Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
AC4500
Posts: 590
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:02 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sat Mar 27, 2021 6:31 pm

AaronPGH wrote:
Ugh. I ready want our pit-sfo nonstops back. At least one. Are we really gonna have a nonstop to Maine before SFO returns? Does not compute.

UA's SFO route network is going to take the longest to recover of all of UA's hubs, especially the longer and thinner transcon routes, like SFO-PIT. In response to the dramatic changes of demand overtime, they're launching leisure routes like PIT-PWM, whereas routes like SFO-PIT mainly survived on business traffic. I almost wonder if a ULCC/LCC carrier (e.g. F9 or B6) would be willing to try SFO-PIT on a sub-daily basis.

Similarly, it looks like B6 still has intentions of flying SFO-RDU, and UA hasn't responded to that. Albeit, UA doesn't really need to respond since B6 keeps pushing back their SFO-RDU start date.
 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 6077
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sat Mar 27, 2021 8:25 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
Didn't UA acknowledge that their April schedule wasn’t enough capacity? Now, they extended it into May? Someone wanna tell me what’s going on?


Kirby has been very head-strong(usually in a self-congratulatory manner) about UA's strategy during COVID.

For reference, UA is operating only close to half of AA's April capacity, while AA is running LFs in the 80s. You can use the excuse of UA's hubs being in cities more impacted by COVID, but they are small regardless.

Image

https://public.tableau.com/profile/dafa ... edSeats/US
ORD & IND

AA & DL
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 674
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sat Mar 27, 2021 9:06 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Didn't UA acknowledge that their April schedule wasn’t enough capacity? Now, they extended it into May? Someone wanna tell me what’s going on?


Kirby has been very head-strong(usually in a self-congratulatory manner) about UA's strategy during COVID.

For reference, UA is operating only close to half of AA's April capacity, while AA is running LFs in the 80s. You can use the excuse of UA's hubs being in cities more impacted by COVID, but they are small regardless.

Image

https://public.tableau.com/profile/dafa ... edSeats/US

It’s a horrible strategy and completely goes against everything Kirby has been saying.
Last edited by Scarebus34 on Sat Mar 27, 2021 9:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sat Mar 27, 2021 9:07 pm

CALMSP wrote:
...I guess I can't understand what the biggest hiccup is with the mainline union pay demands for a smaller a/c. Are they wanting 737/320 prices for the 195/220?


IIRC, the UAL ALPA contract has pay rates for the smaller jets like the E-195 and they are lower than the current smallest mainline narrow body aircraft (A319 and B737-700). Can anyone post those rates?
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
AaronPGH
Posts: 595
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 9:13 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sat Mar 27, 2021 9:29 pm

AC4500 wrote:
AaronPGH wrote:
Ugh. I ready want our pit-sfo nonstops back. At least one. Are we really gonna have a nonstop to Maine before SFO returns? Does not compute.

UA's SFO route network is going to take the longest to recover of all of UA's hubs, especially the longer and thinner transcon routes, like SFO-PIT. In response to the dramatic changes of demand overtime, they're launching leisure routes like PIT-PWM, whereas routes like SFO-PIT mainly survived on business traffic. I almost wonder if a ULCC/LCC carrier (e.g. F9 or B6) would be willing to try SFO-PIT on a sub-daily basis.

Similarly, it looks like B6 still has intentions of flying SFO-RDU, and UA hasn't responded to that. Albeit, UA doesn't really need to respond since B6 keeps pushing back their SFO-RDU start date.


Totally get the strategy, but I find it hard to believe that a route that was solidly double daily can't squeak out once daily frequency this summer. Big Sur, Napa, etc. The Bay Area does lesiure really well too.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 12:08 am

The states with more progress on lifting restrictions will win first. California can rebound if they’ll just get to point of lifting restrictions.

But yes, California is filled with great outdoor travel opportunities.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 12:16 am

Scarebus34 wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Didn't UA acknowledge that their April schedule wasn’t enough capacity? Now, they extended it into May? Someone wanna tell me what’s going on?


Kirby has been very head-strong(usually in a self-congratulatory manner) about UA's strategy during COVID.

For reference, UA is operating only close to half of AA's April capacity, while AA is running LFs in the 80s. You can use the excuse of UA's hubs being in cities more impacted by COVID, but they are small regardless.

Image

https://public.tableau.com/profile/dafa ... edSeats/US

It’s a horrible strategy and completely goes against everything Kirby has been saying.


I’m not buying it anymore either. If the latter half of May doesn’t show a willingness to make capacity available, their summer rebound may be limited.

To me, the UA position is hampered on rebound because they failed to get into the 100 seat category. I don’t buy for one minute that per trip salary costs of a mainline vs regional operated E-190 or A220 are real difference makers.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 12:44 am

I’m actually seeing capacity reductions in May vs April. Can someone possibly provide a deeper look at this for me?
 
