United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q2 2021

atcsundevil · Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:05 pm

This is Q2 2021 of the United Fleet/Network/Discussion Thread.

Link to Q1 viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1456221&p=22581179#p22581179

Link to the last post in Q1 for quick reference viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1456221&p=22721029#p22721029

✈️ atcsundevil

LAXintl · Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:26 pm

Regarding comments about United flying less than AA, lets remember todays market reality of crappy leisure fares and lack of business travel.

Flying for the sake of flying might only increase losses. Yes it can generate short-term cash flow as someone like AA needs to cover its heavier debt burden, but throwing capacity into an already terribly priced market is not exactly a recipe for profitability.

Imo, let United look to manage capacity prudently with an eye on running flying that is atleast breakeven, and not chase market-share when it really does not pay to do so.

Also let's not forget, we might be on the cusp of another virus wave, as COVID cases rise in more than half the states and starting to approaching numbers seen during last summers surge that could lead to another set of restrictions, which means the capacity being thrown out for periods like May, might be for not.

gwrudolph · Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:34 pm

Risky strategy IMO.

The customer doesn’t care about all of these reasons. AA has more service and better prices, I book with them. I sign up for their FF program. I use them again as a result. Oops, bye bye United.

Moreover, if they don’t grandfather status for another year, all the more reason for the United loyal to move over to AA as well.

It really is the same old way of managing through crisis at United—recoil. Interestingly enough, no matter who is running the show, it is always the same reaction.

calpsafltskeds · Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:38 pm

Regarding the below from the 1st Qtr thread, Google Earth shows a few hangers at Mobile Downtown (KBFM) and some airbus USAir aircraft that appear in the scrapping process. Also, an Ex-UA 752, no FedEx is shown in the painting process. Maybe N851UA is getting paint - I can't see any paint activity since the merger re-paints.

"Anyone know why N851UA is scheduled to ferry to BFM today as UA2750? 2750 would indicate maintenance, I presume, but I don't recall UA having any A319 maintenance work done at BFM in the past https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N85 ... /KIAH/KBFM"

Wneast · Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:45 pm

Does anyone see a Newark to BOI or Dulles flight happening in the future ?

LAXintl · Wed Mar 31, 2021 6:48 pm

Here is photo of new LAX hangar complex coming together.

https://i.ibb.co/QX7bHXh/2021-03-31-114519.png

Once complete, United will consolidate all its LAX techops on the eastside of the field and vacate the former CO complex on the westside.

LAXdude1023 · Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:18 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Regarding comments about United flying less than AA, lets remember todays market reality of crappy leisure fares and lack of business travel.

Flying for the sake of flying might only increase losses. Yes it can generate short-term cash flow as someone like AA needs to cover its heavier debt burden, but throwing capacity into an already terribly priced market is not exactly a recipe for profitability.

Imo, let United look to manage capacity prudently with an eye on running flying that is atleast breakeven, and not chase market-share when it really does not pay to do so.

Also let's not forget, we might be on the cusp of another virus wave, as COVID cases rise in more than half the states and starting to approaching numbers seen during last summers surge that could lead to another set of restrictions, which means the capacity being thrown out for periods like May, might be for not.

Two things:

1) It’s not going to be like last summer. Too many people have been vaccinated and the demographic fueling the surge are people under 50 which has kept hospitals in decent shape. People fully immunized are only exceptionally rarely becoming reinfected.

2) The airlines are following the numbers and the money. Pandemic or not, if people are flying, that’s business for them. Maybe California would shut down again if they decided to, but no matter what happens with case loads, places like Texas and Florida definitely will not.

MIflyer12 · Wed Mar 31, 2021 7:44 pm

gwrudolph wrote:
Risky strategy IMO.

The customer doesn’t care about all of these reasons. AA has more service and better prices, I book with them.

LAXdude1023 wrote:
2) The airlines are following the numbers and the money. Pandemic or not, if people are flying, that’s business for them.

You two really have offered nothing to refute LAXintl's argument. Carriers need planes full enough - at avg fares high enough - to cover costs. There were plenty of years 2001-2010 where AA and UA (and NW and DL...) flew lots of people and still lost money. The mantra for the legacies 2011-2109 was 'capacity control.' A few carriers have clearly lost that. Look at yields when 1Q earnings come out in 2-3 weeks. I predict AA will not be at the top of that list.

That jet fuel at $0.42/gallon from April '20 is long gone. Prices have been on a steady upward trajectory for five months and are approaching 2019 averages.

https://ycharts.com/indicators/gulf_coa ... spot_price

Flying more doesn't always mean more income.

LAXdude1023 · Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:22 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:
Risky strategy IMO.

The customer doesn’t care about all of these reasons. AA has more service and better prices, I book with them.

LAXdude1023 wrote:
2) The airlines are following the numbers and the money. Pandemic or not, if people are flying, that’s business for them.

