Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:36 pm

I see it this way :

PVG - IAH (IAD is very much pipe dream)
HKG - LAX much needed (788 is right-size by 789 is needed for the range)
PEK - already well served with 4 gateways (plus IAH/LAX/JFK with CA and YYZ/YVR with AC).
BNE - As much as I love SFO-BNE, it looks like only LAX has a realistic chance
CDG - IAH
NGO - SFO
SIN - SFO (very remote chance with 789 if SA)">UA feels adventurous)
ICN - ORD (LAX traffic is very loyal to KE/OZ)
DEL - SFO
BLR - EWR (somewhat risky but might be very rewarding if it succeeds, only doable with 789)
GIG - EWR (much needed)
GRU - SFO (very doable with 788)
AKL - IAH (not sure if SA)">UA or NZ is better at this)
SYD - IAH (upon a HUGE assumption that VA ever decides to join Star Alliance)

Africa - None needed. ET MS SA already provides ample service on top of IAH-LOS.
MidEast - None needed. Most US-ME traffic on ME3 goes beyond ME anyway, so no point for SA)">UA to fly more big planes there. I expect existing IAD-ME services to go 2-class 777 or 787.
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2990
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:51 pm

WIld and odd SA)">UA new routes wish list:
B757 EWR-LGW Saturday and Sunday 0100h red-eyes + LGW-EWR Sunday and Monday 0100h red-eyes.
B757 EWR-NCL, frequency according to demand
B73G EWR-ABZ , frequency according to demand
B757 EWR-CWL, 4 per week, summer and Xmas/New year
B757 EWR-SCQ, 4 per week, summer and Xmas/New year
B757 EWR-TRN, 4 per week, summer and Xmas/New year
B767 EWR-NAP, 4 per week, summer and Xmas/New year
B767 EWR-ATH, thrice weekly red-eyes both ways
B767/B777 EWR-GIG-JNB, frequency according to demand (as Star Alliance SA doesn't fly JNB-GIG)
B767/B777 EWR-GRU-CPT, thrice weekly (SA doesn't fly CPT-GRU)
B767 EWR-SSA, thrice weekly, red-eyes both ways
B737 EWR-KIN, frequency according to demand, R.O.N. KIN.
B737 IAH-GYE, frequency according to demand
B737 IAH-MAR, frequency according to demand (whenever possible)
B737 IAH-TLC frequency according to demand
B757 IAD-LIM, 4 times per week, red-eyes both ways (LIM is an Star Alliance hub)
B757 ORD-LIM, thrice weekly, red-eyes both ways (LIM is an Star Alliance hub)
B767 SFO-PUS, frequency according to demand
B767 SFO-PPG, frequency according to demand
B777 SFO-BNE, frequency according to demand, red-eyes both ways
B737 LAX-TLC frequency according to demand

There are Star Alliance holes in some major non-stop routes, if SA)">UA is keen to add a couple of P2P:
Bosoton
B757 PVD-LGW, frequency according to demand
B737 PVD-DUB, frequency according to demand
Miami
B767 MIA-VCP, thrice weekly, red-eyes both ways
B737 MIA-TLC, frequency according to demand
B737 PBI-PAP frequency according to demand
B737 PBI-KIN frequency according to demand
B737 PBI-SDQ frequency according to demand
Additional "Miami" link with star Alliance hub
B737 PBI-PTY frequency according to demand
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:23 pm

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 101):
B757 IAD-LIM, 4 times per week, red-eyes both ways (LIM is an Star Alliance hub)
B757 ORD-LIM, thrice weekly, red-eyes both ways (LIM is an Star Alliance hub)
Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 101):
B737 IAH-GYE, frequency according to demand
Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 101):
B767/B777 EWR-GIG-JNB, frequency according to demand (as Star Alliance SA doesn't fly JNB-GIG)

Out of your entire list, only these I see to be feasible. Even the GIG-JNB tag is a bit marginal.
 
hohd
Posts: 977
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 1:03 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:53 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 61):

Would'nt it be funny if UA starts IAH-AKL after Southwest Airlines starts international service from HOU, considering that UA linked the cancellation of this route to Southwest starting intl service in 2016.
 
User avatar
AVENSAB727
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 4:02 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:13 pm

Quoting hohd (Reply 103):

Who knows... Maybe that is why UA has done a good job keeping it quiet.
Always look on the bright side of Life!
 
