Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Midwestindy
Posts: 6076
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 3:14 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
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.


codc10 wrote:
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.


It is not a straight extension, there are frequency and guage differences, although many (if not most) routes are the same.
ORD & IND

AA & DL
 
codc10
Posts: 3085
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 3:23 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
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.


codc10 wrote:
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.


It is not a straight extension, there are frequency and guage differences, although many (if not most) routes are the same.


Fair enough, but in the markets I travel, it would appear to be virtually the same capacity, with some adjustments to equipment (e.g. MAX replacing -900, 319 for 73G, etc.).

Certainly not the expansion UA is guiding for May, which leads me to believe late May/MDW will be a larger increase.
 
excelsior
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 1:25 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 3:30 pm

JoseSalazar 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?


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.


What a fascinating post. Contributions like these are what make this thread and forum overall so compelling. Thanks so much for this write-up.
 
joeljack
Posts: 686
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:38 pm

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 3:49 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
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.


I noticed one of the OMA-ORD flights switched to mainline from express. Otherwise OMA and DSM are the same. I'm assuming maybe a few other upgrades like this too in the two week extension. Hoping the next extension OMA-SFO and OMA-EWR both come back at 1x daily to start for the summer!
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6352
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 4:16 pm

joeljack wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
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.


I noticed one of the OMA-ORD flights switched to mainline from express. Otherwise OMA and DSM are the same. I'm assuming maybe a few other upgrades like this too in the two week extension. Hoping the next extension OMA-SFO and OMA-EWR both come back at 1x daily to start for the summer!


I did notice that one of the 3 daily OMA-IAH flights went to a CRJ and one went to a 319. They were previously all E75.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
AC4500
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:02 pm

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 4:59 pm

codc10 wrote:
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.

EWR-PDX resumes at 5x weekly. Are there any other thinner transcon routes that are resuming?
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3309
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 5:32 pm

789:
N28987 sked delivery flight 2710/30Mar CHS-ORD
 
AmericanAir88
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed May 27, 2020 8:59 pm

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 6:09 pm

Has the May schedule been updated or is it just a temporary extension of April?
 
LGeneReese
Posts: 310
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2019 3:36 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 6:20 pm

dcajet wrote:
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

The Max9 Ship/Nose/Fleet numbers/ IDs are 7501-7530 (so far). The Max8s will be Ships 7251 and up, Max10s 7751 and up.
Formerly IAHCSR
 
jayunited
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 9:33 pm

codc10 wrote:
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.



codc10 I'm starting to think the same thing as well. Ever since the announcement I've been asking myself why is UA launching premium economy on select routes to Hawaii (I think they are testing the market) if the HD 77As are coming back.

Although I'm still going to call it a rumor until UA makes an official statement I've heard from several other people that cracks were found in other fan blades. Assuming the only PW 777s that have been inspected were HD 777 nose number beginning with 2300, 2400, and/or 2500, if there is no way to repair first and foremost the fan blades and UA retires the 77A fleet, UA could simply remove the second half of business class seats but keep the 32 Polaris seats (please keep Polaris on the aircraft and let IPTE go) located between door 1L/R and 2L/R, move premium economy up from rows 20-22 up to rows 9-11 and either add more economy plus seats or additional coach seats. With this layout you won't have 366 seats but UA could get the seat count up over 300 seats.

Another option would be for UA to exercise their options for more 78Xs. Those aircraft in their current layout 44J, 21PE, 54E+, and 199E for a total of 318 seats is perfect for domestic hub to hub and Hawaii routes.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3309
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 9:48 pm

If UA drops the HD fleet that means they will be short 19 aircraft. While there is less demand after the pandemic, UA may have to purchase new units to replace the HD units and maybe some of the PW 772ERs. Instead of changing the remaining 772ER PW fleet to domestic (possibly shorting international units), the 78X makes sense for Hawaiian HD replacement. Hawaii/GUM service would work well with a mix of 78X, 764, 39M and maybe some 321XLR for thinner IAH/ORD/DEN-Hawaii routes, especially in Northern winter.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 9:54 pm

AC4500 wrote:
EWR-PDX resumes at 5x weekly. Are there any other thinner transcon routes that are resuming?



That isn't true anything beyond May 14th is not accurate. This past weekend I tried to get information on our May domestic schedule and why we only updated 2 weeks in May. And why the publish schedule for the first two weeks is not the same schedule employees were lead to believe was coming. Leadership stated our April schedule was to conservative, while UA will increase service to Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean in May, domestically it is more of the same and I have no answer as to why the first two weeks in May domestically are simply an extension of Aprils disastrous schedule.

