This is my first ever post on the website, but I've been a long-time lurker. I am a furloughed UAL CSR anxious to return to the industry that I love. I was speaking to a friend who's a CSR at IAD and was caught off guard with the IAD-Kuwait announcement. Apparently, there are now rumors about new IAD-NRT service. Any truth to this? Please feel free to direct me to the appropriate forum if I'm posting in the wrong place.

Thanks in advance!

Hey Ualcsr welcome to the site!!

Well I dont know about the new rumors for this route, but what will they use? Probably a 744, I dont know if their 772 can make it  

Welcome to Airliners.net and it seems to me like your first post is immediately going to stir up quite a discussion here.

Would a possible UA-operated IAD NRT flight complement or replace the existing daily B777 operated by NH? I know there has been talk in the past of UA's taking over this service.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 2): Would a possible UA-operated IAD NRT flight complement or replace the existing daily B777 operated by NH? I know there has been talk in the past of UA's taking over this service.

It would replace NH's daily 772 (sometimes 773). I've been hearing rumors for the last year or so of UA moving JFK-NRT to IAD-NRT. JFK-NRT yield can't be too great with 5? carriers on the route...UA, NH, JL, AA, NW (or maybe NW just ended it).

Quoting RDUDDJI (Reply 3): It would replace NH's daily 772 (sometimes 773). I've been hearing rumors for the last year or so of UA moving JFK-NRT to IAD-NRT. JFK-NRT yield can't be too great with 5? carriers on the route...UA, NH, JL, AA, NW (or maybe NW just ended it).

NW dropped JFK-NRT just before the bankruptcy. So there are four carriers on the route. It is the one hole left in UA's network from IAD. They've been flying a one-stop to NRT from IAD for years now. A nonstop would do wonders for their large IAD presence.

Quoting MD90fan (Reply 1): Well I dont know about the new rumors for this route, but what will they use? Probably a 744, I dont know if their 772 can make it

Clearly, their 777-200ERs can make it. IAD-NRT is a relatively short hop for their transpac network.

N

Why are you on furlough??? United is hiring CSRs like crazy at almost every station. Move to Dulles, Chicago, San Diego, LAX, SFO...they'll take you.

The only rumors I've seen about IAD-NRT have originated and are perpetuated on this forum. We're kind of inbred here. I doubt anyone can cite a credible source of any such rumor.

He is furloughed from MIA. That station took a big hit with the draw down of a gateway to just a line station. He probably likes living in Miami. I hope they don't take the JFK-NRT to make IAD-NRT. We are pulling way too many flights out of the NYC area.

I think it'd be nice to finally see United flying across the pacific ocean from Dulles.

Kevin

NH isn't moving out of IAD anytime soon. The new 773ERs will be a permanent fixture (for now).
UA has two daily flights on the NRT-ICN at similar times, so one of those slots could be used for the NRT-IAD.

I think there is enough room for both carriers on the NRT-IAD because UA's flight would depart in the evening from NRT, while NH's flight would leave in the current morning slot. There's not much choice when it comes to westbound time slots, so both flights will most likely depart within two hours of each other around noon from IAD.

UA codeshare on the NH IAD-NRT flight dont they?

Quoting RDUDDJI (Reply 3): It would replace NH's daily 772 (sometimes 773). I've been hearing rumors for the last year or so of UA moving JFK-NRT to IAD-NRT. JFK-NRT yield can't be too great with 5? carriers on the route...UA, NH, JL, AA, NW (or maybe NW just ended it).

Its not like UA really care about the NYC market is it. If EU-US open skies happens, whats the chance JFK-LHR will get switched to DEN-LHR?

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 6): Why are you on furlough??? United is hiring CSRs like crazy at almost every station. Move to Dulles, Chicago, San Diego, LAX, SFO...they'll take you.

United is not hiring CSR at LAX anytime soon. We still have people on furlough.

MIA recalling 1FT 2PT this week last I heard but that is about it.

IAD makes far more sense for UA to NRT than JFK. It makes far more sense for UA to operate its own aircraft out of IAD and rely on codeshare service from JFK rather than the other way around.

If rumors of AA's possible conversion of JFKNRT service to another route are true, it would bring a gap in NYCNRT service given NW's departure although I think it is very likely DL will start JFKNRT service within the next year which could put further pressure on UA.

