Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
airbazar
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:25 pm

DL747400 wrote:
With UA planning SFO-BLR, there goes any hopes for AA to be successful on SEA-BLR.

I think the 2 markets have enough strength to stand on their own. More importantly I think the SFO market is too large for only 1 flight/airline so there will still be strong demand from SEA pax that won't be able to get a seat on the SFO flight. The only issue for me and this is not new, is whether AA is the right airline to operate SEA-BLR.
 
Kbud
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:18 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:59 pm

jetblastdubai wrote:
N649DL wrote:

ORD-DEL is going to be a tough one considering AA failed on that route for a long while.


The list of markets that UA succeeded in from ORD that AA failed in (or discontinued) is quite long.

I am excited for the UA add from ORD to Delhi. I've flown on Air India multiple times and I've chosen fly other airlines via one-stop to Delhi from ORD compared to Air India nonstop. I know they are both part of Star, but the service and hard product is quite different. I was hoping for a different Indian city nonstop from ORD such as Mumbai. Nonetheless a great addition.

American just can't seem to do anything successfully long-haul internationally out of ORD other than LHR. Their long-haul International strategy at ORD seems to be LHR, and then relying on the metal of all of their partner airlines. It is sad, but here is where AA has stopped flying out of ORD internationally long-haul (this is pre-covid, so I'm not listing the likes of Barcelona, Venice...): Tokyo, Shanghai, Beijing, Delhi, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Brussels, Moscow, Stockholm, Manchester, Birmingham, Zurich, and one or two between Rio, Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo. I can't find the details for certain of the LA routes.
 
VTORD
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 9:45 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:59 pm

Midwestindy wrote:

Given total demand from SEA-BLR is only around 40 PDEW, even if Amazon & MSFT account for all of that 40 that is still only 15% of the plane.....

When they originally announced the route, I recall reading that the aircraft would route from LAX which would provide a decent number of pax plus they will be able to capitalize on AS feed too so there's that. But yes you do raise a good point. How much of traffic will SFO-BLR steal now esp., the VFR crowd.
 
Alias1024
Posts: 2677
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:13 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:06 pm

HouStrategies wrote:
catiii wrote:
HouStrategies wrote:

National migration patterns are heading to lower-cost areas. When northerners are picking where to go, MIA/FLL area is much more expensive than TPA.


They are? You sure about that? That’s certainly not what the data shows...


Yep - I'm sure. And the data backs it up.

Image


That chart does not back up your point.

What it says is that people are moving from large cities where the spread between income and home price is low to cities where that spread is larger. Housing is only half the equation. Income is the other half and is the point I was making when I asked if you were trying to bring up disposable income. Knowing housing cost alone isn't enough to determine why a place is attractive or not to migrants, or propensity of residents to spend on air travel.

Here is a link to a list of US Metropolitan areas ranked by GDP per capita. The data is a few years old but should give some idea of economic activity and consequently salaries in various metro areas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U. ... per_capita

Since we've been discussing Miami along with comparisons to Charlotte, Denver, and Salt Lake City I will save everyone from having to go look for them in the link.

#22 Denver-Aurora-Lakewood $64,379 (of note Boulder, CO is #11 at $70,077 and undisputedly in the catchment area for DEN).
#31 Salt Lake City $61,809
#45 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia $58,064
#103 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach $48,140
#187 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater $41,222

Also of note, outside of GUM and its very unique near monopoly situation, UA does not have a hub in a metro area below #34 on that list. That's Chicago-Naperville-Elgin at $61,170. A hub in Tampa would definitely not fit United's strategy of being a higher cost, full service carrier that chases high dollar travelers in major markets.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
 
hohd
Posts: 937
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 1:03 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:23 pm

With UA introducing SFO-BLR, which has much greater potential than SEA-BLR, I am beginning to wonder if AA will even start the route. BOM is a big VFR and business route, may be UA could have gone with ORD-BOM. AI's ORD-DEL continues to HYD, which is another big VFR (actually bigger VFR than BLR) and some business destination, so AI will be ok.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 2936
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:04 pm

More detailed launch dates, but not the exact ones:

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

https://crankyflier.com/2020/09/10/unit ... long-haul/
 
airbazar
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:28 pm

VTORD wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:

Given total demand from SEA-BLR is only around 40 PDEW, even if Amazon & MSFT account for all of that 40 that is still only 15% of the plane.....

