junior most pilot at the company.

jayunited wrote:
The 767s were not junior at all depending on the hub a pilot needed a good 13-15 years of seniority to get on the 767.


The last few years there have been new-hires going straight to the right seat of the 756 fleet at UA.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.

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