United To Order 777-300ER?

jayunited · Tue Jan 20, 2015 8:50 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):
I fully believe this order is down to availability tied to a desire to accelerate the 747-400 retirement.

You are absolutely correct UA is feed up with the 744's and that fleet type is a major headache for not only UA but also for passengers because flights are once again experiencing frequent delays and some of the oldest 744's can't carry the payload that some of the younger 744's can. And while UA has placed the 772ER on some long haul routes routes like ORD-HKG, LAX-SYD, and SFO-SYD among others what we are seeing is most times these flights are not able to carry any freight or mail with a full passengers load while our competitors can. I really do get the feeling that UA has reached the end of the road with the 744's especially the 10 oldest models and does not want to wait till 2018 to get the oldest frames out of the fleet. I honestly hope this happens and UA is able to get their hands on some 77W's soon.

a380787 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 8:52 pm

Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 146):

Comment on this photoshop picture, the fuselage looks silver white versus pure white. And it looks terrific, much better than the gloss white. I hope United notices

The chrome silver paint would look like the old AA birds in a few years time if you don't wash them frequently.

DualQual · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:37 pm

Quoting AA777223 (Reply 132):

Some users on here suffer from extreme cases of confirmation bias! Objectively I can say I've had great service from employees on both sides of the fence. I've had not so great service from employees on both sides of the fence. Shocking I know!

81819 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:44 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 136):
$130M each is impressive considering how little volume they're ordering. I think Boeing is trying to reel them in with an eventual 779X order (that would be nice)

You would think Boeing would have tied to link a 777X order with the 777-300ER order.

It will be interesting to see what the final details of the order will be. There could be a guaranteed buy back linked with a 777X order.

TWA772LR · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:45 pm

I the only one hoping UA unveils a total brand, marketing, and hard/soft product overhaul with the 77W and/or A350?

Boeing778X · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:48 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 148):
Instead of placing a new order, UA might convert existing 787 orders into the 777-300ER.

Not sure why they'd do that.
Not only are the 787s meant for keeping a modern fleet, they're meant for fleet renewal as well.

warden145 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:49 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 138):
What's Not to Like???

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 138):
2 fewer engines

There's one of my answers to that question

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 149):
Its not a 747

...and there's the other.

karadion · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:51 pm

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 139):

Nope. The resources have already been committed. KLM's 1280 is already in Position 0.

Stitch · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:51 pm

Quoting travelhound (Reply 153):
You would think Boeing would have t(r)ied to link a 777X order with the 777-300ER order.

I would be surprised if they didn't try, but in the end, Boeing needs 77W orders.

Quoting travelhound (Reply 153):
It will be interesting to see what the final details of the order will be. There could be a guaranteed buy back linked with a 777X order.

Perhaps those 10 options are interchangeable between the 777 and 777X.

dtw9 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:56 pm

Quoting Karadion (Reply 157):
Nope. The resources have already been committed. KLM's 1280 is already in Position 0

What about L/N 1290 for Air France?

KarelXWB · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:58 pm

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 139):
Could United be taking over the defered KL/AF order for 10. If so they would get the first one by April

Quoting Karadion (Reply 157):
Nope. The resources have already been committed. KLM's 1280 is already in Position 0.

Only the last 10 on order are deferred, LN 1280 is from an earlier batch.

[Edited 2015-01-20 13:58:27]

a380787 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:59 pm

Quoting travelhound (Reply 153):

You would think Boeing would have tied to link a 777X order with the 777-300ER order.

It will be interesting to see what the final details of the order will be. There could be a guaranteed buy back linked with a 777X order.

That would be great - first 77X customer of north america (okay, I'm done daydreaming here)

bgm · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:59 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 138):
What's Not to Like???

3-4-3 in Economy, for starters.

DeltaB717 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:59 pm

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 138):
some of the Old Girls are pushing 80.000 hours.

80,000 hours!? That's nothing! Some of QF's are leaving with over 100,000 hours based on the chatter here & elsewhere!

karadion · Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:59 pm

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 159):

Currently they're working on Wing #1288 so I would assume they already have the resources locked for 1290 as well.

KarelXWB · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:00 pm

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 159):
What about L/N 1290 for Air France?

LN 1290 will be leased from ALC to AF later this year. Only the 77W on direct order with Boeing are deferred.

DTWPurserBoy · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:13 pm

I was hoping DL would order some and get them at a good price but with fuel at the price it is I guess it makes sense to just hold on to the 744's until the A350-900's arrive.