When they originally announced the route, I recall reading that the aircraft would route from LAX which would provide a decent number of pax plus they will be able to capitalize on AS feed too so there's that. But yes you do raise a good point. How much of traffic will SFO-BLR steal now esp., the VFR crowd.

BLR is not a VFR type of market. It's very heavy on business traffic. There's a reason why LH operates their most premium heavy aircraft on this route. I wouldn't be shocked if 30 of those 40 PDEW are all business. If you can fill the front of the plane with healthy yields, the back of the plane becomes a little easier to fill with attractive fares and connecting passengers.
Just because UA has a flight from SFO it doesn't mean AA can no longer attract connecting passengers from up and down the western U.S. But this is one of those routes where filling the back of the plane even with attractive fares will be harder than filling the front of the plane.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2502
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:03 pm

chicawgo wrote:
My biggest concern is the nightmares I’m going to have from Patrick Quayle’s terrifying wink-nod. Or whatever the hell that was.


:highfive:

I showed the video to my gf and we both were discussing how terrifying that wink was.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
x1234
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:27 pm

I remember BA saying JNB was one of the highest yields stations in their network, especially connecting onto North America. I heard EWR-CPT did very well with J being sold out most days so UA diving into JNB daily is a good bet. I really hoping Boeing's PIP package for the engines enables JNB-EWR and SFO-BLR non-stop. Will DL test the waters with the A350 being weight restricted to make JNB-ATL non-stop? DL (A350) and UA (B789) will truly tell the difference between Airbus & Boeing in a hot and high elevation battle.
 
Miamiairport
Posts: 694
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:14 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:30 pm

A data point. After getting laid off in 2013 I decided to move out of cold NYC go warm Florida. I settled in MIA because SE is where the bulk of professional jobs are albeit TPA/Orlando are catching up. Now that I've found a job that will allow me to work remote (my ultimate goal) I'm looking at Sanibel/Marco Island/Jacksonville/Pensacola/possibly Ft Walton Beach/Destin. The bulk of my desire to move is to get out of somewhere that's like NYC but with better weather and palm trees. Cost of living is also a consideration albeit Sanibel/Marco Island won't be much cheaper. My brother and wife settled first in West Palm but moved to an area between TPA and Brandenton. I see others now with remote jobs moving away from major cities.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 2936
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:47 pm

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

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

Schedule:
Depart EWR 8:45 pm Arrive JNB 5:45 pm the next day
Depart JNB at 8:00 pm Arrive EWR 5:45 am the next day
 
HouStrategies
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:39 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:00 pm

MAH4546 wrote:
HouStrategies wrote:
catiii wrote:

They are? You sure about that? That’s certainly not what the data shows...


Yep - I'm sure. And the data backs it up.

Image


No the data does not back that up. “People prefer to move to lower cost housing” does not instant mean that “people prefer to move to Tampa over Miami.” Miami receives more domestic migration. It’s nearly triple the size and has a lot more jobs/industry. And compared to NYC, Miami real estate is a bargain.


How about the Tampa MSA has a 15% growth rate vs. 11% for Miami?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... ted_States

Regardless, MIA and FLL are already far too competitive - no room for a new hub.
 
HouStrategies
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:39 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:09 pm

MillwallSean wrote:
I like when posters come with ideas and justify their thoughts. Good post.


Thanks! :-)
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:18 pm

I'm incredibly happy about these adds.

I'm really *excited* to see what the performance numbers look like for the 789 on the JNB-EWR leg. I hope someone can plug in some information. It's no doubt a very incredible and capable plane.