You two really have offered nothing to refute LAXintl's argument. Carriers need planes full enough - at avg fares high enough - to cover costs. There were plenty of years 2001-2010 where AA and UA (and NW and DL...) flew lots of people and still lost money. The mantra for the legacies 2011-2109 was 'capacity control.' A few carriers have clearly lost that. Look at yields when 1Q earnings come out in 2-3 weeks. I predict AA will not be at the top of that list.

That jet fuel at $0.42/gallon from April '20 is long gone. Prices have been on a steady upward trajectory for five months and are approaching 2019 averages.

https://ycharts.com/indicators/gulf_coa ... spot_price

Flying more doesn't always mean more income.

My main point was in regard to LAXintl's argument about cases surges. I explained why we cant view surges and their reactions the same way.

As for the 2nd point, were not in the same place we were last decade. UA is following the trail of what is working and adding capacity where it sees demand. Right now, that appears to be DEN and IAH. The airlines are all doing the same thing. Chasing the business where they find it. Right now, were not in the time period where we could divide low yielding business from high yielding business because the goal is to get people in seats regardless. Its more of a low revenue vs. no revenue situation. No one is going to make any money for a while.

UPlog · Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:38 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
Its more of a low revenue vs. no revenue situation. No one is going to make any money for a while.

If the added revenue does not cover your variable cost, you end up even deeper in the red.

Sometimes its better just not sell something, or fly the flight if it does not generate the revenue to cover its cost.

If you believe airlines and analyst, it was practicing capacity discipline across the industry that helped it generate record earnings the last decade.

Imo, the only ones that can chase such traffic are the low-cost producers - not AA, DL or UA with their high legacy cost base.

From what we hear, United believes it has reached an equilibrium where it can become cash breakeven this month. Good for them.

intotheair · Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:45 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
Pandemic or not, if people are flying, that’s business for them. Maybe California would shut down again if they decided to, but no matter what happens with case loads, places like Texas and Florida definitely will not.

That’s not going to happen again in California. The case rates in the state are among the lowest in the country, and Newsom’s recall election is a certainty. There’s no public health or political will to lockdown again.

LAXdude1023 · Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:48 pm

UPlog wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
Its more of a low revenue vs. no revenue situation. No one is going to make any money for a while.

If the added revenue does not cover your variable cost, you end up even deeper in the red.

Sometimes its better just not sell something, or fly the flight if it does not generate the revenue to cover its cost.

If you believe airlines and analyst, it was practicing capacity discipline across the industry that helped it generate record earnings the last decade.

Imo, the only ones that can chase such traffic are the low-cost producers - not AA, DL or UA with their high legacy cost base.

From what we hear, United believes it has reached an equilibrium where it can become cash breakeven this month. Good for them.

Yes. Im not disagreeing with UA's approach to this. They could probably be a little more aggressive, but theyve largely been sitting out the pi$$ing matches that DL, AA, and WN have gotten into and I say bravo to that.

LAXdude1023 · Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:49 pm

intotheair wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
Pandemic or not, if people are flying, that’s business for them. Maybe California would shut down again if they decided to, but no matter what happens with case loads, places like Texas and Florida definitely will not.

That’s not going to happen again in California. The case rates in the state are among the lowest in the country, and Newsom’s recall election is a certainty. There’s no public health or political will to lockdown again.

Even more to my point. Things arent locking down again. The best we can do is ask people to wear masks and allow them to be at home if they feel they need to or are in danger. Personally, Ive had Covid and Ive been vaccinated. I no longer care to stay at home.

Midwestindy · Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:53 pm

UPlog wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
Its more of a low revenue vs. no revenue situation. No one is going to make any money for a while.

From what we hear, United believes it has reached an equilibrium where it can become cash breakeven this month. Good for them.

Sounds like most carriers are at that mark, AA & a couple others haven't updated guidance yet though, so not sure how many others exactly.

LAXintl · Wed Mar 31, 2021 8:55 pm

With 30+ years in the industry, I tend to view things more from the business and finance angle. Things like fleet size, sexy routes, etc generally don't excite as me much as they might the average A.net enthusiast.

Knowing how crappy the revenue environment is today, I honestly don't see the logic of bringing planes and employees out to fly a massive schedule for sake of some market share ego trip just because others (AA in particular) have adopted a different path to chase after short term cash flow.
United can strategically add flying here and there (such as recent p2p adds, Hawaii growth) where it believes its worthwhile, but managing the balance sheet is an important aspect of the business especially until such time more normal travel patterns can resume and United can deploy capacity back into its key business and international markets which are at the core of its setup.

Looking at this summer, it reminds of me of the bloody 1980s and also of the grocery store industry where one or two weak players in a crowded field manage to destroy everyone's margins by discounting heavily just to get any money in the door as they fight to stay alive.

gdavis003 · Wed Mar 31, 2021 9:11 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
Regarding the below from the 1st Qtr thread, Google Earth shows a few hangers at Mobile Downtown (KBFM) and some airbus USAir aircraft that appear in the scrapping process. Also, an Ex-UA 752, no FedEx is shown in the painting process. Maybe N851UA is getting paint - I can't see any paint activity since the merger re-paints.

