Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
tphuang
Posts: 6460
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 5:27 pm

codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:
I make no reference to terminal space or co-location, or redevelopment.

The argument of the near-impossibility of UA growth at JFK presupposes a 100% return of JFK operations at peak times (e.g., transatlantic push). That's not going to happen for some time, and when it does, the airport is going to look a bit different, with BA/AA co-located and additional T4 development. Even still, we won't see 11x JFK-LHR every day, or the same level of frequency to other EU hubs, that we saw in 2019 and the years leading up to it. So, there will unquestionably be space available to house a United operation of fewer than 20 daily flights, spread throughout the day. United has also told pilots it currently has access to approximately 14 daily slot pairs at JFK, but at the moment there is no business case for operating any greater frequency than what has been scheduled, and the stated priority right now is to rebuild the transcontinental franchise before moving to domestic connectivity.

While BA is planning to vacate T7 once the T8 work is complete, there is no timetable for the closure/demolition of the current facility and the JetBlue T5 expansion has not been funded. So, T7 remains a viable home for UA ... until it isn't. At least at the moment, and for the foreseeable future, there is ample space to house as large of a United operation as it cares to schedule.

Finally, my post contemplates a time where slot waivers at LHR expire, and airlines return to the use-it-or-lose-it rule. I don't see that happening any time in the next year or so; the pressure from BA will be too great.

As for the JV flying, I would not propose additional frequencies, but a possible restructuring of the LH Group airlines could see some reallocation of flying. Internationally, JFK is the most preferred NYC airport from foreign points of sale, so it makes sense for the foreign JV carriers to operate JFK service where greater JFK demand is inbound, not the inverse. Market dynamics post-COVID, especially transatlantic, could change that calculus. For instance, projections are US point-of-sale demand to Europe will far exceed inbound EU-USA for 2021 and into 2022. Co-brand credit card relationships and FF bases at the dominant POS influence JV flying decisions.


So you are making the argument that airlines will operate their LHR due to use it or lose it rule. But somehow, airlines won't use their JFK slots when slot waiver ends?

You are saying that UA has told its pilots that it has access to 14 pairs. Is that permanent slots or temporary slots that has been granted due to slot waiver? I would imagine the latter. Regardless, it's presumptuous to think that 20 permanent slots will all be available for UA once slot waiver is over. The fact is B6, DL and AA have all brought back flights much quicker at JFK than LGA. They should be able to meet the 80% slot usage rule if slot waiver goes away by end of October. If there are permanent slots becoming available during peak times, you can bet that UA will not be the only carrier fighting for them. Who is giving up JFK peak hour slots? That's not to say UA can't get 20 slots at times they want. It just isn't that straight forward. And certainly, JFK losing its slot constraint would probably be the best thing for UA.

LH is already have trouble finding places to operate its flights. So, it's going to solve that problem by flying even less to JFK after it has invested a lot of money there?

T-7 isn't a viable home for UA. jetBlue will demolish T-7 on time unless there is evidence otherwise. They have already told their crew members that they plan for an up to 240 flight operation at JFK. You think T-5 is big enough to support that?


LHR and JFK slot waivers are not tied. I think there's a reasonable case to be made that LHR slot waivers will remain in force longer than the same at JFK for precisely the reason that there will be greater demand for 100% utilization driven by the domestic market, and US carriers (UA's desire to grow its slot portfolio at JFK is clear evidence of this). On the other hand, BA has neither the equipment nor the business case to operate 100% of its LHR slot portfolio, shy of scheduling dozens of shorthaul flights to squat (as it has in the past) at a loss. There's also tremendous environmental pressure to avoid this practice. Thus, I suspect LHR slot waivers will be more permissive, and perhaps longer-lasting, than JFK.


The biggest 3 slot holders at JFK are all at a position where they can meet the 80% slot usage requirement when slot waiver goes away. The most likely airline to not meet its slot usage requirement was AA. That went away once it partnered up with B6. Now, they are adding back some flights and leasing some slots to B6 that it cannot operate. Where is this abundance of permanet slot becoming available for UA to claim?

Again, I'm sure UA can get some slots from airlines that no longer intend to fly TATL. There really isn't any evidence that the 3 primary domestic carriers will give them up any of the prime hour slots.

Again, this all goes out of the window if JFK slot constraint goes away. It could happen, but then UA still has the terminal issue.

Who told you they don't have funding for it? I haven't read any article that says their partners/investors have went busto or pulled out of the project.


Has the JFK Millenium Partners bond issuance taken place yet? I haven't seen it. Can you find evidence of it? At the start of the project, that was a 2020-2021 target. No doubt it has slipped.

You will note I did not say anyone has "pulled out." But if the bond isuance hasn't taken place, the project isn't funded. And that pushes everything back, probably years.


That's because we were in the biggest cash crunch in airline industry. We are almost out of it. JetBlue is back operating as 2% less capacity this June vs 2019. A delay to start of T-6 project does not mean a delay to T-7 demolition. It would actually probably be better for T-6/7 construction to be going on at the same time.

B6 is in the midst of a huge NYC expansion over the next 2 years, because it's getting a bunch of AA slots. It will need all the space it can get. It doesn't have any other terminal projects. If UA is basing its business case at JFK on the possibility that B6 will not tear down T-7, it should probably rethink it.

I'm sure there will be a news coming out on B6's JFK redevelopment plan very soon. If B6 does delay T6/7 construction until after 2023, then good for UA.
 
codc10
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 5:56 pm

Pinto wrote:
codc10 wrote:
airzim wrote:

I have no insight, but given the wording, maybe they plan to take over some of their JV flying? NRT, FRA, MUC, and possibly LHR?


I continue to think JFKLHR is on the table, just a matter of "when". UA will have 18 daily slot pairs once waivers are lifted and I don't think there will be a business case for 7x EWR every night (as was planned for summer 2020, pre-pandemic). If I had to throw something out there for a full deployment of the slot portfolio in post-COVID times, I would posit:

4x EWR (76L)
3x JFK (76L)
2x BOS (76L)
2x ORD (76L)
2x IAD (788/789)
1x IAH (789)
1x DEN (789)
1x LAX (789)
1x SFO (77W)

That would leave an extra frequency to add to other cities on a day-of-week basis (80% rule) or for a "wild card', like MCO.