BTW--saw a picture of the new 242 ton A330-300 makes its first flight today--unfortunately only the engine nacelles had been painted.

UALWN · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:13 pm

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 163):
80,000 hours!? That's nothing! Some of QF's are leaving with over 100,000 hours based on the chatter here & elsewhere!

Even more for some of LH's 744s.

KarelXWB · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:15 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 167):
Even more for some of LH's 744s.

120,000 hours.

UALWN · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:19 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 168):
120,000 hours.

Plus LH's 744s always seem to be in top shape and very reliable. Having said that, I have never had a problem with a UA 744, and I have flown them extensively, for instance last week SFO-FRA. Wait, now that I think about it, there was an air-conditioning issue that set us back some 15 minutes! No big deal, though.

Mitico12 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:22 pm

The 77Ws are exclusively powered by GE no?

Also, I could easily see this aircraft flying EWR - PEK / PVG / DEL / BOM and especially EWR-TLV.

nomorerjs · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:25 pm

LH knows how to maintain airplanes! They may have a problem with an airport in Berlin, but I have confidence in their maintenance!

KarelXWB · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:33 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 155):
Not sure why they'd do that.
Not only are the 787s meant for keeping a modern fleet, they're meant for fleet renewal as well.

It's now confirmed: United to convert at least 10 787-9s to 777-300ERs.

http://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/557666561767772160

Boeing778X · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:33 pm

Quoting Mitico12 (Reply 170):
The 77Ws are exclusively powered by GE no?

Correct.

GE90-115Bs to be exact

seabosdca · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:35 pm

We've had UA maintenance personnel comment here before that the condition of the 744 fleet really suffered from the period in the early to mid-2000s when UA was deferring non-essential maintenance as often as possible. Both anecdotally and from flight stats it seems like the fleet is less reliable than the similarly aged 744 fleets of other remaining operators.

Additional maintenance and IROPS expense associated with a dilapidated 744 fleet also probably help to make the economics of "cheap" new 77Ws, delivered tomorrow, more attractive.

phxa340 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:38 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 172):

That is great news for Boeing as they fill up slots that has lower demand and free up 787 slots that have high demand. Win-win for UA and Boeing.

Stitch · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:40 pm

And UA has plenty of 787 options they can exercise at a later date, as needed.

Boeing778X · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:43 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 176):
And UA has plenty of 787 options they can exercise at a later date, as needed.

Okay, that makes more sense! Forgot about the options.

seabosdca · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:47 pm

Interesting that they are converting 787-9s, not 787-10s. The fleet when all the firm orders are delivered will skew very large for a U.S. operator. That seems to reflect a very bullish view of future international traffic.

16 x 767-400ER
12 x 787-8
16 x 787-9
27 x 787-10
35 x A350-1000
10 x 777-300ER (presumably 10Y)

BiggerJetsPlz · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:49 pm

Quoting DeltaB717 (Reply 163):
80,000 hours!? That's nothing! Some of QF's are leaving with over 100,000 hours based on the chatter here & elsewhere!

All of United's oldest nine active 744s (171, 174, 175, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, and 182) are in the upper 90,000 or low 100,000 hour range. 177 and 178 are the only ones that have over 100,000 I believe, but they're all pretty close.

It's not Lufthansa high, but they've definitely been around the block once or twice

KarelXWB · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:52 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 178):
Interesting that they are converting 787-9s, not 787-10s.

They just converted 787s into 787-10s last year, it would be odd to convert to converted 787-10s into something different.

[Edited 2015-01-20 14:57:56]

Stitch · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:52 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 178):
Interesting that they are converting 787-9s, not 787-10s.

They've already converted earlier orders for the -8 and -9 to the -10.

The 787-10 is going to probably become a major backbone of their fleet as it can do TATL and South America.

7BOEING7 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:54 pm

Quoting Karadion (Reply 157):
Nope. The resources have already been committed. KLM's 1280 is already in Position 0.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 160):
Only the last 10 on order are deferred, LN 1280 is from an earlier batch.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 165):
LN 1290 will be leased from ALC to AF later this year. Only the 77W on direct order with Boeing are deferred

Right now AFA has 4 remaining to be delivered and KLM has 1 (1280) -- that doesn't add up to 10. Unless there are unidentified orders associated with AFA/KLM (unlikely based on past performance) the majority of these deferrals will come from leasing companies.