AC4500
Posts: 590
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:02 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 12:45 am

Nicknuzzii wrote:
I’m actually seeing capacity reductions in May vs April. Can someone possibly provide a deeper look at this for me?

Which particular routes are you looking at?
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 1:12 am

AC4500 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
I’m actually seeing capacity reductions in May vs April. Can someone possibly provide a deeper look at this for me?

Which particular routes are you looking at?


EWR-MCO/BOS are two I found on the spot.
 
LHUSA
Posts: 834
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:15 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 1:20 am

Nicknuzzii wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
I’m actually seeing capacity reductions in May vs April. Can someone possibly provide a deeper look at this for me?

Which particular routes are you looking at?


EWR-MCO/BOS are two I found on the spot.


April still has Spring Break capacity that May doesn’t warrant
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 1:27 am

LHUSA wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
Which particular routes are you looking at?


EWR-MCO/BOS are two I found on the spot.


April still has Spring Break capacity that May doesn’t warrant


What spring break is at the end of April?

Besides that, every other airline has more May capacity then April.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22078
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 1:29 am

We have posters trying to stir up threads will unsubstantiated claims of wild exaggeration. Please flag the posts for the moderators.
6 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 3632
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 1:39 am

Is UA514 the true re-inaugural JFK flight tomorrow? Departing LAX in the morning and arriving in JFK in the afternoon?

And then UA523 JFK-SFO is the first departure from JFK?
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 461
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:20 am

FlyHossD wrote:
CALMSP wrote:
...I guess I can't understand what the biggest hiccup is with the mainline union pay demands for a smaller a/c. Are they wanting 737/320 prices for the 195/220?


IIRC, the UAL ALPA contract has pay rates for the smaller jets like the E-195 and they are lower than the current smallest mainline narrow body aircraft (A319 and B737-700). Can anyone post those rates?

Their 2018 E190/195/221 rates were $205. I think it went up 4% in 2019, so I think it’s around $213 for 12 year captain right now. Probably around $200 for a 5-7 year guy. Their FO rate is around $145 for 190/195/221.

Their A220-300 rate is much higher. 12 year CA around $271, FO around $185

Edited to add: this is according to a CBA comparison document I have. Maybe a UAL guy can validate or correct it if it’s incorrect.
Last edited by JoseSalazar on Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1971
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:28 am

sldispatcher wrote:
The states with more progress on lifting restrictions will win first. California can rebound if they’ll just get to point of lifting restrictions.


I'm tired of people saying this. The state has been expediting the reopening process for more than a month now. Restaurants can operate at 50% capacity indoors in San Francisco now, museums are open again, and theme parks are opening up (California residents only, though that will probably change.) San Diego and Orange County have skirted the restrictions for some time, so things are open up down there too. Facebook and Uber are sending employees back to the office. The latest economic forecast from UCLA Anderson predicts that while California's economy may restart later, it will recover stronger than much of the rest of the country.

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ande ... march-2021

I've gotten back to flying between SFO and DEN about once a month again just like I did pre-pandemic. It's definitely still pretty quiet at SFO Terminal 3, whereas DEN is basically back to normal, though I wouldn't bet against California. Rumors of California's demise are greatly exaggerated.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 CRK Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14346
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:35 am

JoseSalazar wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:
CALMSP wrote:
...I guess I can't understand what the biggest hiccup is with the mainline union pay demands for a smaller a/c. Are they wanting 737/320 prices for the 195/220?


IIRC, the UAL ALPA contract has pay rates for the smaller jets like the E-195 and they are lower than the current smallest mainline narrow body aircraft (A319 and B737-700). Can anyone post those rates?

Their 2018 E190/195/221 rates were $205. I think it went up 4% in 2019, so I think it’s around $213 for 12 year captain right now. Probably around $200 for a 5-7 year guy. Their FO rate is around $145 for 190/195/221

Their A220-300 rate is much higher. 12 year CA around $271, FO around $185


How many seats can United put in a ERJ-195E2, FC, Y+, Y.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 461
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:38 am

STT757 wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:

IIRC, the UAL ALPA contract has pay rates for the smaller jets like the E-195 and they are lower than the current smallest mainline narrow body aircraft (A319 and B737-700). Can anyone post those rates?

Their 2018 E190/195/221 rates were $205. I think it went up 4% in 2019, so I think it’s around $213 for 12 year captain right now. Probably around $200 for a 5-7 year guy. Their FO rate is around $145 for 190/195/221

Their A220-300 rate is much higher. 12 year CA around $271, FO around $185


How many seats can United put in a ERJ-195E2, FC, Y+, Y.


Probably ~120.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:51 am

intotheair wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
The states with more progress on lifting restrictions will win first. California can rebound if they’ll just get to point of lifting restrictions.