As far as the JFK JV markets, I think it's all point of sale dependent. The LH brands are obviously stronger in their respective home markets, so if most of the JFK demand is inbound, it makes sense to keep the flying on the JV tail. But if the LH group is serious about a major restructure, or if it is forecast that local NYC area demand is stronger, I think we could theoretically see swaps to UA equipment (e.g., 2x LH JFK-FRA to 1x UA JFK-FRA, 1x LH JFK-FRA). United's smaller-gauge 767s could be valuable, too, although the likely lower yields for some time makes the mix of aircraft like UA's 767-400, 787-8, 787-10 (larger capacity with more Y seats) attractive, too.


I don't think that this is even remotely possible. UA won't go 3x JFK-LHR at the expense of EWR-LHR.
They might go 2x BOS-LHR if they get an extra slot. UA is going to keep most LHR flying through their hubs, because it will probably hurt them more than doing P2P int'l flying.


We aren't living in 2019... the market in New York has fragmented in a way that was not within the realm of possibility just 18 months ago and there is a window for UA to reestablish a JFK foothold.

I know for a fact that JFK-LHR service is under consideration (this should be no surprise, it has always been). This is by no means an expection, or a prediction, but United is looking at JFK as a long-term, strategically important airport both for its own network and the Atlantic JV, so something like this is not out of the question. Unlikely, yes; impossible, no.

In addition, one cannot discount the possibility of United wielding its slots to attack a JetBlue LHR entry. That's one major reason they've announced BOS-LHR.

tphuang wrote:
That's because we were in the biggest cash crunch in airline industry. We are almost out of it. JetBlue is back operating as 2% less capacity this June vs 2019. A delay to start of T-6 project does not mean a delay to T-7 demolition. It would actually probably be better for T-6/7 construction to be going on at the same time.

B6 is in the midst of a huge NYC expansion over the next 2 years, because it's getting a bunch of AA slots. It will need all the space it can get. It doesn't have any other terminal projects. If UA is basing its business case at JFK on the possibility that B6 will not tear down T-7, it should probably rethink it.

I'm sure there will be a news coming out on B6's JFK redevelopment plan very soon. If B6 does delay T6/7 construction until after 2023, then good for UA.


Believe me, I realize that. I am in the industry. But my point is that the T6 project is not yet funded. T7 demolition may well be something that is carved out and independently funded by the PANYNJ as an enabling project for the T6 redevelopment, but that would have to go before the Board, be approved and contracts awarded. There is some precedent for that, as the PANYNJ is moving forward with some smaller projects with independent funding while the larger projects (specifically T1) are essentially on hold. It just hasn't happened yet.

My expectation/speculation is that the ambitious 2019-announced JFK redevelopment projects will generally follow what was approved for IAT/T4 at the most recent PANYNJ Board meeting: ~40% reduced scope and capital cost to go with 18+ month delay, with provision for long-term phasing of full development. I would further expect to see some stay of execution on T7 of a similar duration, but again, that's just my speculation.

JetBlue's plans for 240+ flights per day at JFK had to be supportable within the current infrastructure anyway, so I don't see anything standing in the way of that... though it will be a busy summer at T5.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 9658
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 6:06 pm

tphuang wrote:
That's because we were in the biggest cash crunch in airline industry. We are almost out of it. JetBlue is back operating as 2% less capacity this June vs 2019.


Please don't confuse operating capacity and revenue. Capacity doesn't mean planes are full; it doesn't mean customers are paying 2019-avg fares. B6's own 8-K this week gave guidance of 2Q21 revenue being down 30-35% vs. 2Q19.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1919
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 6:17 pm

Just wait till UA finds out how much JFK demand has changed during the course of the pandemic. JFK-LHR 3x is not happening period. How could you make the argument that business travel is down and that’s why they will cut EWR to 4x then also try to say they need 3x from JFK because of business demand?
 
codc10
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 6:29 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
Just wait till UA finds out how much JFK demand has changed during the course of the pandemic. JFK-LHR 3x is not happening period. How could you make the argument that business travel is down and that’s why they will cut EWR to 4x then also try to say they need 3x from JFK because of business demand?


Did I say it was because of business demand? Nope. In fact, the only reason there was a planned 7x EWR-LHR operation for Summer 2020 and beyond (which never happened) was to cater to a traditional, Manhattan-centric business demand profile that has fragmented in a way that nobody could have predicted at the beginning of 2020. Manhattan business will substantially return, but a considerable number of the people who lived there, and fit international business class demographics, have left for the suburbs of New Jersey, Long Island, Westchester and Connecticut. Middle and senior level staff, including those who frequently traveled between New York and global business centers, will likely not be in office setting 5 days a week as in the past. The model is evolving. If UA hopes to recapture its clientele, meet the needs of its corporate clients and potentially expand its customer base, it must prepare to be where its customers are. Manhattan will always be the "center of gravity" but at least for the next few years airlines and businesses are not expecting a snap-back to normalcy.

It's no use arguing over something that I posit as mere speculation, subject to a multitude of external factors that none of us can predict... it is expressly not an expectation or forecast.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6460
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 7:52 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
That's because we were in the biggest cash crunch in airline industry. We are almost out of it. JetBlue is back operating as 2% less capacity this June vs 2019.


Please don't confuse operating capacity and revenue. Capacity doesn't mean planes are full; it doesn't mean customers are paying 2019-avg fares. B6's own 8-K this week gave guidance of 2Q21 revenue being down 30-35% vs. 2Q19.


I'm really not. My point is that we have gotten to the point where airlines are thinking less about just saving cash. They are making plans for the future. One can argue that B6 has never worked particularly hard at conserving cash vs other airlines. It's clear that they are all-in on NYC. JFK terminal project is far and away the most important facility project they will have in the next 10 years. It maybe delayed for short period time due to what we just went through. It will not be delayed once they think they making money again. It should not take until end of 2022 for them to be making money again unless we dip into another prolonged demand slump that lasts for the next 18 months.

