United Fleet, Network, and Discussion Thread - Q4 2021

portola2727 · Sat Oct 23, 2021 6:00 pm

I think EWR-BLR would be most likely out of the three. However, if EWR-MAA launches, I'm flying UAL for the foreseeable future. I have family that is based at MAA so a theoretical LAX-EWR-MAA would mean no transit in a third country and multiple flight options from LAX-EWR to connect to MAA.

CALMSP · Sat Oct 23, 2021 6:27 pm

sand26391 wrote:
codc10 wrote:
x1234 wrote:
I heard a rumor that the new route announcement is SFO-MNL or SFO-BKK with MNL before BKK. Tagalog is the 3rd most foreign language spoken in the USA after Spanish and Mandarin/Cantonese.

Of course. No UA route announcement would be complete without "rumors" and "leaks" about SFO-BKK... I am not holding my breath.

Also I keep hearing EWR-BLR/MAA/HYD quiet often.

that's been there for over 10 years when CO ordered the 787's!

sand26391 · Sat Oct 23, 2021 6:57 pm

^^ Probably just a matter of time, I would believe. I'm hearing it since 2017ish. But with pandemic, hopefully by the end of this decade it may become a reality.

LAXdude1023 · Sat Oct 23, 2021 8:38 pm

portola2727 wrote:
I think the next UAL route announcement will also be leisure based or be JV hub to hub announcement like LAX-FRA or LAX-MUC.

Leisure is likely but not anything over the Atlantic. They would have announced those in the previous announcement if that was the case.

Dont think anything over the Pacific either.

Were probably looking at short haul international for the next announcement.

FlyHossD · Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:04 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
portola2727 wrote:
I think the next UAL route announcement will also be leisure based or be JV hub to hub announcement like LAX-FRA or LAX-MUC.

Leisure is likely but not anything over the Atlantic. They would have announced those in the previous announcement if that was the case.

Dont think anything over the Pacific either.

Were probably looking at short haul international for the next announcement.

Maybe they'll announce the start date for BOS-LHR..? I've also wondered when they'll try Cairo which was previously announced, but not flown.

panam330 · Sat Oct 23, 2021 9:16 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
portola2727 wrote:
I think the next UAL route announcement will also be leisure based or be JV hub to hub announcement like LAX-FRA or LAX-MUC.

Leisure is likely but not anything over the Atlantic. They would have announced those in the previous announcement if that was the case.

Dont think anything over the Pacific either.

Were probably looking at short haul international for the next announcement.

Agree on all counts. Latin/Central America flying is now higher than it was pre-Covid, and is apparently doing very well.

ScorpioMC3 · Sun Oct 24, 2021 2:13 am

Cargo-only flights will be resuming in November on 777-300s. Routes that I have noticed so far:

ORD-ICN
ORD-TPE
ORD-BRU
ORD-NRT
EWR-NRT
NRT-HKG
GUM-HKG
SFO-SYD

Ironically, the ORD 777 pilot crew base closes at the end of October.

alohaislandair · Sun Oct 24, 2021 3:19 am

A few things regarding UA in Utah. There is a rumor that UA is looking into adding a new United Club at SLC. Also sounds like PVU is pushing to get UA/OO at the airport once the new terminal opens Spring 2022. 2x daily to DEN is what they’re looking for. Lastly, SGU currently has UAX doing DEN 3x daily but they are trying to get them to resume the SGU-LAX route.

Cmac787 · Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:27 pm

N34131 757-200 is scheduled to exit ILN MX and ferry to EWR F2735/24OCT

Prost · Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:41 pm

Whatever hub is best situated on a map for service to Latin America, I can guarantee you that 90% of the traveling public doesn’t go look on the map and figure out that they are adding 500 miles to their trip. They look at fare and times. Location of a connecting hub doesn’t even enter their consciousness.

And as somebody who works for a United competitor, it’s great seeing how well they’re doing, congratulations to all who are contributing,.

cosyr · Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:12 pm

Prost wrote:
Whatever hub is best situated on a map for service to Latin America, I can guarantee you that 90% of the traveling public doesn’t go look on the map and figure out that they are adding 500 miles to their trip. They look at fare and times. Location of a connecting hub doesn’t even enter their consciousness.