I've also heard some reference to a GE PIP -- does anyone have details on this? How much better will it make the engine? Is it only a paper change that can be incorporated in existing frames? When will be be available?
Whatever
 
izbtmnhd
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:06 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:18 pm

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

The only value TPA would bring as a UA hub would be to serve as a LATAM/SA gateway. So why would UA compete against itself at IAH?
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 963
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:22 pm

airbazar wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
With UA planning SFO-BLR, there goes any hopes for AA to be successful on SEA-BLR.

I think the 2 markets have enough strength to stand on their own. More importantly I think the SFO market is too large for only 1 flight/airline so there will still be strong demand from SEA pax that won't be able to get a seat on the SFO flight. The only issue for me and this is not new, is whether AA is the right airline to operate SEA-BLR.


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

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
acavpics
Posts: 421
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:54 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:35 pm

Why is it that they continue to expand in India yet still refuse to codeshare with Star Alliance partner AI?

AI happily codeshares with UA's JV partners like LH group and AC.
 
User avatar
airzim
Posts: 1449
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2001 7:40 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:43 pm

acavpics wrote:
Why is it that they continue to expand in India yet still refuse to codeshare with Star Alliance partner AI?

AI happily codeshares with UA's JV partners like LH group and AC.


What's in it for UA? UA doesn't need the AI network, or lousy service standards within India, and UA doesn't need to dilute any displaced passengers in the US domestic market with low AI fares on a AI codeshare.

Vistara provides any additional lift needed within India, and Vistara won't care about United flying to DEL/BOM/BLR nonstop and taking away traffic from them (given they are still starting out and don't fly to the US).
Last edited by airzim on Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10177
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:43 pm

DL747400 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
With UA planning SFO-BLR, there goes any hopes for AA to be successful on SEA-BLR.

I think the 2 markets have enough strength to stand on their own. More importantly I think the SFO market is too large for only 1 flight/airline so there will still be strong demand from SEA pax that won't be able to get a seat on the SFO flight. The only issue for me and this is not new, is whether AA is the right airline to operate SEA-BLR.


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

Actually it is. I'm going to go out on a limb a suggest most of these pax out of SEA are either AS or DL FF's. If you're an AA/AS FF, why would you backtrack to SFO to fly UA when you have a chance to fly non-stop? If you're a DL FF, you take the non-stop too unless you want to do a 1-stop. On the flip side, if you're SFO based, a conx in SEA poses no need to backtrack so for th right price that's still viable. At the end of the day I think there's more than enough demand to sustain 2 flights from the West Coast.
On top of that there's the issue of range coming back from BLR, for UA. BLR-SFO is about the same distance as SIN-SFO which we know was payload restricted. And BLR is at 3,000ft alt and it can get pretty humid and hot although it's normally pretty mild by India standards. This route is far from being a slam dunk for UA even if there is strong demand for it. Luckily as I said above, this is primarily a business route so they should be able to afford a few empty rows in Y. But all that means is that this flight alone won't be able to cater to 100% of demand from the West. Not even close.
 
catiii
Posts: 3608
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 5:47 pm

HouStrategies wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:
HouStrategies wrote:

Yep - I'm sure. And the data backs it up.

Image


No the data does not back that up. “People prefer to move to lower cost housing” does not instant mean that “people prefer to move to Tampa over Miami.” Miami receives more domestic migration. It’s nearly triple the size and has a lot more jobs/industry. And compared to NYC, Miami real estate is a bargain.


How about the Tampa MSA has a 15% growth rate vs. 11% for Miami?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... ted_States

Regardless, MIA and FLL are already far too competitive - no room for a new hub.


No, YOU said:

HouStrategies wrote:
When northerners are picking where to go, MIA/FLL area is much more expensive than TPA.