JetBlue will be particularly eager to knock down T-7 to effectively control the largest or the second largest terminal in JFK. It won't be any different than other airlines accumulating as many gates as they can in their hub airports.

JetBlue's plans for 240+ flights per day at JFK had to be supportable within the current infrastructure anyway, so I don't see anything standing in the way of that... though it will be a busy summer at T5.

it's current facility cannot support 240 flights a day from JetBlue. More importantly, completing T5 to T7 gives JetBlue control at JFK. Along with its partnership with AA, they can dictate where domestic airlines operate out of. They can effectively lock out future ULCC competition. This is bigger than just UA. JetBlue does not have 3 or 4 other projects going on around the country like DL. This is it for them.
 
codc10
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 9:03 pm

tphuang wrote:
it's current facility cannot support 240 flights a day from JetBlue. More importantly, completing T5 to T7 gives JetBlue control at JFK. Along with its partnership with AA, they can dictate where domestic airlines operate out of. They can effectively lock out future ULCC competition. This is bigger than just UA. JetBlue does not have 3 or 4 other projects going on around the country like DL. This is it for them.


My apologies as I misread your post... I'm not familiar with JetBlue's planned 2021 summer schedule at JFK and I mistakenly read the 240+ figure for this summer. It makes sense now that they need additional gates to support 240+ daily flights. I fully agree that 8+ turns a day out of the existing T5 facility is unrealistic for JFK and the way JetBlue operates.

With all that said, JetBlue cannot snap a finger and make a new terminal materialize. In the on-time scenario, construction would have been underway already; as far as I can tell nothing has started. So, at minimum, I would think we are already about a year behind schedule. Again, a project like that must be funded before it begins, and the bond market is different today than it was in December 2019. At this point you'd think they would be looking at interim solutions to support growth as a new terminal is probably farther away than anticipated.
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1919
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 9:36 pm

Saw the new United club at EWR today. Honestly really disappointed with how they ruined C3. Essentially the high ceilings will be gone and it will be just like the other concourses. Why didn’t they just build over the Head house?
 
N649DL
Posts: 1180
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 9:45 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
Saw the new United club at EWR today. Honestly really disappointed with how they ruined C3. Essentially the high ceilings will be gone and it will be just like the other concourses. Why didn’t they just build over the Head house?


They had to do something & quick regarding club space. Once they announced that the newer club was going to be converted to a Polaris Lounge, I knew that spelled out major crowding issues. What they maybe should've done was have retrofitted the 1980s C-2 to the Polaris Lounge instead as it was already way overdue for a makeover. The "Pop-Up" Club was also just sad.

Is UA still planning on operating BOS-LHR? I thought they might've rolled that back because of the pandemic? Regarding the return of the JFK-SFO/LAX operations, I checked the seat maps last week randomly on the app. JFK-LAX looked pretty filled up but SFO was light.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6460
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:49 pm

codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
it's current facility cannot support 240 flights a day from JetBlue. More importantly, completing T5 to T7 gives JetBlue control at JFK. Along with its partnership with AA, they can dictate where domestic airlines operate out of. They can effectively lock out future ULCC competition. This is bigger than just UA. JetBlue does not have 3 or 4 other projects going on around the country like DL. This is it for them.


My apologies as I misread your post... I'm not familiar with JetBlue's planned 2021 summer schedule at JFK and I mistakenly read the 240+ figure for this summer. It makes sense now that they need additional gates to support 240+ daily flights. I fully agree that 8+ turns a day out of the existing T5 facility is unrealistic for JFK and the way JetBlue operates.

With all that said, JetBlue cannot snap a finger and make a new terminal materialize. In the on-time scenario, construction would have been underway already; as far as I can tell nothing has started. So, at minimum, I would think we are already about a year behind schedule. Again, a project like that must be funded before it begins, and the bond market is different today than it was in December 2019. At this point you'd think they would be looking at interim solutions to support growth as a new terminal is probably farther away than anticipated.


What interim solution do they have? They have massively reduced pretty much every other focus city to support NYC growth. There is no alternative to their NYC buildup. There is major investment and growth coming at JFK and LGA over the next 12 months as part of NEA. They got 2 years before they BA and other airlines have to move out. They have no facility project anywhere else in the network. They have debt to cap ratio of 59% (still second best among US airlines). I'm not sure why you think JetBlue is incapable of taking on a project when DL has 4 projects ongoing. The only way this doesn't happen on time is if 2022 continues to be terrible for the us airlines industry. It doesn't look like that will happen. If it does happen, I'd think UA's ambition at JFK would be pretty tame for a little while longer.

Again, they can delay starting the project without delaying knocking down T-7. This is about JetBlue having control over who flies out of where in JFK. This is about JetBlue having complete control over the most or second most attractive asset in one of the world's most well known international airports. Think about the value of that for their market value.

If UA wants a medium term solution at JFK, it needs to get into negotiation table with JetBlue or deal with whatever is left over at T-4. The sooner it figures out a solution, the better.
 
codc10
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 1:33 am

tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
it's current facility cannot support 240 flights a day from JetBlue. More importantly, completing T5 to T7 gives JetBlue control at JFK. Along with its partnership with AA, they can dictate where domestic airlines operate out of. They can effectively lock out future ULCC competition. This is bigger than just UA. JetBlue does not have 3 or 4 other projects going on around the country like DL. This is it for them.


My apologies as I misread your post... I'm not familiar with JetBlue's planned 2021 summer schedule at JFK and I mistakenly read the 240+ figure for this summer. It makes sense now that they need additional gates to support 240+ daily flights. I fully agree that 8+ turns a day out of the existing T5 facility is unrealistic for JFK and the way JetBlue operates.

With all that said, JetBlue cannot snap a finger and make a new terminal materialize. In the on-time scenario, construction would have been underway already; as far as I can tell nothing has started. So, at minimum, I would think we are already about a year behind schedule. Again, a project like that must be funded before it begins, and the bond market is different today than it was in December 2019. At this point you'd think they would be looking at interim solutions to support growth as a new terminal is probably farther away than anticipated.