I'm tired of people saying this. The state has been expediting the reopening process for more than a month now. Restaurants can operate at 50% capacity indoors in San Francisco now, museums are open again, and theme parks are opening up (California residents only, though that will probably change.) San Diego and Orange County have skirted the restrictions for some time, so things are open up down there too. Facebook and Uber are sending employees back to the office. The latest economic forecast from UCLA Anderson predicts that while California's economy may restart later, it will recover stronger than much of the rest of the country.

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ande ... march-2021

I've gotten back to flying between SFO and DEN about once a month again just like I did pre-pandemic. It's definitely still pretty quiet at SFO Terminal 3, whereas DEN is basically back to normal, though I wouldn't bet against California. Rumors of California's demise are greatly exaggerated.


Perception is reality. I live in Louisiana. I can't tell you how many people ask if I have alligators in the backyard or live in a swamp. Neither could be further from the truth. But the perception is that California is still locked down. Either way, United is going to need Californians, specifically in the Bay Area, to get traveling again.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:14 am

sldispatcher wrote:
intotheair wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
The states with more progress on lifting restrictions will win first. California can rebound if they’ll just get to point of lifting restrictions.


I'm tired of people saying this. The state has been expediting the reopening process for more than a month now. Restaurants can operate at 50% capacity indoors in San Francisco now, museums are open again, and theme parks are opening up (California residents only, though that will probably change.) San Diego and Orange County have skirted the restrictions for some time, so things are open up down there too. Facebook and Uber are sending employees back to the office. The latest economic forecast from UCLA Anderson predicts that while California's economy may restart later, it will recover stronger than much of the rest of the country.

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ande ... march-2021

I've gotten back to flying between SFO and DEN about once a month again just like I did pre-pandemic. It's definitely still pretty quiet at SFO Terminal 3, whereas DEN is basically back to normal, though I wouldn't bet against California. Rumors of California's demise are greatly exaggerated.


Perception is reality. I live in Louisiana. I can't tell you how many people ask if I have alligators in the backyard or live in a swamp. Neither could be further from the truth. But the perception is that California is still locked down. Either way, United is going to need Californians, specifically in the Bay Area, to get traveling again.


Coming soon. Many counties are approaching 50% of all adults with at least one vaccine. Most of the counties are in the state’s orange tier which is much less restrictive tier.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:00 am

SFOtoORD wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
intotheair wrote:

I'm tired of people saying this. The state has been expediting the reopening process for more than a month now. Restaurants can operate at 50% capacity indoors in San Francisco now, museums are open again, and theme parks are opening up (California residents only, though that will probably change.) San Diego and Orange County have skirted the restrictions for some time, so things are open up down there too. Facebook and Uber are sending employees back to the office. The latest economic forecast from UCLA Anderson predicts that while California's economy may restart later, it will recover stronger than much of the rest of the country.

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ande ... march-2021

I've gotten back to flying between SFO and DEN about once a month again just like I did pre-pandemic. It's definitely still pretty quiet at SFO Terminal 3, whereas DEN is basically back to normal, though I wouldn't bet against California. Rumors of California's demise are greatly exaggerated.


Perception is reality. I live in Louisiana. I can't tell you how many people ask if I have alligators in the backyard or live in a swamp. Neither could be further from the truth. But the perception is that California is still locked down. Either way, United is going to need Californians, specifically in the Bay Area, to get traveling again.


Coming soon. Many counties are approaching 50% of all adults with at least one vaccine. Most of the counties are in the state’s orange tier which is much less restrictive tier.


Very happy to hear. Let the Golden State roar!
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 4:52 am

sldispatcher wrote:
Very happy to hear. Let the Golden State roar!


Speaking of which, SFO leisure seems to finally be coming back, as it should. Not sure how much of it is connecting traffic, but anecdotally, I know many Bay Area residents are booking up Hawaii and in other cases Tahiti, since they feel Hawaii will be too overcrowded.

Additionally, I heard a rumor of UA adding SFO-ITO, but I'm not sure how substantiated that is...
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2942
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 5:09 am

sldispatcher wrote:
intotheair wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
The states with more progress on lifting restrictions will win first. California can rebound if they’ll just get to point of lifting restrictions.


I'm tired of people saying this. The state has been expediting the reopening process for more than a month now. Restaurants can operate at 50% capacity indoors in San Francisco now, museums are open again, and theme parks are opening up (California residents only, though that will probably change.) San Diego and Orange County have skirted the restrictions for some time, so things are open up down there too. Facebook and Uber are sending employees back to the office. The latest economic forecast from UCLA Anderson predicts that while California's economy may restart later, it will recover stronger than much of the rest of the country.

https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/ande ... march-2021

I've gotten back to flying between SFO and DEN about once a month again just like I did pre-pandemic. It's definitely still pretty quiet at SFO Terminal 3, whereas DEN is basically back to normal, though I wouldn't bet against California. Rumors of California's demise are greatly exaggerated.


Perception is reality. I live in Louisiana. I can't tell you how many people ask if I have alligators in the backyard or live in a swamp. Neither could be further from the truth. But the perception is that California is still locked down. Either way, United is going to need Californians, specifically in the Bay Area, to get traveling again.