Boeing778X · Tue Jan 20, 2015 10:54 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 178):
16 x 767-400ER
12 x 787-8
16 x 787-9
27 x 787-10
35 x A350-1000
10 x 777-300ER (presumably 10Y)

Hmmm. When I look at this, I think the numbers are low. They're almost sure to order more 787s later. The 767-300ERs are gone, good. I imagine the A321neo will be highly considered for Int'l use.

Where are the 777-200ERs? A good number of those PMCO -224ERs are good for 15-20 more years, at least!

And then of course there's the possibility of a 777X order.

JayJ · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:09 pm

Always great to see another (U.S) carrier go for the 77W. I wonder if DL will one day follow, thereby meaning all of the major international long-haul U.S carriers had the 77W. It would have been a perfect replacement for their (DL) 747-400s as well.

It would be good to see HA one day adopt the 777, though maybe most of their routes are too medium for the 777W. Though having said that, Air NZ operates 77Ws on many short Tasman sectors.

seabosdca · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:14 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 183):
Where are the 777-200ERs? A good number of those PMCO -224ERs are good for 15-20 more years, at least!

Whether or not they're good for 15-20 more years, their economics are going to start to look pretty ugly once most airlines have 787s and A350s in service. I think the 787-10s and some of the A350s will replace 777-200ERs one for one. You're probably right that more 787-10s will be ordered.

FriendlySkies · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:21 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 183):
Hmmm. When I look at this, I think the numbers are low. They're almost sure to order more 787s later.

Agreed. They still have 70+ 772s to eventually replace, and the 764s won't stick around forever either. I wonder if the decision to keep 11 763s around had something to do with this, since it eliminates the short-term need for those 787-9.

Boeing778X · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:21 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 185):
Whether or not they're good for 15-20 more years, their economics are going to start to look pretty ugly once most airlines have 787s and A350s in service.

True, but nevertheless, I think it's still a little early to write those off. The 777-200As will certainly be the first to go.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 185):
You're probably right that more 787-10s will be ordered.

Certainly -10s, but I imagine more -9s if they're needed. No more -8s IMO.

Sooner787 · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:24 pm

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 183):
Where are the 777-200ERs? A good number of those PMCO -224ERs are good for 15-20 more years, at least!

What is the average age of the pmUA 7777 fleet?

Boeing778X · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:33 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 188):
What is the average age of the pmUA 7777 fleet?

The first 777 arrived at UA in 1995. The last pmUA 777 arrived in 2002.

By how it looks according to Airfleets, I would guess the average age of the fleet would be in the 15-17 year range.

scbriml · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:53 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 112):
Seems that UA will pay $130 million per airframe.

60% discount off list. That's the sort of deal they're going to have to do to fill the 777 line until the -9s & -8s start rolling off the line.

VC10er · Tue Jan 20, 2015 11:57 pm

Quoting jrosa (Reply 147):

As you may know: I even beg on the streets of NYC for United to fly a non-stop from EWR to GIG. Even just a 767-300. It is just too much to expect United loyalists in NY or any northeast city to fly to IAH to catch the fullest and the highest priced ticket United charges for that ONE 777-200 to Rio.

Will these new 777-300's free up some twins to add more options and even destinations? Aside from owning ASIA, UA could make a dent in Deep South America and Europe, Africa. They already have one of the most enviable routes, why not more? They don't need to be the biggest, but perhaps the widest.

I could live with the identity- but they need a new hard product by 2020!

Stitch · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:11 am

Quoting scbriml (Reply 190):
60% discount off list. That's the sort of deal they're going to have to do to fill the 777 line until the -9s & -8s start rolling off the line.

On the plus side, if they can keep the line at 8.3 per month with those deals, they'll be able to continue to leverage the lower production costs which will help protect margins.

777Jet · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:20 am

Quoting S75752 (Reply 82):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 61):
Nonetheless, I'd love to see the larger model 777s flying to SYD one day for UA

If UA were to put a 10 Abreast 77W on that route, I'd bet on Qantas or Virgin Australia coming in and smacking their load factors down by sheer product, unless UA puts up some insane bargain prices on it, like $1000 round trip Y at most.

Even less-regular travellers who are certainly not aviation enthusiasts that I know are well aware of the 10 abreasts and steer clear of them at every possible turn.