What interim solution do they have? They have massively reduced pretty much every other focus city to support NYC growth. There is no alternative to their NYC buildup. There is major investment and growth coming at JFK and LGA over the next 12 months as part of NEA. They got 2 years before they BA and other airlines have to move out. They have no facility project anywhere else in the network. They have debt to cap ratio of 59% (still second best among US airlines). I'm not sure why you think JetBlue is incapable of taking on a project when DL has 4 projects ongoing. The only way this doesn't happen on time is if 2022 continues to be terrible for the us airlines industry. It doesn't look like that will happen. If it does happen, I'd think UA's ambition at JFK would be pretty tame for a little while longer.

Again, they can delay starting the project without delaying knocking down T-7. This is about JetBlue having control over who flies out of where in JFK. This is about JetBlue having complete control over the most or second most attractive asset in one of the world's most well known international airports. Think about the value of that for their market value.

If UA wants a medium term solution at JFK, it needs to get into negotiation table with JetBlue or deal with whatever is left over at T-4. The sooner it figures out a solution, the better.


We are just talking around each other. I am not suggesting that JetBlue is "incapable" (your words, not mine) of taking on the T6 project. I am saying that the T6 project, as was announced in late 2019, appears to be stalled. The funding is not currently in place. Construction isn't underway. As far as I can tell, that's objective fact. But you don't seem to be interested in discussing that.

Most likely, what's happening is behind-the-scenes discussions to revamp the project (much like JFKIAT has done with T4) to reduce scope and capital cost. Perhaps in the coming months we'll see a revised proposal brought to the PANYNJ Board for approval. That will require changes to the JetBlue T5 lease, perhaps a new lease for the to-be-developed T6 facility, and a revision or sunset of the BA T7 lease. The process is necessarily public, so the timelines and high-level approvals will be no secret. But those are all prerequisites for any major facility projects at JFK, and in the interim, it's not unreasonable to expect the status quo to persist.

I would also note that, philosophically, what you're suggesting (JetBlue to "control" JFK) is diametrically opposed to the Port Authority's current stance on competitive access to its airport faciltiies. The Port has been much more aggressive in demanding common-use gate allocation for major projects, especially those in which the PA partially funds. Criticism over historical exclusive leases on gates (UA at EWR C, AA at JFK T8) reducing access to new-entrants has led the Port to adopt new usage thresholds and common/preferential use stipulations for the most recent terminal projects.

That's not to say B6 won't utilize gates it has a hand in developing, but the Port is committed to creating more common use gates at its airports, so non-incumbent players (like B6 at EWR, or UA at JFK) are not hamstrung by a lack of gate space if they intend to add service that the airfield can support.
 
tphuang
Posts: 6460
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 2:33 am

codc10 wrote:
tphuang wrote:
codc10 wrote:

My apologies as I misread your post... I'm not familiar with JetBlue's planned 2021 summer schedule at JFK and I mistakenly read the 240+ figure for this summer. It makes sense now that they need additional gates to support 240+ daily flights. I fully agree that 8+ turns a day out of the existing T5 facility is unrealistic for JFK and the way JetBlue operates.

With all that said, JetBlue cannot snap a finger and make a new terminal materialize. In the on-time scenario, construction would have been underway already; as far as I can tell nothing has started. So, at minimum, I would think we are already about a year behind schedule. Again, a project like that must be funded before it begins, and the bond market is different today than it was in December 2019. At this point you'd think they would be looking at interim solutions to support growth as a new terminal is probably farther away than anticipated.


What interim solution do they have? They have massively reduced pretty much every other focus city to support NYC growth. There is no alternative to their NYC buildup. There is major investment and growth coming at JFK and LGA over the next 12 months as part of NEA. They got 2 years before they BA and other airlines have to move out. They have no facility project anywhere else in the network. They have debt to cap ratio of 59% (still second best among US airlines). I'm not sure why you think JetBlue is incapable of taking on a project when DL has 4 projects ongoing. The only way this doesn't happen on time is if 2022 continues to be terrible for the us airlines industry. It doesn't look like that will happen. If it does happen, I'd think UA's ambition at JFK would be pretty tame for a little while longer.

Again, they can delay starting the project without delaying knocking down T-7. This is about JetBlue having control over who flies out of where in JFK. This is about JetBlue having complete control over the most or second most attractive asset in one of the world's most well known international airports. Think about the value of that for their market value.

If UA wants a medium term solution at JFK, it needs to get into negotiation table with JetBlue or deal with whatever is left over at T-4. The sooner it figures out a solution, the better.


We are just talking around each other. I am not suggesting that JetBlue is "incapable" (your words, not mine) of taking on the T6 project. I am saying that the T6 project, as was announced in late 2019, appears to be stalled. The funding is not currently in place. Construction isn't underway. As far as I can tell, that's objective fact. But you don't seem to be interested in discussing that.

Most likely, what's happening is behind-the-scenes discussions to revamp the project (much like JFKIAT has done with T4) to reduce scope and capital cost. Perhaps in the coming months we'll see a revised proposal brought to the PANYNJ Board for approval. That will require changes to the JetBlue T5 lease, perhaps a new lease for the to-be-developed T6 facility, and a revision or sunset of the BA T7 lease. The process is necessarily public, so the timelines and high-level approvals will be no secret. But those are all prerequisites for any major facility projects at JFK, and in the interim, it's not unreasonable to expect the status quo to persist.

All of this speculation on your part based on the fact that DL reduce the scope of its project. Keep in mind that DL still has the option to expand the scope later. It does not lose anything by reducing the scope of the project On top of that, it has been spending money on at least 3 other major projects. JetBlue has no reason to give up lease on something it has worked hard for. Keep in mind, it has the rights to redevelop T-6 as it sees fit for many years now. Why would it give that up? Why would it give up the right to redevelop T-7 that it worked so hard to get?

Apart from making things easier for UA, there is no real benefit for JetBlue of anything that you are suggesting. If UA won't give up its assets at EWR for reducing costs, why would B6 do that at JFK?
I would also note that, philosophically, what you're suggesting (JetBlue to "control" JFK) is diametrically opposed to the Port Authority's current stance on competitive access to its airport faciltiies. The Port has been much more aggressive in demanding common-use gate allocation for major projects, especially those in which the PA partially funds. Criticism over historical exclusive leases on gates (UA at EWR C, AA at JFK T8) reducing access to new-entrants has led the Port to adopt new usage thresholds and common/preferential use stipulations for the most recent terminal projects.