"Anyone know why N851UA is scheduled to ferry to BFM today as UA2750? 2750 would indicate maintenance, I presume, but I don't recall UA having any A319 maintenance work done at BFM in the past https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N85 ... /KIAH/KBFM"

Paint might make sense, MAAS has a paint shop at BFM, but they mostly paint the Airbus aircraft made at BFM, if I recall, as opposed to repaint. Could also be going to VT MAE for maintenance work. I just don’t recall a United A319 at BFM for maintenance or paint in recent years so guess work could be shifting there. AA uses BFM for maintenance for their 777s, and they also do a good bit of work for FX and 5X

gwrudolph · Wed Mar 31, 2021 9:38 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:
Risky strategy IMO.

The customer doesn’t care about all of these reasons. AA has more service and better prices, I book with them.

LAXdude1023 wrote:
2) The airlines are following the numbers and the money. Pandemic or not, if people are flying, that’s business for them.

You two really have offered nothing to refute LAXintl's argument. Carriers need planes full enough - at avg fares high enough - to cover costs. There were plenty of years 2001-2010 where AA and UA (and NW and DL...) flew lots of people and still lost money. The mantra for the legacies 2011-2109 was 'capacity control.' A few carriers have clearly lost that. Look at yields when 1Q earnings come out in 2-3 weeks. I predict AA will not be at the top of that list.

That jet fuel at $0.42/gallon from April '20 is long gone. Prices have been on a steady upward trajectory for five months and are approaching 2019 averages.

https://ycharts.com/indicators/gulf_coa ... spot_price

Flying more doesn't always mean more income.

I understand that more flying doesn’t necessarily mean more income. However, taking the risk losing loyal customers might not work well in the long run. That’s my point.

AA and WN certainly are taking a more aggressive approach

SunsetLimited · Wed Mar 31, 2021 10:21 pm

gwrudolph wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:
Risky strategy IMO.

The customer doesn’t care about all of these reasons. AA has more service and better prices, I book with them.

LAXdude1023 wrote:
2) The airlines are following the numbers and the money. Pandemic or not, if people are flying, that’s business for them.

You two really have offered nothing to refute LAXintl's argument. Carriers need planes full enough - at avg fares high enough - to cover costs. There were plenty of years 2001-2010 where AA and UA (and NW and DL...) flew lots of people and still lost money. The mantra for the legacies 2011-2109 was 'capacity control.' A few carriers have clearly lost that. Look at yields when 1Q earnings come out in 2-3 weeks. I predict AA will not be at the top of that list.

That jet fuel at $0.42/gallon from April '20 is long gone. Prices have been on a steady upward trajectory for five months and are approaching 2019 averages.

https://ycharts.com/indicators/gulf_coa ... spot_price

Flying more doesn't always mean more income.

I understand that more flying doesn’t necessarily mean more income. However, taking the risk losing loyal customers might not work well in the long run. That’s my point.

AA and WN certainly are taking a more aggressive approach

And then on the flip side you have people like me who’ll
do everything they can to stay loyal to UA. I’ve managed to make it work even in smaller markets, though at times it hasn’t been easy. I get what UA is doing and why.

Everyone’s plight is different and not everyone will necessarily book away just because other carriers offer more flights.

jayunited · Wed Mar 31, 2021 10:24 pm

Midwestindy wrote:
UPlog wrote:
LAXdude1023 wrote:
Its more of a low revenue vs. no revenue situation. No one is going to make any money for a while.

From what we hear, United believes it has reached an equilibrium where it can become cash breakeven this month. Good for them.

Sounds like most carriers are at that mark, AA & a couple others haven't updated guidance yet though, so not sure how many others exactly.

It is without question that of the US3 AA has been the most aggressive especially out of DFW and CLT. But what I'm wondering is this both Delta and United announced they've broken even this month no more negative core cash burn. AA so far hasn't made any such announcement so I wonder if United would have been equally as agressive at AA in chasing bottom of the barrel fares would we still have hit break even one year after the airline went from 100% capacity down to 10% or would we still be burning millions of dollars per day chasing $60 dollar fares?

As frustrated as I am by UA's April and the first 2 weeks of May's schedule, when I step back and really look at the situation starting from last March/April where UA was burning over $100 million dollars a day to now it does temper my frustration.

gwrudolph wrote:
Risky strategy IMO.

The customer doesn’t care about all of these reasons. AA has more service and better prices, I book with them. I sign up for their FF program. I use them again as a result. Oops, bye bye United.

Moreover, if they don’t grandfather status for another year, all the more reason for the United loyal to move over to AA as well.