Because that is precisely the narrative pushed by conservative media outlets that “blue states” are locked down by governors to destroy the economy and take away freedoms. It is false.
 
Wneast
Posts: 739
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:37 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 5:13 am

sfojvjets wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
Very happy to hear. Let the Golden State roar!


Speaking of which, SFO leisure seems to finally be coming back, as it should. Not sure how much of it is connecting traffic, but anecdotally, I know many Bay Area residents are booking up Hawaii and in other cases Tahiti, since they feel Hawaii will be too overcrowded.

Additionally, I heard a rumor of UA adding SFO-ITO, but I'm not sure how substantiated that is...

Would SFO - ITO be a new route or a resumption, I thought they did that flight at least at some point
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 5:14 am

Also, we can't forget how consistently strong significant VFR markets like India and Israel have been during the pandemic. These are the types of markets that UA can and is playing to its advantage, and where its global presence shines through as an advantage since VFR demand continues to be high and increase as vaccines are disseminated.
 
sfojvjets
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 6:00 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 5:23 am

Wneast wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
Very happy to hear. Let the Golden State roar!


Speaking of which, SFO leisure seems to finally be coming back, as it should. Not sure how much of it is connecting traffic, but anecdotally, I know many Bay Area residents are booking up Hawaii and in other cases Tahiti, since they feel Hawaii will be too overcrowded.

Additionally, I heard a rumor of UA adding SFO-ITO, but I'm not sure how substantiated that is...

Would SFO - ITO be a new route or a resumption, I thought they did that flight at least at some point


Yup - my bad, it looks like it's actually a resumption.
 
UAinAUS
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:11 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 5:25 am

UAX Update:

E145XR:
N27200 exited IGM. Ferried MCN in prep for transfer to CommutAir
N12201 exited IGM. Ferried YQB in prep for transfer to CommutAir

CR2:
N909SW re-entered service with Skywest
 
User avatar
ChaseP
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:52 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 5:51 am

Storage Update:

N19130 (Boeing 757-200) exited ROW for ferry to MCO. The aircraft will undergo a heavy maintenance check before entering service.
 
User avatar
adamh8297
Posts: 3271
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 12:25 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
LHUSA wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:

EWR-MCO/BOS are two I found on the spot.


April still has Spring Break capacity that May doesn’t warrant


What spring break is at the end of April?

Besides that, every other airline has more May capacity then April.


New England has April Vacation either of the last two weeks of April for public school K-12.

Massachusetts is week of the marathon and New Hampshire is the following week.
Airlines flown: A3, AA, AC, AF, AM, BA, B6, CA, CO, CX, DL, EA, EL, IB, LH, MI, MQ, NH, NW, NZ, OU, PE, QF, S4, SQ, TP, UA, US, VS, WE, WN
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 1:37 pm

Of the Big 3, where is UA positioned amongst the US Big 3 in terms of aircraft and readiness IF there was an international travel surge?

I seem to recall DL has jettisoned many widebodies. Not sure of AA. UA seems to have quietly just waited. Need some clarity.
 
FlyingSicilian
Posts: 1663
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 1:52 pm

flight152 wrote:
[threeid][/threeid]
FlyingSicilian wrote:
AA is running bigger RJs st SJT and ABI on some runs so they are not actually "barely supporting" service. Having a second choice is harder but both SJT and ABI, for example, supported DL for years with the DFW hub. 1.2 million over two years for "possible" guarantees is not a huge amount but average with other deals from similar areas in the past. Good on UA for going after them.


Bigger RJ’s? All I see are 145’s.

Pre-COVID AA had 175s on a couple flights a day along with The 145s.
I was told there would be cookies...
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 803
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:19 pm

JoseSalazar wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:
CALMSP wrote:
...I guess I can't understand what the biggest hiccup is with the mainline union pay demands for a smaller a/c. Are they wanting 737/320 prices for the 195/220?


IIRC, the UAL ALPA contract has pay rates for the smaller jets like the E-195 and they are lower than the current smallest mainline narrow body aircraft (A319 and B737-700). Can anyone post those rates?

Their 2018 E190/195/221 rates were $205. I think it went up 4% in 2019, so I think it’s around $213 for 12 year captain right now. Probably around $200 for a 5-7 year guy. Their FO rate is around $145 for 190/195/221.

Their A220-300 rate is much higher. 12 year CA around $271, FO around $185

Edited to add: this is according to a CBA comparison document I have. Maybe a UAL guy can validate or correct it if it’s incorrect.


A220-300 does NOT qualify for additional 76-seat scope relief. Only the A220-100, E2-190, and E2-195 qualify.

UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:41 pm

Okcflyer wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:

IIRC, the UAL ALPA contract has pay rates for the smaller jets like the E-195 and they are lower than the current smallest mainline narrow body aircraft (A319 and B737-700). Can anyone post those rates?

