UA New Int'l Routes: Where Are The Ac Coming From?

skycruiser · Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:54 am

Recently, UA has announced the following and loaded into schedules already:

SFO-TPE 744 daily
IAD-FCO 772 daily
SFO-FRA 772 daily (additional frequency)
SFO-HKG 772 3x/wk
ORD-PVG 744 daily (equipment upgrade)

and...
IAD-PEK 744 daily (not yet loaded)

I thought that UA did not have too many spare widebodies lying around. These new routes require at least 10 airframes. Where are these planes coming from? Are these aircraft in storage? Does anyboy have info on UA's aircraft utilization?

Thanks!

adizzy · Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:11 am

I would say that they are coming from the dessert!

LAXdude1023 · Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:54 am

Once again we (LAX) get passed up. Sad

skycruiser · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:15 am

LAXDude,

LAX gets seasonal additional frequency on LAX-LHR with 763... not like the routes of the mid-90s though...

planetime · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:20 am

Quoting Skycruiser (Thread starter):
I thought that UA did not have too many spare widebodies lying around. These new routes require at least 10 airframes. Where are these planes coming from? Are these aircraft in storage? Does anyboy have info on UA's aircraft utilization?

Also there is a SYD-LAX flight that they add additional during the Southern Summer.

Maybe they might take them from the desert.

Stitch · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:21 am

Quoting Skycruiser (Thread starter):
Where are these planes coming from?

UA will be reducing the domestic hub-to-hub positioning flights and re-scheduling to allow the planes to arrive from one international destination and then depart for the next one.

Quoting ADiZzy (Reply 1):
I would say that they are coming from the dessert!

UA has no 777 equipment in the desert and the only 744s there, while in UA colors, are no longer owned by UA and cannot be directly returned to service.

warreng24 · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:30 am

Does UA currently have any 763 or 763ER's parked? If any are parked, are they owned by Lessors or UA?

What was the CASM of the 762's which caused them to be retired? Or were they getting close to needing C/D checks?

Stitch · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:40 am

Quoting Warreng24 (Reply 6):
Does UA currently have any 763 or 763ER's parked? If any are parked, are they owned by Lessors or UA?

To my knowledge, UA has no 767-300s in the desert. They bought four (I believe) from their lessors when those lessors refused to reduce their rates and were preparing to take them back.

Quoting Warreng24 (Reply 6):
What was the CASM of the 762's which caused them to be retired? Or were they getting close to needing C/D checks?

All of UA's 767-200s were sold to another company. I can't remember if they are in revenue passenger service or were scheduled for cargo conversion.

Flyer732 · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:42 am

I've been told that there were "extra" 744's floating around. I used to see them doing AMC charters quite frequently...but I don't know if its still the case.

DC8FanJet · Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:18 am

There were 747's doing military work, won't be come spring.

kaitak · Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:21 am

Are you sure IAD-PEK is a 744? I thought it would be a 772?

kiwiandrew · Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:27 am

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 10):
Are you sure IAD-PEK is a 744? I thought it would be a 772?

definitely a 744 - it has been mentioned on more than one thread that by awarding the route to UA using 744s they would actually be adding more capacity between the USA and China than by awarding to either AA or CO using 772ERs and I think it was one of the points that UA focussed on in their application ( along with the "Capital city to Capital city " argument )

shane · Sat Jan 20, 2007 8:27 am

Quoting Skycruiser (Thread starter):
SFO-FRA 772 daily (additional frequency)

When does this start? From what I can see on the schedule they've just replaced flight 900 which was a 744 with flight 926 which is now a 772.

[Edited 2007-01-20 00:38:24]

legacyins · Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:55 am

Quoting Shane (Reply 12):
When does this start? From what I can see on the schedule they've just replaced flight 900 which was a 744 with flight 926 which is now a 772.

