Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Jetport
Posts: 304
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:23 pm

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 5:52 am

flyer56 wrote:
GoSharks wrote:
flyer56 wrote:

UA does not do much ULH compared to what airlines? Certainly more than DL or AA, but even if you look at international airlines pre-COVID who was flying more long haul flights?

Of the 30 longest flights in the world, UA operates 4 of them - the same number that QR and SQ operate. Only EK operates more, with 5.

This is not including UA's SFO-BLR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_f ... e_distance)


Thank you, this is kind of my point! UA actually does decent amount of long haul flying.


Yes, and United is doing all of that long haul flying with their current fleet, no A350's or 777X's anywhere to be found. Amazing how United is managing just fine without them. :?
 
UA857
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:41 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:27 am

Back to my question. Could UA convert the 764 into a high-density domestic configuration to replace the 77A? If so UA could keep and reduce the BusinessFirst seats in F and add seats and remove AVOD in Y.
 
UA857
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:41 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:53 am

jayunited wrote:
cosyr wrote:
I thought the reason the 789 was delivered with Diamond seats was that the Polaris seats were so slow in initial production that they didn't want to bog down the manufacturer, which would have delayed delivery of both 77W's and 789's. Since they already had 787's with Diamond, they went with short term consistency over delays in deliveries. I seem to remember some 77W's sitting for a while before delivery, waiting for Polaris seats, and that was without 789's competing for production capacity.



No this is way before the supply issues crept up and delay deliveries of some 77Ws.
Back in early 2016 a decision or compromise was made even before United ever took delivery of our first 77W that we would continue to take delivery of future 787-9s with diamond seats and not Polaris seats. So if true this decision was made once United settled on the Polaris seat we have today, a decision that made no sense then and still makes no sense now but it all came down to money. We know the diamond seats were much cheaper build and install than Oscars Polaris seats. And although United had placed the order for those 787-9s years earlier the decision to continue installing diamond seats on all 787-9 deliveries from 2017 onward was made in 2016. If the rumors are true Oscars rollout plan originally called for Polaris to make its debut on both the 77W's in 2016 and 787-9 deliveries beginning in 2017.
We know did not happen and United continued to take delivery of 787-9s with diamond seats until late 2019. I think our first 787-9 delivered from Boeing with Polaris was delivered just before Christmas in 2019. This means United had 7 frames delivered between 2017 and the end of 2019 with diamond seats that could have had Polaris installed if Oscar had had his way.


What UA should have done to save money was have Polaris installed on all factory built 77Ws and 78Js and existing 763s and 77Es and leave the 752, 764, 77A, 788, and 789 in either IPTE or BusinessFirst configuration. Meaning that all 789s delievered after 2017 would still have BF seats rather then Polaris.
 
codc10
Posts: 3218
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:16 am

UA857 wrote:
jayunited wrote:
cosyr wrote:
I thought the reason the 789 was delivered with Diamond seats was that the Polaris seats were so slow in initial production that they didn't want to bog down the manufacturer, which would have delayed delivery of both 77W's and 789's. Since they already had 787's with Diamond, they went with short term consistency over delays in deliveries. I seem to remember some 77W's sitting for a while before delivery, waiting for Polaris seats, and that was without 789's competing for production capacity.



No this is way before the supply issues crept up and delay deliveries of some 77Ws.
Back in early 2016 a decision or compromise was made even before United ever took delivery of our first 77W that we would continue to take delivery of future 787-9s with diamond seats and not Polaris seats. So if true this decision was made once United settled on the Polaris seat we have today, a decision that made no sense then and still makes no sense now but it all came down to money. We know the diamond seats were much cheaper build and install than Oscars Polaris seats. And although United had placed the order for those 787-9s years earlier the decision to continue installing diamond seats on all 787-9 deliveries from 2017 onward was made in 2016. If the rumors are true Oscars rollout plan originally called for Polaris to make its debut on both the 77W's in 2016 and 787-9 deliveries beginning in 2017.
We know did not happen and United continued to take delivery of 787-9s with diamond seats until late 2019. I think our first 787-9 delivered from Boeing with Polaris was delivered just before Christmas in 2019. This means United had 7 frames delivered between 2017 and the end of 2019 with diamond seats that could have had Polaris installed if Oscar had had his way.


What UA should have done to save money was have Polaris installed on all factory built 77Ws and 78Js and existing 763s and 77Es and leave the 752, 764, 77A, 788, and 789 in either IPTE or BusinessFirst configuration. Meaning that all 789s delievered after 2017 would still have BF seats rather then Polaris.


In the words of Randy Jackson, that’s gonna be a no for me, dawg. :lol:
 
UA857
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:41 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 7:40 am

codc10 wrote:
UA857 wrote:
jayunited wrote:


No this is way before the supply issues crept up and delay deliveries of some 77Ws.
Back in early 2016 a decision or compromise was made even before United ever took delivery of our first 77W that we would continue to take delivery of future 787-9s with diamond seats and not Polaris seats. So if true this decision was made once United settled on the Polaris seat we have today, a decision that made no sense then and still makes no sense now but it all came down to money. We know the diamond seats were much cheaper build and install than Oscars Polaris seats. And although United had placed the order for those 787-9s years earlier the decision to continue installing diamond seats on all 787-9 deliveries from 2017 onward was made in 2016. If the rumors are true Oscars rollout plan originally called for Polaris to make its debut on both the 77W's in 2016 and 787-9 deliveries beginning in 2017.
We know did not happen and United continued to take delivery of 787-9s with diamond seats until late 2019. I think our first 787-9 delivered from Boeing with Polaris was delivered just before Christmas in 2019. This means United had 7 frames delivered between 2017 and the end of 2019 with diamond seats that could have had Polaris installed if Oscar had had his way.