Their 2018 E190/195/221 rates were $205. I think it went up 4% in 2019, so I think it’s around $213 for 12 year captain right now. Probably around $200 for a 5-7 year guy. Their FO rate is around $145 for 190/195/221.

Their A220-300 rate is much higher. 12 year CA around $271, FO around $185

Edited to add: this is according to a CBA comparison document I have. Maybe a UAL guy can validate or correct it if it’s incorrect.


A220-300 does NOT qualify for additional 76-seat scope relief. Only the A220-100, E2-190, and E2-195 qualify.

UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network

I've been wondering about the A221 vs A223 rates. Are they so different because of the scope clause or is something like this the case on 737's as well? A pilot rated to fly the 73G can fly the 739, but do they get paid differently? I assume UA doesn't separate the groups, so do more senior pilots, who bid earlier, just get to choose the routes on the larger aircraft for higher scale? Or do 737 types have less variation in the pay scale?
 
NLINK
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 3:20 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:42 pm

sldispatcher wrote:
Of the Big 3, where is UA positioned amongst the US Big 3 in terms of aircraft and readiness IF there was an international travel surge?

I seem to recall DL has jettisoned many widebodies. Not sure of AA. UA seems to have quietly just waited. Need some clarity.


United has got rid of zero widebodies but does have the PW4000 777 grounded which we do not know the future of, Delta has retired 40 and American has retired 41. This is per the annual reports.
 
joeljack
Posts: 686
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:38 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 2:49 pm

Does anybody have an updated list of what is in storage for UA? I saw that AA is bring back all grounded plans by May, just wondering how many UA still has grounded because of covid and could fly in short order? Especially interested in the narrow body side.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:05 pm

cosyr wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
Their 2018 E190/195/221 rates were $205. I think it went up 4% in 2019, so I think it’s around $213 for 12 year captain right now. Probably around $200 for a 5-7 year guy. Their FO rate is around $145 for 190/195/221.

Their A220-300 rate is much higher. 12 year CA around $271, FO around $185

Edited to add: this is according to a CBA comparison document I have. Maybe a UAL guy can validate or correct it if it’s incorrect.


A220-300 does NOT qualify for additional 76-seat scope relief. Only the A220-100, E2-190, and E2-195 qualify.

UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network

I've been wondering about the A221 vs A223 rates. Are they so different because of the scope clause or is something like this the case on 737's as well? A pilot rated to fly the 73G can fly the 739, but do they get paid differently? I assume UA doesn't separate the groups, so do more senior pilots, who bid earlier, just get to choose the routes on the larger aircraft for higher scale? Or do 737 types have less variation in the pay scale?


Yes, the 737-700s and A319s pay less at UAL than their larger brethren as I recall. So at the bottom of the mainline pay scale are those two aircraft (and I would expect the A220-300 to fit there), then the large narrow body (A320, B738, B739, B752), then B753/B763 and finally wide body (B764, B772/773 and B787). Please correct me if I’m wrong: I have a copy of the pilot contract, but I’m on the wrong PC at the moment...
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1083
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:15 pm

FlyHossD wrote:
cosyr wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:

A220-300 does NOT qualify for additional 76-seat scope relief. Only the A220-100, E2-190, and E2-195 qualify.

UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network

I've been wondering about the A221 vs A223 rates. Are they so different because of the scope clause or is something like this the case on 737's as well? A pilot rated to fly the 73G can fly the 739, but do they get paid differently? I assume UA doesn't separate the groups, so do more senior pilots, who bid earlier, just get to choose the routes on the larger aircraft for higher scale? Or do 737 types have less variation in the pay scale?


Yes, the 737-700s and A319s pay less at UAL than their larger brethren as I recall. So at the bottom of the mainline pay scale are those two aircraft (and I would expect the A220-300 to fit there), then the large narrow body (A320, B738, B739, B752), then B753/B763 and finally wide body (B764, B772/773 and B787). Please correct me if I’m wrong: I have a copy of the pilot contract, but I’m on the wrong PC at the moment...


You are correct.

More senior pilots can’t just bid to fly the higher paying plane. They bid trips and very rarely are they all the same model.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:47 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:

Yes, the 737-700s and A319s pay less at UAL than their larger brethren as I recall. So at the bottom of the mainline pay scale are those two aircraft (and I would expect the A220-300 to fit there), then the large narrow body (A320, B738, B739, B752), then B753/B763 and finally wide body (B764, B772/773 and B787). Please correct me if I’m wrong: I have a copy of the pilot contract, but I’m on the wrong PC at the moment...


You are correct.

More senior pilots can’t just bid to fly the higher paying plane. They bid trips and very rarely are they all the same model.


Just had a look at my copy of the contract - it's an older copy, but I believe this info is still correct. The A220-300 is in the payrates as the CS300 and it fits in as a large narrow body like the B738/739 or A320/321. The A220-100 is in there, too as the CS100. I did not remember that the CRJ900 or the A380 was in there, as well.