If the EU-US open skies agreement is opened, it will put further pressure on UA in NYC. DL and CO will undoubtedly expand/gain new service from NYC and to LON.

The Star Alliance is relatively weak in NYC when compred with the alliances due to the strength/weakness of their US partners.

Quoting USPIT10L (Reply 4): nonstop would do wonders for their large IAD presence.

I haven't heard anything about IAD-NRT but like Ualcsr's friends at IAD I hadn't heard anything about IAD-KWI until the press release. It would be nice to have another regular 744 flight (if that was the a/c chosen) from IAD, currently we only have the 17:15 to FRA.

And if you're interested in coming off furlough IAD would be a good place to start...

  

I had heard from one of my accounts in New England about a year ago that his NH rep told him that NH was going to drop IAD, move flight to ORD, and UA was going into IAD. Whether or not JFK would be dropped or not was not mentioned. It would, however, make sense, from a financial point.

When UA had all of the ex-PA route authority from JFK, only the NRT service made money. The main reason for that was that, unlike LHR, NRT was an already established "hub" that fed high yield routes beyond NRT. LHR, on the other hand, only had feed to a handful of continental European cities. In terms of share in the JFK-NRT market, AA is 1, JAL 2, NH 3 and UA 4. (NW had been in last place, but withdrew.) This route is a money maker for JAL but am surprised about AA rumor that they might be thinking of suspending it.

The South American flights, were essentially JFK to GRU/EZE/CCS services, and the market was more local, whereas AA & CO were able to feed JFK & EWR from beyond points. When UA moved the South American flying to IAD, these flights started to do very well financially.

One last thing on this diatribe - when I was in sales at UA, and we had "info sessions", we were shown a video by then-president Dutta which explained the logic behind how routes were chosen. It went something like hub to hub, such as ORD-DEN, always were profitable because UA was a dominant carrier in both cities, and was feeding off the strengths of the network. Hub to STAR cities, such as ORD-LHR, were marginally profitable because on one end, there was a true hub, which would always play on the strangths of the network. But STAR to STAR cities, such as JFK to LHR, would never make money, because the carrier was not strong in either city and only a hub "connection" could support it. Although UA would have liked to build up the likes of NYC & MIA, the financial committment to add real estate, equipment and routes would have been staggering. (This was pre-LCC days, so that could have changed by now). If you factor the FFP into the equation (in NY AA w/Citibank, CO w/Chase), this skews things as well.

Don

Quoting Scrappy74 (Reply 14): And if you're interested in coming off furlough IAD would be a good place to start...

I was never furloughed by any airline--the thread-starter was.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 13): If rumors of AA's possible conversion of JFKNRT service to another route are true, it would bring a gap in NYCNRT service given NW's departure although I think it is very likely DL will start JFKNRT service within the next year which could put further pressure on UA.

I have heard that AA's JFK-NRT is performing well. Of course not the same story for SJC-NRT which will enter the history books in October. Either way if UA drops out of the NYC-Japan race, DL could very well re-enter the market given their aggressive focus on JFK lately. Of course they'd have to shuffle their fleet to dedicate 2 777's for the route.

However UA operating IAD-NRT is long overdue. With a hub at both ends, UA's large customer base in DC, and decent O&D and yields, I would think it would be a no-brainer - especially if they tagged it to PEK (Don't they still have Japan-China rights?).

Ramprat---You're absolutely right; I was furloughed out of Miami in 2003. I was born and raised here and have family commitments and another full-time job which keep me in Miami. I have friends who've transferred to MSP and IAD and have been lucky to enough to "give away hours" and be able to commute, but I'm a little scared doing it because if it doesn't work out and I'd have to quit, I'd lose all recall rights. Honestly, I agree with Scrappy that IAD would be a great place to go to for UAL right now, much more so that ORD. It just seems UAL is making more of a commitment out of IAD.