At least UA didn't make their refurbed 772ERs 10 abreast in Y when they had the chance

Quoting UA444 (Reply 93):
Quoting 777Jet (Reply 61):
I'd love to see UA operate the 777-300ER on routes to SYD over the dated and less capable 777-200ER they currently use to SYD

Have you even flown on one? Those planes are not dated. They've been refurbished head to tail, have full AVOD at every seat and are getting wifi. The 777-222/ER is easily one of the nicest and most comfortable planes flying.

Yes I have, as well as every other airline / type on the SYD-LAX route - recently too. But just talking about 777s, the Virgin Australia 77W makes the UA 772ER feel prehistoric -(in addition to the attitude of the FAs from my experience)

I do prefer the UA 772ER product to the DL 77L on SYD-LAX though but again the DL FAs make the flight much more enjoyable overall.

So, my conclusion, the UA 777ER product on SYD-LAX might not technically be 'dated', but it still feels more dated than that of the competition from my recent experience on the SYD-LAX route.

jayunited · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:22 am

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 155):
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 148):
Instead of placing a new order, UA might convert existing 787 orders into the 777-300ER.

Not sure why they'd do that.
Not only are the 787s meant for keeping a modern fleet, they're meant for fleet renewal as well.

After reading the Flight global article my take away from it was this UA has plenty of options for the 787 and may convert some of those options. I don't think UA will convert existing 787 orders into 77W orders.

However I do wonder if UA does indeed order 10 77W's and keep the 35 A35J's already on order will this represent to much capacity? When UA converted its A359 order to the A35J and added an addition 10 frames I understood it because in addition to replacing current 744 routes the A35J would be used to upguage some routes out of EWR and IAH. Now if this order for 10 77W's comes to pass will UA have to many large widebody aircraft in its fleet? If this order happens UA would have 10 - 77W's, 27 - 787-10's and 35 - A35J's. I know UA at some point will have to replace 74 -777-200's, the 77W, 787-10, and the A35J are all larger than the 777-200. With only 12 788's and 26 789's will this move to larger widebody aircraft hurt UA down the road because UA will still have a need for smaller widebody jets to replace to fully replace the entire 767-3/4 fleet and upguage a few 757 international routes and most of the routes utilizing 767's or 757's don't need the capacity of an aircraft the size of a 787-10 or the larger 77W/35J.

UA444 · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:23 am

Quoting Boeing778X (Reply 189):
The first 777 arrived at UA in 1995. The last pmUA 777 arrived in 2002. By how it looks according to Airfleets, I would guess the average age of the fleet would be in the 15-17 year range.

Most of the ex-CO 777s are the same age as the UA 777s, especially the ERs. There are only 6 777-224ERs newer than N229UA, the newest 222ER and two of those are newer by less than two weeks. When the 772s are being replaced. they'll all be replaced at the same time since they're all around the same age.

UA444 · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:29 am

Quoting FlyHossD (Reply 123):
Wouldn't that be something? One can wish...United let the 747-400s get too run down and now they're just old, too. By that, I mean that they're having the kind of issues and reliability problems that older planes have. It would have been nice if pmUA had been able to at least start to replace the 744s before the merger (with 773s, perhaps).

Yes, some of the 744s unfortunately are up for retirement, but they've had a good run. I will miss them and hope a few get preserved.

The 773 really didn't work until now for so many reasons. Part of it being the 744s still had life left in them and had recent refurbishments, the bankruptcy, recession, etc. They said around 2009 or so that they were no longer interested in the 773 because they wanted newer technology planes and engines, which is why they skipped ahead to the 787/A350.

This deal sounds too good to pass up. Wish Boeing was doing it for 748s. I'm sure there is a price point low enough where UA would just have to bite.

ua900 · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:38 am

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 111):
We could see something like this on the UA 77W when you look at seating capacity:http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Aer...sian_Airlines_Boeing_777-300ER.phpPerhaps a larger B/F cabin and 3-3-3 in their so-called Y+. I'd love for them to have a true Premium Economy but think they won't expend the effort.

I could see them go 10 across in Y, but doubt they'll go with a Premium Y product a la TK / LH in the next 3 years.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 109):
Yeah, the copy Delta mentality. Its cute. Rainey is a moron.

Copying everything from DL except the service improvements. 2015 will an interesting year for UA since AA didn't go along with the mileage program adjustments.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 92):
He just said what everyone was thinking, and then DL acted on it aggressively, by taking out J seats, tying frequent flyer to spend, and then raising that spending requirement.

What's everyone thinking, that customers won't be able to tell the difference? DL improved service quite a bit. You can look at the LAX - SFO shuttle, their expanding base in SEA as an alternative to SFO, their large amount of domestic wide body service and far better domestic F product there, and you could see that they are better than UA. It wasn't always that way and UA should try to recapture some market share.