Okcflyer wrote:
...UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network


I wonder how UAL computes the opportunity cost of NOT having the A220-100 (CS100) or E190/195 in the mainline fleet as these aircraft would unlock or allow more 76 seat aircraft at the United Express carriers.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
EssentialBusDC
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:33 pm

FlyHossD wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:

Yes, the 737-700s and A319s pay less at UAL than their larger brethren as I recall. So at the bottom of the mainline pay scale are those two aircraft (and I would expect the A220-300 to fit there), then the large narrow body (A320, B738, B739, B752), then B753/B763 and finally wide body (B764, B772/773 and B787). Please correct me if I’m wrong: I have a copy of the pilot contract, but I’m on the wrong PC at the moment...


You are correct.

More senior pilots can’t just bid to fly the higher paying plane. They bid trips and very rarely are they all the same model.


Just had a look at my copy of the contract - it's an older copy, but I believe this info is still correct. The A220-300 is in the payrates as the CS300 and it fits in as a large narrow body like the B738/739 or A320/321. The A220-100 is in there, too as the CS100. I did not remember that the CRJ900 or the A380 was in there, as well.

Okcflyer wrote:
...UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network


I wonder how UAL computes the opportunity cost of NOT having the A220-100 (CS100) or E190/195 in the mainline fleet as these aircraft would unlock or allow more 76 seat aircraft at the United Express carriers.


Actually the PBS bidding program allows one to specify aircraft type. So if the trip just has the larger paying variant, or more legs with the higher paying variant, it would assign those to the senior pilot if requested. Same thing happens for 767 flying vs 757 flying. Especially for those seeking the 767-400 pay.


The A220-300(CS300 as listed) pays the same as the 319/737-700. $271/hr at 12th year Captain pay. So slightly less then the 320/737-800/900/MAX. ($283/hr)

The A220-100 pays that same as the E195/190 (original or E2 version- $213/hr)
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 461
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 7:59 pm

cosyr wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
JoseSalazar wrote:
Their 2018 E190/195/221 rates were $205. I think it went up 4% in 2019, so I think it’s around $213 for 12 year captain right now. Probably around $200 for a 5-7 year guy. Their FO rate is around $145 for 190/195/221.

Their A220-300 rate is much higher. 12 year CA around $271, FO around $185

Edited to add: this is according to a CBA comparison document I have. Maybe a UAL guy can validate or correct it if it’s incorrect.


A220-300 does NOT qualify for additional 76-seat scope relief. Only the A220-100, E2-190, and E2-195 qualify.

UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network

I've been wondering about the A221 vs A223 rates. Are they so different because of the scope clause or is something like this the case on 737's as well? A pilot rated to fly the 73G can fly the 739, but do they get paid differently? I assume UA doesn't separate the groups, so do more senior pilots, who bid earlier, just get to choose the routes on the larger aircraft for higher scale? Or do 737 types have less variation in the pay scale?


They are so different because, from a high level, that’s what the rest of the industry has negotiated with various pay banding. This particular 100 vs 300 is an odd one though with some big variations at some US airlines. Each airline has its own history with pay rates, and then subsequent contracts are negotiated at other airlines based on pattern bargaining off of those rates. So I’ll try to paint a history of small narrowbody rates which I believe is the reason we are where we are today. Someone else can feel free to correct or add to the following.

The first E190/195 rates were negotiated by (at the time) the union-less B6 (ie dictated, not negotiated), and were very very low. Nobody else had them in their fleets, so no negotiating capital was spent anywhere else raising those rates (even though they were “ghost rates” at carriers that didn’t have them). E190/195 was kind of still an “RJ” (its type rating is even called the ERJ170/190), and so it never got treated as a small mainline plane. It’s always been kind of an in-between plane (despite carrying what an old DC9/731/732 carried, but I digress). Not sure about the history of the rates at US, but I imagine they were pattern bargained off B6, and they were such a small fleet it didn’t matter too much. When delta bought E190s (then quickly got rid of them after the pilots voted down their TA in 2015), there was talk there of trying to raise those rates. So, basically when it became an issue for them, they started to focus on it. But the bottom line is, the 190/195 have always been very very low since B6 got them.

Enter the C series. Delta pilots negotiated some very solid rates for it. Delta also doesn’t really pay band their rates as much as the other airlines. They have many different pay rates for planes, even within the same family. On the small narrowbody side, the CS300 was the same as the MD88/90, the -100 in-between the 717 and MD-88. They already had decent rates for the 717, despite having pretty bad ghost rates for the 195 and especially the 190, which helped them negotiate a solid CS100 rate. A223: $269, A221: $263, 717: $256, 195: $215, 190: $183.