I expected SFO's MAY schedule to be pretty much a carry over from April but I thought at the very least EWR would see a boost in domestic capacity. But the only hubs to see any increase for the first two week in May are DEN and IAH. This past week UA's daily load factor out of ORD averaged 90%, EWR this past week averaged 86% LAX 85% and IAD averaged 82%. However none of these hubs will see any increase domestically from what I can tell during the first two weeks in May. There are several NOC town halls coming up in April with NOC leadership and company leadership I will be asking what is going on with our May schedule because at this point the domestic recovery is taking place. And while UA pre-pandemic did have a higher dependence on international travel which help fuel domestic travel we need to do more to get in on this domestic recovery that is taking place now. The U.S. is now vaccinating 3 million people per day a number that continues to grow as more vaccines are distributed and even though international long haul travel remains down UA has to get in on this domestic surge especially from EWR, ORD and IAD and perhaps to a lesser extent LAX.
 
codc10
Posts: 3085
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 10:23 pm

I wonder if staffing is an issue... over the last few weeks there have been a lot of training events and movement in/out of various fleets, IOE, checkrides, etc. I know the company is seeking applications for LCA positions in a number of fleets.

Yield is one thing, but at this point the company needs its assets to start generating revenue, too.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 10:31 pm

jayunited wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
EWR-PDX resumes at 5x weekly. Are there any other thinner transcon routes that are resuming?



That isn't true anything beyond May 14th is not accurate. This past weekend I tried to get information on our May domestic schedule and why we only updated 2 weeks in May. And why the publish schedule for the first two weeks is not the same schedule employees were lead to believe was coming. Leadership stated our April schedule was to conservative, while UA will increase service to Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean in May, domestically it is more of the same and I have no answer as to why the first two weeks in May domestically are simply an extension of Aprils disastrous schedule.

I expected SFO's MAY schedule to be pretty much a carry over from April but I thought at the very least EWR would see a boost in domestic capacity. But the only hubs to see any increase for the first two week in May are DEN and IAH. This past week UA's daily load factor out of ORD averaged 90%, EWR this past week averaged 86% LAX 85% and IAD averaged 82%. However none of these hubs will see any increase domestically from what I can tell during the first two weeks in May. There are several NOC town halls coming up in April with NOC leadership and company leadership I will be asking what is going on with our May schedule because at this point the domestic recovery is taking place. And while UA pre-pandemic did have a higher dependence on international travel which help fuel domestic travel we need to do more to get in on this domestic recovery that is taking place now. The U.S. is now vaccinating 3 million people per day a number that continues to grow as more vaccines are distributed and even though international long haul travel remains down UA has to get in on this domestic surge especially from EWR, ORD and IAD and perhaps to a lesser extent LAX.


EWR-PDX resumes May 5th but is assume this is just a shot at AS because they plan on resuming in May too. This is the same reason SEA is getting 2 flights a day in May too.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 10:50 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
EWR-PDX resumes May 5th but is assume this is just a shot at AS because they plan on resuming in May too. This is the same reason SEA is getting 2 flights a day in May too.


I owe you an apology I seriously thought UA would do better than this for the month of May especially after they admitted April was a mistake.

My earlier confrontation with you on this thread over the schedule was uncalled for and you are absolutely right in expecting more from United Airlines. At this point there is simply no explanation for this schedule and I think I'm now joining a long line of employees who are loosing patience with UA.

On the one hand I applaud what UA's expansion in May in Mexico, Central America, and Caribbean but at the same time we are falling behind once again in the domestic market.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:49 pm

jayunited wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
EWR-PDX resumes May 5th but is assume this is just a shot at AS because they plan on resuming in May too. This is the same reason SEA is getting 2 flights a day in May too.


I owe you an apology I seriously thought UA would do better than this for the month of May especially after they admitted April was a mistake.

My earlier confrontation with you on this thread over the schedule was uncalled for and you are absolutely right in expecting more from United Airlines. At this point there is simply no explanation for this schedule and I think I'm now joining a long line of employees who are loosing patience with UA.

On the one hand I applaud what UA's expansion in May in Mexico, Central America, and Caribbean but at the same time we are falling behind once again in the domestic market.


No problem.