Hiflyer---I also heard the rumor about the recall --1FT, 2PT---supposedly due to some CSRs retiring soon, not growth. However, as you probably know, there have been rumors circulating for some time that once the new north terminal opens at MIA sometime in early 2007 (???), Star Alliance is obligated to have a minimum of 30 to 35 flights and it will fall on United to make up the difference so hopefully, if all that is true, then UA can have a bigger recall here and I'll be back in; I'm not too far off from the current seniority being called (I was actually trained in Apollo, not FastAir, so that gives you an idea!) I can see UA adding TED flights to IAD, especially as FLL is maxed out, and reinstating LAX and SFO (using TED) and maybe adding LAS, I think, would work well in the market. I've heard about adding Caribbean flights from here, but I can't see that happening given AA's presence in Miami. I don't think we'll ever see Deep South flying on UA from MIA again. Although it cost me my job, having the Latin American "gateway" in Miami made absolutely no sense; I believe that only MIA-EZE was profitable 'til the end, but those flights are now doing great out of IAD. I wish though, that UA would make a bigger commitment to Latin America, perhaps flying from IAD-CCS, IAD-BOG, IAD-SCL and IAD-LIM

I really should've started another thread about this; I'm just a novice so please bear with me.

Thanks to all for the comments to my post and the warm welcomes!

Correction to above----meant to say the new "South" terminal. I know the "North" terminal is for American.

Back to the original thread a bit----how does UA do out of JFK on JFK-LHR and JFK-NRT? The more I think about it, the more moving the flights to IAD makes sense. There's no connectivity for UA out of JFK and enough local competition to keep margins below profit levels. Still, those flights have been around for a long time and know that UA is not one to keep unprofitable routes in its system.

When I was in UA sales, all of the big corporate clients wanted frequency between JFK and LHR. They **despised** the 767 on the route versus the 747s that BA flew/flies, and their product. UA had the 777 out of EWR, but it was a COG (Change of gauge) from ORD until the ORD-LHR nonstops started, at which point it went to a 767. UA didn't make the committment to JFK-LHR that AA did, and I remember someone remarking that UA never had more flights in the market than PA did in its hey day - that is, 3 during non-peak, and 4 peak season. Hate to say it, but think UA would do far better in IAD-NRT than they do JFK-NRT. In addition to the US feed, the could pick up additional Latin America traffic over IAD that is currently being routed via AC, as well as AA & CO and some UA via ORD. RG withdrawing from Brazil-Japan market has left a huge void, and our flight (JAL) is always full. And yes, Shellflat seats coming online in late October....

My take on this rumor is that there isn't really a demand for both ANA and UA to operate IAD-NRT. I would agree that UA may operate this route if ANA was to drop it. However, I am not convinced that ANA is getting ready to drop IAD in order to cooperate with its Star Alliance partner UA. I think ANA's IAD-NRT held its own weight for many years by being the sole operator connecting the the capitals of the U.S. and Japan. ANA is currently in a growth mode. It also reported recently that its North American routes are doing well. For UA, the codesharing is probably the way...and I wouldn't count on Japan-Latin America traffic via IAD due to Visa problems...and the connecting traffic from Asia to other east coast cities in the U.S. are simply handled at ORD. Therefore, I don't see connecting Asia and IAD hub is a necessity at this point.

I also do not believe UA's JFK-NRT is a bad performer mainly because of the connection feed to its Asian hub in NRT to go places beyond Japan. That's something that AA does not offer on its own metal from JFK. Besides, if UA pulled out of JFK-NRT to establish IAD-NRT (drop more seats than it needs), AA would become the sole American carrier to operate JFK-NRT. I would say UA would keep JFK-NRT. UA should still be very competive in that market to compete with AA.

[Edited 2006-05-27 18:11:01]

UA is the only Star Alliance carrier flying between London and NYC. They won't give up that route. Too many frequent flyers from all the Star Alliance members fly that route between the major business and entertainment capitals. Star Alliance wouldn't disservice them by not offering the route

As an anecdote only, I've flown UA twice to and from NYC-NRT. Both times were packed in all classes both ways. Don't know about the cargo loads down below.

Hey Tokyo - while I agree w/you on these points, it doesn't mean that it can't happen. The Sales Dept for United fought tooth and nail to keep the South American flying at JFK - none of which was profitable due to lack of feed and UA not being a major player in the NYC market - but lost. It was moved to IAD where, between th e local market and feed, it does very well.

AA does better from JFK for a variety of reasons. 1) AA is a huge presence at JFK as well as in NY market 2) Frequent flyer program, AAdvantage, is largest in NY metro area, and is tied in w/largest bank, Citibank 3) AA has feed from throughout the Eastern seabord as well as deep South America. Look, I don;t want to see UA pull out of JFK - if they ever decide to. I spent 24 years of my life there, and am not thrilled about a lot of the changes. But JFK is to AA what IAD is to UA - a strong hub. (Have you had a chance to see what AA is building at JFK? The check-in area for their new terminal is bigger than Giants Stadium.)