American bands everything into groups 1-5.
5: A380, B-747
4: B-767-400, B-777, B-787, A330, A340, A350
3: B-757, B-767-200/300, A300
2: A319/320/321, B-737-700/800/900, MD80
1: Any aircraft configured with 77-117 seats, including E190/195, CRJ1000, MRJ-100, and Bombardier A220-100

United is banded as follows:
A380
A350, A330, B-747, B-777, B-787, B-767-400
B-767-200/300, B-757-300
B-757-200, B-737-800/900, A320/321, MD80/90
A319, B-737-500/700, A220-300
E195
E190, CRJ900
*I think their A220-100 fits with the E195, but the documents I am looking at aren’t clear.


All this to say: at UA/AA, the A220-100 was grouped in with 100ish seat RJs due to similar size, where very little negotiating capital was spent because they didn’t have any, (minus the 20 at AA from the merger that affected only a small fraction of their pilots and who could bid off of it quickly anyway. 1st year pay on a 190 was the same as a 737. And their upgrade was quick on that plane, so it wasn’t a big deal to them). Delta pilots were able to negotiate some of the highest 220-100 rates, largely because their 717 rates were already decent, and the -100 was a similar seat, higher range plane. I suspect if they had kept their 190s and grew that fleet, delta pilots would have insisted on higher 190/195 rates.

When B6 was negotiating their A221 rates, they were stuck with management using artificially low ghost rates at UA/AA to compare to. So they ended up somewhere in-between AA/UA and DL.

An interesting, somewhat related point is how “family rates” exist. In some aircraft and at some airlines, an A319 pays the same as an A321. An A330-200 pays the same as an A330-900. At some airlines a 752/753/763 all pay the same. But then the 767-400 pays the same as 330 or 777. One would think with such a small difference between an A220-100 and A220-300, they would pay the same. I would argue that should be the case (Delta pilots did, hence why they have such a small split between the two). But it seems at B6/UA/AA, management’s theory that the -100 closely matches the lower paying 190/195s, and the -300 is close to an A319, so there should be a larger split. Take B6 for example: B6 management said most US airlines didn’t have a higher paying A321 vs A320 rate (which is true since AA keeps theirs as Group 2, UA doesn’t yet have an A321 rate, and deltas was only marginally higher and the same as their 737 rate), and therefore they stated that the 320/321 should be a family rate. So B6 pilots flying a 150 seat A320 are making the same as they would flying a 200 seat A321NEO, or an A321XLR. But then they argue the ghost A221 rates at UA/AA are cause for the B6 A221 rate to be a lot lower than the A223 rate, despite being more similar in size than a 320/321.

As the A321NEO (+LR/XLR) is becoming a 757 replacement at all 3 legacies, I suspect there will be pressure to increase the 321 pay across the board to more closely match 757.

As for the future of 190/195/221/223 rates, who knows. I’d bet if UAL ordered some 195s, UAL ALPA will insist on increasing those rates significantly and would use some negotiating capital to do it.

Side note: if all planes had the same pay rate, people would not keep switching planes as much chasing higher pay. That lowers the training float (number of pilots in training, which costs money and resources, and who are not producing revenue flying the line) and increases costs for the company. It also requires more staffing (when there is movement either direction) because of the increased training float. ALPA apparently likes different rates for that reason and because it causes more choice. Lower paying planes give someone a chance at being higher percentage in category and thus having a higher quality of life (line vs reserve, better trips, etc.), or higher pay rate but lower percentage in category. So, every ALPA person with whom I’ve spoken has seemed to scoff at the idea of single pay rates. Seems like they want more choice and more rates. APA (AA) openers I saw when they were beginning their section 6 negotiations were calling for taking away their pay bands and having individual rates for planes. If I were king, I’d advocate for either a single narrowbody rate and single widebody rate, or just single rate period. Seems to work ok for UPS. But the unions disagree for the reasons I listed above.

Anyway, that’s the history of the A221 and A223 pay rates as I understand them, with some other related info thrown in.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Sun Mar 28, 2021 10:35 pm

NLINK wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
Of the Big 3, where is UA positioned amongst the US Big 3 in terms of aircraft and readiness IF there was an international travel surge?

I seem to recall DL has jettisoned many widebodies. Not sure of AA. UA seems to have quietly just waited. Need some clarity.


United has got rid of zero widebodies but does have the PW4000 777 grounded which we do not know the future of, Delta has retired 40 and American has retired 41. This is per the annual reports.



Thanks for the numbers. Plus United has ongoing deliveries. Seems like they could ride a wave of long distance travel surge if and when it happens.

I cannot even begin to imagine the numbers that have to be crunched by route planners/forecasters. No doubt it has become both a more exacting science, but still some art to it.
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 12:54 am

EssentialBusDC wrote:
FlyHossD wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:

You are correct.

More senior pilots can’t just bid to fly the higher paying plane. They bid trips and very rarely are they all the same model.


Just had a look at my copy of the contract - it's an older copy, but I believe this info is still correct. The A220-300 is in the payrates as the CS300 and it fits in as a large narrow body like the B738/739 or A320/321. The A220-100 is in there, too as the CS100. I did not remember that the CRJ900 or the A380 was in there, as well.