And as somebody who works for a United competitor, it’s great seeing how well they’re doing, congratulations to all who are contributing,.

Even more so, the perception of geography can preempt actual geography. If it was literally just about connections, Anchorage would be the best place in North America to transfer to Asia, but people looking at a map would think that SFO or LAX makes more sense, when in reality it adds hundreds of miles to their trip. I think people in Georgia or Tennessee understand they would be flying in the wrong direction to go through IAH on their way to South America, but I'm not sure people in Ohio or Michigan would know that they kind of are. Obviously, anyone west of the Mississippi would be just as well of changing in IAH as ATL/MIA.

As an aside, non airline people are usually floored, when I tell them ATL is further from South Africa than IAD, something I used to share when people would ask what the longest flights in the world are.

sand26391 · Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:34 pm

I'm curious, for the sfo BLR flight, I was told that they were deploying a "modified" b789, any update on this b789? What modifications are out are being done for this 789s to fly such long route?
Thank you

adamblang · Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:02 pm

United’s 2021 Plan: Leisure and Modified 787s for Ultra Long-Haul - Cranky Flier

There are two routes here that are ultra-long haul and until recently, United didn’t have the airplanes to make them work. But, Patrick explained to me that United is doing some modification work to its 787-9 aircraft. Specifically, it has increased engine thrust and altered the fuel management system to squeeze more range out of the fleet. (Both of these are software changes.)

Eventually this will be on the entire 787-9 fleet, but for now it will be a subfleet.

UPlog · Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:23 pm

Human remains found in forest preserve ID'd as missing United Airlines executive Jacob Cefolia.

https://abc7chicago.com/jacob-cefolia-h ... /11163158/

Cardude2 · Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:21 am

Is this a correct list of aircraft still needing Polaris?

763:
N657UA
N658UA
N661UA (stored)
N663UA (stored)

789:
N26952
N35953
N13954
N38955
N45956
N27957
N27958
N17963
N27964
N27965
N26966
N26967
N29971
N24872
N24973
N24974

And all 764's

Cmac787 · Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:07 am

Correct. N657UA just went into storage at GYR awaiting a slot in HKG for Polaris install

Cardude2 wrote:
Is this a correct list of aircraft still needing Polaris?

763:
N657UA
N658UA
N661UA (stored)
N663UA (stored)

789:
N26952
N35953
N13954
N38955
N45956
N27957
N27958
N17963
N27964
N27965
N26966
N26967
N29971
N24872
N24973
N24974

And all 764's

avi8 · Mon Oct 25, 2021 12:34 pm

Don't forget IAH is a powerhouse to connect smaller Mexican destinations. There are several mainline flights to secondary Mexican cities that could probably never be served profitably from another UA hub. People can connect to most major cities in Latin America from IAH.

The only ones missing in my opinion are MDE, GYE, CLO, and SDQ. However, traffic to those cities is heavily Miami-oriented.

LAXdude1023 · Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:36 pm

avi8 wrote:

The only ones missing in my opinion are MDE, GYE, CLO, and SDQ. However, traffic to those cities is heavily Miami-oriented.

SDQ is overwhelmingly NYC centric.

Colombia traffic is more dispersed. Florida and NYC are the biggest of course but there is still plenty to go around outside there.

CALMSP · Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:37 pm

avi8 wrote:
Don't forget IAH is a powerhouse to connect smaller Mexican destinations. There are several mainline flights to secondary Mexican cities that could probably never be served profitably from another UA hub. People can connect to most major cities in Latin America from IAH.

The only ones missing in my opinion are MDE, GYE, CLO, and SDQ. However, traffic to those cities is heavily Miami-oriented.

I am surprised that GYE hasn't come back.....all those years of it being tied to UIO however may be telling to the market. CLO was also flown and always did well on the Y cabin, but F was always empty. I don't see SDQ ever coming, but MDE could be added as well.

Polot · Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:53 pm

CALMSP wrote:
avi8 wrote:
Don't forget IAH is a powerhouse to connect smaller Mexican destinations. There are several mainline flights to secondary Mexican cities that could probably never be served profitably from another UA hub. People can connect to most major cities in Latin America from IAH.

The only ones missing in my opinion are MDE, GYE, CLO, and SDQ. However, traffic to those cities is heavily Miami-oriented.