As for the JFK must have 2 US carriers argument, don't know that that even flies anymore, especially w/fuel costs. EWR is a powerful hub, getting bigger each day, thanks to CO - so, you do have a minimum of 2 carriers serving the NY market, versus the specific airport. UA's reduction in the NY market has been huge. EWR has gone from 8 gates to 4, w/another one possibly being sold to B6. LGA & JFK service have shrunk, and they're concentrating on profitable flying to the hubs. 1 NRT & 1 LHR flights are the sole exceptions. The EWR flight attendant domocile will be closed come 01JUN, and combined w/JFK. So NY is not a growth market for them, but it would seem more of a fine tuning at this point. But as I said, I'd hate to see UA scale back anymore than it has in NY.

Quoting MD90fan (Reply 1): I dont know if their 772 can make it

In winter and fall it's going to be extremely tight on payload given UA's saeating for their TransPac 777's...just pax no excess ACL for cargo...Also depends on if they can/will over fly kamchatka or not which saves 40mins and about 10,000lbs of fuel. Through the summer months their payloads will be limited by any temp above 15-17C which is the highest temp 648Klb MTOW is available for a PW powered 772 out of IAD...At the most severe conditions available TOW is cut to 630Klb or so but average avail MTOW in summer will be around 640Klb. The PW engine performance does limit capabilities for 777's flying this route, especially out of IAD. One of the reasons NH is moving to the 777-300ER...

Quoting RDUDDJI (Reply 3): It would replace NH's daily 772 (sometimes 773). I've been hearing rumors for the last year or so of UA moving JFK-NRT to IAD-NRT. JFK-NRT yield can't be too great with 5? carriers on the route...UA, NH, JL, AA, NW (or maybe NW just ended it).

Regardless of what UA does they will not "replace" the NH daily flight which will change to a daily 777-300ER July 1, or as soon as reg JA735A enters service...no payload concerns on those ships, believe me.



-widebodyphotog

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 17): DL could very well re-enter the market given their aggressive focus on JFK lately

No way this will happen.

B4real,
are you going to send me a restaurant gift certificate when DL announces JFKNRT service, which could come as early as next spring... and which they could easily do w/ their current fleet of 8 777s.

avatordon,
good posts. you understand the business well.
UA certainly hasn't wanted to pull down NYC but they have had no choice up against much more entrenched competition. Unfortunately, UA has allowed itself to drop to the #4 carrier in both the transatlantic and Latin regions and even worse in NYC. It's mighty hard to convince passengers to fly you with so little service in such big regions of the country and world. NW filled their 744s from JFK to NRT but they relied on low yield connections. As carriers operate nonstops to Asia from NYC, UA's NRT hub becomes less and less necessary. With all carriers, do we not have nonstops from NYC to SIN, BKK, ICN, PEK, HKG,... TPE (?)... plus NRT... and possibly more that I'm missing. most of the major Asian destinations. On the other hand, very few of these destinations are served nonstop from IAD. UA cannot continue to compete in the NYC-Tokyo route as #4 when all of the connecting traffic is being cut out from under them. Also, AA builds traffic based on its strength in NYC and its JAL relationship at NRT. NH basically duplicates and adds a few more cities to UA's list from NRT.

As for rumors that AA might withdraw from JFK, I am simply working w/ other people's rumors. I'd be surprised if it happens but I have no knowledge of how well they do.

[Edited 2006-05-27 20:26:36]

Thanks Worldtraveler - excellent points. The technology that provides nonstop flights from NYC area (JFK & EWR) to most major Asian cities has somewhat rendered UA/NW hubs in NRT almost unnecessary.

From EWR, CO offers nonstops to NRT,HKG,BJS,DEL and has applied for PVG. SQ provides nonstop service to SIN.

From JFK, in addition to NRT, various carriers provide nonstop service to ICN, BJS, ICN, HKG and BKK. Don't recall if TPE is nonstop or not, and I understand PVG nonstop service will start soon on MU or CZ.

If you could see the data of where the true traffic is from NYC to Asia, it would blow you away. HKG & ICN have more point to point traffic from NYC than NRT.