That's not to say B6 won't utilize gates it has a hand in developing, but the Port is committed to creating more common use gates at its airports, so non-incumbent players (like B6 at EWR, or UA at JFK) are not hamstrung by a lack of gate space if they intend to add service that the airfield can support.


T-5 at JFK is basically like T-8 in how it operates. Only airlines that are partners with JetBlue are operating out of T-5 right now. It's so funny. You get offended when a couple of us mention B6 grabbing more gates at EWR terminal 1, which actually is well known to be a CUTE facility built by PANYNJ. On the other hand, T-5 extension to T-6/7 is a facility that will be developed/managed by JetBlue and its partners. But somehow, this facility needs to be opened up with CUTE allocation for any airlines to come in. Here is the deal. B6 will find tenants for its new facility, because it won't use enough slots to fully utilize those gates. But if it doesn't want UA in there, UA is not getting in there.

UA will have to negotiate for something with B6 if T5-7 is where it wants to be long term.
 
codc10
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 2:54 am

tphuang wrote:
All of this speculation on your part based on the fact that DL reduce the scope of its project. Keep in mind that DL still has the option to expand the scope later. It does not lose anything by reducing the scope of the project On top of that, it has been spending money on at least 3 other major projects. JetBlue has no reason to give up lease on something it has worked hard for. Keep in mind, it has the rights to redevelop T-6 as it sees fit for many years now. Why would it give that up? Why would it give up the right to redevelop T-7 that it worked so hard to get?

Apart from making things easier for UA, there is no real benefit for JetBlue of anything that you are suggesting. If UA won't give up its assets at EWR for reducing costs, why would B6 do that at JFK?


Now you're just making things up. I'm merely pointing to the fact that progress on the T6 project, as contemplated at the outset in late 2019 (ancient history in this business), appears to be at a standstill. No bonds, no enabling projects, no apparent construction. I'm not doubting it will happen... but I am highly skeptical of the timetable and have questions about the status of the project. I think that's totally legitimate given the state of the industry.

If you have actual insight on what's happening with the JFK Millenium Partners project, I'd love to hear it. Suffice to say, it has been radio silence for while.

T-5 at JFK is basically like T-8 in how it operates. Only airlines that are partners with JetBlue are operating out of T-5 right now. It's so funny. You get offended when a couple of us mention B6 grabbing more gates at EWR terminal 1, which actually is well known to be a CUTE facility built by PANYNJ. On the other hand, T-5 extension to T-6/7 is a facility that will be developed/managed by JetBlue and its partners. But somehow, this facility needs to be opened up with CUTE allocation for any airlines to come in. Here is the deal. B6 will find tenants for its new facility, because it won't use enough slots to fully utilize those gates. But if it doesn't want UA in there, UA is not getting in there.

UA will have to negotiate for something with B6 if T5-7 is where it wants to be long term.


I think you must have me confused with someone else. I am intimately aware of how T1/EWR (now apparently TA again) is being developed, and how access will be allocated. It will be nominally common-use, with preferential gate allocations to airlines based on relatively low usage thresholds calculated by past gate leases and operations at EWR. There will not be long-term airline exclusive gates there.

What I consistently cautioned against on this forum was looking at post-COVID schedules as the sole basis for how preferential-access gates will be allocated at T1. Some users have predicted that reduced COVID-era schedules would weigh heavily on gate assignments when the new facility opens. The PANYNJ most assuredly isn't looking at it this way.

I am fully aware of the nature JFK T5 lease; working with that document and others like it at the NYC airports is a big part of what I do for a living. Do you know for a fact that T6 is going to be a JetBlue exclusive lease? That's not at all my understanding; in fact, I understood the Port Authority is no longer interested in doing exclusive leases/custodial tenancies for future projects. T5 is likely the last all-new airline-exclusive facility on the Port Authority property... keep in mind we are well into the second decade of that lease.

But, if you can show your work to the contrary, please be my guest.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1881
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 3:20 am

codc10 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
Just wait till UA finds out how much JFK demand has changed during the course of the pandemic. JFK-LHR 3x is not happening period. How could you make the argument that business travel is down and that’s why they will cut EWR to 4x then also try to say they need 3x from JFK because of business demand?


Did I say it was because of business demand? Nope. In fact, the only reason there was a planned 7x EWR-LHR operation for Summer 2020 and beyond (which never happened) was to cater to a traditional, Manhattan-centric business demand profile that has fragmented in a way that nobody could have predicted at the beginning of 2020. Manhattan business will substantially return, but a considerable number of the people who lived there, and fit international business class demographics, have left for the suburbs of New Jersey, Long Island, Westchester and Connecticut. Middle and senior level staff, including those who frequently traveled between New York and global business centers, will likely not be in office setting 5 days a week as in the past. The model is evolving. If UA hopes to recapture its clientele, meet the needs of its corporate clients and potentially expand its customer base, it must prepare to be where its customers are. Manhattan will always be the "center of gravity" but at least for the next few years airlines and businesses are not expecting a snap-back to normalcy.

It's no use arguing over something that I posit as mere speculation, subject to a multitude of external factors that none of us can predict... it is expressly not an expectation or forecast.


Great post. I think you can copy and paste this for a lot if not most large metros.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1996
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 3:48 am

I'm not against UA at JFK (I think it was a brilliant idea to come back), but I don't have too many expectations for them beyond JFK-SFO/LAX. Those are the two markets that make by far the most sense in terms of utility to O&D. Getting those two back up to 6-7x each would be a success in its own right. Maybe there's some connectivity advantage in adding ORD/DEN/IAH (what, is there big demand for JFK-DEN-TUS?), but at the same time, LGA is going to be superior to JFK for most people coming from ORD/DEN/IAH.