I am surprised that GYE hasn't come back.....all those years of it being tied to UIO however may be telling to the market. CLO was also flown and always did well on the Y cabin, but F was always empty. I don't see SDQ ever coming, but MDE could be added as well.

The US and Ecuador do not have an open skies agreement. I’m pretty sure all frequencies available to US airlines are spoken for so if UA returns to GYE they have to cut a (the? I don’t know how many flights UA has) UIO flight.

Okcflyer · Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:46 pm

Polot wrote:
CALMSP wrote:
avi8 wrote:
Don't forget IAH is a powerhouse to connect smaller Mexican destinations. There are several mainline flights to secondary Mexican cities that could probably never be served profitably from another UA hub. People can connect to most major cities in Latin America from IAH.

The only ones missing in my opinion are MDE, GYE, CLO, and SDQ. However, traffic to those cities is heavily Miami-oriented.

I am surprised that GYE hasn't come back.....all those years of it being tied to UIO however may be telling to the market. CLO was also flown and always did well on the Y cabin, but F was always empty. I don't see SDQ ever coming, but MDE could be added as well.

The US and Ecuador do not have an open skies agreement. I’m pretty sure all frequencies available to US airlines are spoken for so if UA returns to GYE they have to cut a (the? I don’t know how many flights UA has) UIO flight.

I don't know how that system functions. What I do know is that sometimes UA flies IAH-UIO 2x a day and sometimes it's just one. I cannot make rhyme or reason on what drives them to offer the second frequency. It's usually just 2-3 days per week, but I haven't found a decrenable trend from a season's perspective. It seems to come and go. While it's stated the USA-owned frequencies are all taken, it's not clear they're all actually being flown regularly and used. I suspect UA has 2x/day rights to UIO and they only occasionally use it. Jetblue, Spirit, Eastern all recently found frequencies so they could start their services from USA-GYE, and did so seemingly without issue (I assume they took dormant frequencies assigned someone else who was not using them)

What I do know is that most of the business traffic is centered out of Quito, especially in the oil & gas sector which is rather helpful in UA's case given Houston being a hub of this traffic. Guayaquil's USA traffic seems to be heavily VFR.

In the case of UA, they have a unique advantage being long-time partners with Copa, who is uniquely (and best) positioned to connect just about anywhere from North America to South/Central America. Keep in mind that Copa is who they are today largely because of Continental's ownership and influence during their rapid growth period to get established. As a result of this, they have less need to invest in these secondary cities in the South. With UA and CM together, literally every USA airport can be connected with 1 or 2 stops to every major South American airport, all with very short transit times. The downside is that UA gives up a big chunk that revenue to CM when they're involved. Regardless, up until this point, UA seemed content with taking their share of the traffic on the secondary markets and letting the others fight for the VFR traffic. Example: UA would take the OKC-IAH-PTY legs and let CM keep the PTY-GYE. Or for some markets, UA would take SEA-DEN and CM takes DEN-PTY-GYE. (note that UA has rights to fly from it's hub to PTY, but that in the case of DEN, UA started the route but shortly there after both parties agreed to let CM fly it instead of UA).

That strategy works well for secondary markets but not for larger markets, which is where most of the growth has happened. As a result, Copa has grown to become rather large and offering their own 1-stops with no UA cut from 13 US cities now. Avianca (between both BOG and SAL), was trying to do the same, albeit quite poorly.

Given that UA doesn't have a Florida hub, I don't not gunning for MDE/CLO/GYE-Florida traffic. That's for the LCC's/ULCC's, Avianca/Latam, and AA to fight out. In the case of MDE/CLO/GYE-NYC, United can easily flow this traffic over PTY (or in more recent times, SAL or BOG) to connect to EWR. However, CM is happy to carry this traffic to JFK and not share a dime with UA. The problem for both UA and CM is that 1-stop cost structure is not competitive with the non-stops from Jetblue, etc. NYC-ECU traffic is almost all VFR or small business (i.e. non premium) traffic and they can't compete on price due to their cost structure. Also, UA has historically stayed away from low-end VFR, which is one reason why they don't fly EWR-UIO.

UA can continue to sit on the sidelines and wait for a UA hub to latin america traffic to grow big enough to warrant their entry, but in the meantime they're missing out on one of the fastest growing markets. I don't think the current UA management is going to sit still and let the market build around them.