Besides, for the corporate traveler, time is money. On UA, its better to connect over ORD or SFO to get to Asia as nonstops other than TYO are offered. In addition, there are additional points that feed IAD that UA is not capturing becuse it goes to NH. Star Alliance notwithstanding, UA & NH are still competitors - and UA could/should grab every passenger it can. It does a GREAT job doing that as it is; **if** it flew IAD-NRT, would do it even more effectively.

Quoting Avatordon (Reply 27): Star Alliance notwithstanding, UA & NH are still competitors - and UA could/should grab every passenger it can.

Amen. All too frequently it seems to be forgotten that alliance airlines still compete against each other on numerous routes. I personally think the route would do well for UA. I expect UA to continue to expand int'l service out of IAD. I think Kuwait was just the beginning. ORD is too congested, prone to delays, and strong competition from AA. DEN just isn't feasible for most routes (perhaps NRT or some European destinations.) It doesn't have the O&D like the Washington DC area. Int'l is were the    is and IAD is UA's best shot.

Avatordon - great posts!

WorldXplorer

[Edited 2006-05-27 22:01:56]

WorldXplorer---I also think that Kuwait is just the beginning for UA's international expansion out of IAD. Although NYC obviously has a larger pax base than DC, competition at NYC is much fiercer than in DC which is still relatively virgin territory when it comes to international flying; I think UA is in the best position to capture that market. I could see IAD-NRT being profitable from the start. What other routes do you think could come onboard? Here are a few I think are feasible:

IAD-BOM (I know we've tried India before, but this seems like the right time),
IAD-WAW,
IAD-DUB (using p.s. service on 757s),
IAD-IST,
IAD-JNB,

plus the Latin American destinations I mentioned above.

Quoting Ualcsr (Reply 29): What other routes do you think could come onboard?

I have thought that DXB should be served by a US carrier for quite a while now. I also think that Eastern Europe is virgin territory. But Eastern Europe would be out of character for UA. My money is on Asia. What about avoiding the usual Indian spots of DEL and BOM and going for other under served markets like HYD and BLR. Just guesses.

Out of your list I am most skeptical about JNB. Granted I do not know what the loads are like for SAA out of IAD, but is there room for UA on that route? I will be curious to see how DL does out of ATL.

WorldXplorer

Quoting Ramprat74 (Reply 7): I hope they don't take the JFK-NRT to make IAD-NRT.

I also hope they don't. But I don't think that will happen.

Quoting Humberside (Reply 10): whats the chance JFK-LHR will get switched to DEN-LHR?

Zero. UA is down to one flight on JFK-LHR. If they decide to start JFK-LHR, they'll probably use the slots allocated to the second LAX-LHR flight (which currently aren't being used).

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 13): If the EU-US open skies agreement is opened, it will put further pressure on UA in NYC. DL and CO will undoubtedly expand/gain new service from NYC and to LON. The Star Alliance is relatively weak in NYC when compred with the alliances due to the strength/weakness of their US partners.

I agree that Star is pretty weak in NYC, which is why I don't see UA pulling either JFK-LHR or JFK-NRT. To do so would be to abandon any UA international service from JFK. I don't think that will happen.

As for DL and CO initiating new service to LON, it won't be into LHR because there are no slots currently being sold.

Quoting Ualcsr (Reply 29): IAD-JNB,

Quoting WorldXplorer (Reply 30): Out of your list I am most skeptical about JNB. Granted I do not know what the loads are like for SAA out of IAD, but is there room for UA on that route?

Doesn't UA codehsare on SAA's IAD flights. I cant see any need for two carriers on the route

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 31): As for DL and CO initiating new service to LON, it won't be into LHR because there are no slots currently being sold.

Assuming EU-US open skies happens, they could make offers to airlines (maybe AF/KL with the Skyteam connection) or one of the smaller airlines at LHR. It wouldn't be cheap but they could secure LHR access if they were prepared to pay for it. However in the case of DL I dont think they could afford to at the moment

[Edited 2006-05-27 23:11:16]

Everybody's forgetting the obvious - UA doesn't have many extra aircraft. The IAD-NRT rumors have been around for a long time. Further, if UA was to do it, it would likely be in a 747 given that UA recently expanded he 747 base out of IAD.

UA recently said at some frequent flyer breakfast events that JNB while always looked at, is simply not in the cards right now.

Quoting Mymiles2go (Reply 33): UA doesn't have many extra aircraft.