If "much more expensive" is a proxy for where they are choosing, that's not the case. In fact, a recent NY Times article in the last 7 days noted that 45% of those leaving from the tri-state went to Broward/Dade/Palm Beach Counties. That would leave 55% of those leaving for the entirety of the rest of Florida, to include Orlando, Jacksonville, Sarasota, Fort Myers, Naples, and the panhandle outside of Tampa.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1216
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 6:11 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
SFOtoORD wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:

AA will launch the route if it has the corporate book of business from MSFT and Amazon. There never was any doubt that AA would have to rely on AS feed at SEA since it is a mere spoke in the AA network. UA adding SFO to BLR doesn't make the AA route go away necessarily, though only time and a post-COVID19 industry will tell if BLR can support two flights from the US. I don't see either of these flights going out full. UA has the edge in that SFO is a larger catchment and includes Silicon Valley, but AA has made RDU to LHR last all these years largely on the back of a single corporate contract so who knows.


While MSFT has a meaningful presence in BLR, their main location is HYD. Amazon is also quite distributed through India with a quarter of their staff in HYD. It’s a long flight and those two companies are going to fill planes year round from SEA.


Given total demand from SEA-BLR is only around 40 PDEW, even if Amazon & MSFT account for all of that 40 that is still only 15% of the plane.....


Sorry, that was a typo and should have said:

It’s a long flight and those two companies aren’t going to fill planes year round from SEA.
 
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 Sep 10, 2020 6:20 pm

Very cool adds! I hope these are able to come to fruition given the environment.

The Africa adds all make a lot of sense given business and VFR ties and the gaps that will be there from SA's retrenchment. Someone upthread noted that there are only 21 weekly U.S.-South Africa frequencies available for U.S. carriers, and with this announcement we'll be up to 17 of those (at least in the winter when UA's 3x weekly EWR-CPT operates). Not much room for further additions - either DL or AA could add something summer seasonal or fly a year-round route less than daily, or UA could make their CPT service daily in the winter or extend the season.

SFO-BLR should probably do well, even if it has to be weight restricted. I agree with others that this puts some pressure on AA's planned SEA-BLR service, although perhaps the shorter distance there will allow them to make some cargo revenue that UA won't be able to capture. On the other hand, AA's 789s are much more dense than UA's so maybe they won't have that much payload to spare for cargo (assuming they can fill the passenger cabin)... BLR will be interesting to watch.

ORD-DEL seems like a moderately safe add. Cool to see ORD getting some long haul love with TLV and DEL being added this year!

The Hawai'i adds seem like a good use of aircraft that likely won't be needed for transatlantic lift next summer. As long as Hawai'i opens back up I'm sure there would be demand to fill those flights.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
DTWLAX
Posts: 1119
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:19 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 6:44 pm

AA will definitely lose some of the BLR traffic it was hoping to capture from the Bay Area and SoCal.
 
lga31vfr
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 12:23 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 6:51 pm

[quote="airbazar"]
On top of that there's the issue of range coming back from BLR, for UA. BLR-SFO is about the same distance as SIN-SFO which we know was payload restricted. ]
UA is in the process of making software changes to the fuel system on the 789's, It will enable them to get some more range which should make a lot of these super long flights a breeze.
 
HouStrategies
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:39 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 6:53 pm

catiii wrote:
HouStrategies wrote:
MAH4546 wrote:

No the data does not back that up. “People prefer to move to lower cost housing” does not instant mean that “people prefer to move to Tampa over Miami.” Miami receives more domestic migration. It’s nearly triple the size and has a lot more jobs/industry. And compared to NYC, Miami real estate is a bargain.


How about the Tampa MSA has a 15% growth rate vs. 11% for Miami?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... ted_States

Regardless, MIA and FLL are already far too competitive - no room for a new hub.


No, YOU said:

HouStrategies wrote:
When northerners are picking where to go, MIA/FLL area is much more expensive than TPA.


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


Maybe some northerners live outside NYC? ;-) UA already has a strong presence in NYC and will certainly capture plenty of them that move anywhere going back and forth to NYC. But there is also the potential migration of many others across a wide swath of the northern cold belt to Florida, and the overall strong growth rate in the Tampa MSA implies they will attract a lot of them. And, did I mention that MIA and FLL are already saturated with competition?
 
dfw88
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:25 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 6:58 pm

DTWLAX wrote:
AA will definitely lose some of the BLR traffic it was hoping to capture from the Bay Area and SoCal.