UA needs to fight for US-POS traffic to these destinations with 1-stops. Otherwise, Spirit, JetBlue, AA are going to continue adding 1-stop options as they grown/expand within the states and UA/CM's 2 stop stuff becomes every less competitive.

There is a technical challenge with these South American routes: The VFR traffic carries a LOT of bags, and some bulk-load cargo opportunities which can lead to payload problems. MAX and neo have enough enough payload/range to make many of them possible without blocks, but previous generation aircraft can be question. Example, Jetblue is flying A321neo from JFK, likely because of payload issues on regular A321's due to the much heavier than normal bags/cargo carried.

In UA's cause, they were already short on narrow bodies and started these routes are marginal if you're fleet constrained. I think a modern 738 should be ok performance wise on IAH-GYE, although back in the day when CO flew this, they had blocks on the 738. As the MAX8 fleet grows, hopefully this can finally unlock the potential.

Bias Alert: My wife is from GYE and as such we return there several times a year. We now live in IAH and are obviously biased about wanting that route to reopen. Prior to moving to Houston, we lived in OKC and MAF and did the double connect options I mentioned.

Polot · Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:55 pm

Okcflyer wrote:
Polot wrote:
CALMSP wrote:

I am surprised that GYE hasn't come back.....all those years of it being tied to UIO however may be telling to the market. CLO was also flown and always did well on the Y cabin, but F was always empty. I don't see SDQ ever coming, but MDE could be added as well.

The US and Ecuador do not have an open skies agreement. I’m pretty sure all frequencies available to US airlines are spoken for so if UA returns to GYE they have to cut a (the? I don’t know how many flights UA has) UIO flight.

I don't know how that system functions. What I do know is that sometimes UA flies IAH-UIO 2x a day and sometimes it's just one. I cannot make rhyme or reason on what drives them to offer the second frequency. It's usually just 2-3 days per week, but I haven't found a decrenable trend from a season's perspective. It just seems to come and go, much like the IAH-BOG frequencies are constantly changing. I while they frequencies are all taken, it's not clear they're all actually being flown regularly. Jetblue, Spirit, Eastern all recently found frequencies so they could start their service from USA-GYE, seemingly without issue.

The fact that airlines recently found frequencies doesn’t mean they are any left. JetBlue recently “found frequencies” for GYE services because they cut a FLL-UIO flight. And both Eastern and Spirit protested B6’s shift with the DOT wanting (some of) the frequencies themselves- not behavior taken if there was open frequencies available. Looking it up UA has 9 weekly frequencies, explaining why some days IAH-UIO is operated double daily.

Okcflyer · Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:03 pm

Polot wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
Polot wrote:
The US and Ecuador do not have an open skies agreement. I’m pretty sure all frequencies available to US airlines are spoken for so if UA returns to GYE they have to cut a (the? I don’t know how many flights UA has) UIO flight.

I don't know how that system functions. What I do know is that sometimes UA flies IAH-UIO 2x a day and sometimes it's just one. I cannot make rhyme or reason on what drives them to offer the second frequency. It's usually just 2-3 days per week, but I haven't found a decrenable trend from a season's perspective. It just seems to come and go, much like the IAH-BOG frequencies are constantly changing. I while they frequencies are all taken, it's not clear they're all actually being flown regularly. Jetblue, Spirit, Eastern all recently found frequencies so they could start their service from USA-GYE, seemingly without issue.

The fact that airlines recently found frequencies doesn’t mean they are any left. JetBlue recently “found frequencies” for GYE services because they cut a FLL-UIO flight. And both Eastern and Spirit protested B6’s shift with the DOT wanting (some of) the frequencies themselves- not behavior taken if there was open frequencies available. Looking it up UA has 9 weekly frequencies, explaining why some days IAH-UIO is operated double daily.

Thanks for the response. As I stated, I don't know how the allocation system works. I didn't know there was as much arguing behind the scenes. With the current ECU government in place, and the reality of having major locally-owned carriers able to compete on a global stage, maybe Ecuador would consider opening additional frequencies to US-owned companies in order to promote connectivity to the country.

adamblang · Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:04 pm

Polot wrote:
I’m pretty sure all frequencies available to US airlines are spoken for so if UA returns to GYE they have to cut a (the? I don’t know how many flights UA has) UIO flight.