What UA should have done to save money was have Polaris installed on all factory built 77Ws and 78Js and existing 763s and 77Es and leave the 752, 764, 77A, 788, and 789 in either IPTE or BusinessFirst configuration. Meaning that all 789s delievered after 2017 would still have BF seats rather then Polaris.


In the words of Randy Jackson, that’s gonna be a no for me, dawg. :lol:


Why no? Wouldn't UA save money buy having all 763/77E/77W/78J configured with Polaris and leave the 752/764/77A/788/789 in IPTE//BF configuration?
 
andz
Posts: 7781
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 10:04 am

There's a United 787 at JNB right now. Nice to see a new tail on the tarmac.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14532
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:58 pm

UA857 wrote:
Back to my question. Could UA convert the 764 into a high-density domestic configuration to replace the 77A? If so UA could keep and reduce the BusinessFirst seats in F and add seats and remove AVOD in Y.


Why would they remove AVOD?
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14532
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:59 pm

UA857 wrote:
codc10 wrote:
UA857 wrote:

What UA should have done to save money was have Polaris installed on all factory built 77Ws and 78Js and existing 763s and 77Es and leave the 752, 764, 77A, 788, and 789 in either IPTE or BusinessFirst configuration. Meaning that all 789s delievered after 2017 would still have BF seats rather then Polaris.


In the words of Randy Jackson, that’s gonna be a no for me, dawg. :lol:


Why no? Wouldn't UA save money buy having all 763/77E/77W/78J configured with Polaris and leave the 752/764/77A/788/789 in IPTE//BF configuration?


Why would you not put Polaris on the 787-9 that are doing your longest routes?
 
UA857
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:41 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:21 pm

STT757 wrote:
UA857 wrote:
codc10 wrote:

In the words of Randy Jackson, that’s gonna be a no for me, dawg. :lol:


Why no? Wouldn't UA save money buy having all 763/77E/77W/78J configured with Polaris and leave the 752/764/77A/788/789 in IPTE//BF configuration?


Why would you not put Polaris on the 787-9 that are doing your longest routes?


Because you have the A350 on order which has better range then the 789.
 
UA857
Posts: 718
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 3:41 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:23 pm

STT757 wrote:
UA857 wrote:
Back to my question. Could UA convert the 764 into a high-density domestic configuration to replace the 77A? If so UA could keep and reduce the BusinessFirst seats in F and add seats and remove AVOD in Y.


Why would they remove AVOD?


Because the 77A doesn't have AVOD in Y.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14532
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:49 pm

UA857 wrote:
STT757 wrote:
UA857 wrote:
Back to my question. Could UA convert the 764 into a high-density domestic configuration to replace the 77A? If so UA could keep and reduce the BusinessFirst seats in F and add seats and remove AVOD in Y.


Why would they remove AVOD?


Because the 77A doesn't have AVOD in Y.


That's because they didn't have them before the conversions, the had the tvs over the aisle.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14532
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 2:51 pm

UA857 wrote:
STT757 wrote:
UA857 wrote:

Why no? Wouldn't UA save money buy having all 763/77E/77W/78J configured with Polaris and leave the 752/764/77A/788/789 in IPTE//BF configuration?


Why would you not put Polaris on the 787-9 that are doing your longest routes?


Because you have the A350 on order which has better range then the 789.


First unless you are talking the ULR, which United has not ordered, they don't have more range. The A350-900 has less range than the 787-9. Also the A350, if it ever does come, is years away.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3357
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:04 pm

The 350-900 seems to fill a small window the 787 doesn't fit - about 30 more seats on flights 10% shorter than 789 and flights 500 nm farther than the 78X.

Comparing to the Wiki shows the 350-900 has just 2,000 more pounds of payload, but weighs 30,000 lbs. (10%) more than the 789. MGTOW vs. EOW indicates the 350-900 can carry about 25,000 pounds more payload plus fuel, in line with the difference in aircraft size. Higher fuel burn?

350-900 holds about 10% more seats, but holds over 10% more fuel. Oddly, thrust is 18% higher, same runway needed, but the range is 10% shorter than 789.

9 across Y in both with 350-900 5 extra inches width or about a half inch per seat.

350-900 and 789 have same LD3/pallet configuration. If seats full, extra 30 people on a 350-900 would reduce cargo lift over 5,000 vs. 789.

So, UA needs the 789 for ULR flights 10% longer than 350-900 can handle.

The question is if UA needs the extra capacity of the 350-900 on routes within its range and above the 500 nm range advantage it has over the 78X.
Note that the 78X has a slightly longer range than the 772ER, which has flown several ULR routes longer than its stated range, including EWR-BOM/HKG or SFO/LAX-SYD for years.
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 4:50 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
The 350-900 seems to fill a small window the 787 doesn't fit - about 30 more seats on flights 10% shorter than 789 and flights 500 nm farther than the 78X.

Comparing to the Wiki shows the 350-900 has just 2,000 more pounds of payload, but weighs 30,000 lbs. (10%) more than the 789. MGTOW vs. EOW indicates the 350-900 can carry about 25,000 pounds more payload plus fuel, in line with the difference in aircraft size. Higher fuel burn?

350-900 holds about 10% more seats, but holds over 10% more fuel. Oddly, thrust is 18% higher, same runway needed, but the range is 10% shorter than 789.

9 across Y in both with 350-900 5 extra inches width or about a half inch per seat.