I think everyone agrees on that. How could they not? The real question is: Is there enough traffic for both to survive?

The way I see it the split goes like this:

UA captures: Star Alliance loyalists in the Bay Area (large), Bay Area corporate contracts (large), Star Alliance flyers from the western US, including a sizable IAH-BLR crowd, as well as the LA area (medium)

AA captures: Seattle Corporate contracts (medium), AS/OW loyalists in the Bay Area (smaller than UA, for sure, but no idea how big of a group that is), AS/OW loyalists in the LA and Seattle areas (large), AS/OW loyalists in the western US, including the larger-than-you-think DFW-BLR segment (medium)

The carriers split the price-sensitive VFR crowd who are willing to connect wherever and as many times as necessary to get a good deal.

Obviously it's not actually that simple. I'm just trying to make the best guess I can.

The advantage is certainly in UA's favor, but I can envision a world where both can find their niches and survive. For a good breakdown of the amount of OD traffic from the US to BLR take a look at Cranky Flier's post from today.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8413
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:11 pm

UA SFO-BLR will not only eat into AA SEA-BLR, but also eat into LH and SQ premium loads among others. BIAL's SFO-BLR being world's #1 underserved route marketing campaign failed to mention multiple 1-Stops already serving the market. Someone has to give. Also, BLR lacks a domestic full service carrier to feed the premium segment. Let's wait and see.
All posts are just opinions.
 
01pewterz28
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:43 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:20 pm

catiii wrote:
01pewterz28 wrote:
We had a mini Hub at MCO back in the early 90's it was actually larger than United's Mini hub at MIA.

We had 45 flights a day to in 1991 the plan was to grow the hub and open a pilot base @ MCO.


UA has an inflight base there now right? Around 200 or so?


We have no pilot bases @ MCO we have many pilots who live in the Central Florida and commute but no pilot base. We have a Satellite Base FA Base and the PM CO MOC.

The only 3 airlines with pilot bases @ MCO are FR, JB, and SW
 
Max Q
Posts: 8507
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:24 pm

Tampa’s home for me so I’d love to see it and TPA is outstanding user friendly airport with no congestion and great potential


I’m really not sure if the market is here or not, I know there’s plenty of people and they all seem to be on the road at once when I go anywhere!
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
Coexstud
Posts: 89
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:48 pm

Re: United New Route Announcement 9/9/2020

Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:39 pm

AA94 wrote:
Coexstud wrote:
AA94 wrote:
EWR-OGG is 4903 miles according to Great Circle, and those numerical tiles appear alongside a photo of the New York Public Library lions and a lei

Nope the lei and lion both represent Singapore especially the lion


And yet, United announced EWR-OGG and nothing to/from Singapore. Not to mention it was literally a photo of the lions outside the NYPL ...

What’s your point it was a guess NYPL - Newark that’s a given . I doubt they even start any of these routes with the massive furloughs coming
 
sabby
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:11 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:50 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
UA SFO-BLR will not only eat into AA SEA-BLR, but also eat into LH and SQ premium loads among others. BIAL's SFO-BLR being world's #1 underserved route marketing campaign failed to mention multiple 1-Stops already serving the market. Someone has to give. Also, BLR lacks a domestic full service carrier to feed the premium segment. Let's wait and see.


BLR doesn't need "feeding". UA is clearly targeting BLR originating/terminating traffic, they can feed at SFO end if needed. I do agree LH will feel the burn. So far, Star alliance traffic were funneled via LH at FRA to both LH and UA.
 
cityshuttle
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:56 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:08 pm

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

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

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


Is it a requirement by the DOT that UA has to send a copy of their application for new routes to its competitors AA, DL and HA too ?