UA 900 will remain a 744. They are starting a second daily flight with a 777. Details as follows:
The added service, which will be on a Boeing 777, begins on April 24, 2007, is scheduled as follows:

Flight: Route: Depart: Arrive:
UA926 San Francisco- Frankfurt 6:55 p.m. 3:00 p.m. (next day)
UA927 Frankfurt-San Francisco 5:25 p.m. 7:59 p.m.(same day)
(beginning 4/25)

CaliforniaMate · Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:06 am

is the 2nd SFO-HKG flight really being flown by a 772? Didnt think it could make it to HKG. Its usually (and predominantly flown by 744 by everyone else)

IPFreely · Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:14 pm

Quoting Skycruiser (Thread starter):
Where are these planes coming from?

Maybe they know of a soon-to-be-announced intercontinental regional jet and they're planning to put these routes out for bid by Skywest, Mesa, Transstates, ShuttleAmerica, Colgan, GoJet, Republic, Chataqua, and BillyBob's Flying Service. Smile

LipeGIG · Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:28 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
UA has no 777 equipment in the desert and the only 744s there, while in UA colors, are no longer owned by UA and cannot be directly returned to service.

What about 3 ex-RG 772 planes with PW engines ? I believe even the 772A (non-ER) can fly IAD-FCO, am i right ?

Felipe

LAXintl · Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:43 pm

Quoting CaliforniaMate (Reply 14):
is the 2nd SFO-HKG flight really being flown by a 772?

Yes indeed, along with the 2nd ORD-HKG which is a 777 starting April 3rd as well.

In addition there will be a bunch of other swaps including both ORD-NRT's becoming 777s starting late March, while all 4 current China routes become 744s instead of current 2 777/ 2 744.

Finalized schedules thru June were just loaded this week.

TinkerBelle · Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:06 pm

Quoting CaliforniaMate (Reply 14):
is the 2nd SFO-HKG flight really being flown by a 772? Didnt think it could make it to HKG. Its usually (and predominantly flown by 744 by everyone else)

SQ uses a 772ER so it can be done with a 772ER. I believe SQ has had to make some tech stops in TPE lately coz of the pacific headwinds.

legacyins · Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:27 pm

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 18):
SQ uses a 772ER so it can be done with a 772ER. I believe SQ has had to make some tech stops in TPE lately coz of the pacific headwinds.

If you are refering to SQ 1/2, SFO-HKG, SQ flies a 744 on the route. SQ 16/15 uses the 772 and soon to be a 773 on the SFO-INC route.

TinkerBelle · Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:37 pm

Quoting Legacyins (Reply 19):
If you are refering to SQ 1/2, SFO-HKG, SQ flies a 744 on the route. SQ 16/15 uses the 772 and soon to be a 773 on the SFO-INC route.

You're right. My bad. Which one has been making a tech stop in TPE lately?

legacyins · Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:50 pm

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 20):
Which one has been making a tech stop in TPE lately?

SQ1/2, the 744

United777atGU · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:25 pm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 17):
Yes indeed, along with the 2nd ORD-HKG which is a 777 starting April 3rd as well.

There's no way in hell that we can make ORD to HKG on a 772 (with our derated engines)....is there??? a 772ER??? Come on. That's almost 15 hours dude. Is it possible? I know JFK-NRT and IAD-NRT are pushing 14, if not 14 full-fledged, but ORD-HKG on a 772. They must plan on blocking seats. Or maybe they aren't going to be filling it up with pax and cargo... What the hell do I know? I don't. But as much as people talk about our 777s being sub-par to so many others, how would our 772s make it that far?

Don't take this as criticism. It's not. It's utter shock. By the way, if it can do it, the tech stops will be very inconveniencing for pax, no?

daron4000 · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:31 pm

Actually, UA has been flying ORD-HKG 10x weekly for over a year now, all with 744 aircraft. Therefore, I disagree with what LAXintl has just said.

LAXintl · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:44 pm

Quoting Daron4000 (Reply 23):
I disagree with what LAXintl has just said.

What is there to disagree? Why not look up the schedules? The 2nd ORD-HKG becomes a 777.

ORD-HKG UA829 1027-1510+1 Nonstop B777 Tue/Thu/Sat
HKG-ORD UA828 1720-1915 Nonstop B777 Wed/Fri/Sun

LTU932 · Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:44 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
UA has no 777 equipment in the desert

What about the two former UA 772ERs at AFW, which used to fly for RG? Anyone know who might be leasing those, because in the end, UA could just re-lease them (they're -222ERs after all, which they stored due to the bankruptcy if I'm not mistaken)

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 16):
I believe even the 772A (non-ER) can fly IAD-FCO, am i right ?

IAD-FCO is 3915 nm still air distance. It might be doable for a 772A.

AF086 · Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:00 pm

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 25):
What about the two former UA 772ERs at AFW, which used to fly for RG? Anyone know who might be leasing those, because in the end, UA could just re-lease them (they're -222ERs after all, which they stored due to the bankruptcy if I'm not mistaken)

Actually there are 3 ex-RG 772 at AFW. Given that at VEM/GIG's hangar there are still 2 772s (PP-VRB (777-2Q8/ER) and PP-VRF (777-222/ER) and that the others are gone (PP-VRA (777-2Q8/ER - Gone to Aeromexico), PP-VRC (777-236 - std @ Marana), PP-VRD (777-236 - to be scrapped), PP-VRE (777-222/ER - unknown location), PP-VRI (777-222 - unknown location) and PP-VRJ (777-222 - unknown location), my guess is that those 3 triple-7s (former VRE/I/J) are at AFW and that the 4th ex-UA bird (VRF) might join them pretty soon.
But would UA be interested in leasing them again? So far nobody heard of these planes finding themselves new operators...yet. So is UA wants them back it's time to go after those planes.

TinkerBelle · Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:54 pm

Quoting United777atGU (Reply 22):
There's no way in hell that we can make ORD to HKG on a 772 (with our derated engines)....is there??? a 772ER???

UA's derated 772's might not be able to do it but I believe a 772ER will do SFO-HKG with no restrictions. no??

LAXdude1023 · Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:06 pm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 24):
What is there to disagree? Why not look up the schedules? The 2nd ORD-HKG becomes a 777.

ORD-HKG on flights 829/828 are on 744's according to UA's website and their schedules.

LAXintl · Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:18 pm

Look for flights past April 3rd.

Hope this screen shot helps.

Big version: Width: 1281 Height: 1025 File size: 143kb

[Edited 2007-01-20 09:29:53]

unitednrt · Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:31 pm

Laxintl is quite correct, as it is in reservations. The B777-222ER can make the flight.

ZKNBX · Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:48 pm

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 17):
Yes indeed, along with the 2nd ORD-HKG which is a 777 starting April 3rd as well.

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 18):
SQ uses a 772ER so it can be done with a 772ER. I believe SQ has had to make some tech stops in TPE lately coz of the pacific headwinds.

Maybe UA will refit or re-certify with engines that are not derated? Is this technically possible? I agree with much of the above, that UA's 777-222ERs are not really up to ORD-HKG or LAX-HKG - nor were they really up to West coast USA to Australia, and were (correct me if I am wrong) payload restricted from time to time between LAX and AKL when they were flying that route.

ZK-NBT · Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:08 pm

The second ORD-HKG flight appears to go back to a 744 from July.

Quoting ZKNBX (Reply 31):

Maybe UA will refit or re-certify with engines that are not derated? Is this technically possible?

I believe it is but not without a rather large amount of $ required which may make it unviable.

hiflyer · Sat Jan 20, 2007 9:45 pm

My understanding on the ex RG birds is that maintenance had been deferred on all 4 for quite a period of time. The one still in GIG is reported to have no engines currently...the IFE on all of them is reported in disrepair. I would suspect that a D check would be required and an interior refurb. The question would be who pays for it...the owner or the new user....what would be the rates on the aircraft once done....and where could the aircraft be slotted into a repair facility that works with UA to bring them back to UA current standard 3 class config. (it would be easier to bring the a models back as a 2 class as no inseat IFE video is required).

Further...these aircraft were lease rejections in court by UA. Whether they could now come to an agreement with an owner they refused before would also be a large factor. However, remember the owner has lost a good sum of money on these aircraft with the rejection by UA...sitting in the desert...and then the failed operation by RG and now the poor condition of the aircraft.

Pratt powered 777's are in less demand due to shorter ranges...and 2 are a models to boot. I would suspect that a UA position could be all 4 or none with the lessor picking up the maintenance/refurb costs and a lease cost comparable to the levels originally rejected. That would be a tough nut for the owner to swallow but it would mean a long stable lease now.

Qantas744er · Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:12 am

Quoting United777atGU (Reply 22):
There's no way in hell that we can make ORD to HKG on a 772 (with our derated engines)....is there??? a 772ER??? Come on. That's almost 15 hours dude. Is it possible? I know JFK-NRT and IAD-NRT are pushing 14, if not 14 full-fledged, but ORD-HKG on a 772. They must plan on blocking seats. Or maybe they aren't going to be filling it up with pax and cargo... What the hell do I know? I don't. But as much as people talk about our 777s being sub-par to so many others, how would our 772s make it that far?

Don't take this as criticism. It's not. It's utter shock. By the way, if it can do it, the tech stops will be very inconveniencing for pax, no?

Quoting ZKNBX (Reply 31):
Maybe UA will refit or re-certify with engines that are not derated? Is this technically possible? I agree with much of the above, that UA's 777-222ERs are not really up to ORD-HKG or LAX-HKG - nor were they really up to West coast USA to Australia, and were (correct me if I am wrong) payload restricted from time to time between LAX and AKL when they were flying that route.

Ok it is time to clear things up......!!!

United has PW4090 engines just like KE:

The PW4090 has 90,000Lbs of thrust!

Compared to other engines this engine is a little weaker and yes you are correct but compared to the RR892 with 92,000Lbs only 2000Lbs less of thrust.

Here is my proof..

I will give you a example for 1 plane from the fleet of KE and one from UA

KE 77-28E (ER)

HL7743 MTOW 292567 Kgs. PW4090

UA 777-222 (ER)

N798UA MTOW 290909 Kgs. PW4090

As you can see KE has a higher MTOW with the same engines...

(MTOW) Maximum Take off Weight

And why does KE have a higher MTOW with the same engines?

Each airline can choose a certain number of MTOW options for their planes less MTOW will make the plane cheaper, but it is not a change in the plane itself. Only the FMC and the manuals will be updated for money. So UA can get the uxtra two tonnes of MTOW for money from Boeing!

So as you see the PW4090 can still have 2 tonnes more of MTOW for the 772ER but UA never got it.

BTW max MTOW for the 772ER is 297556 Kgs.

So yes UA's 772ER's are 5 tonnes short of MTOW but as long as they dont need it it is fine... + UA 772's have a lot lower OEW (Operating Empty Weight) because they have lighter seats and their C class and F class products are pretty light compared to other operators requiring less MTOW.

And in the end UA isnt even the only operator to have this MTOW.

So i hope i cleared things up!

Funny how for years people were thinking wrong about this but now we know better!

Leo Big grin

United777atGU · Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:58 am

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 34):
United has PW4090 engines just like KE:

The PW4090 has 90,000Lbs of thrust!

Compared to other engines this engine is a little weaker and yes you are correct but compared to the RR892 with 92,000Lbs only 2000Lbs less of thrust.

That's foreign to me, but I understand your point. Now for my question which you didn't answer: Can the 772ER with MTOW 290909 and computer-derated PW4090s make ORD-HKG WITHOUT any changes and upgrades to the engines? And do it non-stop? What I'm looking for in your proof is a route that KE 772ER does that has stage length comparable to a ORD-HKG by UA. That's the only thing that lacks for me; I'm still skeptical.

United does not have money to spend trying to upgrade some of its engines. If it does, why would you only do it to one or two of your planes? You might as well hit the entire fleet of 772s...Maybe from their perspective it's justified. I don't know.

Quoting UnitedNRT (Reply 30):
Laxintl is quite correct, as it is in reservations. The B777-222ER can make the flight.

The schedule shows non-stop, but they won't show tech stops, will it? I'll check to see the block time today. My whole argument with this topic is that I don't think it's fair to the pax to use this this 772ER we have claimed can make ORD-HKG-ORD if the plane can't do a non-stop and needs to make a tech stop.

Qantas744er · Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:34 am

Quoting United777atGU (Reply 35):
That's foreign to me, but I understand your point. Now for my question which you didn't answer: Can the 772ER with MTOW 290909 and computer-derated PW4090s make ORD-HKG WITHOUT any changes and upgrades to the engines? And do it non-stop? What I'm looking for in your proof is a route that KE 772ER does that has stage length comparable to a ORD-HKG by UA. That's the only thing that lacks for me; I'm still skeptical.United does not have money to spend trying to upgrade some of its engines. If it does, why would you only do it to one or two of your planes? You might as well hit the entire fleet of 772s...Maybe from their perspective it's justified. I don't know.

KE's longest 777-200ER fligt must be ICN-JFK which is a good 850nm shorter than ORD-HKG. So no KE cant compare but of course KE's plane would do better cause of the higher MTOW.

Yes the plane can do it non-stop with out any upgrades..

BTW there is no upgrades to be done on the engines.. the PW4090 is PW's strongest engine except for the PW4098 which went out of service but was for the 773A not 772ER. The only thing United could do is a MTOW increase of 2 tonnes.

Quoting United777atGU (Reply 35):
The schedule shows non-stop, but they won't show tech stops, will it? I'll check to see the block time today. My whole argument with this topic is that I don't think it's fair to the pax to use this this 772ER we have claimed can make ORD-HKG-ORD if the plane can't do a non-stop and needs to make a tech stop.

My dad flew HKG-ORD on the 772ER with UA in 2005 and back was on the 744. Don't forget the 744 takes a lot of weight restrictions too on the flight.

So again in the end it has nothing to with UA upgrading their engines... they chose the PW4090 knowing they could not have the same MTOW as with RR,GE but it seems they were fine with it and if they want a little more rage all they need to do is phone Boeing for a higher MTOW..

Course that cost a Bob or two..

Leo

LIPZ · Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:45 am

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 25):
IAD-FCO is 3915 nm still air distance.

It's about 600 miles more.

United 0966
Depart: IAD 06:16 PM
Arrive: FCO 08:50 AM Next day
Non-stop
8h 34m
Boeing 777
4,505 miles traveled

airportplan · Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:56 am

I believe that the derating of the UA 777 engines was software based not mechanical. This was done to extend engine life. The engines can be uprated with a software upgrade. Could the UA maintence guys out there clear this up?

Qantas744er · Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:23 am

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 38):
I believe that the derating of the UA 777 engines was software based not mechanical. This was done to extend engine life. The engines can be uprated with a software upgrade. Could the UA maintence guys out there clear this up?

Don't you read? as i stated in my 2 posts above i explained everything about UA's 772Er's and their engines..

So again for you the PW4090 is the engine UA uses on their 772ER's they use it with 90,000Lbs so they use the max thrust available. There is nothing to upgrade or derate. The engine they have operates on the thrust it wa smade for. PW40(90) means 90,000Lbs!

mk777 · Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:26 am

I am hoping UA will buy some new a/cs and start IAD-DEL/BOM service.

I am not very sure how AA, CO and DL are doing with their non-stop service but ive heard they aren't doing so bad. So i am sure UA would do good on this route as well.

Having said that, UA should think about it soon cos i think AI, once they get their 77Ws, might start a non-stop route on this sector.

I am sure people of Indian origin in the DC area would love to get a non-stop service to India, be it UA or AI, rather than flying via a european hub.

daron4000 · Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:18 am

I apologize, Laxintl for my mistake. When I checked, it showed 2 744 but now it doesnt. That's .bomb for you. Cheers

FL370 · Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:44 pm

airlines are good with moving plane around, im amazed on how they do that without or little effect on the domestic schedule. though its good to hear that UA is adding all those flights. keep it up UA.

fl370

United777atGU · Sun Jan 21, 2007 1:34 pm

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 36):
So again in the end it has nothing to with UA upgrading their engines... they chose the PW4090 knowing they could not have the same MTOW as with RR,GE but it seems they were fine with it and if they want a little more rage all they need to do is phone Boeing for a higher MTOW..

Course that cost a Bob or two..

Thanks mate for great clarification. So, hopefully no tech stops. UA would have done better to get better engines... I regret it for them. 777 is a great plane, in our configuration, for routes that are long, but may not be able to handle the 744...

Thanks to everyone

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net