350-900 and 789 have same LD3/pallet configuration. If seats full, extra 30 people on a 350-900 would reduce cargo lift over 5,000 vs. 789.

So, UA needs the 789 for ULR flights 10% longer than 350-900 can handle.

The question is if UA needs the extra capacity of the 350-900 on routes within its range and above the 500 nm range advantage it has over the 78X.
Note that the 78X has a slightly longer range than the 772ER, which has flown several ULR routes longer than its stated range, including EWR-BOM/HKG or SFO/LAX-SYD for years.


If in fact the 78X is slightly more capable than the 777ER, it would seem to me there are only a handful of flights where the 78X can’t cover the range, and most of them don’t need the additional seats over the 789. BTW, a few of those cited were stretches for the 777ER at certain times of the year I believe
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 5:28 pm

First UA MAX 8 is out on the flight line

Image
https://www.flickr.com/photos/737max-pr ... 223844208/
 
jayunited
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 6:07 pm

gwrudolph wrote:
If in fact the 78X is slightly more capable than the 777ER, it would seem to me there are only a handful of flights where the 78X can’t cover the range, and most of them don’t need the additional seats over the 789. BTW, a few of those cited were stretches for the 777ER at certain times of the year I believe



Pre-pandemic United had a lot more than a handful of routes the 78X couldn't cover do to lack of range. I could name numerous routes out of every sing hub that the 78X would not be able to cover where a 77W, 789, or even a 77E could easily cover.
 
gwrudolph
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:46 pm

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 8:42 pm

jayunited wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:
If in fact the 78X is slightly more capable than the 777ER, it would seem to me there are only a handful of flights where the 78X can’t cover the range, and most of them don’t need the additional seats over the 789. BTW, a few of those cited were stretches for the 777ER at certain times of the year I believe



Pre-pandemic United had a lot more than a handful of routes the 78X couldn't cover do to lack of range. I could name numerous routes out of every sing hub that the 78X would not be able to cover where a 77W, 789, or even a 77E could easily cover.


Ok so then the 787x is not as capable as the 777ER. So maybe there is a place still for the 359s as the 777ERs are phased out and the 77Ws get older toward the end of the 2020s

I do, however, believe Boeing may tweak the later model 787Xs to squeeze out a little more range, much like they did with the 777ERs
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1645
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 9:11 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
The 350-900 seems to fill a small window the 787 doesn't fit - about 30 more seats on flights 10% shorter than 789 and flights 500 nm farther than the 78X.

Comparing to the Wiki shows the 350-900 has just 2,000 more pounds of payload, but weighs 30,000 lbs. (10%) more than the 789. MGTOW vs. EOW indicates the 350-900 can carry about 25,000 pounds more payload plus fuel, in line with the difference in aircraft size. Higher fuel burn?

350-900 holds about 10% more seats, but holds over 10% more fuel. Oddly, thrust is 18% higher, same runway needed, but the range is 10% shorter than 789.

9 across Y in both with 350-900 5 extra inches width or about a half inch per seat.

350-900 and 789 have same LD3/pallet configuration. If seats full, extra 30 people on a 350-900 would reduce cargo lift over 5,000 vs. 789.

So, UA needs the 789 for ULR flights 10% longer than 350-900 can handle.

The question is if UA needs the extra capacity of the 350-900 on routes within its range and above the 500 nm range advantage it has over the 78X.
Note that the 78X has a slightly longer range than the 772ER, which has flown several ULR routes longer than its stated range, including EWR-BOM/HKG or SFO/LAX-SYD for years.

The question is how do the 789, 359 and 77E (GE) compare when not pressed to the limits of its range. Lets say IAH-EZE, SFO-NRT or ORD-FRA? Can the 359 carry the extra 30 pax and the extra cargo over the 789, and do it more fuel efficiently than the 77E? I think there will be routes that the 359 hits the sweet spot, and routes that it is a wash with the 789 or 78X, but with a widebody fleet as large as UA's, they have the flexibility to have this many fleet types, when they trade 77E's for 359's. Most importantly in my mind is after 787 groundings, 737Max groundings, and now PW777 groundings, hopefully all airlines are learning the pitfalls of putting all your eggs in one basket. Even if UA could fly every route Intl with a combo of 788, 789, and 78X, if they had a PW type problem with the GenX engines, they would be completely screwed.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1277
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

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

Sat Jun 05, 2021 11:51 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
First UA MAX 8 is out on the flight line

Image
https://www.flickr.com/photos/737max-pr ... 223844208/


Did this one roll off the line with all of the MCAS and wiring changes incorporated or is there still work to do on this one?
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 12:18 am

SFOtoORD wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
First UA MAX 8 is out on the flight line

Image
https://www.flickr.com/photos/737max-pr ... 223844208/


Did this one roll off the line with all of the MCAS and wiring changes incorporated or is there still work to do on this one?

I would imagine all of that would be standardized into production as soon as those fixes were available
 
avi8
Posts: 1376
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:36 am

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 12:40 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
First UA MAX 8 is out on the flight line

Image
https://www.flickr.com/photos/737max-pr ... 223844208/


How many more MAX aircraft is UA expected to get this year and in 2022?
 
airplanedriver6
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:27 pm

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 1:06 pm

avi8 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
How many more MAX aircraft is UA expected to get this year and in 2022?

21 (total) in 2021
40 in 2022
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14532
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 1:17 pm

airplanedriver6 wrote:
avi8 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
How many more MAX aircraft is UA expected to get this year and in 2022?

21 (total) in 2021
40 in 2022


With no planned retirements 61 aircraft by the end of 2022 is a huge increase in United’s fleet.
 
avi8
Posts: 1376
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:36 am

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 1:27 pm

airplanedriver6 wrote:
avi8 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
How many more MAX aircraft is UA expected to get this year and in 2022?