DiscoverCSG
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:22 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:24 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 49):
Russia doesn't sound like a likely destination for U.S. troops.

At least not on a 767-400.

Quoting fxramper (Reply 75):
We don't need no intermediate route. Why not EWR-JNB (7,989 mi).

EWR-JNB could be done with a number of different current widebodies. JNB-EWR, by contrast, is much more difficult because JNB is hot and high.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3584
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:37 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 49):

there are lots of thinks that dont sound like typical places.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 101):

I was surprised when LGW was shut down 100%. Given the ability of the 757, I would think 1x EWR-LGW would have stayed. Would have been nice!

Quoting Jetblue1965 (Reply 102):

I do wish the LIM would happen. However, while EWR/IAH have the Americas routes, ORD/IAD attempts seem to struggle. (SJO/SAL/etc)
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:44 pm

Quoting CALMSP (Reply 106):

I do wish the LIM would happen. However, while EWR/IAH have the Americas routes, ORD/IAD attempts seem to struggle. (SJO/SAL/etc)

It's expected that they struggle given they offer very advantages over IAH for connections. But at the same time, LIM is also much richer than the likes of SAL, so it might have a chance if UA starts small and build it up.

But I don't think LIM is the priority here. UA should be maximizing flights to PTY and BOG first and foremost.
 
upwardfacing
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 6:56 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:08 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 99):
How far out of the way north-westward would a flight need to go to avoid those forbidden ranges, or rather is there some corridor it would need to use? I couldn't find any examples of flights that would go to destinations northwest that were obstructed by the areas mentioned. However, I could certainly see the major detour in action for ones like PEK and PVG.

I'm not sure what you mean--northwestward starting from where? One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of route maps posted online and flight data websites don't show exact routings, but rather approximations. Try typing "real-time flight radar" into your favourite search engine. When you reach the website I'm thinking of, center in on the relevant parts of Asia involved, and you can get an idea of just where planes fly over, and where they don't. Also try typing "flight path Himalayas", travel to the website I'm thinking of, and you will get a good explanation of the problems of flying over that region.

(I am avoiding mentioning any aviation websites by name.)

Quoting S75752 (Reply 99):
Yet UA sends 772's, and AI does so with 77W's to JFK, EWR, and ORD, both nonstop, and now they've got partners with connections on both ends (Assuming UA switches to AI relations from 9W).

Right, but SFO-to-DEL might be around 17-18 hours block time, if I remember correctly, from an airline marketing professional. That's still longer than those you mentioned. How many ULH flights of 17 hours and longer are still around compared with a few years ago? A little extra time seems to make a big difference.

One thing to note is that the airlines and the consultants who advise them are not stupid. I remember reading on another forum, again from an airline marketing professional, that SFO-to-India nonstops have been studied by multiple firms, and it just does not make economic sense, period.

A.netters and other enthusiasts rely too much on great circle maps (highly idealised routings without consideration of airspace restrictions and wind conditions, for example) and overall traffic volumes, often painting a much rosier picture of a potential route than is warranted. You can trust that the airlines have looked at both the pros and cons.

Quoting S75752 (Reply 99):
If that range and yield is still for some reason a concern, then they could still try it to YVR with the likewise rich connection network provided by AC, that'd be in the 788's grasp even with a geographical detour, and SFO-DEL flies near it anyways.

Except that YVR-DEL is notoriously low-yielding. Otherwise it would definitely be flown. Again, the airlines have studied this route as well. AC in fact was planning to launch it back in 2001. Good thing they dropped the plan.

[Edited 2014-09-02 13:54:04]
 
avek00
Posts: 3260
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:23 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 41):
Oh wow... I bet that makes things awkward and complicated!

Not really -- it all boils down to the terms of interline prorate agreements, and some carriers have no desire to enter into agreements that dilute yields. SQ works with VA and B6 in part because UA has no desire to offer SQ interline prorate agreements for seats on busy domestic routes where it commands solid fares.
Live life to the fullest.
 
avek00
Posts: 3260
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:26 pm

As far as next international services, here's what I'd like to see:

1. EWR/IAH-ICN;

2. EWR-AUH;

3. Late night departures from SFO (and eventually, EWR) to HKG.
Live life to the fullest.
 
upwardfacing
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 6:56 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:56 pm

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 94):
There's not really many viable options, especially given the distances and market size for Australia-US routes.