I’ve been to EWR 3 or 4 times this week and all 3 times it has been packed. I posted in the B6 thread how their line has been wrapped outside too. It also seems that UAs EWR operation is understaffed. There were very few agents available and the ones who were were not friendly to other pax because they were so stressed. Has there been any rise in complaints? I also noticed a lack of compassion on my EWR-DEN flight but it was a DEN based crew which typically aren’t as friendly as EWR flight crews.

Is there any talk internally when the second half of May will be announced?
 
Golfmikey
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:41 am

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:55 pm

whats confusing to me is the international schedule that has been posted for a while...it led people to believe that was the schedule they were going to run, and instead they only chose mxp and fco from ewr...now all the routes they have for June how can anyone believe they will happen..(ath,edi,muc,lis,mad,bcn)
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Mon Mar 29, 2021 11:56 pm

Golfmikey wrote:
whats confusing to me is the international schedule that has been posted for a while...it led people to believe that was the schedule they were going to run, and instead they only chose mxp and fco from ewr...now all the routes they have for June how can anyone believe they will happen..(ath,edi,muc,lis,mad,bcn)


They announced MXP and FCO but the others are still for sale from EWR. I am just as confused.
 
ericm2031
Posts: 1466
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:46 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:26 am

There are a few COVID suspended routes I’m seeing coming back in the beginning of May, FAT/GEG-ORD (might have to do with AA), SBA-LAX. There might be others out there.

What is a little odd is that the plan was for May to be consistent throughout the month as it has been every previous month, so I’m not sure what is with the partial rollout. Might have to do with the new P2P routes they are launching around Memorial Day they wanted to get loaded first before pushing out the schedule changes that far out?

With regards to April, I wonder how loads are looking once Spring Break dies down. With most schools resuming, I’m guessing the surge we are in the midst of might slow down somewhat and maybe UA won’t seem as underscheduled as it seems right now. Guess we’ll see.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3414
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:31 am

sfojvjets wrote:
Wneast wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:

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.


UA definitely flew LAX-ITO pre-pandemic, but I don't think they have ever flown SFO-ITO on a regularly scheduled basis...
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8640
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:40 am

FSDan wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:
Wneast wrote:
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.


UA definitely flew LAX-ITO pre-pandemic, but I don't think they have ever flown SFO-ITO on a regularly scheduled basis...


SFO-ITO was launched at the same time as LAX-ITO, right after the merger.

IIRC it only last six months.

http://upgrd.com/blogs/friendlyskies/un ... awaii.html
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
GmoneyCO
Posts: 217
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2017 4:42 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:17 am

789:
N29985 - Typo in the tail number and flight aware link on the Fleet site. The first "9" has been accidentally transposed with a "4" and needs to be corrected

763:
N651UA - Scheduled exit from HKG on 30-Mar/2845

764:
N67052 - Ferried SFO to HKG on 26-Mar/2703 for heavy maintenance before re-entering revenue service. While in SFO, the aircraft received a landing gear change
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:19 am

This is just one data point, but it seems like the schedule is too conservative. My trusty usual route, SFO-DEN, still has only two departures after noon on Sun 25 Apr. Both are going for $397 one way. Great for UA I guess, but I ended up booking WN instead.

I flew SFO-DEN yesterday afternoon, and SFO has definitely picked up a little bit compared to last month. I suppose it is Spring Break time after all, but there was certainly more activity buzzing about. DEN is basically back to normal, or at least that’s how it feels.
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
 
jayunited
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:26 am

Nicknuzzii wrote:
No problem.

I’ve been to EWR 3 or 4 times this week and all 3 times it has been packed. I posted in the B6 thread how their line has been wrapped outside too. It also seems that UAs EWR operation is understaffed. There were very few agents available and the ones who were were not friendly to other pax because they were so stressed. Has there been any rise in complaints? I also noticed a lack of compassion on my EWR-DEN flight but it was a DEN based crew which typically aren’t as friendly as EWR flight crews.

Is there any talk internally when the second half of May will be announced?



No I haven't heard anything about when the second half of May's schedule will drop.

But it is funny you should bring up very few agents available at EWER because UA is actually hiring ramp and C.S. agents for temporary positions at DEN. I think they have already taken down the C.S. position do to the number of responses received but the temporary ramp positions in DEN are still posted. United during this last VSL (voluntary separation) had a fairly decent response from union employees so it does not surprise me to see they are hiring off the street in DEN and like you pointed out other stations have very few agents who are stressed, understaffed and over worked.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:39 am

intotheair wrote:
This is just one data point, but it seems like the schedule is too conservative. My trusty usual route, SFO-DEN, still has only two departures after noon on Sun 25 Apr. Both are going for $397 one way. Great for UA I guess, but I ended up booking WN instead.