21 (total) in 2021
40 in 2022



Last question I apologize, how many more MAXs yet to be delivered this year? I assume the deliveries are a mix of 737-9 and 737-8 (MAX of course).
 
NZ321
Posts: 1430
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 1:34 pm

gwrudolph wrote:
calpsafltskeds wrote:
The 350-900 seems to fill a small window the 787 doesn't fit - about 30 more seats on flights 10% shorter than 789 and flights 500 nm farther than the 78X.

Comparing to the Wiki shows the 350-900 has just 2,000 more pounds of payload, but weighs 30,000 lbs. (10%) more than the 789. MGTOW vs. EOW indicates the 350-900 can carry about 25,000 pounds more payload plus fuel, in line with the difference in aircraft size. Higher fuel burn?

350-900 holds about 10% more seats, but holds over 10% more fuel. Oddly, thrust is 18% higher, same runway needed, but the range is 10% shorter than 789.

9 across Y in both with 350-900 5 extra inches width or about a half inch per seat.

350-900 and 789 have same LD3/pallet configuration. If seats full, extra 30 people on a 350-900 would reduce cargo lift over 5,000 vs. 789.

So, UA needs the 789 for ULR flights 10% longer than 350-900 can handle.

The question is if UA needs the extra capacity of the 350-900 on routes within its range and above the 500 nm range advantage it has over the 78X.
Note that the 78X has a slightly longer range than the 772ER, which has flown several ULR routes longer than its stated range, including EWR-BOM/HKG or SFO/LAX-SYD for years.


If in fact the 78X is slightly more capable than the 777ER, it would seem to me there are only a handful of flights where the 78X can’t cover the range, and most of them don’t need the additional seats over the 789. BTW, a few of those cited were stretches for the 777ER at certain times of the year I believe


I'm not sure this is a factually incorrect statement. The 78X is not a more capable aircraft than the 777ER - unless we are talking passenger uplift. There are dozens of trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic routes where the 78X simply doesn't work in its current form on routes previously flown by the 777-200ER. For example, AKL-IAH, AKL-EZE, SYD-LAX. It just simply doesn't do the job because it doesn't have the payload-range element. Airlines know this already. Hence Boeing's hint at an PIP connected to the NZ 78X order, which has not materialised. This may be because the 78X is at the edge of it's design specs. There are other threads in this forum which suggest further payload range increase on the 78X will be very difficult - it's clear the 78X is not a true 777-ER replacement and certainly well short of 77W.

Second, the A359 is significantly more capable today than it's early rendition (AFAIK all PIP for A350-ULR are now standard on all A350-900 including incorporation of the additional wing-twist.). This means this aircraft is every bit the equal if not more, than the 789 in its current form. Boeing has also intimated there may be a PIP for the 789 at the same time as the 78X PIP but, again, this is just talk. Nothing to suggest this is here imminently. We will have to wait and see.

So I wouldn't be placing my bets yet on what will unfold, although I do agree that it seems improbable that UA will receive the A359 in its current form. I guess as the pandemic clock ticks and long haul international travel still doesn't rebound as many predicted - the problem is not urgent, regardless of UA's present woes with their PW 777s.
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 2:32 pm

andz wrote:
There's a United 787 at JNB right now. Nice to see a new tail on the tarmac.


UA just launched EWR-JNB on the 789. Right now, the only airline flying nonstop to South Africa from the US. SAA is out of the market, and Delta's triangle route from ATL to JNB and CPT isn't operating yet.
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 2:35 pm

UA857 wrote:
STT757 wrote:
UA857 wrote:

Why no? Wouldn't UA save money buy having all 763/77E/77W/78J configured with Polaris and leave the 752/764/77A/788/789 in IPTE//BF configuration?


Why would you not put Polaris on the 787-9 that are doing your longest routes?


Because you have the A350 on order which has better range then the 789.


The standard A350 does not have more range than the 789. The A350-ULR does. Two different A350 models. I am not sure UA will ever take delivery of the A350. They do need a 777-200ER replacement, but I strongly suspect the A350 order which has been kicked down the road since the mid-2000s, when they were ordered by PMUA as a 747-400 replacement aircraft) will be repackaged into an A320 family replacement order. UA's 747 replacement was the 77W. Those birds are quite new.
 
airplanedriver6
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:27 pm

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 3:02 pm

avi8 wrote:
airplanedriver6 wrote:
avi8 wrote:

21 (total) in 2021
40 in 2022



Last question I apologize, how many more MAXs yet to be delivered this year? I assume the deliveries are a mix of 737-9 and 737-8 (MAX of course).

The UAL Fleet Website should have what you are looking for:

https://sites.google.com/site/unitedfle ... t-tracking
 
EssentialBusDC
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 3:20 pm

ContinentalEWR wrote:
UA857 wrote:
STT757 wrote:

Why would you not put Polaris on the 787-9 that are doing your longest routes?


Because you have the A350 on order which has better range then the 789.


The standard A350 does not have more range than the 789. The A350-ULR does. Two different A350 models. I am not sure UA will ever take delivery of the A350. They do need a 777-200ER replacement, but I strongly suspect the A350 order which has been kicked down the road since the mid-2000s, when they were ordered by PMUA as a 747-400 replacement aircraft) will be repackaged into an A320 family replacement order. UA's 747 replacement was the 77W. Those birds are quite new.

Actually it does if you read the above pips to the 350, to include a higher takeoff weight (280T).

A “normal” 350 is flying SIN-NYC for Singapore.
 