Right, that's why I wrote "a handful"
 
 
User avatar
lesfalls
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 11:58 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:03 pm

Quoting ipodguy7 (Reply 60):

Iceland air used to have a big hub in LUX and I think they did have service from LUX-JFK for quite some time until the moved their base to Iceland.
Lufthansa: Einfach ein bisschen besser.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:34 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 87):
To come back to what I said above, I genuinely believe that, in time, UA would be able to make SFO-BNE and/or SFO-MEL work on the 787, feeding into their broader network at SFO, but I think we're a couple of years of that as UA would want to bed down LAX-MEL and let the over-capacity situation on LAX-BNE correct itself.
Quoting eaglefarm4 (Reply 91):
I had a friend who was in management in United here in Australia who stated that after UA pulled BNE in the early nineties that every year at their bi annual meetings in Asia that BNE was mentioned.

Of course UA started BNE around 1991 and only lasted 2-3 years i think.Initially LAX-SYD-BNE-SYD-LAX 3 a week then daily over the same routing .Services were 744.Back tracklng via SYD was a no brainer .

Yes i believe SFO-BNE will happen by 2017 but by who??
Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 94):
I do feel that UA will work towards consolidating SYD and MEL routes to both LAX and SFO first before it looked at a 3rd destination. BNE will likely have its hands full for a while dealing with the significant LAX route competition.

The above points make good sense. I also feel that consilidating MEL would be a good idea (I believe SYD will stay with the 777s and is strong) before announcing a third Australian destination. So, I am guessing that (as SFO-MEL also makes more sense than USA-BNE) that we will see LAX-SYD, SFO-SYD, LAX-MEL and then next SFO-MEL before they would consider BNE. Then, would BNE more likely come from SFO or LAX? Despite the more O&D at LAX, I would guess that BNE would be launched from SFO as SFO is the UA hub, the is no competiton on that route, and, moreover, there is not overcapacity on the route as it currently does not exist unlike LAX-BNE...

So, SFO-MEL next some time in the future followed by SFO-BNE later...???
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3417
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:46 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 113):
So, SFO-MEL next some time in the future followed by SFO-BNE later...???

I would suspect so.

I think many would have felt UA would have gone into MEL-SFO first rather than MEL-LAX based on competitive pressures but the O&D figures seemed to dictate its move. It also saw a fairly weak VA presence on the LAX route, along with a decent existing UA customer base for it to build from (from its existing tag on flights).

The SFO market will need to continue to build demand from/to Australia in its own right before I think any additional focus is put on it though. UA would have the traffic data for demand and yields from its current SFO-SYD flights, along with its overall network, so it would be working with that to try and determine what it can do next.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 2:12 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 114):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 113):
So, SFO-MEL next some time in the future followed by SFO-BNE later...???

I would suspect so.

I think many would have felt UA would have gone into MEL-SFO first rather than MEL-LAX based on competitive pressures but the O&D figures seemed to dictate its move. It also saw a fairly weak VA presence on the LAX route, along with a decent existing UA customer base for it to build from (from its existing tag on flights).

The SFO market will need to continue to build demand from/to Australia in its own right before I think any additional focus is put on it though. UA would have the traffic data for demand and yields from its current SFO-SYD flights, along with its overall network, so it would be working with that to try and determine what it can do next.

If load factors were an issue and they wanted to start SFO-MEL they could always downguage SFO-SYD to a 787 (so that the only 777 would be on the LAX-SYD flight) and then use the most appropriate 787s, either the -8 or the -9, to operate the SFO flights.

So, if capacity was an issue, but UA wanted more Oz destinations, UA could do something like this:

LAX-SYD 777
SFO-SYD 777 (until SFO-MEL is launched and then 789 or 788 after the launch of the second Oz destination from SFO)
LAX-MEL 787-9 (for now and then if SFO-MEL is launched it *could* go 788)
SFO-MEL 787-8 (the -8 to start but the -9 a possibility)

A 788 could do any future flight to BNE.

It seems that opeerating 777s and 788s and 789s at least could allow UA to juggle capacity around on these routes if it wanted to operate more legs into Australia.
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3417
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:10 am

It would be interesting to see how F does on the SYD-SFO route, as any move to downgrade that route to a 789 would be removing that class from the offering. I hear it does quite well overall on F into SYD, but just how much of a difference the LAX or SFO flights perform with it would be good to know.