Notice of Action Taken re: Eastern Airlines, LLC from the Department of Transportation dated Nov 23, 2020 backs that up:

There are currently no U.S.-Ecuador frequencies available for allocation until the return of certain frequencies that are allocated on a temporary basis to JetBlue and Eastern.

The document is slightly out of date. A DOT docket search shows all sorts of requests and approvals for temporary dormancy waivers and extensions. I don't care to invest the time in unwinding and tallying all of the motions and proceedings but on the surface it looks like all of the frequencies are indeed spoken for.

As an aside, U.S.-Ecuador Protocol to Air Transport Agreement Annexes of July 21, 2010 has this to say about capacity:

The designated airlines of each Party may operate a maximum number of 120 round trip combination frequencies per week over the routes specified in Section 2 of this Annex.

Okcflyer · Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:08 pm

adamblang wrote:
Polot wrote:
I’m pretty sure all frequencies available to US airlines are spoken for so if UA returns to GYE they have to cut a (the? I don’t know how many flights UA has) UIO flight.

Notice of Action Taken re: Eastern Airlines, LLC from the Department of Transportation dated Nov 23, 2020 backs that up:
There are currently no U.S.-Ecuador frequencies available for allocation until the return of certain frequencies that are allocated on a temporary basis to JetBlue and Eastern.

The document is slightly out of date. A DOT docket search shows all sorts of requests and approvals for temporary dormancy waivers and extensions. I don't care to invest the time in unwinding and tallying all of the motions and proceedings but on the surface it looks like all of the frequencies are indeed spoken for.

As an aside, U.S.-Ecuador Protocol to Air Transport Agreement Annexes of July 21, 2010 has this to say about capacity:
The designated airlines of each Party may operate a maximum number of 120 round trip combination frequencies per week over the routes specified in Section 2 of this Annex.

Thanks for the info!

Now back to the regularly scheduled discussion around United Airlines

FlyingElvii · Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:57 pm

Body of missing United Executive, Senior VP of Worldwide Sales, Jake Cefolia, found Hanging from a tree in a Suburban Chicago forest preserve Saturday.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/24/body-of-u ... lia-found/

SQ22 · Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:04 pm

FlyingElvii wrote:
Body of missing United Executive, Senior VP of Worldwide Sales, Jake Cefolia, found Hanging from a tree in a Suburban Chicago forest preserve Saturday.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/24/body-of-u ... lia-found/

Ongoing thread can be found here:

Updated: Body of missing United executive found over a year after disappearance

Cmac787 · Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:08 pm

N17139 757-200 is scheduled to exit AMA paint with Evo Blue Livery and ferry to EWR F2719/ 25 Oct

adamblang · Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:28 pm

There was a segment on the Boom Overture on CBS Saturday Morning this weekend.

Interesting quote from Michael Leskinen, VP of United Airlines Ventures:

The difference will be that we won’t have lie-flat seats and we don’t need lie-flat seats because we’re gonna be getting our customers back home to their own beds.

Granted, this aircraft, if it happens, is 8 years away so who knows what cabin configurations look like at the end of the decade. But that's how at least one decision maker is thinking about the aircraft.

airplanedriver6 · Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:26 pm

adamblang wrote:
Granted, this aircraft, if it happens, is 8 years away so who knows what cabin configurations look like at the end of the decade. But that's how at least one decision maker is thinking about the aircraft.

Given the square footage of the cabin floor, or lack thereof, I'm gonna side with Mr. Leskinen is assuming that full lay-flat cubicles are not a realistic option among all the potential configurations.

EssentialBusDC · Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:28 pm

adamblang wrote:
There was a segment on the Boom Overture on CBS Saturday Morning this weekend.

Interesting quote from Michael Leskinen, VP of United Airlines Ventures:

The difference will be that we won’t have lie-flat seats and we don’t need lie-flat seats because we’re gonna be getting our customers back home to their own beds.

Granted, this aircraft, if it happens, is 8 years away so who knows what cabin configurations look like at the end of the decade. But that's how at least one decision maker is thinking about the aircraft.

Makes sense. A “Short” flight doesn’t require a lie flat seat option. In addition it would take too much cabin real estate given the size of the proposed aircraft.