I flew SFO-DEN yesterday afternoon, and SFO has definitely picked up a little bit compared to last month. I suppose it is Spring Break time after all, but there was certainly more activity buzzing about. DEN is basically back to normal, or at least that’s how it feels.


I came into this problem too. Great for UA until I give my business to other airlines because UA won’t offer enough capacity. I simply can’t justify a $200 up charge to fly UA on EWR-MCO instead of NK.
 
FSDan
Posts: 3414
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:59 am

RyanairGuru wrote:
FSDan wrote:
sfojvjets wrote:

Yup - my bad, it looks like it's actually a resumption.


UA definitely flew LAX-ITO pre-pandemic, but I don't think they have ever flown SFO-ITO on a regularly scheduled basis...


SFO-ITO was launched at the same time as LAX-ITO, right after the merger.

IIRC it only last six months.

http://upgrd.com/blogs/friendlyskies/un ... awaii.html


Thanks for the correction. I didn't remember that one.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 4:35 am

jayunited wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
No problem.

I’ve been to EWR 3 or 4 times this week and all 3 times it has been packed. I posted in the B6 thread how their line has been wrapped outside too. It also seems that UAs EWR operation is understaffed. There were very few agents available and the ones who were were not friendly to other pax because they were so stressed. Has there been any rise in complaints? I also noticed a lack of compassion on my EWR-DEN flight but it was a DEN based crew which typically aren’t as friendly as EWR flight crews.

Is there any talk internally when the second half of May will be announced?



No I haven't heard anything about when the second half of May's schedule will drop.

But it is funny you should bring up very few agents available at EWER because UA is actually hiring ramp and C.S. agents for temporary positions at DEN. I think they have already taken down the C.S. position do to the number of responses received but the temporary ramp positions in DEN are still posted. United during this last VSL (voluntary separation) had a fairly decent response from union employees so it does not surprise me to see they are hiring off the street in DEN and like you pointed out other stations have very few agents who are stressed, understaffed and over worked.


We are hiring permanent in DEN, not temporary - at least on the ramp. But we do have about 80 temporary duty rampers from EWR right now.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:40 am

I don’t mean to be dramatic here but JetBlue adds EWR-ANU/UVF and now UA hops off both of them? I understand a bit more conservative schedule but didn’t we just tout how the Caribbean is recovering?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6530
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:35 am

FSDan wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
FSDan wrote:

UA definitely flew LAX-ITO pre-pandemic, but I don't think they have ever flown SFO-ITO on a regularly scheduled basis...


SFO-ITO was launched at the same time as LAX-ITO, right after the merger.

IIRC it only last six months.

http://upgrd.com/blogs/friendlyskies/un ... awaii.html


Thanks for the correction. I didn't remember that one.


Of you course you are aware that UA flew SFO-ITO from the late 1960s into the 1980s. I assume you mean in more modern times.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 9:12 am

Pure conjecture, but I believe the extension of the schedule to May 15 was simply to buy more time not just for latter half of May but into the summer as well. The volume of info having to be digested must be quite large.
Corporate contracts are probably starting to make requests as well that have shifted demand from 14 months ago.
 
codc10
Posts: 3085
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 10:47 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
FSDan wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:

SFO-ITO was launched at the same time as LAX-ITO, right after the merger.

IIRC it only last six months.

http://upgrd.com/blogs/friendlyskies/un ... awaii.html


Thanks for the correction. I didn't remember that one.


Of you course you are aware that UA flew SFO-ITO from the late 1960s into the 1980s. I assume you mean in more modern times.


SFO-ITO was operating on Saturdays periodically, before the pandemic, but by no means on a regular basis (meaning, every season).
 
jayunited
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 11:43 am

Nicknuzzii wrote:
intotheair wrote:
This is just one data point, but it seems like the schedule is too conservative. My trusty usual route, SFO-DEN, still has only two departures after noon on Sun 25 Apr. Both are going for $397 one way. Great for UA I guess, but I ended up booking WN instead.

I flew SFO-DEN yesterday afternoon, and SFO has definitely picked up a little bit compared to last month. I suppose it is Spring Break time after all, but there was certainly more activity buzzing about. DEN is basically back to normal, or at least that’s how it feels.


I came into this problem too. Great for UA until I give my business to other airlines because UA won’t offer enough capacity. I simply can’t justify a $200 up charge to fly UA on EWR-MCO instead of NK.