It really is the same old way of managing through crisis at United—recoil. Interestingly enough, no matter who is running the show, it is always the same reaction.

If you really believe this is more of the same old way of managing United through a crisis then you haven't been paying attention at all and it really is insulting to the people who work for this airline who've lived through and done the hard work to get United to where we are today. This is not the same old way of managing that was found during bankruptcy, or the financial crisis. United has expanded the network domestically, we've expanded our short haul international reach and our long haul international reach we have maintained all of our aircraft, we've continue to invest in our Polaris/PE product, we've continued some capitol investment projects, we've taken delivery of new aircraft, accelerated the delivery of 737MAX jets, placed an order for more MAXs and the list goes on and on.

Finally why should United on March 31, 2021 grandfather 2019 status to another year? AA, DL, and UA have all done a status match over the past 12 months and right now American isn't offering any type of status match they are only offering a status challenge in which customers have to pay upfront to even enter the challenge. With travel on the rise it is highly doubtful AA would bring back a status match at this point because there is no upside in it for the airline. Also each of these airlines have already extended customers 2019 status through January 31, 2022. It is far to early for any of the US3 to extend 2019 status to January 2023 a decision like that would not be made until August or September.

dmstorm22 · Wed Mar 31, 2021 10:32 pm

jayunited wrote:
It is far to early for any of the US3 to extend 2019 status to January 2023 a decision like that would not be made until August or September.

I largely agree, but with biz travel still so depleted I have a sense it is inevitable they extend it another year. (selfishly hoping being a 1K with very limited prospects for business travel this year.

When was the decision announced in 2020 - from my memory it was over the late spring, but I could be way off there.

LGeneReese · Wed Mar 31, 2021 11:25 pm

789
N19986 C1 30Mar. Last -9.

gwrudolph · Wed Mar 31, 2021 11:37 pm

jayunited wrote:
Midwestindy wrote:
UPlog wrote:

From what we hear, United believes it has reached an equilibrium where it can become cash breakeven this month. Good for them.

Sounds like most carriers are at that mark, AA & a couple others haven't updated guidance yet though, so not sure how many others exactly.

It is without question that of the US3 AA has been the most aggressive especially out of DFW and CLT. But what I'm wondering is this both Delta and United announced they've broken even this month no more negative core cash burn. AA so far hasn't made any such announcement so I wonder if United would have been equally as agressive at AA in chasing bottom of the barrel fares would we still have hit break even one year after the airline went from 100% capacity down to 10% or would we still be burning millions of dollars per day chasing $60 dollar fares?

As frustrated as I am by UA's April and the first 2 weeks of May's schedule, when I step back and really look at the situation starting from last March/April where UA was burning over $100 million dollars a day to now it does temper my frustration.

gwrudolph wrote:
Risky strategy IMO.

The customer doesn’t care about all of these reasons. AA has more service and better prices, I book with them. I sign up for their FF program. I use them again as a result. Oops, bye bye United.

Moreover, if they don’t grandfather status for another year, all the more reason for the United loyal to move over to AA as well.

It really is the same old way of managing through crisis at United—recoil. Interestingly enough, no matter who is running the show, it is always the same reaction.

If you really believe this is more of the same old way of managing United through a crisis then you haven't been paying attention at all and it really is insulting to the people who work for this airline who've lived through and done the hard work to get United to where we are today. This is not the same old way of managing that was found during bankruptcy, or the financial crisis. United has expanded the network domestically, we've expanded our short haul international reach and our long haul international reach we have maintained all of our aircraft, we've continue to invest in our Polaris/PE product, we've continued some capitol investment projects, we've taken delivery of new aircraft, accelerated the delivery of 737MAX jets, placed an order for more MAXs and the list goes on and on.

Finally why should United on March 31, 2021 grandfather 2019 status to another year? AA, DL, and UA have all done a status match over the past 12 months and right now American isn't offering any type of status match they are only offering a status challenge in which customers have to pay upfront to even enter the challenge. With travel on the rise it is highly doubtful AA would bring back a status match at this point because there is no upside in it for the airline. Also each of these airlines have already extended customers 2019 status through January 31, 2022. It is far to early for any of the US3 to extend 2019 status to January 2023 a decision like that would not be made until August or September.

Despite all of the tactics you point out, it still appears that United is holding back more than its competitors and I merely question whether that is the best long term strategy.

Undoubtedly, managing through an enormous financial crisis and balancing the need to keep market share for the long term is quite the dilemma. Obviously, there are merits to the various approaches to that challenge. Otherwise, I suppose, WN and AA wouldn’t be taking the more aggressive approach.