LHR would be fascinating and bold, and I could see how that could be something they'd try to do, especially in the Scott Kirby era. But I bet they'd want more slots over there first, which was something they were starting to do pre-pandemic. Remember how they got a LHR slot from LH to make LHR-DEN year-round? I have trouble imagining UA would want to get into the JFK-LHR bloodbath if it meant drawing down EWR-LHR to 4x and SFO-LHR to 1x, even if demand in those two markets is soft right now. Maybe BOS is the experiment this summer to see how well they can hold their weight on a non-hub-LHR route.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 7M9 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
Midwestindy
Posts: 6123
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:56 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 12:39 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:

July domestic is updated now on united.com


Im not sure it is. It has routes like IAH-RIC at 3x daily and IAH-LGA at 8x daily.


Meant on Unitedcargo.com, my bad

IAH-LGA looks like 5x on July 16, and RIC 1x


Now updated July is bookable.
ORD & IND

AA & DL
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 4510
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 1:35 pm

Some of the posts in here are starting to get quite personal and borderline hostile. Let's take the tone down a few notches and just have a productive discussion please.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
User avatar
ChaseP
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:52 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sat May 01, 2021 5:20 pm

Maintenance Update:
N57855 (Boeing 757-300) ferried from ORD to SFO (UA2755/01) for heavy maintenance check.
N649UA (Boeing 767-300) is scheduled to ferry from ILN to EWR (UA2763/03) after heavy maintenance.
 
atrude777
Posts: 4482
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sun May 02, 2021 4:55 pm

As mentioned above by MidwestIndy July is now up!

I got a schedule change for my July 10th booking which I knew would happen. The fare was so low I had to grab it. The new schedule gave me a 15 min connection so I was able to change it and keep my seats and all!

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
codc10
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sun May 02, 2021 5:09 pm

atrude777 wrote:
As mentioned above by MidwestIndy July is now up!

I got a schedule change for my July 10th booking which I knew would happen. The fare was so low I had to grab it. The new schedule gave me a 15 min connection so I was able to change it and keep my seats and all!

Alex


Lots of 757-200s and 767-300s added to the West Coast-Hawaii schedule for June/July with this update...
 
UALifer
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2018 3:35 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sun May 02, 2021 6:52 pm

codc10 wrote:
atrude777 wrote:
As mentioned above by MidwestIndy July is now up!

I got a schedule change for my July 10th booking which I knew would happen. The fare was so low I had to grab it. The new schedule gave me a 15 min connection so I was able to change it and keep my seats and all!

Alex


Lots of 757-200s and 767-300s added to the West Coast-Hawaii schedule for June/July with this update...


A 767 in LIH, that’ll be fun to see.
 
atrude777
Posts: 4482
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sun May 02, 2021 7:11 pm

codc10 wrote:
atrude777 wrote:
As mentioned above by MidwestIndy July is now up!

I got a schedule change for my July 10th booking which I knew would happen. The fare was so low I had to grab it. The new schedule gave me a 15 min connection so I was able to change it and keep my seats and all!

Alex


Lots of 757-200s and 767-300s added to the West Coast-Hawaii schedule for June/July with this update...


I went from a CR5 to an Airbus A319.

I would LOVE if a 757 or 767 showed up at my gate! Hahahaha

Alex
Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sun May 02, 2021 7:25 pm

Is the only thing holding further DEN expansion back at this point gate space? Seems like they were jammed in there a couple of weeks ago during an afternoon bank. Other than adding banks, not sure what else UA can do at DEN until more gates come online. What say you?
 
alasizon
Posts: 2990
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sun May 02, 2021 7:37 pm

sldispatcher wrote:
Is the only thing holding further DEN expansion back at this point gate space? Seems like they were jammed in there a couple of weeks ago during an afternoon bank. Other than adding banks, not sure what else UA can do at DEN until more gates come online. What say you?


It isn't just gate space, there are also considerations of other hub levels that have to come into play. Out and back doesn't work for every market due to stage length resulting in getting back to DEN too late (or having to leave too early). When other hubs are depressed, that leaves less routing opportunities in the outstations to meet the required departure times to get back to DEN in time. All of the Mountain West hubs (PHX, SLC, DEN) plus DFW and IAH to a degree have the exact same problem.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Sun May 02, 2021 9:52 pm

Guys, any news yet when the July international schedule will be loaded? Thanks.
Flying at the cruising altitude is (mostly) boring. I wish all flights were nothing but endless take offs and landings every 10 minutes or so.
 
User avatar
ChaseP
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:52 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 1:31 pm

For you schedule nerds like myself, United's May flight scheduled will start on May 6. Look for your favorite hub to increase flights.


Storage Update:
N659UA (Boeing 767-300) is scheduled to ferry from ROW to SFO (UA2720/04). Aircraft will eventually head to HKG for heavy maintenance.
N69059 (Boeing 767-400) is scheduled to ferry from ROW to IAD (UA2719/04) for heavy maintenance.

Maintenance Update:
N67052 (Boeing 767-400) entered EWR for maintenance and engine change.
N644UA (Boeing 767-300) is scheduled to ferry from HKG to GUM (UA2848/04) after heavy maintenance.

Polaris Update:
N657UA (Boeing 767-300) is scheduled to ferry from GUM to HKG (UA2846/04) for Polaris seating.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 2:18 pm

Polaris status:

Below all complete or in mod/stored
763 High J/PP, 19 complete, last 2 now in mod (7 currently stored/heavy maint.)
772GE, 21 complete, last now in mod (9 currently stored/heavy maint.)
788, 10 complete, last 2 now in mod (1 currently heavy maint.)
78X/77W, all delivered with Polaris/PP (all flying)
772PW, 29 complete, (all grounded/fan blades - Note: 4 conversions to Domestic all stored/1 complete)

Below Polaris Program incomplete
763 30BF Polaris, 14 of 17 complete, (3 stored/heavy maint. - 3 unconverted stored)
789 14 of 38 complete, (all flying, newest unit now receiving Polaris seats)
764: 0 of 16 complete (all stored/heavy maint.) fleet to be reactivated, Polaris conversion unknown
 
EssentialBusDC
Posts: 208
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 2:29 pm

ChaseP wrote:
For you schedule nerds like myself, United's May flight scheduled will start on May 6. Look for your favorite hub to increase flights.