ILikeTrains
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 3:18 am

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

Sun Jun 06, 2021 4:51 pm

Yea the A350 is a lot more capable than some on here give it credit. Its ACAPS pdf shows it can haul 53T about 500nm further than a 787-9. Ive heard somewhere on here (I think from Zeke?) that the ACAPS page shows the payload-range chart for the ULR, and the actual max payload is 60T. That would make the A359 basically a 1-1 replacement for the 77E.

78X is the perfect plane for TATL from ORD/EWR, or on longer routes when only needing to haul pax (SFO-AKL).

789, A359 and 77W all can mostly cover the same routes in terms of range (the 77W probably being the most deficient here) but will probably offer a nice stepped approach going up in capability as needed.
 
Cmac787
Posts: 265
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:15 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 12:28 am

Looks like all but 1 77E are back in service.
 
User avatar
adamblang
Posts: 1404
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 5:47 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 12:53 am

I assume this is referring to only the GE 77Es and not the PW 77Es. My immediate reaction was "wait, when did the fan blade issue get resolved? how did I miss that?" but a quick check of Flight Aware shows no PW 77Es moving since early April.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 1:23 am

Appears UA is wasting no time in getting the MAX 8 in service, it rolled off of the line just a few days ago.
Details on configuration and routes below.

The picture mentions seatback AVOD and PDE. Looks like the rumors were true

UNITED's Boeing 737 MAX 8 to enter revenue service on 15JUL21, Houston – Newark and Houston – Las Vegas.

Configuration is C16Y150, identical to Boeing 737-800

Image
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 1346071552
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 17/photo/1
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14532
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 1:35 am

ikolkyo wrote:
Appears UA is wasting no time in getting the MAX 8 in service, it rolled off of the line just a few days ago.
Details on configuration and routes below.

The picture mentions seatback AVOD and PDE. Looks like the rumors were true

UNITED's Boeing 737 MAX 8 to enter revenue service on 15JUL21, Houston – Newark and Houston – Las Vegas.

Configuration is C16Y150, identical to Boeing 737-800

Image
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 1346071552
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 17/photo/1


That pretty much confirms the pivot back to seatback entertainment on domestic narrow bodies.
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 1008
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 1:51 am

ikolkyo wrote:
Appears UA is wasting no time in getting the MAX 8 in service, it rolled off of the line just a few days ago.
Details on configuration and routes below.

The picture mentions seatback AVOD and PDE. Looks like the rumors were true

UNITED's Boeing 737 MAX 8 to enter revenue service on 15JUL21, Houston – Newark and Houston – Las Vegas.

Configuration is C16Y150, identical to Boeing 737-800

Image
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 1346071552
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 17/photo/1


Very excited to see this! It makes me wonder if they will make a public announcement regarding future narrowbody AVOD plans for the rest of the fleet when the 7M8s start revenue service.
 
ContinentalEWR
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 2:50 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 2:42 am

EssentialBusDC wrote:
ContinentalEWR wrote:
UA857 wrote:

Because you have the A350 on order which has better range then the 789.


The standard A350 does not have more range than the 789. The A350-ULR does. Two different A350 models. I am not sure UA will ever take delivery of the A350. They do need a 777-200ER replacement, but I strongly suspect the A350 order which has been kicked down the road since the mid-2000s, when they were ordered by PMUA as a 747-400 replacement aircraft) will be repackaged into an A320 family replacement order. UA's 747 replacement was the 77W. Those birds are quite new.

Actually it does if you read the above pips to the 350, to include a higher takeoff weight (280T).

A “normal” 350 is flying SIN-NYC for Singapore.


A normal 350 may be flying JFK-SIN (although a dummy booking reveals it is actually the ULR for the most part) because the loads are extremely light, pax wise there's no real issue. What normally flies between the NY Area and SIN outside the pandemic is the ULR.
 
UA444
Posts: 3112
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 2:47 am

[photoid][/photoid]
STT757 wrote:
UA857 wrote:
STT757 wrote:

Why would they remove AVOD?


Because the 77A doesn't have AVOD in Y.


That's because they didn't have them before the conversions, the had the tvs over the aisle.

Actually only the 6 domestic ones N210UA-N215UA had TVs. The rest had nose to tail AVOD and for some stupid reason they ripped it all out.
 
SATexan
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 6:49 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 3:33 am

Acey559 wrote:
FWIW SFO-BLR has been pushed back until September. Rumor is that it could launch sooner but highly unlikely. Hopefully things in India improve soon.

I see that SFO-BLR is available for booking from October 1st. Can you tell me if it is indeed September? I have friends that want to be on the inaugural whenever that may be!
 
User avatar
Acey559
Posts: 1476
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:30 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:03 am

SATexan wrote:
Acey559 wrote:
FWIW SFO-BLR has been pushed back until September. Rumor is that it could launch sooner but highly unlikely. Hopefully things in India improve soon.

I see that SFO-BLR is available for booking from October 1st. Can you tell me if it is indeed September? I have friends that want to be on the inaugural whenever that may be!


So far September is the plan, but understandably the situation is pretty fluid. I don’t have much inside info other than having a good friend who works at WHQ, but hopefully someone here will be able to give you solid info when more is available. We pilots are always the last to know! :D
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 2027
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:34 am

STT757 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
Appears UA is wasting no time in getting the MAX 8 in service, it rolled off of the line just a few days ago.
Details on configuration and routes below.

The picture mentions seatback AVOD and PDE. Looks like the rumors were true

UNITED's Boeing 737 MAX 8 to enter revenue service on 15JUL21, Houston – Newark and Houston – Las Vegas.