The one thing that UA may well be mindful of though is that NZ is a partner carrier and offers transfer connections via AKL from Australian destinations. It is likely a lot less of a risk to rely on that feed into SFO than trying to start a 2nd ULH flight on what will potentially be a marginal route.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8611
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:20 am

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 113):
So, SFO-MEL next some time in the future followed by SFO-BNE later...???

Before QF announced the additional MEL-LAX frequencies I was thinking it could well happen as soon as next IATA Winter (i.e. Summer 2015-16). Now I would probably wait until IATA Winter 2016-17.

The challenge is UA's fleet (and this applies to every suggestion in this thread). UA 787 deliveries over the next 24 months will barely cover 767 retirements, so I wouldn't expect many "outside the box" route announcements prior to 2016-17.

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 115):
they could always downguage SFO-SYD to a 787

Apparently UA make a killing in F to SYD, so I think the chance of them downgauging either SYD route to a 2 class aircraft is remote for as long as they continue to offer F.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:10 am

My money is on DEN - ZRH as their next international route, but I wouldn't be surprised if LH persuaded UA to fly DEN - MUC instead. In any case, either one of these two.
 
upwardfacing
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 6:56 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:12 am

Quoting S75752 (Reply 99):


In addition to my reply to your post, I sent you a PM for clarification.
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:21 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 118):
My money is on DEN - ZRH as their next international route.

And what would this route offer? Linking 2 of the world's greatest ski hubs ?
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 7532
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:24 am

How about IAH/ORD-ARN/OSL/CPH?
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
ipodguy7
Posts: 458
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:44 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:00 am

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 121):
How about IAH/ORD-ARN/OSL/CPH?

Star partner SK already serves ORD-ARN/CPH, and UA doesn't even fly to CPH at all anymore. I could maybe see IAH-OSL to serve oil routes to the North Sea (however SK just recently launched IAH-SVG covering most of the oil traffic IAH-Norway).
AA/DL/NW/CO/UA/US/B6/AS/AC/FI/NY/EI/BD/BA/AF/AZ/DY/SK/QF/JQ/JL
 
N104UA
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:27 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:19 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 118):

I would love to see DEN-MUC but this would have to come if LH downgrades the FRA flight to an A340 as there is not enough capacity, LH used to fly FRA and MUC on A340s from DEN but I see a 763 or 788 on the MUC route
"Learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly." -H.H. The Dalai Lama
 
amax1977
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:34 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:24 am

SFO-GRU is my ultimate wish!
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:27 am

Quoting Jetblue1965 (Reply 120):
And what would this route offer? Linking 2 of the world's greatest ski hubs ?

More like linking one of the world's greatest legal marijuana hubs and one of the world's greatest banking hubs...
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 7532
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:35 am

Quoting VCEflyboy (Reply 125):
More like linking one of the world's greatest legal marijuana hubs and one of the world's greatest banking hubs...

They can't get loans from US banks, so perhaps this way the dispensaries don't have to pay taxes on the profits. Everybody wins  
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:06 pm

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 116):
It would be interesting to see how F does on the SYD-SFO route, as any move to downgrade that route to a 789 would be removing that class from the offering. I hear it does quite well overall on F into SYD,

See below. Apparently UA make a killing in F to SYD. I would like to somehow see a comparison between LAX and SFO though, particularly which flight brings in more $$$ from F?

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 117):
Apparently UA make a killing in F to SYD, so I think the chance of them downgauging either SYD route to a 2 class aircraft is remote for as long as they continue to offer F.

I just wonder about the future of F in general. Especially how J class seems to be improving. The J class on many airlines seems to be better than the F class of not too long ago (and some airlines J beats other airlines F). I just wonder when or if we will see the loss of F from most types / airlines...???
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2990
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:46 pm

Quoting Jetblue1965 (Reply 107):
But I don't think LIM is the priority here. UA should be maximizing flights to PTY and BOG first and foremost.

UA adding flights to PTY from where? SFO? if all other of its UA hubs are covered either by it or its partner CM.
If UA doesn't do it now, CM will whenever it gets B737MAX.
UA has been quite shy to add Latin American routes out of its original hubs so chances it will add routes to Star Alliance hub BOG are slim at best.
Haven't checked if there are still SSA-NYC non-stop flights but that EWR-SSA is a market UA could study, best twice or thrice weekly, red eyes both ways so to allow the same crew to fly back the aircraft.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
N104UA
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:27 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:46 am

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 128):
Haven't checked if there are still SSA-NYC non-stop flights but that EWR-SSA is a market UA could study, best twice or thrice weekly, red eyes both ways so to allow the same crew to fly back the aircraft.