Okcflyer · Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:15 pm

EssentialBusDC wrote:
adamblang wrote:
There was a segment on the Boom Overture on CBS Saturday Morning this weekend.

Interesting quote from Michael Leskinen, VP of United Airlines Ventures:

The difference will be that we won’t have lie-flat seats and we don’t need lie-flat seats because we’re gonna be getting our customers back home to their own beds.

Granted, this aircraft, if it happens, is 8 years away so who knows what cabin configurations look like at the end of the decade. But that's how at least one decision maker is thinking about the aircraft.

Makes sense. A “Short” flight doesn’t require a lie flat seat option. In addition it would take too much cabin real estate given the size of the proposed aircraft.

Gate to Gate is still going to be 4+ hours for NYC-LHR. Sure, the service takes up a chunk of that, but it's also likely to pay the premium are also the type that want/need the sleep/nap before arriving. I see this being a challenge.

cosyr · Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:23 pm

EssentialBusDC wrote:
adamblang wrote:
There was a segment on the Boom Overture on CBS Saturday Morning this weekend.

Interesting quote from Michael Leskinen, VP of United Airlines Ventures:

The difference will be that we won’t have lie-flat seats and we don’t need lie-flat seats because we’re gonna be getting our customers back home to their own beds.

Granted, this aircraft, if it happens, is 8 years away so who knows what cabin configurations look like at the end of the decade. But that's how at least one decision maker is thinking about the aircraft.

Makes sense. A “Short” flight doesn’t require a lie flat seat option. In addition it would take too much cabin real estate given the size of the proposed aircraft.

It would be an improvement over Concorde's seats if they were just wider than typical economy seats (which I don't know that they will be.) Yeah lie flat is not necessary on 3-4 hour flights.

AaronPGH · Mon Oct 25, 2021 11:28 pm

A polished, elevated version of premium plus (service and hard product) should be more than enough for this kind of flight.

Unrelated: do we know what United's schedule is for upgrading older aircract to the newer cabins? Just boarded one of the dumpy 739s with the old F seats and it got me wondering when these are finally going to bite the dust.

avi8 · Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:20 am

AaronPGH wrote:
A polished, elevated version of premium plus (service and hard product) should be more than enough for this kind of flight.

Unrelated: do we know what United's schedule is for upgrading older aircract to the newer cabins? Just boarded one of the dumpy 739s with the old F seats and it got me wondering when these are finally going to bite the dust.

Many of us have asked the same question and it seems like nobody knows yet. Hopefully we hear some news soon.

intotheair · Tue Oct 26, 2021 2:28 am

It shouldn't be a surprise that there won't be lie-flats on the Boom plane. If you look at all of their conceptual renders, they show what looks like a comfortable but perhaps slightly tight lounger in a 1-1 configuration. Carry-on storage looks tight too.

https://boomsupersonic.com/overture

Looks like that's Governor Newsom sitting in 6B

I don't understand how the seat count pencils out though. The renders all look like the seats are matched to one per window. I count 27 windows, so 27 rows x 2 seats per row = 54 seats. But then under capacity, it lists 65-88 passengers. Boom also promises that it will be all biz class. Either the seats are going to be a lot tighter than what they're showing, or there's something else we don't know.

avi8 · Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:13 am

Any idea what happened at IAD/EWR yesterday? A friend of mine flew IAD-EWR, got delayed because of weather, spent two hours at the tarmac, returned to the gate, then landed at EWR 6 hours after scheduled departure, then waited an hour for a gate and the last cherry on top was that the luggage came out almost 4 hours after they landed.

UALFAson · Tue Oct 26, 2021 11:44 am

avi8 wrote:
Any idea what happened at IAD/EWR yesterday? A friend of mine flew IAD-EWR, got delayed because of weather, spent two hours at the tarmac, returned to the gate, then landed at EWR 6 hours after scheduled departure, then waited an hour for a gate and the last cherry on top was that the luggage came out almost 4 hours after they landed.