UA is being somewhat competitive on our SFO-DEN route with WN, WN only has 2 nonstop flights out of SFO on Sunday April 25th, UA is scheduled to operate 5 nonstop flights. The lowest price I found when I checked for UA was $60 dollars on a basic economy ticket early morning departure, and the highest $446 dollars in coach for the last flight of the day. On the other hand WN had a lowest price of $49 dollars on a wanna get away fare early morning departure and the highest price I saw for a nonstop flight on WN was $569 dollars. And that $569 dollar price was for their singular afternoon departure.

Neither one of these airlines is offering anywhere close to the capacity they were offering pre-pandemic on this route, and both of these airlines depending on the type of ticket customers purchase and when a customer just so happens to check fare online are now charging a lot of money. So it isn't just United charging a premium for an afternoon or evening flights WN is doing the same with less capacity than United on the same SFO-DEN route. I understand that for whatever reason UA's schedule did not work for intotheair but that does not equate into UA not offering a competitive schedule especially when WN with less flights has the most expensive ticket in coach on the route.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:41 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
I don’t mean to be dramatic here but JetBlue adds EWR-ANU/UVF and now UA hops off both of them? I understand a bit more conservative schedule but didn’t we just tout how the Caribbean is recovering?



While both Island are open to US citizens both islands still have some a lot of restrictions. Take St Lucia for example if your country is not part of their travel bubble (and the US is not part of the travel bubble) you must first receive approval from the government to even travel to ST. Lucia. Once approval is granted all travelers over the age of 5 must present a negative PRC test no more than 5 days old. All travelers must stay at approved COVID-19 accommodations, and can only travel to those accommodations from the airport in special taxis approved to transport international arrivals. Even after being rested upon arrival into St Lucia all passengers must submit to several more COVID-19 test during their stay at COVID-19 approved accommodations. Guest must remain at those COVID-19 approved accommodations for 14 days or the entirety of their journey which ever is shorter, and should a guest test positive during any number of random test perform the guest will immediately be transferred Respiratory Hospital for care and treatment at their own cost. If you plan to stay on the island longer than 14 days once your 14 day stay at COVID approved accommodations is over and you test negative then and only then you are free to leave your COVID-19 accommodations and move about the island freely. St Lucia instituted these stricter entry requirements in February of this year so far I don't think they have rescinded or eased their entry requirements.


Antigua and Barbuda has restrictions but not as sever as St. Lucia. You do not need permission to enter Antigua or Barbuda, however all passengers over the age of 12 must present a negative PCR test, all passengers must stay at COVID-19 approved accommodations, you still must submit to random COVID-19 testing during your stay. However Antigua and Barbuda does allow passengers to venture outside of their COVID-19 approved accommodation after your arrival tests results come back. Your mandatory arrival test which conducted at the airport cost $100 dollars per person and it still can take anywhere from 48 to 96 hours for you to receive your test results. However should you test positive at any point during your stay and you must submit to random test you will be taken into quarantine at different COVID-19 facility by the Ministry of Health, and you will have to pay $100 dollars per day while you stay at this facility this is on top of whatever medical cost you incur.

Demand has recovered to some Caribbean islands I'm just not sure how many American's are kicking down the doors at this point in time to go visit St. Lucia or Antigua and Barbuda. Unless you are fully vaccinated I wouldn't risk traveling to Antigua and Barbuda there seems to be a lot of hidden fees especially if you test positive. And for now fully vaccinated means nothing to St.Lucia because you are still required to quarantine for 14 days or the duration of your trip which ever is shorter. If JetBlue wants to get a jump on these 2 markets that is fine but that does not mean demand to these 2 islands has returned.
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 986
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 2:29 pm

I bet we’ll see the rest of May published over the weekend. IIRC, April’s schedule wasn’t published until after March 1. So if that trend continues, it would make sense for the complete May to be published on April 3/4, around there. Maybe the week after that at the latest.

All my UA flights in May (JFK-SFO, SFO-EWR,SEA-LAX, etc) are after 5/14 so I’m very curious as to what changes my itineraries will see.
Spread hope like fire.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6530
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 4:05 pm

codc10 wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
FSDan wrote:

Thanks for the correction. I didn't remember that one.


Of you course you are aware that UA flew SFO-ITO from the late 1960s into the 1980s. I assume you mean in more modern times.


SFO-ITO was operating on Saturdays periodically, before the pandemic, but by no means on a regular basis (meaning, every season).