Is having fuel surcharges while paying far less for fuel not good enough? Are $1,200 Y tickets between LAX / SFO and FRA priced too low to turn a profit, especially considering that you'll likely get routed through a long domestic NB route to EWR or ORD? Are domestic BoB choices overly generous? Is the UA Y+ competitive without Mileage Plus vis-à-vis LH Y+ product?

UA is making a mistake trying to measure itself only against AA and DL. It would be nice if UA tried to undertake a major initiative to come up with a better product than DL or AA.

Boeing778X · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:44 am

Quoting jayunited (Reply 194):
After reading the Flight global article my take away from it was this UA has plenty of options for the 787 and may convert some of those options. I don't think UA will convert existing 787 orders into 77W orders.

However I do wonder if UA does indeed order 10 77W's and keep the 35 A35J's already on order will this represent to much capacity? When UA converted its A359 order to the A35J and added an addition 10 frames I understood it because in addition to replacing current 744 routes the A35J would be used to upguage some routes out of EWR and IAH. Now if this order for 10 77W's comes to pass will UA have to many large widebody aircraft in its fleet? If this order happens UA would have 10 - 77W's, 27 - 787-10's and 35 - A35J's. I know UA at some point will have to replace 74 -777-200's, the 77W, 787-10, and the A35J are all larger than the 777-200. With only 12 788's and 26 789's will this move to larger widebody aircraft hurt UA down the road because UA will still have a need for smaller widebody jets to replace to fully replace the entire 767-3/4 fleet and upguage a few 757 international routes and most of the routes utilizing 767's or 757's don't need the capacity of an aircraft the size of a 787-10 or the larger 77W/35J.

United says that in the course of their fleet renewal (although I do not know how far that extends to, whether it'd be to the 767s, or 777s) they do not want a significant change in the net size of their fleet.

Obviously, the 787s will replace the 767s and some of the 777s (particularly the A models) and the A350-1000 could also ideally replace some of the 777s as well.

Now, the number of 787s A350s are not sufficient to replace everything. Assuming the A350s replace 747 and some 777 routes, there would be, approximately, 49 widebody aircraft that would need to be ordered to complete the fleet renewal and not have a net change in fleet size.

10 777-300ERs are being ordered.

39 aircraft need to be ordered.

I believe additional 787s will be ordered in the near future, perhaps 15-20 more. 35 is a very healthy fleet size for the A350-1000. That said, I don't see additional orders for said aircraft anytime soon, and the options UA currently has could be used for the A321neoLR, should they choose to order it.

Because of the very nature of the potential 777-300ER order, it's suggested that the 777X could be ordered down the road (at this point, whether it'd be for the 777-8 or -9, I really don't know anymore.)

So UA's longhaul widebody fleet is as followed (assuming the 747s 767s and 777s are retired)

12 787-8
>35 (?) 787-9
>35 (?) 787-10
35 A350-1000
10 777-300ER
20 (?) 777X

Total: 147

Size for current 747, 767 and 777 fleet:

149

Thoughts?

[Edited 2015-01-20 16:57:54]

UA444 · Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:46 am

Quoting jayunited (Reply 194):
However I do wonder if UA does indeed order 10 77W's and keep the 35 A35J's already on order will this represent to much capacity? When UA converted its A359 order to the A35J and added an addition 10 frames I understood it because in addition to replacing current 744 routes the A35J would be used to upguage some routes out of EWR and IAH. Now if this order for 10 77W's comes to pass will UA have to many large widebody aircraft in its fleet? If this order happens UA would have 10 - 77W's, 27 - 787-10's and 35 - A35J's. I know UA at some point will have to replace 74 -777-200's, the 77W, 787-10, and the A35J are all larger than the 777-200. With only 12 788's and 26 789's will this move to larger widebody aircraft hurt UA down the road because UA will still have a need for smaller widebody jets to replace to fully replace the entire 767-3/4 fleet and upguage a few 757 international routes and most of the routes utilizing 767's or 757's don't need the capacity of an aircraft the size of a 787-10 or the larger 77W/35J

They should just hold onto the 35 strong 763 fleet, outfit the rest with winglets, and fly them until they can't fly anymore. Gas is cheaper and the 767 is still quite efficient for the routes it flies. DL and AA have 763s that are in some cases 5 years older still flying. They still have several years of life in them.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net