Here in D.C. we had 2 quick but powerful storms move through on Monday late afternoon and evening--wind, rain, thunder, lightning. DCA halted inbound arrivals at least twice; didn't check IAD but did see on the news that IAD got almost 2.5 inches of rain. Was visiting my parents who live near DCA and there were takeoffs and landings well after midnight, which means lots of delays. Two storm systems are combining today to create a Nor'easter that will hit BOS and most of the northeast. Going to be a terrible day to fly in that part of the country.

cosyr · Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:24 pm

intotheair wrote:
It shouldn't be a surprise that there won't be lie-flats on the Boom plane. If you look at all of their conceptual renders, they show what looks like a comfortable but perhaps slightly tight lounger in a 1-1 configuration. Carry-on storage looks tight too.

https://boomsupersonic.com/overture

Looks like that's Governor Newsom sitting in 6B

I don't understand how the seat count pencils out though. The renders all look like the seats are matched to one per window. I count 27 windows, so 27 rows x 2 seats per row = 54 seats. But then under capacity, it lists 65-88 passengers. Boom also promises that it will be all biz class. Either the seats are going to be a lot tighter than what they're showing, or there's something else we don't know.

Those renders make me even more pessimistic that that plane will ever fly. I don't understand how the economics of a 1-1 configuration with 54-68 seats could exceed the economics of a 100 seater, even with improvements to engine technology. This thing could burn way less fuel than Concorde, but I don't believe it is going to be half the fuel. Also, why was it that Concorde needed pencil thin windows due to heat, and this supersonic jet can magically have windows larger than a 787? These renders seem like a kid's imagination of the future (albeit, a kid with very good computer graphics skills.)

atcsundevil · Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:19 pm

avi8 wrote:
Any idea what happened at IAD/EWR yesterday? A friend of mine flew IAD-EWR, got delayed because of weather, spent two hours at the tarmac, returned to the gate, then landed at EWR 6 hours after scheduled departure, then waited an hour for a gate and the last cherry on top was that the luggage came out almost 4 hours after they landed.

The weather on the east coast got progressively worse yesterday. It was compounded by VIP movements that put EWR into holding twice, but weather was the real issue. Flying IAD-EWR is ill-advised even on the clearest of days.

gwrudolph · Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:23 pm

cosyr wrote:
intotheair wrote:
It shouldn't be a surprise that there won't be lie-flats on the Boom plane. If you look at all of their conceptual renders, they show what looks like a comfortable but perhaps slightly tight lounger in a 1-1 configuration. Carry-on storage looks tight too.

https://boomsupersonic.com/overture

Looks like that's Governor Newsom sitting in 6B

I don't understand how the seat count pencils out though. The renders all look like the seats are matched to one per window. I count 27 windows, so 27 rows x 2 seats per row = 54 seats. But then under capacity, it lists 65-88 passengers. Boom also promises that it will be all biz class. Either the seats are going to be a lot tighter than what they're showing, or there's something else we don't know.

Those renders make me even more pessimistic that that plane will ever fly. I don't understand how the economics of a 1-1 configuration with 54-68 seats could exceed the economics of a 100 seater, even with improvements to engine technology. This thing could burn way less fuel than Concorde, but I don't believe it is going to be half the fuel. Also, why was it that Concorde needed pencil thin windows due to heat, and this supersonic jet can magically have windows larger than a 787? These renders seem like a kid's imagination of the future (albeit, a kid with very good computer graphics skills.)

They are just renderings. I’ve often found that renderings look way different and better than real life. The original Dreamliner renderings would have had you think it was an all new mode of transportation :-)

adamblang · Tue Oct 26, 2021 1:51 pm

cosyr wrote:
Also, why was it that Concorde needed pencil thin windows due to heat, and this supersonic jet can magically have windows larger than a 787?

I suppose if an F-100 Super Sabre can have a big transparent canopy so can a Boom Overture. Just depends on how much you want to spend on materials and manufacturing.

CALMSP · Tue Oct 26, 2021 2:13 pm

as we come into the last week of October, do we think we'll hear more route announcements tomorrow?

adamblang · Tue Oct 26, 2021 2:28 pm

CALMSP wrote:
as we come into the last week of October, do we think we'll hear more route announcements tomorrow?

Probably.

I finally got around to listening to the earnings call yesterday.

This stood out:

There are some recently announced regulatory changes that are driving momentum in bookings. We were pleased by the announcement that the US entry restrictions on travelers from Europe, UK, India and other international locations, the so-called 212 restrictions will be lifted by November 8 and replaced by a global proof of vaccination requirement for all international visitors entering the US. We look forward to more specific details including the effective date of the changes to avoid any confusion about the new requirements for our customers and employees.