A lot of times it is cheaper to pay for two nights of hotel for crew than having an a/c sitting on the ground for 12+ hours, it could fly back to the States and fly 1-2 more flights in that time frame.

Also I am not sure what UAs minimum crew rest would be, but EWR-SSA (4343mi) is further as EWR-TXL (3980mi) so it would most likely be a minimum of 24hrs of rest of the crew. Lets just hope that they would not try to put a 757 on that route.
"Learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly." -H.H. The Dalai Lama
 
United Airline
Posts: 8971
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:24 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Thu Sep 04, 2014 5:25 am

Quoting hz747300 (Reply 15):
United tried this route with a 744, and cut it for some reason. We flew it twice it was full both times each way. One ironic thing, is there must have been 20 people on the CRJ2 to PHX who were on the HKG 744 flight. It was short lived, so I assume full was not profitable in this case.

UA used the B 747-400 on the HKG-LAX route throughout the 90s and they did very well. I suppose that was due to the fact that CX was a lot smaller and had only 1 flight per day to LAX????

UA did a comeback back in 2008 but why did they cut it again?

Can't they increase flights to HKG to compete with CX?
 
darrellnichols
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 10:53 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Thu Sep 04, 2014 9:59 am

I wonder if UA could get a foothold into the other London airports...maybe something like EWR / STN, or IAD / LTN using B757s, or B767s too
 
S75752
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Thu Sep 04, 2014 1:05 pm

Quoting DarrellNichols (Reply 131):
I wonder if UA could get a foothold into the other London airports...maybe something like EWR / STN, or IAD / LTN using B757s, or B767s too

This is very interesting, and I've wondered about this myself. But it seems odd that LHR seems to be the only one that anyone cares to serve, aside from the leisure flights here and there. Sounds like there's a lot of reason that LHR is the one they stick to... But aside from location and maybe connectivity, what keeps carriers away from long haul out of LGW, STN, LTN?

Quoting United Airline (Reply 130):

Can't they increase flights to HKG to compete with CX?

Well the obvious UA disadvantage is service. Why anyone would ever fly UA 744's when CX (and at SFO) SQ have service on the complete opposite end of the spectrum with similar fares to HKG is absolutely beyond me.
But the 788's and 789's that UA is using to shower LAX with love are much the step in the right direction feature and servicewise and a smaller lower risk(?) craft as well... So maybe the reason that they didn't do HKG from LAX again is they didn't have the 787.
It sounds as though LAX is the big O&D goldmine - so it makes no sense to me why they don't do it to the other goldmine HKG while they do from 'lower yield' SFO with jumbo jets.
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Thu Sep 04, 2014 1:40 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 132):

It sounds as though LAX is the big O&D goldmine - so it makes no sense to me why they don't do it to the other goldmine HKG while they do from 'lower yield' SFO with jumbo jets.
Quoting S75752 (Reply 132):
But the 788's and 789's that UA is using to shower LAX with love are much the step in the right direction feature and servicewise and a smaller lower risk(?) craft as well... So maybe the reason that they didn't do HKG from LAX again is they didn't have the 787.

The 788 might struggle a bit with westbound payload, but I agree this is a prime route for UA to go with the 787-9.

The 789 is a godsend for UA at LAX - limited connections, long distances, and very strong foreign competition. If they ever re-launch LAX-HKG with the 789, that would make 3x 789 routes out of LAX - PVG (now 788 soon 789) MEL and HKG.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3584
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Thu Sep 04, 2014 1:43 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 132):

It was nice when CO was servicing EWR-LGW and also announced EWR-STN, only to cancel immediately due to 9/11.


As for why anyone would fly UA over CX, a lot comes down to *Alliance and maintaining your status, or be a no one by flying Oneworld at times.
 
S75752
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Thu Sep 04, 2014 2:24 pm

Quoting CALMSP (Reply 134):

As for why anyone would fly UA over CX, a lot comes down to *Alliance and maintaining your status, or be a no one by flying Oneworld at times.