Storage Update:
N659UA (Boeing 767-300) is scheduled to ferry from ROW to SFO (UA2720/04). Aircraft will eventually head to HKG for heavy maintenance.
N69059 (Boeing 767-400) is scheduled to ferry from ROW to IAD (UA2719/04) for heavy maintenance.

Maintenance Update:
N67052 (Boeing 767-400) entered EWR for maintenance and engine change.
N644UA (Boeing 767-300) is scheduled to ferry from HKG to GUM (UA2848/04) after heavy maintenance.

Polaris Update:
N657UA (Boeing 767-300) is scheduled to ferry from GUM to HKG (UA2846/04) for Polaris seating.


Heavy Mx at Dulles?
 
rjbesikof
Posts: 261
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:21 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 2:57 pm

BEG2IAH wrote:
Guys, any news yet when the July international schedule will be loaded? Thanks.


It's complicated. The EU Commission just recommended that European countries reopen to fully vaccinated people. I wonder if United will really ramp up its Europe schedule beyond the recent adds to KEF, ATH, and Dubrovnik.
 
RJNUT
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 1999 1:58 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 3:40 pm

I'm treating myself to Business class ORD-HNL on the nonstop 787-8 end of June , which i assume will be Polaris seating ? I cant assign a seat right now which has me wondering.
 
mmahpeel
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 11:18 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 3:56 pm

For July - the Hawaii schedule for sale currently is still the placeholder schedule.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 3:57 pm

All 788s now have Polaris. 10 complete, 2 in mod.

In fact right now, the only widebodies currently flying w/o Polaris are 789s. 23 of 38 still have Diamond. Conversions could re-start in XMN when 2 788s are complete.
- 3 non-Polaris 763s stored and will probably stay that way until potential 30BF Polaris conversion
- 16 764s are sked to return to service this summer without Polaris - maybe temporarily due to 772PW fan blade issue.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3515
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 8:53 pm

rjbesikof wrote:
BEG2IAH wrote:
Guys, any news yet when the July international schedule will be loaded? Thanks.


It's complicated. The EU Commission just recommended that European countries reopen to fully vaccinated people. I wonder if United will really ramp up its Europe schedule beyond the recent adds to KEF, ATH, and Dubrovnik.


The long haul and short haul international schedule is already loaded, United updated the long haul schedule way before the EU commission recommended reopening to vaccinated travelers.

I think what we will see is once it becomes official and not just a recommendation UA will add back some European destinations that are currently still showing as suspended. One of the best examples I can think of is Greece United immediately reinstated EWR-ATH and announced IAD-ATH once it was official Greece would be opened to Americans. However I don't think this can be a one way street, if the EU reopens to fully vaccinated American then I think the expectation is the White House would need to respond in kind and reopen US borders to fully vaccinated Europeans from the EU.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6385
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 9:01 pm

jayunited wrote:
rjbesikof wrote:
BEG2IAH wrote:
Guys, any news yet when the July international schedule will be loaded? Thanks.


It's complicated. The EU Commission just recommended that European countries reopen to fully vaccinated people. I wonder if United will really ramp up its Europe schedule beyond the recent adds to KEF, ATH, and Dubrovnik.


The long haul and short haul international schedule is already loaded, United updated the long haul schedule way before the EU commission recommended reopening to vaccinated travelers.

I think what we will see is once it becomes official and not just a recommendation UA will add back some European destinations that are currently still showing as suspended. One of the best examples I can think of is Greece United immediately reinstated EWR-ATH and announced IAD-ATH once it was official Greece would be opened to Americans. However I don't think this can be a one way street, if the EU reopens to fully vaccinated American then I think the expectation is the White House would need to respond in kind and reopen US borders to fully vaccinated Europeans from the EU.


The long haul schedule is already loaded for July?

Thats great if so. That means IAH-NRT/AMS/LHR are all back.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 709
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Mon May 03, 2021 10:30 pm

jayunited wrote:
rjbesikof wrote:
BEG2IAH wrote:
Guys, any news yet when the July international schedule will be loaded? Thanks.


It's complicated. The EU Commission just recommended that European countries reopen to fully vaccinated people. I wonder if United will really ramp up its Europe schedule beyond the recent adds to KEF, ATH, and Dubrovnik.


The long haul and short haul international schedule is already loaded, United updated the long haul schedule way before the EU commission recommended reopening to vaccinated travelers.

I think what we will see is once it becomes official and not just a recommendation UA will add back some European destinations that are currently still showing as suspended. One of the best examples I can think of is Greece United immediately reinstated EWR-ATH and announced IAD-ATH once it was official Greece would be opened to Americans. However I don't think this can be a one way street, if the EU reopens to fully vaccinated American then I think the expectation is the White House would need to respond in kind and reopen US borders to fully vaccinated Europeans from the EU.

Not so. EWR-ATH had been for sale the entire time starting in July and was never suspended.
 
UAinAUS
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:11 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Tue May 04, 2021 12:10 pm

UAX Update:

E145XR:
N14188 entered revenue service with CommutAir

CR7:
N743SK exited ROW in EvoBlu livery
N795SK exited ROW n EvoBlu livery
N792SK entered ROW for paint
N793SK entered ROW for paint
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1919
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Tue May 04, 2021 12:23 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
jayunited wrote:
rjbesikof wrote:

It's complicated. The EU Commission just recommended that European countries reopen to fully vaccinated people. I wonder if United will really ramp up its Europe schedule beyond the recent adds to KEF, ATH, and Dubrovnik.


The long haul and short haul international schedule is already loaded, United updated the long haul schedule way before the EU commission recommended reopening to vaccinated travelers.

I think what we will see is once it becomes official and not just a recommendation UA will add back some European destinations that are currently still showing as suspended. One of the best examples I can think of is Greece United immediately reinstated EWR-ATH and announced IAD-ATH once it was official Greece would be opened to Americans. However I don't think this can be a one way street, if the EU reopens to fully vaccinated American then I think the expectation is the White House would need to respond in kind and reopen US borders to fully vaccinated Europeans from the EU.