Additionally, I must point out that nowhere did I state or suggest they should extend now, March 31, 2021. What I said was “if they don’t . . . “ implying that the combination of making it harder to be loyal to United and the fact that some might have a full year of start over could make it more enticing to consider finally switching over AA or DL loyalty

jayunited · Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:04 am

gwrudolph wrote:

Additionally, I must point out that nowhere did I state or suggest they should extend now, March 31, 2021. What I said was “if they don’t . . . “ implying that the combination of making it harder to be loyal to United and the fact that some might have a full year of start over could make it more enticing to consider finally switching over AA or DL loyalty

How is United making it harder for customers to be loyal when they already lowered the qualifying threshold for every published elite tier in 2021 for 2022 status? United lowered the threshold in the fall of 2020.

Silver: 3,000 PQP/8 PQF or 3,500 PQP (2021) v.s. 4,000 PQP/12 PQF or 5,000 PQP (2019)
Gold: 6,000 PQP/16 PQF or 7,000 PQP (2021 v.s. 8,000 PQP/24 PQF or 10,000 PQP (2019)
Platimum: 9,000 PQP/24 PQF or 10,000 PQP (2021) v.s 12,000 PQP/36 PQF or 15,000 PQP (2019)
Premier 1K: 13,500 PQP/36 PQF or 15,000 PQP (2021) v.s 18,000 PQP/54 PQF or 24,000 PQP (2019)

United also offered bonus PQPs to all Mileage Plus members on their first 3 trips booked in Q1. General members could earn a 50% bonus on each of their first 3 trips, while elite member could earn a 100% bonus on each of their first 3 trips.

The notion that United is making it harder for loyal customers to remain loyal is not true. United has lowered the threshold for the entire year and for members who taken advantage they've earned bonus PQPs on up to 3 of their roundtrips taken in Q1 2021.

If someone wants to switch over to AA or DL and start the long climb all over again that is their choice which I respect but it isn't because United is making it harder for customers to reach premium status and a decision on extending customers 2019 status through January 2023 will be made later this year.

gwrudolph · Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:20 am

jayunited wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:

Additionally, I must point out that nowhere did I state or suggest they should extend now, March 31, 2021. What I said was “if they don’t . . . “ implying that the combination of making it harder to be loyal to United and the fact that some might have a full year of start over could make it more enticing to consider finally switching over AA or DL loyalty

How is United making it harder for customers to be loyal when they already lowered the qualifying threshold for every published elite tier in 2021 for 2022 status? United lowered the threshold in the fall of 2020.

Silver: 3,000 PQP/8 PQF or 3,500 PQP (2021) v.s. 4,000 PQP/12 PQF or 5,000 PQP (2019)
Gold: 6,000 PQP/16 PQF or 7,000 PQP (2021 v.s. 8,000 PQP/24 PQF or 10,000 PQP (2019)
Platimum: 9,000 PQP/24 PQF or 10,000 PQP (2021) v.s 12,000 PQP/36 PQF or 15,000 PQP (2019)
Premier 1K: 13,500 PQP/36 PQF or 15,000 PQP (2021) v.s 18,000 PQP/54 PQF or 24,000 PQP (2019)

United also offered bonus PQPs to all Mileage Plus members on their first 3 trips booked in Q1. General members could earn a 50% bonus on each of their first 3 trips, while elite member could earn a 100% bonus on each of their first 3 trips.

The notion that United is making it harder for loyal customers to remain loyal is not true. United has lowered the threshold for the entire year and for members who taken advantage they've earned bonus PQPs on up to 3 of their roundtrips taken in Q1 2021.

If someone wants to switch over to AA or DL and start the long climb all over again that is their choice which I respect but it isn't because United is making it harder for customers to reach premium status and a decision on extending customers 2019 status through January 2023 will be made later this year.

Sorry I meant harder to be loyal because of the limited schedules. As you can see in my second posting above, I tried to clarify my original post by editing it to say so. I must have fat fingered it resulting in an edited repost of my own post.

Anyway, my point being that some of us have been very loyal to United because of our MP program status and schedules. When the schedules are not there and status is potentially at risk anyway, the benefits of loyalty may no longer be there . . .

One loyal customer’s point of view anyway. Take it for what it is

kngkyle · Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:26 am

jayunited wrote:
gwrudolph wrote:

Additionally, I must point out that nowhere did I state or suggest they should extend now, March 31, 2021. What I said was “if they don’t . . . “ implying that the combination of making it harder to be loyal to United and the fact that some might have a full year of start over could make it more enticing to consider finally switching over AA or DL loyalty

How is United making it harder for customers to be loyal when they already lowered the qualifying threshold for every published elite tier in 2021 for 2022 status? United lowered the threshold in the fall of 2020.

Silver: 3,000 PQP/8 PQF or 3,500 PQP (2021) v.s. 4,000 PQP/12 PQF or 5,000 PQP (2019)
Gold: 6,000 PQP/16 PQF or 7,000 PQP (2021 v.s. 8,000 PQP/24 PQF or 10,000 PQP (2019)
Platimum: 9,000 PQP/24 PQF or 10,000 PQP (2021) v.s 12,000 PQP/36 PQF or 15,000 PQP (2019)
Premier 1K: 13,500 PQP/36 PQF or 15,000 PQP (2021) v.s 18,000 PQP/54 PQF or 24,000 PQP (2019)

United also offered bonus PQPs to all Mileage Plus members on their first 3 trips booked in Q1. General members could earn a 50% bonus on each of their first 3 trips, while elite member could earn a 100% bonus on each of their first 3 trips.