Is this procedure common in other countries too ?
 
x1234
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:33 pm

UA is targeting high yielding J traffic on all of these routes that will pay a premium to go non-stop. My source in UA says SFO-MNL almost made it but in a TPAC yielding environment where the CN3 sells SFO-XXX-MNL as low as $600 USD round-trip its not worth it. PAL prices itself as a premium. Same with BKK. If you were dreaming of SFO-BKK we will have to wait until Thailand gets Cat 1 status again with the FAA and TG launches it (not likely due to mismatched fleet type and losing $$$). I'm still wondering when UA will resume SFO-SIN as SQ only flies LAX-SIN now.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1791
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 9:02 pm

airbazar wrote:
DL747400 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
I think the 2 markets have enough strength to stand on their own. More importantly I think the SFO market is too large for only 1 flight/airline so there will still be strong demand from SEA pax that won't be able to get a seat on the SFO flight. The only issue for me and this is not new, is whether AA is the right airline to operate SEA-BLR.


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

Actually it is. I'm going to go out on a limb a suggest most of these pax out of SEA are either AS or DL FF's. If you're an AA/AS FF, why would you backtrack to SFO to fly UA when you have a chance to fly non-stop? If you're a DL FF, you take the non-stop too unless you want to do a 1-stop. On the flip side, if you're SFO based, a conx in SEA poses no need to backtrack so for th right price that's still viable. At the end of the day I think there's more than enough demand to sustain 2 flights from the West Coast.
On top of that there's the issue of range coming back from BLR, for UA. BLR-SFO is about the same distance as SIN-SFO which we know was payload restricted. And BLR is at 3,000ft alt and it can get pretty humid and hot although it's normally pretty mild by India standards. This route is far from being a slam dunk for UA even if there is strong demand for it. Luckily as I said above, this is primarily a business route so they should be able to afford a few empty rows in Y. But all that means is that this flight alone won't be able to cater to 100% of demand from the West. Not even close.



Based on your response, you must not know. The SFO-SIN (westbound) was able to take a full load of passengers and about 7 tons of cargo on most days.

The flight back from BLR will be a mostly polar route and have less winds to deal with than the SFO-SIN. I wouldn't expect much in the way of performance penalties on this route, other than the occasional bad weather day in SFO or some unforeseen routing needed.
Whatever
 
capitalflyer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:43 am

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 9:06 pm

From the release:
United will become the only U.S. carrier serving Accra nonstop from Washington, D.C. and the only airline to serve Lagos nonstop from Washington, D.C., with three weekly flights to each destination beginning in late spring 2021. The Washington metropolitan area has the second-largest population of Ghanaians in the United States, and Lagos is the largest Western African destination from the United States. Now, with 65 different U.S. cities connecting through Washington Dulles, United will offer convenient one-stop connections to Western Africa.

Note the emphasis on connections in the final sentence. I think these new flights are both to serve O&D and a continuation of shifting connecting flights to IAD. I expect once air travel recovers (who knows when) we will see EWR more trim and more efficiently focused as primarily an O&D monster for UA in NYC area and IAD as the east coast cog in the UA network.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

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

Thu Sep 10, 2020 9:06 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
airbazar wrote:
DL747400 wrote:

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

Actually it is. I'm going to go out on a limb a suggest most of these pax out of SEA are either AS or DL FF's. If you're an AA/AS FF, why would you backtrack to SFO to fly UA when you have a chance to fly non-stop? If you're a DL FF, you take the non-stop too unless you want to do a 1-stop. On the flip side, if you're SFO based, a conx in SEA poses no need to backtrack so for th right price that's still viable. At the end of the day I think there's more than enough demand to sustain 2 flights from the West Coast.
On top of that there's the issue of range coming back from BLR, for UA. BLR-SFO is about the same distance as SIN-SFO which we know was payload restricted. And BLR is at 3,000ft alt and it can get pretty humid and hot although it's normally pretty mild by India standards. This route is far from being a slam dunk for UA even if there is strong demand for it. Luckily as I said above, this is primarily a business route so they should be able to afford a few empty rows in Y. But all that means is that this flight alone won't be able to cater to 100% of demand from the West. Not even close.