Again, UA flew SFO-ITO daily with DC-8s from the late 1960s to about 1986. At the end in 1986 it was a DC-10 doing a round robin with KOA. UA also flew LAX-ITO with DC-8s.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 670
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:06 pm

SunsetLimited wrote:
I bet we’ll see the rest of May published over the weekend. IIRC, April’s schedule wasn’t published until after March 1. So if that trend continues, it would make sense for the complete May to be published on April 3/4, around there. Maybe the week after that at the latest.

All my UA flights in May (JFK-SFO, SFO-EWR,SEA-LAX, etc) are after 5/14 so I’m very curious as to what changes my itineraries will see.

The one likely to face a change is SEA-LAX...
 
User avatar
Acey559
Posts: 1447
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:30 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:10 pm

New vacancy bid opened today. Of particular interest was the specific mention that 767-400 flying will return to EWR and IAD. Categories reopening are planned for sometime next year, but could be sooner depending on demand.
 
flight152
Posts: 3497
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:20 pm

Acey559 wrote:
New vacancy bid opened today. Of particular interest was the specific mention that 767-400 flying will return to EWR and IAD. Categories reopening are planned for sometime next year, but could be sooner depending on demand.

What’s funny is how many on here said the plane would never come back.
 
User avatar
Acey559
Posts: 1447
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:30 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:59 pm

flight152 wrote:
Acey559 wrote:
New vacancy bid opened today. Of particular interest was the specific mention that 767-400 flying will return to EWR and IAD. Categories reopening are planned for sometime next year, but could be sooner depending on demand.

What’s funny is how many on here said the plane would never come back.


Indeed. Lots of experts here. ;)

However to be fair, there’s a chance that between now and the time these categories reopen, the -400 could potentially be fully retired. I don’t see that happening, but it is still a possibility. If the PW 777s are forced into an early retirement, which I hope can be avoided but obviously that drama is still playing out, then I think the -400 is about as good of a “bridge” aircraft we could hope for until that situation gets sorted.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3648
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:06 pm

even with the problems with the HD777, I couldn't envision the 764 never flying again. I think many of us who fly always have loved the 767 from a coach perspective. Glad to have this bird coming back.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:19 pm

jayunited wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
I don’t mean to be dramatic here but JetBlue adds EWR-ANU/UVF and now UA hops off both of them? I understand a bit more conservative schedule but didn’t we just tout how the Caribbean is recovering?



While both Island are open to US citizens both islands still have some a lot of restrictions. Take St Lucia for example if your country is not part of their travel bubble (and the US is not part of the travel bubble) you must first receive approval from the government to even travel to ST. Lucia. Once approval is granted all travelers over the age of 5 must present a negative PRC test no more than 5 days old. All travelers must stay at approved COVID-19 accommodations, and can only travel to those accommodations from the airport in special taxis approved to transport international arrivals. Even after being rested upon arrival into St Lucia all passengers must submit to several more COVID-19 test during their stay at COVID-19 approved accommodations. Guest must remain at those COVID-19 approved accommodations for 14 days or the entirety of their journey which ever is shorter, and should a guest test positive during any number of random test perform the guest will immediately be transferred Respiratory Hospital for care and treatment at their own cost. If you plan to stay on the island longer than 14 days once your 14 day stay at COVID approved accommodations is over and you test negative then and only then you are free to leave your COVID-19 accommodations and move about the island freely. St Lucia instituted these stricter entry requirements in February of this year so far I don't think they have rescinded or eased their entry requirements.


Antigua and Barbuda has restrictions but not as sever as St. Lucia. You do not need permission to enter Antigua or Barbuda, however all passengers over the age of 12 must present a negative PCR test, all passengers must stay at COVID-19 approved accommodations, you still must submit to random COVID-19 testing during your stay. However Antigua and Barbuda does allow passengers to venture outside of their COVID-19 approved accommodation after your arrival tests results come back. Your mandatory arrival test which conducted at the airport cost $100 dollars per person and it still can take anywhere from 48 to 96 hours for you to receive your test results. However should you test positive at any point during your stay and you must submit to random test you will be taken into quarantine at different COVID-19 facility by the Ministry of Health, and you will have to pay $100 dollars per day while you stay at this facility this is on top of whatever medical cost you incur.