The notion that United is making it harder for loyal customers to remain loyal is not true. United has lowered the threshold for the entire year and for members who taken advantage they've earned bonus PQPs on up to 3 of their roundtrips taken in Q1 2021.

If someone wants to switch over to AA or DL and start the long climb all over again that is their choice which I respect but it isn't because United is making it harder for customers to reach premium status and a decision on extending customers 2019 status through January 2023 will be made later this year.

I agree here. UA has done a lot to make requalifying as easy as is reasonable for existing premier members. I'd argue that some culling of the premier herd is needed to keep the value of status... valuable. The light schedule on the other hand (compared to peers) does make it a bit more difficult. If UA came out and stated this was their strategy then it would make more sense, but what they are doing so far is basically the opposite of what they've claimed to be trying to do.

ChaseP · Thu Apr 01, 2021 3:20 am

Maintenance Update:
N851UA (Airbus 319) entered BFM for heavy maintenance.

BFM (Mobile Downtown) is, along with BQN (Aguadilla), a new heavy maintenance base that is opening for United.

Storage Update:
N14102 (Boeing 757-200) is scheduled ferry (UA2724/02) from RWO to GSO for heavy maintenance before re-entering service.

ChaseP · Thu Apr 01, 2021 5:33 am

Storage Update:
N807UA (Airbus 319) ferried TPA to GYR (UA2723/31) for storage.

Golfmikey · Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:03 am

The rest of May schedule is out it looks like...it is updated until 6/2

AC4500 · Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:11 am

Golfmikey wrote:
The rest of May schedule is out it looks like...it is updated until 6/2

It looks like the same exact schedule as the first two weeks of May. Not really seeing anything different that's noteworthy.

Nicknuzzii · Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:37 am

AC4500 wrote:
Golfmikey wrote:
The rest of May schedule is out it looks like...it is updated until 6/2

It looks like the same exact schedule as the first two weeks of May. Not really seeing anything different that's noteworthy.

Yes, agreed.

I’m not really understanding how just today they claimed leisure travel was back and now they cut a lot of EWR pure leisure routes by more than half.

Is UA being forced to give up flying from EWR because of the runway construction? I’m sorry but there is no reason to fly EWR-ATL 1x a day on Sundays, on a regional jet. Or BNA less than daily. EWR-ORD 4x a day isn’t that great either.

VirginFlyer · Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:51 am

LAXintl wrote:
Here is photo of new LAX hangar complex coming together.

https://i.ibb.co/QX7bHXh/2021-03-31-114519.png

Once complete, United will consolidate all its LAX techops on the eastside of the field and vacate the former CO complex on the westside.

Where is this hangar complex exactly?

V/F

LGeneReese · Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:11 am

ChaseP wrote:
Maintenance Update:
N851UA (Airbus 319) entered BFM for heavy maintenance.

BFM (Mobile Downtown) is, along with BQN (Aguadilla), a new heavy maintenance base that is opening for United.

Storage Update:
N14102 (Boeing 757-200) is scheduled ferry (UA2724/02) from RWO to GSO for heavy maintenance before re-entering service.

N14102 is the other Her Artwork livery (New York). Nice to have both flying again.

Midwestindy · Thu Apr 01, 2021 11:14 am

Nicknuzzii wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
Golfmikey wrote:
The rest of May schedule is out it looks like...it is updated until 6/2

It looks like the same exact schedule as the first two weeks of May. Not really seeing anything different that's noteworthy.

Yes, agreed.

I’m not really understanding how just today they claimed leisure travel was back and now they cut a lot of EWR pure leisure routes by more than half.

Is UA being forced to give up flying from EWR because of the runway construction? I’m sorry but there is no reason to fly EWR-ATL 1x a day on Sundays, on a regional jet. Or BNA less than daily. EWR-ORD 4x a day isn’t that great either.

Pretty sure BNA-EWR isn't less than daily, they just shrunk the route down so much that now flights are already completely sold out.

That tends to occur when you shrink 5 mainline + 1 RJ, down to 2 RJs a little over a month before departure.

AC4500 wrote:
Golfmikey wrote:
The rest of May schedule is out it looks like...it is updated until 6/2

It looks like the same exact schedule as the first two weeks of May. Not really seeing anything different that's noteworthy.

Noticed a lot of frequency bumps to ORD:
CLE, DFW IND, LAX, LAS, PIT, SAN, SEA, e.t.c

jayunited · Thu Apr 01, 2021 12:47 pm

Nicknuzzii wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
Golfmikey wrote:
The rest of May schedule is out it looks like...it is updated until 6/2

It looks like the same exact schedule as the first two weeks of May. Not really seeing anything different that's noteworthy.