Based on your response, you must not know. The SFO-SIN (westbound) was able to take a full load of passengers and about 7 tons of cargo on most days.

The flight back from BLR will be a mostly polar route and have less winds to deal with than the SFO-SIN. I wouldn't expect much in the way of performance penalties on this route, other than the occasional bad weather day in SFO or some unforeseen routing needed.

The Singapore flight was often 17 hours or more. And could still take a modest amount of cargo on a good day, Bangalore should be under 16 hours most of the time.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8420
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:42 am

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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

The beauty of these Southern Hemisphere markets is that they are a great place to add capacity in winter when demand drops significantly in other regions of the world.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
catiii
Posts: 3608
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:32 am

HouStrategies wrote:
catiii wrote:
HouStrategies wrote:

How about the Tampa MSA has a 15% growth rate vs. 11% for Miami?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... ted_States

Regardless, MIA and FLL are already far too competitive - no room for a new hub.


No, YOU said:

HouStrategies wrote:
When northerners are picking where to go, MIA/FLL area is much more expensive than TPA.


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


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


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

A link to a Wikipedia page about relative growth in the Tampa MSA isn’t dispositive of that claim.
 
User avatar
tb727
Posts: 2226
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:00 am

01pewterz28 wrote:
catiii wrote:
01pewterz28 wrote:
We had a mini Hub at MCO back in the early 90's it was actually larger than United's Mini hub at MIA.

We had 45 flights a day to in 1991 the plan was to grow the hub and open a pilot base @ MCO.


UA has an inflight base there now right? Around 200 or so?


We have no pilot bases @ MCO we have many pilots who live in the Central Florida and commute but no pilot base. We have a Satellite Base FA Base and the PM CO MOC.

The only 3 airlines with pilot bases @ MCO are FR, JB, and SW


NK has an MCO pilot and FA base.
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
avi8
Posts: 1192
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:36 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:10 am

Quick question. I was looking at Flightradar24 and noticed that, during the evening bank at IAH, there were 39 flights operated by E175 aircraft. That’s more than half of the destinations served during that specific bank. Is the utilization of the E175 being capitalized as much as possible because of the pandemic? How does that compare to other UA hubs?
avi8
 
LHUSA
Posts: 829
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:15 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:25 am

UA's inaugural ORD-TLV is in the air! I've waited years and years for this flight. Wish it would have happened under better circumstances. Nevertheless, still great to see!

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL140
 
sand26391
Posts: 663
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 11:47 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:23 am

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

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

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



Does UA apply like this for all the new routes mentioned? Can't find the docs for the new routes announced
 
LH658
Posts: 1203
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:35 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:51 am

Why IAD - LOS over IAH - LOS?
 
SATexan
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 6:49 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:53 am

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

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

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

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

Finally, airlines such as Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa and Cathay were milking the SFO-BLR sector. Singapore is vulnerable since it is out of the way and relied heavily on its superior service. Lufthansa will lose some premium travellers on SFO-BLR and also will have to deal with a more extensive UA network to India.
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:55 am

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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

Inbound EWR arrival around 7:00am to take advantage of the morning bank to the west coast, Florida and Canada.
 
B752OS
Posts: 1251
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:05 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:58 am

Who will be able to capture the important connecting traffic best to/from BLR? United? or American?
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:15 am

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

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

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


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

The EWR inbound is perfect for the connection passengers. Only problem is now this flight will be added to the morning inbound power bank of TLV,DEL,BOM,JNB,GRU.
 
RainerBoeing777
Posts: 524
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:43 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 4:53 am

why not launch more routes to Houston? I think the last one was Sydney, even LAX and DEN have received new routes in recent years, because IAH does not :(
CX - JL - LH - KE - KL - SQ - QR - QF - TG
 
sand26391
Posts: 663
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 11:47 am

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:32 am

^^ Oops! My bad, forgot to say the numbers are Bi-directional in nature! :‑)
 
airboss787
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:39 pm

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

Fri Sep 11, 2020 6:44 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
CONTACREW wrote:
N649DL wrote:

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

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


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


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


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

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