Demand has recovered to some Caribbean islands I'm just not sure how many American's are kicking down the doors at this point in time to go visit St. Lucia or Antigua and Barbuda. Unless you are fully vaccinated I wouldn't risk traveling to Antigua and Barbuda there seems to be a lot of hidden fees especially if you test positive. And for now fully vaccinated means nothing to St.Lucia because you are still required to quarantine for 14 days or the duration of your trip which ever is shorter. If JetBlue wants to get a jump on these 2 markets that is fine but that does not mean demand to these 2 islands has returned.


Well that does indeed make sense, I wasn’t aware of all these restrictions. I was simply looking at the inaugural week sales and they look pretty solid.

Is there any push to start bringing back any business routes? B6 is now running 3 flights a day each on EWR-ATL/BOS. I’d love to see things like EWR-GSP/GSO on top of frequency boosts for other routes.
 
AC4500
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:02 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:25 pm

jayunited wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
EWR-PDX resumes at 5x weekly. Are there any other thinner transcon routes that are resuming?



That isn't true anything beyond May 14th is not accurate. This past weekend I tried to get information on our May domestic schedule and why we only updated 2 weeks in May. And why the publish schedule for the first two weeks is not the same schedule employees were lead to believe was coming. Leadership stated our April schedule was to conservative, while UA will increase service to Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean in May, domestically it is more of the same and I have no answer as to why the first two weeks in May domestically are simply an extension of Aprils disastrous schedule.

I was referring to the first two weeks of May. As Nicknuzzii pointed out, it resumes May 5th. I'm assuming that UA will have the same (or similar) schedule for the last two weeks of May as well.
 
User avatar
kngkyle
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:33 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:54 pm

All this talk from UA about keeping their fleet intact and utilizing it to sweep in and regain market share when demand returns has so far been a bunch of hot air. So far they're being the slowest of the big 4 to bring capacity back and with this April extension into May it is only getting worse. Once again I'm having to fly AA on EWR-ORD because UA has no capacity.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:59 pm

jayunited wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
intotheair wrote:
This is just one data point, but it seems like the schedule is too conservative. My trusty usual route, SFO-DEN, still has only two departures after noon on Sun 25 Apr. Both are going for $397 one way. Great for UA I guess, but I ended up booking WN instead.

I flew SFO-DEN yesterday afternoon, and SFO has definitely picked up a little bit compared to last month. I suppose it is Spring Break time after all, but there was certainly more activity buzzing about. DEN is basically back to normal, or at least that’s how it feels.


I came into this problem too. Great for UA until I give my business to other airlines because UA won’t offer enough capacity. I simply can’t justify a $200 up charge to fly UA on EWR-MCO instead of NK.


UA is being somewhat competitive on our SFO-DEN route with WN, WN only has 2 nonstop flights out of SFO on Sunday April 25th, UA is scheduled to operate 5 nonstop flights. The lowest price I found when I checked for UA was $60 dollars on a basic economy ticket early morning departure, and the highest $446 dollars in coach for the last flight of the day. On the other hand WN had a lowest price of $49 dollars on a wanna get away fare early morning departure and the highest price I saw for a nonstop flight on WN was $569 dollars. And that $569 dollar price was for their singular afternoon departure.

Neither one of these airlines is offering anywhere close to the capacity they were offering pre-pandemic on this route, and both of these airlines depending on the type of ticket customers purchase and when a customer just so happens to check fare online are now charging a lot of money. So it isn't just United charging a premium for an afternoon or evening flights WN is doing the same with less capacity than United on the same SFO-DEN route. I understand that for whatever reason UA's schedule did not work for intotheair but that does not equate into UA not offering a competitive schedule especially when WN with less flights has the most expensive ticket in coach on the route.


I actually ended up booking WN out of OAK for about $179 o/w. You’re right that the WN fares are also somewhat high and that WN has a lighter schedule. However, I still want to point out that the fares are higher than they would be one month out, and the schedule overall still seems pretty paltry. I just get the sense that demand is starting to tick up on SFO/OAK-DEN, and I bet a return of the 3:30pm departure UA used to have would do well.
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
 
jagraham
Posts: 1186
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:01 pm

jayunited wrote:
codc10 wrote:
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.



codc10 I'm starting to think the same thing as well. Ever since the announcement I've been asking myself why is UA launching premium economy on select routes to Hawaii (I think they are testing the market) if the HD 77As are coming back.