Yes, agreed.

I’m not really understanding how just today they claimed leisure travel was back and now they cut a lot of EWR pure leisure routes by more than half.

Is UA being forced to give up flying from EWR because of the runway construction? I’m sorry but there is no reason to fly EWR-ATL 1x a day on Sundays, on a regional jet. Or BNA less than daily. EWR-ORD 4x a day isn’t that great either.

You are correct there are some domestic destinations that remain frustratingly low however during the second half of May United is adding flights and/or increasing capacity out of EWR to destinations like BQN/BDA/AUA/SDQ/SJU/MBJ/SEA/PDX/MSY/CHS/SAV and other destinations.

For the month of March United averaged 145 daily departures out of EWR. In April and the first 2 weeks of May United will average around 170 daily departures out of EWR. Starting in the second half of May that number jumps up to 203 daily departures. I get it, the pace is painfully slow but United is slowly restoring more flights to EWR, what has changed is where those flights are being added.

Also we have to ask ourselves how many people are planning a vacation in New York City?

It is going to take time to get United's operation at EWR back to 450 daily departures which is where we were at pre-pandemic.

Golfmikey · Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:26 pm

jayunited wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
AC4500 wrote:
It looks like the same exact schedule as the first two weeks of May. Not really seeing anything different that's noteworthy.

Yes, agreed.

I’m not really understanding how just today they claimed leisure travel was back and now they cut a lot of EWR pure leisure routes by more than half.

Is UA being forced to give up flying from EWR because of the runway construction? I’m sorry but there is no reason to fly EWR-ATL 1x a day on Sundays, on a regional jet. Or BNA less than daily. EWR-ORD 4x a day isn’t that great either.

You are correct there are some domestic destinations that remain frustratingly low however during the second half of May United is adding flights and/or increasing capacity out of EWR to destinations like BQN/BDA/AUA/SDQ/SJU/MBJ/SEA/PDX/MSY/CHS/SAV and other destinations.

For the month of March United averaged 145 daily departures out of EWR. In April and the first 2 weeks of May United will average around 170 daily departures out of EWR. Starting in the second half of May that number jumps up to 203 daily departures. I get it, the pace is painfully slow but United is slowly restoring more flights to EWR, what has changed is where those flights are being added.

Also we have to ask ourselves how many people are planning a vacation in New York City?

It is going to take time to get United's operation at EWR back to 450 daily departures which is where we were at pre-pandemic.

Jay do you have the daily departure breakdown for those time periods but mainline only?

LAXdude1023 · Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:28 pm

Schedule looks exactly the same for IAH.

cosyr · Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:29 pm

Dear Mods,

I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but this is why I think the Fleet and Network threads need to be split up again. I think the experiment has failed. The conversation is psychophrenic at times. I've asked several fleet related questions in the first quarter, that went completely ignored, because discussions about network and monthly schedules went back and forth for pages. Also, you were forced to break things up by quarter, because this disjointed thread has gotten too long.

I understand the reasoning, that the topics are sometimes related, but I would rather subscribe to two threads and read each of them, but be able to discuss the topic I want without a separate conversation happening at the same time, that runs away with the whole thread.

LAXintl · Thu Apr 01, 2021 2:43 pm

VirginFlyer wrote:
Where is this hangar complex exactly?

https://i.ibb.co/fDsW1X8/hangar.png

STT757 · Thu Apr 01, 2021 3:21 pm

LAXintl wrote:
VirginFlyer wrote:
Where is this hangar complex exactly?

https://i.ibb.co/fDsW1X8/hangar.png

I was watching a YouTube video of a flight leaving LAX, the new hangar looked huge.

adamblang · Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:18 pm

Domestic leisure travel demand back to pre-pandemic levels, airline CEOs say - The Points Guy

“Domestic leisure demand has almost entirely recovered,” Kirby said. “It tells you something about that pent up desire to travel, the pent up desire to remake those connections.”

“Business demand is still down over 80%, and of course international borders, particularly long-haul, are still closed,” he said. “So those are huge chunk of our business that are still almost at zero, but it’s really nice to see that recovery.”

and

United is flying more than 100% of its 2019 capacity to Mexico, the Caribbean and Central America, and South America, where some countries have reopened to Americans.

jetblastdubai · Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:37 pm

STT757 wrote:

I was watching a YouTube video of a flight leaving LAX, the new hangar looked huge.

It will look small next to T9!

psa1011 · Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:40 pm

adamblang wrote:
Domestic leisure travel demand back to pre-pandemic levels, airline CEOs say - The Points Guy

“Domestic leisure demand has almost entirely recovered,” Kirby said. “It tells you something about that pent up desire to travel, the pent up desire to remake those connections.”