Those with such status to maintain or the ability to build such probably get to fly Business or First anyways, so I suppose that's not a problem for them. What does baffle me is the Y customers. Of course, there is the chance that I overestimate how well versed most are in finding the amenities and services of each airline before the flight.
 
rising
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:59 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Fri Sep 05, 2014 3:48 pm

What even happened to Guangzhou? I remember they received approval for it years back, but after the press releases and the confetti cannons it just died....
If it doesn't make sense, it's probably not true.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Fri Sep 05, 2014 7:46 pm

Quoting 777Jet (Reply 115):
LAX-MEL 787-9 (for now and then if SFO-MEL is launched it *could* go 788)
SFO-MEL 787-8 (the -8 to start but the -9 a possibility)

The 788 would be hard pressed to do these sectors even at the UA rather spacious 222-seat layout . Could be as much as 10t less payload than the 789.
 
toxtethogrady
Posts: 1861
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2000 12:33 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:42 pm

I see a lot of speculation and wishful thinking regarding Australia and New Zealand. I am not convinced the markets are large enough to support new service from any US point not on the West Coast. HKG, SHA and CAN make better sense.

On the other hand, UA needs to refocus on markets where CO had past success. More points in Mexico can be served from IAH, as could new destinations in the Caribbean (there is no reason IAH-PUJ can't go daily from its currently-proposed Saturday only service). In addition, UA should examine the success JetBlue and Spirit have had in the smaller markets in Colombia and see if IAH, IAD and ORD can't support service to some of them.

In Europe, IAH-MAD and IAH-CDG should be studied (UA needs to figure out why they couldn't make it work), along with IAH-ZRH.

I'm not sure what else is left undone. Perhaps we'll get a hint from the next foreign carrier to set foot in Houston.
 
IAHflyer97
Posts: 740
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:45 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Fri Sep 05, 2014 9:05 pm

Quoting toxtethogrady (Reply 138):

IAH-MAD: I know for a fact that there is oil traffic going to Spain. I don't know how much though. I've heard that Y would sell fairly well.
IAH-CDG: What can UA do that AF can't? AF has the alliance feed, better product and potentially a better fare at the time they were both running.
IAH-ZRH: Most definitely the best European option from IAH. Question is, would LX do better (even though they're te same alliance). It may just be me, but I have a feeling that UA wouldn't do as well at ZRH as Swiss would.
A man is only as big as the amount of strings on his guitar.
 
allegiantflyer
Posts: 367
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 6:59 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Fri Sep 05, 2014 10:12 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 10):
SFO-GRU/GIG/SCL These are wishful thinking too, but I would think that at least one would be bound to work.
Quoting amax1977 (Reply 124):
SFO-GRU is my ultimate wish!

This is actually really interesting. When AA launched LAX-GRU I was confident that the one flight filled the West Coast-Brazil market (And it could we will never know) but whenever I do random checks on the flight its almost always completely full, even months in advance. So I can assume theres enough market share for SFO-GRU to be possible. But again you have to think about thing, I've always though of UA as a USA to - Asia/Pacific destinations internationally, AA is definitely a USA to - South America and DL, eh I've kinda thought of them as kinda a filler of markets that had good O&D(primarily Europe), but with their merger i guess you could say they are also a prime USA to -Asia. Although UA has opened up their route mad to the middle east, and has Good Europe coverage. AA has dominated South America - USA(especially Brazil, I remember reading the magazine on a US flight in june and one of the articles explained how Brazil has become an even more important market than mexico, etc) ever since Eastern collapsed.
I really want to see BSB(JNB is another fantasy of mine) in UA's future, But I kinda think they're more Favorited to their prime international market area Asia/pacific so I will think the next destination would be there.
 
CALMSP
Posts: 3584
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Fri Sep 05, 2014 10:46 pm

Quoting toxtethogrady (Reply 138):

IAH-PUJ was absolutely terrible on load factors when it was flown just a few short years ago. Surprised the attempt is being made again. Sadly, dont see this lasting either.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 7532
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sat Sep 06, 2014 4:08 am

Quoting toxtethogrady (Reply 138):
In Europe, IAH-MAD and IAH-CDG

I agree with these. I've been a long time advocate of MAD, and I personally would like to see the return of CDG.

Quoting IAHflyer97 (Reply 139):
IAH-ZRH

ZRH would be cool, but with MUC in the picture, it doesn't make sense. They are close geographically but MUC has Mich more connection opportunities. Zurich is a financial center anyway, it's mich better served from the likes of ORD, EWR, and friends.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
VC10er
Posts: 4293
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sat Sep 06, 2014 12:47 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 135):

Why do people pay top dollar to fly UA when the international competitor is so much better? One, corp contracts may strongly influence choice. If you want great service on United, become a member of Global Services where you must SPEND big money to be invited. So, while there have been many times I could have flown LX to Geneva or CX to HK, I am on a mission to get into GS, so as GS, I go UA. It ain't Singapore in any way, but I live in NYC and I don't fly SQ all the time, yet I fly UA all over the USA.