Okcflyer wrote:
...UA has crunched the numbers several different times. It has been better to buy used A319/B737 rather than new smaller planes. The very low capital cost of these helps a lot with a flexible network. Many of these destinations are relatively close to the hubs (not a lot of enroute fuel savings), and they sit in the ground quite long between turns (low utilization). Most of these markets don’t support the same amount of service daily either. Parked for slow seasons or slow days of week

Short version … fuel savings of E2/A220 haven’t justified their capital costs in United’s network


I wonder how UAL computes the opportunity cost of NOT having the A220-100 (CS100) or E190/195 in the mainline fleet as these aircraft would unlock or allow more 76 seat aircraft at the United Express carriers.


Actually the PBS bidding program allows one to specify aircraft type. So if the trip just has the larger paying variant, or more legs with the higher paying variant, it would assign those to the senior pilot if requested. Same thing happens for 767 flying vs 757 flying. Especially for those seeking the 767-400 pay.


The A220-300(CS300 as listed) pays the same as the 319/737-700. $271/hr at 12th year Captain pay. So slightly less then the 320/737-800/900/MAX. ($283/hr)

The A220-100 pays that same as the E195/190 (original or E2 version- $213/hr)

Ok, that makes sense, especially since there isn't a big difference between the ~130 seat aircraft and the ~180 seat aircraft, but there is a big difference with the ~100 seat aircraft. So most pilots would probably balance favorable routing on a 73G with slightly higher pay on a 738. If UA ever got A221's, I'm sure all the most junior pilots would fly that, and some more senior ones would bid on the A223, if UA got both. This might make for a good way for entry level pilots to occasionally pick up higher paying routes.

For comparison, does anyone have rough numbers for E75 rates? I know there are other price factors and operational flexibility, and risk mitigation that UA is factoring into their decision not to pull the trigger on the ~100 seaters.
 
Cmac787
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 1:16 am

7508 scheduled to ferry to LAX from GYR on 29 March. All 737 MAX are back in service
 
audidudi
Posts: 2787
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:35 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 2:52 am

Cmac787 wrote:
7508 scheduled to ferry to LAX from GYR on 29 March. All 737 MAX are back in service

What aircraft is #7508? I swear I've gone through the fleet #s twice, and I can't find it!
 
dcajet
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 9:31 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 2:59 am

audidudi wrote:
Cmac787 wrote:
7508 scheduled to ferry to LAX from GYR on 29 March. All 737 MAX are back in service

What aircraft is #7508? I swear I've gone through the fleet #s twice, and I can't find it!


It's N37508, msn 43439, l/n 7201
Keep calm and wash your hands.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6352
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 1:09 pm

Looks like the schedule is up through May 14. I dont really see any noticeable changes on the domestic front.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
codc10
Posts: 3087
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 1:11 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
Looks like the schedule is up through May 14. I dont really see any noticeable changes on the domestic front.


As far as I can tell, a straight extension of the April schedule.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1672
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 1:45 pm

For all those who said UA is being too deliberate in fleet decisions and why didn't they scrap the 764's in mid-2020, the PW crisis shows us why it's prudent to delay decisions in certain cases. Now, they have the extra lift if needed and it really didn't cost them too much to store.

With the 788 being put on Hawaii routes and the marketing of the Polaris, that all but confirms the 788 in XMN are in for Polaris, so the final two should be next. Should the 77A's return, how would UA revert back to those on Hawaii routes? I think it would be a mistake to do so. Hopefully, these flights will recover and someday justify the 78J. Finally, UA is competitive with AA's DFW HI flights.
 
codc10
Posts: 3087
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 2:08 pm

fun2fly wrote:
For all those who said UA is being too deliberate in fleet decisions and why didn't they scrap the 764's in mid-2020, the PW crisis shows us why it's prudent to delay decisions in certain cases. Now, they have the extra lift if needed and it really didn't cost them too much to store.

With the 788 being put on Hawaii routes and the marketing of the Polaris, that all but confirms the 788 in XMN are in for Polaris, so the final two should be next. Should the 77A's return, how would UA revert back to those on Hawaii routes? I think it would be a mistake to do so. Hopefully, these flights will recover and someday justify the 78J. Finally, UA is competitive with AA's DFW HI flights.


I am starting to wonder if UA might end up retiring the earliest-build 777s, especially if a cowling redesign is in the offing. The slightly younger domestic frames and the ERs to be converted to domestic could accommodate a PE cabin without an extended mod, so that could be a solution if PE is a success to Hawaii.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 674
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread, Q1 2021

Mon Mar 29, 2021 2:43 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
Looks like the schedule is up through May 14. I dont really see any noticeable changes on the domestic front.

Yep - we talked about this Saturday night as it went up. It appears to be an extension of the April schedule - we're likely to see the big changes when they post the the rest of May.

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