Neither did CO, but with increased utilization and a/c swapping on other routes, they got their int'l expansion done. Plus I thought that UA had 4 744's parked at VCV (N172UA, N185UA, N106UA, N192UA).

WorldXplorer

Granted, thre rumors have been around for a long time, but the price of fuel being what it is hasn't. If some of these carriers make the changes, it will be because they're forced to, not because they want to. The days of the no/low profit prestige routes are over. My own carrier, JAL, is suspending service on routes globally (NRT-LHR from 2 daily to 1 daily, LAX-KIX, terminated altogether.) In the end, each carrier will have to make business decisions based on where the maximum revenue potential will come from. Be it JFK or Chicken Lips, NE.....  

Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 17): I would think it would be a no-brainer - especially if they tagged it to PEK (Don't they still have Japan-China rights?).

UA would have to discontinue one of its current China flights to restart Japan-China service. Anyway IAD-ORD-PEK is considerably shorter than IAD-NRT-PEK, so I'm not sure how attractive it would be.

The 772 can easily make IAD-NRT. UA uses a 772 on JFK-NRT, as does AA and CO flies a 772 from EWR-NRT. DL uses a 772 from ATL to NRT. The distances are very well within the plane's range.

As for UA moving JFK-NRT to IAD-NRT, it is a possibility and would not be at all surprising. I could also see them dump the last JFK-LHR flight they are operating and increase the IAD-LHR frequencies to 4 per day, leaving JFK with just LAX and SFO service, all in "PS" subfleet.

BUT........United still has a good share of the NY area corporate travel mkt and is an established carrier on the NYC-Tokyo run. Has been for a very long time.

We took UA800 NRT-JFK last year - it's a nice flight and gets you to New York before 4 p.m. We were supposed to do NRT-SFO-JFK and arrive at 7:30 or so p.m. but our NRT-SFO (UA852 I believe, the early departure) was delayed by at least four hours so they put us on the nonstop. As much as I like the ps service SFO-JFK it was great to arrive 3+ hours early. The crew was excellent and the flight really went by fast (we had C seats) on the 777. I'd hate to see this one go but IAD makes sense.

Quoting ContinentalEWR (Reply 37): As for UA moving JFK-NRT to IAD-NRT, it is a possibility and would not be at all surprising. I could also see them dump the last JFK-LHR flight they are operating and increase the IAD-LHR frequencies to 4 per day,

As I stated earlier, UA offers the only Star Alliance flight between two important business centers, NYC and London, which is heavily utilized by frequent flyers from all Star Alliance member airlines. That flight isn't going away. Star Alliance will not allow such a big hole in its network. Now we could talk about p.s. United service being implemented on 757s but they won't abandon the route.

I don't think United will ever drop JFK-LHR, but it would perhaps make sense to put a ps 757 on that run....

Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 39): As I stated earlier, UA offers the only Star Alliance flight between two important business centers, NYC and London, which is heavily utilized by frequent flyers from all Star Alliance member airlines. That flight isn't going away.

Perhaps. However UA isn't going to operate a flight just to insure the Star Alliance can offer service between NYC-LHR. UA will put their resources that will best suit UA, not the alliance.

Nonetheless, I do agree with you - I don't see JFK-LHR going away but it will be becuase UA makes money on the flight - not becasue Star needs a presence. At the end of the day, UA needs to make money for UA.

Quoting Ualcsr (Reply 18): Hiflyer---I also heard the rumor about the recall --1FT, 2PT---supposedly due to some CSRs retiring soon, not growth. However, as you probably know, there have been rumors circulating for some time that once the new north terminal opens at MIA sometime in early 2007 (???), Star Alliance is obligated to have a minimum of 30 to 35 flights and it will fall on United to make up the difference so hopefully, if all that is true, then SA)">UA can have a bigger recall here and I'll be back in; I'm not too far off from the current seniority being called (I was actually trained in Apollo, not FastAir, so that gives you an idea!) I can see SA)">UA adding TED flights to IAD, especially as FLL is maxed out, and reinstating LAX and SFO (using TED) and maybe adding LAS, I think, would work well in the market. I've heard about adding Caribbean flights from here, but I can't see that happening given SA)">AA's presence in Miami. I don't think we'll ever see Deep South flying on SA)">UA from MIA again. Although it cost me my job, having the Latin American "gateway" in Miami made absolutely no sense; I believe that only MIA-EZE was profitable 'til the end, but those flights are now doing great out of IAD. I wish though, that SA)">UA would make a bigger commitment to Latin America, perhaps flying from IAD-CCS, IAD-BOG, IAD-SCL and IAD-LIM