Although I'm still going to call it a rumor until UA makes an official statement I've heard from several other people that cracks were found in other fan blades. Assuming the only PW 777s that have been inspected were HD 777 nose number beginning with 2300, 2400, and/or 2500, if there is no way to repair first and foremost the fan blades and UA retires the 77A fleet, UA could simply remove the second half of business class seats but keep the 32 Polaris seats (please keep Polaris on the aircraft and let IPTE go) located between door 1L/R and 2L/R, move premium economy up from rows 20-22 up to rows 9-11 and either add more economy plus seats or additional coach seats. With this layout you won't have 366 seats but UA could get the seat count up over 300 seats.

Another option would be for UA to exercise their options for more 78Xs. Those aircraft in their current layout 44J, 21PE, 54E+, and 199E for a total of 318 seats is perfect for domestic hub to hub and Hawaii routes.



I would like to see at least BE Diamond stay; anything other than IPTE. But when the 77E was converted to high density and reverted back to IPTE, the writing was on the wall.

Along these lines, are the fuel stats available for some of the 77A flights? Either transcoms or HI? I know they aren't flying now, but hopefully it isn't too late to get some data . . .
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3648
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:11 pm

kngkyle wrote:
All this talk from UA about keeping their fleet intact and utilizing it to sweep in and regain market share when demand returns has so far been a bunch of hot air. So far they're being the slowest of the big 4 to bring capacity back and with this April extension into May it is only getting worse. Once again I'm having to fly AA on EWR-ORD because UA has no capacity.


When are you not seeing any availability?
 
User avatar
kngkyle
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:33 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:36 pm

CALMSP wrote:
kngkyle wrote:
All this talk from UA about keeping their fleet intact and utilizing it to sweep in and regain market share when demand returns has so far been a bunch of hot air. So far they're being the slowest of the big 4 to bring capacity back and with this April extension into May it is only getting worse. Once again I'm having to fly AA on EWR-ORD because UA has no capacity.


When are you not seeing any availability?


Sorry, I meant availability at reasonable prices about a week in advance. I'm not paying $700+ for EWR-ORD in coach when comparable flights on AA are $200-300 cheaper.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 670
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:04 pm

kngkyle wrote:
All this talk from UA about keeping their fleet intact and utilizing it to sweep in and regain market share when demand returns has so far been a bunch of hot air. So far they're being the slowest of the big 4 to bring capacity back and with this April extension into May it is only getting worse. Once again I'm having to fly AA on EWR-ORD because UA has no capacity.


Yep. What is happening is when they go in and reduce the schedule and consolidate flights, that's leaving many city pairs full or oversold. No tickets left to sell. This is intentional. Problem is, it goes against everything Kirby has been saying for months.
 
jagraham
Posts: 1186
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:17 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
If UA drops the HD fleet that means they will be short 19 aircraft. While there is less demand after the pandemic, UA may have to purchase new units to replace the HD units and maybe some of the PW 772ERs. Instead of changing the remaining 772ER PW fleet to domestic (possibly shorting international units), the 78X makes sense for Hawaiian HD replacement. Hawaii/GUM service would work well with a mix of 78X, 764, 39M and maybe some 321XLR for thinner IAH/ORD/DEN-Hawaii routes, especially in Northern winter.


The 787-10 would be the best HI / GUM plane. But it would be the best plane on almost every widebody route UA has.

There are places where the 787-10 can make more money. Same for the 787-9. I would guess that GE 772s would end up with Hawaii flying. A look at one day of the UA schedule shows 2 737s and 5 777-200s
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

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

Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:20 pm

kngkyle wrote:
CALMSP wrote:
kngkyle wrote:
All this talk from UA about keeping their fleet intact and utilizing it to sweep in and regain market share when demand returns has so far been a bunch of hot air. So far they're being the slowest of the big 4 to bring capacity back and with this April extension into May it is only getting worse. Once again I'm having to fly AA on EWR-ORD because UA has no capacity.


When are you not seeing any availability?


Sorry, I meant availability at reasonable prices about a week in advance. I'm not paying $700+ for EWR-ORD in coach when comparable flights on AA are $200-300 cheaper.


So United only has to sell 1 seat for every 2 or 3 that AA or WN has to sell? And that’s a bad thing? They are trying to not dump capacity and reduce already tight (or even negative) margins. You can’t make money on volume if you are losing on every transaction. You can only make money on volume if you are selling your product for a profit. Losing $40 a seat can’t be made up by selling 500 more seats. You can however cut your losses at $10 a seat by flying a reduced schedule and curbing against depressed market forces.

There are places United should probably be a bit more aggressive, but this is a very delicate balance of adding capacity vs flooding saturated markets with weak demand.

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