The long haul schedule is already loaded for July?

Thats great if so. That means IAH-NRT/AMS/LHR are all back.


No it’s not updated. Some routes that were previously cut are just gone and then there was no additional tweaks.
 
User avatar
AVENSAB727
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:02 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Tue May 04, 2021 8:27 pm

Any updates on when the MAXes with the electrical issue should be fixed up and flying again?
Always look on the bright side of Life!
 
flyer56
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:46 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 3:23 am

Looks like SFO-TPE is back to doing a crew change in GUM again. Possibly related to the recent TPE Novotel COVID breakout. While it was not that many cases I heard they shipped everyone in the hotel to a government quarantine center, maybe it included some foreign crew and United does not want any of their crew in a similar situation. Bummer for me, though.
 
MLIAA
Posts: 249
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 11:08 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 3:27 am

In early 2019 United took delivery of ex EasyJet G-EZIY, and it became N3305U. It doesn’t look like it’s done anything since being delivered.

Was this just a parts bird to help keep the rest of the fleet going?
A319 A320 A321 A332 B712 B722 B737 B738 B739 B744 B752 B763 B764 B772 B788 B789 MD80 S340 E140 E145 E170 E175 E195 CRJ2 CRJ7 CRJ9
 
User avatar
ChaseP
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:52 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 3:30 am

MLIAA wrote:
In early 2019 United took delivery of ex EasyJet G-EZIY, and it became N3305U. It doesn’t look like it’s done anything since being delivered.

Was this just a parts bird to help keep the rest of the fleet going?


The EasyJet frames will become parts for United's fleet.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1996
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 4:56 am

ChaseP wrote:
MLIAA wrote:
In early 2019 United took delivery of ex EasyJet G-EZIY, and it became N3305U. It doesn’t look like it’s done anything since being delivered.

Was this just a parts bird to help keep the rest of the fleet going?


The EasyJet frames will become parts for United's fleet.


Any idea yet on when we’ll start seeing that happen?
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 380 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 7M9 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
 
codc10
Posts: 3160
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 9:17 am

intotheair wrote:
ChaseP wrote:
MLIAA wrote:
In early 2019 United took delivery of ex EasyJet G-EZIY, and it became N3305U. It doesn’t look like it’s done anything since being delivered.

Was this just a parts bird to help keep the rest of the fleet going?


The EasyJet frames will become parts for United's fleet.


Any idea yet on when we’ll start seeing that happen?


Reportedly, the EasyJet frames will now be sold, this was disclosed by Nocella in the (IIRC) 4Q earnings call. I wouldn’t be surprised if some are scrapped. Apparently, the plan to integrate the ex-EZY 319s with CFM power has been dropped. The Volaris 320s bought a few years ago have already been parted-out.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3515
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 11:14 am

flyer56 wrote:
Looks like SFO-TPE is back to doing a crew change in GUM again. Possibly related to the recent TPE Novotel COVID breakout. While it was not that many cases I heard they shipped everyone in the hotel to a government quarantine center, maybe it included some foreign crew and United does not want any of their crew in a similar situation. Bummer for me, though.


UA also runs cargo only flights out of both ORD and LAX to TPE. It looks like tomorrows (5/6/2021) ORD-TPE flight will now operate ORD-NRT-TPE instead of ORD-TPE.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3515
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 11:24 am

AVENSAB727 wrote:
Any updates on when the MAXes with the electrical issue should be fixed up and flying again?



The last update given was airlines are still waiting for the service bulletin. We were told UA knows what the problem is and can fix it but we have to wait for the service bulletin, and we were told both the FAA and Boeing are being cautious and meticulous for safety reasons but also because neither wants to appear as though they are cutting corners to get these aircraft back into service.

As soon as the service bulletin is out UA stated it would take around 24 hours of work on each frame to get them back in service, but for now United just like every other airline with grounded MAXes sits and waits for the FAA and Boeing and the original timeframe airlines were given has come and gone.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 1:27 pm

I wonder how much of the 24 hour repair includes getting to the part and if UA has taken the steps (or been allowed) in at least one aircraft to get to the part while its grounded?
 
mah584jr
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:35 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 2:05 pm

It looks like ten more United Clubs will be opening in the coming weeks:


Chicago O’Hare (ORD) – reopening at Gate C16, followed by locations at B18 and F4 — all United Clubs open by end of June.
Houston (IAH) – reopening two more lounges: C South and Terminal B.
San Francisco (SFO) – reopening in Boarding Area E (Gate E4).
Washington Dulles (IAD) – reopening near Gate C17.
Fort Lauderdale (FLL) – reopening near Gate C1.
Orlando (MCO) – reopening near Gate 43.
Las Vegas (LAS) – reopening between Gates 33 and 35.

No immediate plans for the Polaris lounges.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... g-lounges/
 
Golfmikey
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:41 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 2:12 pm

first rev flight for 764 tomorrow 5/6 flt 1235 ewr-iah
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 709
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 2:22 pm

mah584jr wrote:
It looks like ten more United Clubs will be opening in the coming weeks:


Chicago O’Hare (ORD) – reopening at Gate C16, followed by locations at B18 and F4 — all United Clubs open by end of June.
Houston (IAH) – reopening two more lounges: C South and Terminal B.
San Francisco (SFO) – reopening in Boarding Area E (Gate E4).
Washington Dulles (IAD) – reopening near Gate C17.
Fort Lauderdale (FLL) – reopening near Gate C1.
Orlando (MCO) – reopening near Gate 43.
Las Vegas (LAS) – reopening between Gates 33 and 35.

No immediate plans for the Polaris lounges.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-ai ... g-lounges/

United plans to reopen eight additional lounges by Labor Day weekend, including locations in New York LaGuardia (LGA) and Boston (BOS).
 
Golfmikey
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:41 am

Re: United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

Wed May 05, 2021 3:32 pm

789: N28987 expected to depart XMN with polaris tomorrow: XMN-NRT-ORD
772 : N77019 expected to depart XMN after heavy mx tomorrow: XMN- NRT-SFO
A319:N882UA ex China southern to depart XMN tomorrow: XMN-NRT-ANC-SFO

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