Quoting Ualcsr (Reply 29): IAD-BOM (I know we've tried India before, but this seems like the right time), IAD-WAW, IAD-DUB (using p.s. service on 757s), IAD-IST, IAD-JNB,

Once SA)">UA gets the planes necessary to start expanding in a large scale internationally, I think IAD-WAW, IAD-CCS, and IAD-SCL would do well. IAD-JNB is already served by SA, and I doubt there's any real demand from IAD to IST or DUB, especially since DUB was/is served by EI (they may have dropped it--I'm not sure).

Anything to India would be through ORD or SFO, there is just too much traffic in either market to ignore. As for MIA, we'll just have to see how the South Terminal unfolds. SA)">UA has had problems feeding their MIA-LatAm flights in the past, and SA)">AA has only gotten stronger in South Florida since 2003. LIM was discontinued in 2000, and seeing what LH and RG have done there, seems to be very low-yielding for Star Alliance. OneWorld seems to have the MIA-LatAm markets sewn up for good.

If VS ever joins an alliance - and my money would be on STAR, due to SQ equity - BD notwithstanding, would make UA's one flight in JFK-LHR market somewhat redundant. One corporate account I had - whose single largest international O&D was JFK-LHR - used VS as a "back up" to keep AA/BA out, as VS had the lift that UA didn't; and this was in the time frame when UA operated 3 JFK and 1 EWR trips. Tilton himself has said, if a route doesn't make money, it will be pulled. These folks are not taking any prisoners; alliance, or not.

USPIT10L--

I checked EI's website and couldn't find any service from IAD to Ireland, although they might do some kind of code sharing with SA)">AA. I still think DUB from IAD using p.s. could work given the business climate in Ireland.

You're right about the SA code share and JNB, but I do think it's important that UA establish some type of presence in Africa from IAD. Could you see any airports where it might be feasible? Nairobi maybe?

It is impossible to compete with SA)">AA/OneWorld to Latin America out of Miami and they have in fact, gotten stronger. This is SA)">AA's cash cow and assuming someone would try to compete, SA)">AA (and Miami-Dade County) would make it very difficult--not to mention that LAN also does very well out of here. It made all the sense in the world for UA to move Latin American operations to IAD although I would like to see that operation expand. Here's another one--IAD-PTY?

Have you been down here recently? From the outside at least, the South Terminal looks very nice and almost complete. It's coming with the huge cost overruns you can expect from the Miami-Dade County Commission, but it seems to be in much better shape than the North Terminal.

Technical question----why do the letters SA appear everytime I write SA)">AA?

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 26): B4real, are you going to send me a restaurant gift certificate when DL announces JFKNRT service, which could come as early as next spring... and which they could easily do w/ their current fleet of 8 777s.

No, I won't give you a dinner for it. But, do you have any indication that they would do this? Here are my reasons against DL operating JFK-NRT:

-Limited 777 inventory
-JFK-NRT fairly competitive market and well served among Int'l routes (AA/UA/JL/NH)
-The route didn't last before
-NW left the route/market - but they have very little feed @ JFK, sizeable feed @ NRT
-Didn't they sell their slots to FedEx?
-And my gut says no!

Quoting B4real (Reply 45): NW left the route/market - but they have very little feed @ JFK, sizeable feed @ NRT

Supposedly, once NW gets the 787, JFK-NRT will return.

Quoting Flyguy1 (Reply 46): Supposedly, once NW gets the 787, JFK-NRT will return.

That would make sense.

Quoting Avatordon (Reply 43): Tilton himself has said, if a route doesn't make money, it will be pulled. These folks are not taking any prisoners; alliance, or not.

Thank you! This is ultimately and always the bottom line.

EI didn't serve IAD - twas BWI!   After 9/11, they suspended both BWI & EWR. (Wish they flew to EWR!) I remember reading years ago, that EI had wanted to serve PHL as well, as PHL had something like the single largest Irish community in the US (found that hard to believe, but the article said it). EI was denied the service because PA & TW were not allowed to serve DUB at the time. Not bashing BWI, but even w/IAD as a STAR "hub", think EI would have done better from there versus BWI due to all of the high-tech companies in the surrounding areas.