Since the announcement, we have seen a 35 point increase in year-over-two-year system bookings from international point of sale agencies for travel in November and December.

I imagine this second round of route announcements will be more restorations of routes that were suspended due to the pandemic. The two weeks between the federal government announcement and the summer flying announcement are probably to short turn around time to get a bunch of international market resumptions ready to go. (Plus it would muddy the PR message.) But a month seems doable.

Cmac787 · Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:44 am

N436UA A320 is scheduled to exit LCQ MX and ferry to IAD F2744/27 Oct
N48127 757-200 is scheduled to enter ILN MX F2747/27 Oct
N17264 737MAX8 has entered PDX induction. Interesting that this aircraft ferried from PAE instead of BFI.

mm320cap · Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:12 am

Cmac787 wrote:
N436UA A320 is scheduled to exit LCQ MX and ferry to IAD F2744/27 Oct
N48127 757-200 is scheduled to enter ILN MX F2747/27 Oct
N17264 737MAX8 has entered PDX induction. Interesting that this aircraft ferried from PAE instead of BFI.

That was me. We found it odd that we flew out of PAE as well. With the accelerating delivery schedule I suspect it will become more common. Was supposed to deliver Friday but had some maintenance.

Flew to PDX instead of the usual SEA due to maint manpower.

dlphoenix · Wed Oct 27, 2021 3:05 pm

Cardude2 wrote:
Is this a correct list of aircraft still needing Polaris?

763:
N657UA
N658UA
N661UA (stored)
N663UA (stored)

789:
N26952
N35953
N13954
N38955
N45956
N27957
N27958
N17963
N27964
N27965
N26966
N26967
N29971
N24872
N24973
N24974

And all 764's

The google site mainline tab lists N17963 at XMN for Polaris upgrade (with the wrong entry date, should be 10/16)

adamblang · Wed Oct 27, 2021 3:24 pm

United Airlines to launch new hourly shuttle service between New York and D.C. - New York Business Journal

United will be flying

18 daily flights EWR-DCA
5 daily flights EWR-IAD
9 daily flights LGA-IAD

United also said that beginning October 31, all of its flights leaving New York City airports (Newark, LaGuardia and JFK) will have first class seating options available for travelers, which it said will total 7,000 premium seats that's "more than any other airline, and the most in the airline's history."

Cardude2 · Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:29 pm

dlphoenix wrote:
Cardude2 wrote:
Is this a correct list of aircraft still needing Polaris?

763:
N657UA
N658UA
N663UA (stored)

789:
N26952
N35953
N13954
N38955
N45956
N27957
N27958
N17963
N27964
N27965
N26966
N26967
N29971
N24872
N24973
N24974

And all 764's

The google site mainline tab lists N17963 at XMN for Polaris upgrade (with the wrong entry date, should be 10/16)

must've updated it since I took the info from them a few days ago.

763:
N657UA
N658UA
N661UA (stored)
N663UA (stored)

789:
N26952
N35953
N13954
N38955
N45956
N27957
N27958
N27964
N27965
N26966
N26967
N29971
N24972
N24973
N24974

And all 764's

Cardude2 · Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:44 pm

Cardude2 wrote:
dlphoenix wrote:
Cardude2 wrote:
Is this a correct list of aircraft still needing Polaris?

763:
N657UA
N658UA
N663UA (stored)

789:
N26952
N35953
N13954
N38955
N45956
N27957
N27958
N17963
N27964
N27965
N26966
N26967
N29971
N24872
N24973
N24974

And all 764's

The google site mainline tab lists N17963 at XMN for Polaris upgrade (with the wrong entry date, should be 10/16)

must've updated it since I took the info from them a few days ago.

763:
N657UA
N658UA
N661UA (stored)
N663UA (stored)

789:
N26952
N35953
N13954
N38955
N45956
N27957
N27958
N27964
N27965
N26966
N26967
N29971
N24972
N24973
N24974

And all 764's

post inaccurate, N661UA is in hong kong getting converted. N657UA and N658UA have been unknowingly stored yesterday in Goodyear AZ. Anyone have anymore info on the 2 birds (657 and 658)?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net