So, the more UA international non stops, the better. And United just is not as bad as people like to pile on. (Except for many lounges, which are SLOWLY being renovated)...and the NO aisle access in BF sucks on long hauls.
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
S75752
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:38 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sat Sep 06, 2014 2:23 pm

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 142):
I've been a long time advocate of MAD, and I personally would like to see the return of CDG.

Those both definitely sound like markets with strong potential, especially CDG. It sounds like they're doing good on CDG from SFO, so I don't see why not IAH.

I would also advocate SFO-MAD/BCN but those are sort of nearing the too far range of the 763.
In addition to my SFO-BRU thought, I also think IAH-BRU, considering that UA apparently has enough love for BRU to send 772's there from the airports that do serve it (I'm curious the reason they do).

Quoting VC10er (Reply 143):

Sure, UA is not bad at all in First/Business. In fact, I'm betting they're quite amazing, and luckily that which corporations will pay for, Global Services will be given upgrades to fly it, and those aiming for Global Services will pay for it to get to that status. At least, my impression is that flying Y class won't get you there. But let's be honest, does any major airline have bad business/first class? ...Maybe some, but likely in the small minority, for obvious reasons.

But I wasn't talking about Global Services. Obviously, you're going to get outstanding service through that, and if you don't then something is very wrong. But what I was talking about is the Y class, that is where UA historically falls so short. If an airline can't get Y class right (if applicable) then I don't consider it to be very good.

Not that my opinion matters, given that I'm not a business traveller nor a business.

I will say that UA is certainly improving it. The 772's (non-Hawaii), 752 Intls, 787 Series, 763 2-Class, 764, and 739ER's all have better features than what most American (with some few exceptions) and in some few cases Foreign competitors offer in Y. The obvious weak point is the 744, but assuming they stick with their word this year, that will actually become quite strong when Y power is introduced (assuming they don't backtrack and only do Y+). The 738's and 320's I'd also say are weak points, thanks to their Transcon (both) and Hawaii uses.
Of course, Food also leaves some to be desired, but I'd honestly say that about all US carriers except maybe DL.

Point is, sure airlines "don't make money off of Y", but in the end Y is what matters to me not only because it's what I fly, but because if they can get Y right, and if they can demonstrate that they can put effort in to making the quality of that section right, then surely they get the higher classes right as well (I'd be very, very amused to know if there are any exceptions to this). pmUA did not have good Y, and in many cases their competitors pulled far ahead much quicker (namely DL), but they're improving, much slower than some of their competitors but they are trying it, and I think they're off to good starts if they can keep their word with it.

The way I think UA can excel is in pioneering new routes that nobody else serves, in addition to better links with alliance partners that aren't previously available, with good aircraft, that is when I would fly UA, and of course why I take particular interest in this thread. DEL is one such route, and if the need comes up to fly there, then I would certainly take UA (or AI) nonstop there rather than adding several hours to flying and layover time in one of the many far out of the way stops
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sat Sep 06, 2014 2:34 pm

Quoting S75752 (Reply 144):

BRU has that unique west African network by SN ... of course now it must be in a world of hurt thanks of ebola (the phrase all eggs in one basket comes to mind)
 
klwright69
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sat Sep 06, 2014 3:56 pm

Regarding international routes, I noticed that UA stopped one of CO's miniscule number of point to point routes they inherited. Besides dropping CO's long, long time SEA-ANC route, they also dropped their seasonal LGA-AUA route. I am pretty sure of this, it didn't return this summer. I guess they thought a Sat only leisure route from LGA wasn't worth it any longer. But it did run with heavy loads (that old chestnut). I bet a lot of you new here didn't even know that CO flew LGA-AUA for a long time.
 
lhcvg
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 2:53 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sun Sep 07, 2014 1:06 am

Quoting Jetblue1965 (Reply 145):
BRU has that unique west African network by SN ... of course now it must be in a world of hurt thanks of ebola (the phrase all eggs in one basket comes to mind)

In SN's defense, they don't really HAVE another basket to use -- the only real selling point (at least that wouldn't duplicate/conflict with other LH Group offerings) is to Africa, leveraging the old colonial connections mostly. So I can't fault them for doing that and then getting burned by ebola.