Configuration is C16Y150, identical to Boeing 737-800

Image
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 1346071552
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 17/photo/1


That pretty much confirms the pivot back to seatback entertainment on domestic narrow bodies.


Excellent news. I was skeptical they would actually do it, but it’s great to see. This is another good example of how UA is a completely different airline from what it was six years ago.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4323
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 9:41 am

RyanairGuru wrote:
VC10er wrote:
One question that has popped into my head: moving forward as UA decides what to do about HD aircraft is that the original “forward/backward” seats which we all know are really outdated and NOT competitive. They are tight with ZERO storage space. (To the seat’s credit; when they launched, no other US airline had lie flats in business class, at the time I recall being super impressed with them. It was very transparent that UA must have briefed Pentagram for a 1 for 1 replacement of the previous grey lounge chair with a “lie flat”. With that restriction, there was no way to make them less tight. But they are actually very comfortable for sleeping- so long as nobody needed to go to the Lav or keep a carry-on with them) for a hot minute they were great!

The Diamond seat is dated too, but not that dated. My question is: Could UA use the Diamond seats coming off the 789’s for the First Class seat on the HD aircraft, be it a PW 777 or 764 (which already have them) as they would be a nice step up from the “catacomb seats”? Or, would they lose too many F lie flats?

Plus, the Diamond seat with Polaris upholstery (as seen on some of the spruced up 752’s) actually look rather nice (an would be even better with a refurbished bulkhead and entryway sign, etc) Then the HD ac would not look like an emergency evacuation aircraft! And it would provide United with so much more brand consistency with just 2 different F lie-flats.


My personal opinion is that the Diamond seats will hang around on the 77A or its replacement, be that a sub fleet of 77E or 764.

For Hawaii and seasonal Europe leisure markets there is a much lower percentage of single travellers. Those routes have more vacationing couples, even families. For that market the Diamond seats in pairs are quite good. It’s why Hawaiian Airlines went with seats in pairs even after the market was moving towards direct access single seats, for Hawaii pairs work better. Single travellers can choose an aisle seat in the centre block and still have aisle access without someone climbing over them.

For the HD sub fleet I therefore don’t see the value in paying big bucks for Polaris seats. In a market wheee Diamond is good enough, the return on investment probably isn’t there. If the HD frames are limited to Hawaii, domestic, and maybe secondary Europe, then the product will be fine IMHO.


I couldn’t agree more. I cannot see all those hundreds of Diamond seats being disposed of, maybe some could be sold? But isn’t that version of the Diamond seat on a 789 a “bit” updated, seat controls moved from the side to the top (unfortunately exactly where I put my elbow!) But, by virtue of being NEW, they do look so much better than much older versions, and in turn make the cabin look more contemporary (intentionally avoiding the word “modern”)

My primary question is, how many seats does a HD 772 lose to install newer Diamond seats? Would they lose too many F or Y seats by scrapping the old “forward/backward” lie-flat First? Can UA manage losing X amount of seats on an HD 772?

For consistency sake, I would hope to see UNITED with 3 lie-flat seats:
Polars
Diamond*
The new NB lie-flat

Last question: for all the 77W’s and a handful of 763’s, will United keep the beautiful, sculpted and lit bulkheads? Or will they remove them for the pain silver wall paper?

United never BRANDED their cabins (apart from Saul Bass’ grey sky with orange, red & blue abstract sunset), but with all the newness and innovation UA should brand the front bulkhead…as nicely as many other airlines ex: Lufthansa, Swiss, Cathay (British?) and many more.
The CURRENT silver plaque does not look nearly as proud, it’s just type to a pax (UA lacks a strong symbol and the “Globe-in-Box” is not a great “symbol” - until I saw my first 77W. That blew me away! What a gorgeous cabin! NO MISTAKING “THIS IS THE NEW UNITED” and the best use of the 1/4 globe.

*a last thought about HD aircraft Diamond seat. They should get Polaris upholstery, but if the sides of the headrests got a new “United Color” (ala: purple for PE) a new color (I vote for the turquoise) for a HD First cabin would go a long way to offset the potential disappointment of seeing an old seat vs Polaris. Plus set a great mood for Hawaii!
 
jagraham
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 10:01 am

GoSharks wrote:
flyer56 wrote:
jagraham wrote:

UA doesn't do much ULH. So the best thing for UA is the 789. And if you need more than 270 pax is the 78J. There just arent that many routes in the UA network which need more plane. Besides, the 778 is a better replacement for the 77W; if it ever shows up.


UA does not do much ULH compared to what airlines? Certainly more than DL or AA, but even if you look at international airlines pre-COVID who was flying more long haul flights?

Of the 30 longest flights in the world, UA operates 4 of them - the same number that QR and SQ operate. Only EK operates more, with 5.

This is not including UA's SFO-BLR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_f ... e_distance)


I was speaking on a percentage basis. UA does 4 of the 30 longest flights. That requires 12 planes. And those 12 were 789s.

UA doesn't do the kind of flying that requires a 779. UA has done fine with the 77W, 78J, and hi density 772As. Where they fly over 15 hours, they don't carry 400+ passengers.

For airlines like QR and SQ, longhaul and ultralonghaul is a higher percentage of the total.
 
User avatar
KLMatSJC
Posts: 877
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 1:16 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:32 am

Anyone know if the narrowbodies will get Channel 9 then?
 
jayunited
Posts: 3608
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 12:13 pm

SunsetLimited wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
Appears UA is wasting no time in getting the MAX 8 in service, it rolled off of the line just a few days ago.
Details on configuration and routes below.

The picture mentions seatback AVOD and PDE. Looks like the rumors were true

UNITED's Boeing 737 MAX 8 to enter revenue service on 15JUL21, Houston – Newark and Houston – Las Vegas.

Configuration is C16Y150, identical to Boeing 737-800

Image
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 1346071552
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 17/photo/1


Very excited to see this! It makes me wonder if they will make a public announcement regarding future narrowbody AVOD plans for the rest of the fleet when the 7M8s start revenue service.


Exactly this is great news for United customers the apparent reversal of this policy.
Hopefully there will be some announcement starting with United installing setback AVOD on all of our MAX 9s that we've already taken delivery of, followed by the installation of setback AVOD on the remainder of the narrowbody fleet.
 
ILikeTrains
Posts: 111
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 3:18 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 12:27 pm

VC10er wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
VC10er wrote:
One question that has popped into my head: moving forward as UA decides what to do about HD aircraft is that the original “forward/backward” seats which we all know are really outdated and NOT competitive. They are tight with ZERO storage space. (To the seat’s credit; when they launched, no other US airline had lie flats in business class, at the time I recall being super impressed with them. It was very transparent that UA must have briefed Pentagram for a 1 for 1 replacement of the previous grey lounge chair with a “lie flat”. With that restriction, there was no way to make them less tight. But they are actually very comfortable for sleeping- so long as nobody needed to go to the Lav or keep a carry-on with them) for a hot minute they were great!

The Diamond seat is dated too, but not that dated. My question is: Could UA use the Diamond seats coming off the 789’s for the First Class seat on the HD aircraft, be it a PW 777 or 764 (which already have them) as they would be a nice step up from the “catacomb seats”? Or, would they lose too many F lie flats?

Plus, the Diamond seat with Polaris upholstery (as seen on some of the spruced up 752’s) actually look rather nice (an would be even better with a refurbished bulkhead and entryway sign, etc) Then the HD ac would not look like an emergency evacuation aircraft! And it would provide United with so much more brand consistency with just 2 different F lie-flats.


My personal opinion is that the Diamond seats will hang around on the 77A or its replacement, be that a sub fleet of 77E or 764.

For Hawaii and seasonal Europe leisure markets there is a much lower percentage of single travellers. Those routes have more vacationing couples, even families. For that market the Diamond seats in pairs are quite good. It’s why Hawaiian Airlines went with seats in pairs even after the market was moving towards direct access single seats, for Hawaii pairs work better. Single travellers can choose an aisle seat in the centre block and still have aisle access without someone climbing over them.

For the HD sub fleet I therefore don’t see the value in paying big bucks for Polaris seats. In a market wheee Diamond is good enough, the return on investment probably isn’t there. If the HD frames are limited to Hawaii, domestic, and maybe secondary Europe, then the product will be fine IMHO.


My primary question is, how many seats does a HD 772 lose to install newer Diamond seats? Would they lose too many F or Y seats by scrapping the old “forward/backward” lie-flat First? Can UA manage losing X amount of seats on an HD 772?


Only a few seats would be lost if they went to diamond. The Diamond configuration of the GE 77E’s had 26 Diamond seats ahead of door 2, compared to 28 seats for the IPTE PW 77E’s and 32 for the 77A’s.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 3357
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 1:34 pm

The difference is lavs and galleys on each configuration.
Between Doors 1 and 2
Polaris has 32 seats, with no lavs or galleys
Diamond GE had 26 seats, but there were 3 lavs, a closet and a galley
HD 772A 28 lie flat 8 across, with 2 lavs and a massive galley in the center
HD 772ER 32 lie flat 8 across, with no lavs and a galley (no lavs gains zero seats vs. 772A)

So, its a bit hard to know how many Diamond seats would fit into certain aircraft without more details on lav and galley positioning down to the the inch. But, looking at the CO Diamond config, if lavs and galley were pulled from the area, it could yield either 30, 32 or 36 seats, which compares to 32 Polaris. I'm sure UA had Polaris measured to the inch to fit 32 between Doors 1 and 2.

The IPTE config had no lavs between Doors 1 and 2, and maybe with galley relocation 24 Diamond plus 2 or 3 rows of PP could fit without touching more than removing a center section of 4 Y seats to move the galley back about 30 inches. That could net 24 Polaris, 16 (or possibly 24) PP seats plus 326 in E+/Y, total 366 or 370, vs. current HD seating of 28/336=364 or 32/330=366.
If 30 Diamond were in the same space maybe just one PP row could fit.

Unfortunately the 772A fleet has a set of lavs between Doors 1 and 2, limiting options without costly removal.
 
jagraham
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 4:21 pm

VC10er wrote:
RyanairGuru wrote:
VC10er wrote:
One question that has popped into my head: moving forward as UA decides what to do about HD aircraft is that the original “forward/backward” seats which we all know are really outdated and NOT competitive. They are tight with ZERO storage space. (To the seat’s credit; when they launched, no other US airline had lie flats in business class, at the time I recall being super impressed with them. It was very transparent that UA must have briefed Pentagram for a 1 for 1 replacement of the previous grey lounge chair with a “lie flat”. With that restriction, there was no way to make them less tight. But they are actually very comfortable for sleeping- so long as nobody needed to go to the Lav or keep a carry-on with them) for a hot minute they were great!

The Diamond seat is dated too, but not that dated. My question is: Could UA use the Diamond seats coming off the 789’s for the First Class seat on the HD aircraft, be it a PW 777 or 764 (which already have them) as they would be a nice step up from the “catacomb seats”? Or, would they lose too many F lie flats?

Plus, the Diamond seat with Polaris upholstery (as seen on some of the spruced up 752’s) actually look rather nice (an would be even better with a refurbished bulkhead and entryway sign, etc) Then the HD ac would not look like an emergency evacuation aircraft! And it would provide United with so much more brand consistency with just 2 different F lie-flats.


My personal opinion is that the Diamond seats will hang around on the 77A or its replacement, be that a sub fleet of 77E or 764.

For Hawaii and seasonal Europe leisure markets there is a much lower percentage of single travellers. Those routes have more vacationing couples, even families. For that market the Diamond seats in pairs are quite good. It’s why Hawaiian Airlines went with seats in pairs even after the market was moving towards direct access single seats, for Hawaii pairs work better. Single travellers can choose an aisle seat in the centre block and still have aisle access without someone climbing over them.

For the HD sub fleet I therefore don’t see the value in paying big bucks for Polaris seats. In a market wheee Diamond is good enough, the return on investment probably isn’t there. If the HD frames are limited to Hawaii, domestic, and maybe secondary Europe, then the product will be fine IMHO.


I couldn’t agree more. I cannot see all those hundreds of Diamond seats being disposed of, maybe some could be sold? But isn’t that version of the Diamond seat on a 789 a “bit” updated, seat controls moved from the side to the top (unfortunately exactly where I put my elbow!) But, by virtue of being NEW, they do look so much better than much older versions, and in turn make the cabin look more contemporary (intentionally avoiding the word “modern”)

My primary question is, how many seats does a HD 772 lose to install newer Diamond seats? Would they lose too many F or Y seats by scrapping the old “forward/backward” lie-flat First? Can UA manage losing X amount of seats on an HD 772?

For consistency sake, I would hope to see UNITED with 3 lie-flat seats:
Polars
Diamond*
The new NB lie-flat

Last question: for all the 77W’s and a handful of 763’s, will United keep the beautiful, sculpted and lit bulkheads? Or will they remove them for the pain silver wall paper?

United never BRANDED their cabins (apart from Saul Bass’ grey sky with orange, red & blue abstract sunset), but with all the newness and innovation UA should brand the front bulkhead…as nicely as many other airlines ex: Lufthansa, Swiss, Cathay (British?) and many more.
The CURRENT silver plaque does not look nearly as proud, it’s just type to a pax (UA lacks a strong symbol and the “Globe-in-Box” is not a great “symbol” - until I saw my first 77W. That blew me away! What a gorgeous cabin! NO MISTAKING “THIS IS THE NEW UNITED” and the best use of the 1/4 globe.

*a last thought about HD aircraft Diamond seat. They should get Polaris upholstery, but if the sides of the headrests got a new “United Color” (ala: purple for PE) a new color (I vote for the turquoise) for a HD First cabin would go a long way to offset the potential disappointment of seeing an old seat vs Polaris. Plus set a great mood for Hawaii!


I think most of us pundits would agree that a HD 772 with BE Diamond seats would be worth the loss of seats. But UA mgmt doesn't think so. The one 77E that was converted to HD (UA had planned 4 before COVID) had the BE seats ripped out for the same IPTE seats the 19 772As have :(
 
codc10
Posts: 3218
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 4:27 pm

jagraham wrote:
I think most of us pundits would agree that a HD 772 with BE Diamond seats would be worth the loss of seats. But UA mgmt doesn't think so. The one 77E that was converted to HD (UA had planned 4 before COVID) had the BE seats ripped out for the same IPTE seats the 19 772As have :(


That one was a 777-222ER which had previously been in the IPTE configuration.
 
atrude777
Posts: 4497
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 11:23 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:03 pm

jayunited wrote:
SunsetLimited wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
Appears UA is wasting no time in getting the MAX 8 in service, it rolled off of the line just a few days ago.
Details on configuration and routes below.

The picture mentions seatback AVOD and PDE. Looks like the rumors were true


Image
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 1346071552
https://twitter.com/theaeronetwork/stat ... 17/photo/1


Very excited to see this! It makes me wonder if they will make a public announcement regarding future narrowbody AVOD plans for the rest of the fleet when the 7M8s start revenue service.


Exactly this is great news for United customers the apparent reversal of this policy.
Hopefully there will be some announcement starting with United installing setback AVOD on all of our MAX 9s that we've already taken delivery of, followed by the installation of setback AVOD on the remainder of the narrowbody fleet.


I am STILL not seeing a confirmation of this from United (Internally) or on the UA's Website.

I see the screenshot, but when you go to the 737-800 in Aircraft Information, there's no Max 8 Seat Map.

I did United.com-->Travel Information--> Airport and Aircraft Info--> Aircraft-->737-800 Only 3 versions, no Max 8....

Alex
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

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

Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:05 pm

atrude777 wrote:
jayunited wrote:
SunsetLimited wrote:

Very excited to see this! It makes me wonder if they will make a public announcement regarding future narrowbody AVOD plans for the rest of the fleet when the 7M8s start revenue service.


Exactly this is great news for United customers the apparent reversal of this policy.
Hopefully there will be some announcement starting with United installing setback AVOD on all of our MAX 9s that we've already taken delivery of, followed by the installation of setback AVOD on the remainder of the narrowbody fleet.


I am STILL not seeing a confirmation of this from United (Internally) or on the UA's Website.

I see the screenshot, but when you go to the 737-800 in Aircraft Information, there's no Max 8 Seat Map.

I did United.com-->Travel Information--> Airport and Aircraft Info--> Aircraft-->737-800 Only 3 versions, no Max 8....

Alex


Its been removed, but this photo is directly from the website. Looks like it wasn't suppose to get out.

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