“Business demand is still down over 80%, and of course international borders, particularly long-haul, are still closed,” he said. “So those are huge chunk of our business that are still almost at zero, but it’s really nice to see that recovery.”

and

United is flying more than 100% of its 2019 capacity to Mexico, the Caribbean and Central America, and South America, where some countries have reopened to Americans.

Interesting, although I am seeing a number of UA routes that were to resume in May but are now pushed into June, and I wouldn't be surprised to see more delays. Much of SFO's domestic routes were going to resume 5/6, and are now pushed to 6/3. Obviously some of this is due to slower business, but SFO-MSY/FLL/TPA seem like they would have resumed as leisure routes already.

sldispatcher · Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:58 pm

psa1011 wrote:
adamblang wrote:
Domestic leisure travel demand back to pre-pandemic levels, airline CEOs say - The Points Guy

“Domestic leisure demand has almost entirely recovered,” Kirby said. “It tells you something about that pent up desire to travel, the pent up desire to remake those connections.”

“Business demand is still down over 80%, and of course international borders, particularly long-haul, are still closed,” he said. “So those are huge chunk of our business that are still almost at zero, but it’s really nice to see that recovery.”

and

United is flying more than 100% of its 2019 capacity to Mexico, the Caribbean and Central America, and South America, where some countries have reopened to Americans.

Interesting, although I am seeing a number of UA routes that were to resume in May but are now pushed into June, and I wouldn't be surprised to see more delays. Much of SFO's domestic routes were going to resume 5/6, and are now pushed to 6/3. Obviously some of this is due to slower business, but SFO-MSY/FLL/TPA seem like they would have resumed as leisure routes already.

I would not trust much in the way of any domestic schedule past 6/2 at this point.

AC4500 · Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:17 pm

sldispatcher wrote:

I would not trust much in the way of any domestic schedule past 6/2 at this point.

I wouldn't trust ANY part of the schedule past 6/2 at all.

Acey559 · Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:25 pm

Not exactly network or fleet related, but we just received an ALPA email stating that pilot hiring will resume effective immediately. This seems to hint that the schedule will be increased in the next few months.

UPlog · Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:30 pm

Acey559 wrote:
Not exactly network or fleet related, but we just received an ALPA email stating that pilot hiring will resume effective immediately. This seems to hint that the schedule will be increased in the next few months.

You had ~1,000 take the early out and have 300'ish age 65 attrition planned each year moving forwards, so its more like keeping the status quo.

psa1011 · Thu Apr 01, 2021 6:53 pm

AC4500 wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:

I would not trust much in the way of any domestic schedule past 6/2 at this point.

I wouldn't trust ANY part of the schedule past 6/2 at all.

I think my question still stands about why some of these UA leisure routes haven't already resumed prior to 6/2.

adamblang · Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:02 pm

United Airlines tells staff it’s hiring hundreds of pilots next month as carrier plans for a travel recovery - CNBC

“With vaccination rates increasing and travel demand trending upwards, I’m excited to share that United will resume the pilot hiring process that was halted last year,” Bryan Quigley, United’s senior vice president of flight operations, wrote in a staff note on Thursday, which was viewed by CNBC. “We’ll start with the approximately 300 pilots who either had a new hire class date that was canceled, or who had a 2020 conditional job offer.”

FSDan · Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:34 pm

cosyr wrote:
Dear Mods,

I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but this is why I think the Fleet and Network threads need to be split up again. I think the experiment has failed. The conversation is psychophrenic at times. I've asked several fleet related questions in the first quarter, that went completely ignored, because discussions about network and monthly schedules went back and forth for pages. Also, you were forced to break things up by quarter, because this disjointed thread has gotten too long.

I understand the reasoning, that the topics are sometimes related, but I would rather subscribe to two threads and read each of them, but be able to discuss the topic I want without a separate conversation happening at the same time, that runs away with the whole thread.

I agree with this. Separate fleet and network threads would be great. There's inevitably some duplication of discussion, but it's manageable.

AVLAirlineFreq · Thu Apr 01, 2021 8:37 pm

FSDan wrote:
cosyr wrote:
Dear Mods,

I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but this is why I think the Fleet and Network threads need to be split up again. I think the experiment has failed. The conversation is psychophrenic at times. I've asked several fleet related questions in the first quarter, that went completely ignored, because discussions about network and monthly schedules went back and forth for pages. Also, you were forced to break things up by quarter, because this disjointed thread has gotten too long.

I understand the reasoning, that the topics are sometimes related, but I would rather subscribe to two threads and read each of them, but be able to discuss the topic I want without a separate conversation happening at the same time, that runs away with the whole thread.

I agree with this. Separate fleet and network threads would be great. There's inevitably some duplication of discussion, but it's manageable.

Yes, please. This thread in particular is nearly unreadable, especially for someone who doesn't care nearly as much about topics like fleet registration and repainting of equipment. All of the major airline threads should be split in the same way. Please, mods, just do it.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net