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 146):
I guess they thought a Sat only leisure route from LGA wasn't worth it any longer. But it did run with heavy loads (that old chestnut). I bet a lot of you new here didn't even know that CO flew LGA-AUA for a long time.

Funny you put it that way, because my assumption was that however it came about (I don't recall ever hearing the origin story, but I know of the route) it must have done ok for them as random as it was, and as perfunctory as PMCO service at LGA was.
 
N104UA
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:27 pm

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sun Sep 07, 2014 3:54 am

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 146):
Regarding international routes, I noticed that UA stopped one of CO's miniscule number of point to point routes they inherited. Besides dropping CO's long, long time SEA-ANC route, they also dropped their seasonal LGA-AUA route. I am pretty sure of this, it didn't return this summer. I guess they thought a Sat only leisure route from LGA wasn't worth it any longer. But it did run with heavy loads (that old chestnut). I bet a lot of you new here didn't even know that CO flew LGA-AUA for a long time.

First off UA did not inherit CO's routes, the airlines merged and it is CO management, policies, and business plan (including the CO AOC#) flying with UNITED on the side of the planes.

pmUA also had a SEA-ANC route and pmUA had SEA-NRT (which was UAs first international route), but it appears that the new UA is really backing off of SEA and allowing DL to have that market.

Canceling LGA-AUA makes sense when they have a major operation at EWR that they can run any day of the week. My money says that they would close LGA completely if EWR was not slot restricted, but they need to keep those routes open in order to have enough routes into the NYC market.
"Learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly." -H.H. The Dalai Lama
 
klwright69
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

RE: UAs Next International Service?

Sun Sep 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Quoting LHCVG (Reply 147):
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 146):
I guess they thought a Sat only leisure route from LGA wasn't worth it any longer. But it did run with heavy loads (that old chestnut). I bet a lot of you new here didn't even know that CO flew LGA-AUA for a long time.

Funny you put it that way, because my assumption was that however it came about (I don't recall ever hearing the origin story, but I know of the route) it must have done ok for them as random as it was, and as perfunctory as PMCO service at LGA was.

I believe the route was a success because it ran for a number of years. When I said wasn't worth it any longer, I was really being tongue and cheek. I don't know why it was discontinued. LGA has exceptions to their rules on weekends and AUA has preclearance. CO thought it was a good way to use an aircraft to a leisure market on a Saturday. It is sad when a fun oddball route is gone.

Quoting N104UA (Reply 148):
First off UA did not inherit CO's routes, the airlines merged and it is CO management, policies, and business plan (including the CO AOC#) flying with UNITED on the side of the planes.

pmUA also had a SEA-ANC route and pmUA had SEA-NRT (which was UAs first international route), but it appears that the new UA is really backing off of SEA and allowing DL to have that market.

Canceling LGA-AUA makes sense when they have a major operation at EWR that they can run any day of the week. My money says that they would close LGA completely if EWR was not slot restricted, but they need to keep those routes open in order to have enough routes into the NYC market.

You are right on your points, it was a merger and not necessarily an inheritance if we want to argue over the meaning of words and semantics. LGA is an excellent and convenient airport for a lot of people that want to use UA to their key markets. There is no evidence to suggest UA is not happy with LGA operations or that they believe LGA is redundant. No one has ever suggested LGA detracts from EWR. You have no proof, it is just an imagined notion. Imagine the reaction if UA dropped LGA and moved even more to EWR, we would never hear the end of it. As a matter of fact, at one time EWR was not slot controlled and LGA/JFK were slot controlled a lot of years ago, well before your time (judging by your profile). So you already lost your bet since CO never dropped LGA to focus on EWR. Everyone knows JFK was the problem airport for CO, CLE/IAH to JFK never lasted. They won't keep flights that have little profitability or strategic purpose. LGA is a prime airport that UA will never, ever, ever leave. Unimaginable to even suggest this.

I think UA may eventually bring back IAH-CDG. CAI would be good, but not anytime soon. As I said, I was just there and it was completely safe, but that's different from public perception. And of course we all might be dead by the time UA brings back EWR-GIG. What about EWR-ICN? Can the new 787 do LAX-SIN nonstop? Or EWR-SIN? Would love to see EWR-EZE come back but that may never happen any time soon either.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos