User avatar
SFOA380
Topic Author
Posts: 563
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:35 am

SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:53 pm

UA1 starts today; scheduled to depart SFO at 10:55PM Pacific. The fourth SFO flight to use the "1-2" designation. JL HND-SFO, SQ SIN-HKG-SFO, VX SFO-WAS and now United to Singapore! Congrats to UA on this momentous occasion and the buildup of their fantastic SFO operation!
 
LHUSA
Posts: 769
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:15 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:00 pm

Thanks for the reminder. Fun fact about the flight number.

I've heard the advanced bookings look outstanding.
 
olympic472
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:37 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:05 pm

They say, "If you build it, they will come."

I say, "If you price it right, they will fly."

Excited for United and wishing them all the best.
Also looking forward to my UA2 flight later this month.
Civil Aviation has a "Need for Speed"!
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23635
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:06 pm

Best wishes.

Though I am not sure I would like to experience the flight with the current UA product.

Quoting LHUSA (Reply 1):
I've heard the advanced bookings look outstanding.

I would not use that description. Pretty decent up front, but definitely softer in the back.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
commavia
Posts: 11489
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:13 pm

Quoting SFOA380 (Thread starter):
Congrats to UA on this momentous occasion and the buildup of their fantastic SFO operation!
Quoting LHUSA (Reply 1):
I've heard the advanced bookings look outstanding.

  

Aviation Week had a report today on United's VP-Network Brian Znotins talking about the centrality of SFO in United's network and with United's Asia strategy in an internal message.

As Aviation Week reports, Znotins said, among other things, that while United "won't ignore" LAX, it will "concentrate its growth" in SFO where the competitive environment is obviously far more favorable, and particularly as the Bay Area economy is "growing rapidly" and "red hot right now."

I think this highlights and confirms what pretty much everyone already understood about United's view on LAX, which is increasingly as a very large and important market, but one primarily valuable to United for O&D and increasingly less as a connecting hub.

Somewhat unrelated but interestingly, Znotins also reportedly singled out BKK and JNB as markets that United is "watching closely" for future ultra-longhaul nonstop service from U.S. hubs given "good bases of business and leisure traffic" in both cities.

[Edited 2016-06-01 11:19:57]
 
bw50505
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:53 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:15 pm

Is this now the longest nonstop, regularly scheduled leg flight operated by a 787?
 
United1
Posts: 3836
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:20 pm

Quoting bw50505 (Reply 5):
Is this now the longest nonstop, regularly scheduled leg flight operated by a 787?

Longest 787 flight and the 3rd longest flight overall.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23635
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 6:25 pm

Quoting commavia (Reply 4):
Somewhat unrelated but interestingly, Znotins also reportedly singled out BKK and JNB as markets that United is "watching closely" for future ultra-longhaul nonstop service from U.S. hubs given "good bases of business and leisure traffic" in both cities.

What he also said about both...

" but aren't quite big enough to yet warrant nonstop U.S. service.

He also dismissed any nonstop MNL service stating its "its very low-yield with low levels of business traffic. It would be hard to fill the business cabin on that flight."

He also spoke about how the benefits ANA and LH JV's provide ability to greatly extend the United global network at low cost.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Pbb152
Posts: 634
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2000 2:57 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 8:12 pm

I'll be on UA1 on June 23rd in business class. Looking forward to the trip.
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2270
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 9:20 pm

Awesome, I'm going to add this to my "gotta take this flight" list.   

Pity there's no F product though. I would think they would clean up on this route with F.
oh boy, here we go!!!
 
User avatar
thekorean
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 9:05 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 9:30 pm

Does SQ fly nonstop on this route?
 
B747forever
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 9:36 pm

Quoting thekorean (Reply 10):
Does SQ fly nonstop on this route?

No, they dont have any nonstop routes to the US, though they are planning to return sometime in 2018 to LAX/NYC.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1552
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:06 pm

Given the flight is so long, is this a flight in which the SFO-SIN leg would go out with fuel tanks maxed out?
Whatever
 
Eirules
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 5:17 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:51 pm

Is SFO-JNB (and more so the return) doable with any aircraft? Or was the reference meant for EWR/IAD -JNB which are covered by SA?

UA is growing real Asian presence in SFO with the traditional routes of NRT, BKK, PEK etc alongside new routes like XIY, SIN etc. While BKK is a real possibility, especially with TG as a Star partner, yield has traditionally been low. Anywhere else in Japan? Cambodia? India?
The way you cut your meat reflects the way you live....
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 557
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 11:48 pm

By the sound of it, the 789 is configured fairly optimally for the route with its high J ratio. Does anyone know how many if any Y seats are being blocked, especially westbound?

The SQ UA improved cooperation should help this route a bit as well although it will survive mostly on SFO-SIN o/d and USA-SIN 1-stop from the many dozens of medium and smaller markets that won't have another 1-stop option.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23635
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Wed Jun 01, 2016 11:55 pm

Quoting okcflyer (Reply 14):
By the sound of it, the 789 is configured fairly optimally for the route with its high J ratio. Does anyone know how many if any Y seats are being blocked, especially westbound?

Zero to start. The seat holds kick in for winter.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
trent1000
Posts: 672
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:55 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 12:01 am

Quoting commavia (Reply 4):
good bases of business

Not BKK. The lack of premium passengers was one of the reasons why UA stopped services there last year. The departure from BKK was quite early, too in order to make connections in the US (via NRT).
If airlines are "closely wating" anything in Thailand, it should be the political instability. A military government currently has power. The King is frail. The situation can and has turned on a dime there. I can't think of how direct US/Thailand flights would make good business sense.

Quoting United1 (Reply 6):
Longest 787 flight

This is where passengers and crew should really be able to notice the marketed innovations of the 787, such as less irritation to eyes, nose and throat from increased humidity in the cabin. Also the claim that the 77 induces less jetlag.
I have flown quite a few times and I do feel more comfortable with the cabin air - also other passengers not coughing/sneezing much.

Quoting Eirules (Reply 13):
Anywhere else in Japan?

That's a hard one! Routes are hard to sustain here and are very seasonal (New Year, Early May and mid-Aug peaks).
UA has had mixed success with KIX and for passengers anywhere west of Osaka, it's faster and much much cheaper to fly via ICN or even PVG to practically any destination.

FUK is currently constructing it's second, badly needed runway and who knows how this will encourage carriers with new slots available in the next few years. DL currently fly from here to HNL a few times a week. I can't see UA flying the US mainland or Hawaii from here, but they do currently serve GUM daily with 738.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 12:15 am

Quoting Eirules (Reply 13):

Is SFO-JNB (and more so the return) doable with any aircraft? Or was the reference meant for EWR/IAD -JNB which are covered by SA?

Currently only the B77L with aux tanks and not a lot of pax and no cargo will be able to do it.
"Up the Irons!"
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12322
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 12:54 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
Pretty decent up front, but definitely softer in the back.

If they had to choose, pretty sure they'd much rather THAT to be the case than the inverse.


Quoting commavia (Reply 4):
but one primarily valuable to United for O&D and increasingly less as a connecting hub.

Especially with AA and DL about to start a turf war at LAX, with maybe WN joining in on the regional international front.


Quoting United1 (Reply 6):
Longest 787 flight and the 3rd longest flight overall.

And the second longest scheduled nonstop even attempted by a USA carrier.


Quoting Eirules (Reply 13):
Is SFO-JNB (and more so the return) doable with any aircraft?

Nope. It's 1800nm longer than JNB-ATL, which would exceed the capabilities of even a 77L with full auxiliary tank options, even at sea level... yet JNB is higher than DEN.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
United1
Posts: 3836
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:58 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 18):
Quoting United1 (Reply 6):
Longest 787 flight and the 3rd longest flight overall.

And the second longest scheduled nonstop even attempted by a USA carrier.

Hmmmmm...what route by a US carrier is/was longer? Can't think of one...SFO-SIN is slightly longer than ATL-JNB.

UA1 tonight BTW is being flown by N36962 tonight...
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
traindoc
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:35 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:00 am

My wife and I are travelling SFO-SIN on UA 1 in September. I have flown longhaul on both the 788 and 789, and they truly are better pax experience. The higher cabin humidity and pressurization are most likely the reasons for the improved comfort .
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12322
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:13 am

Quoting United1 (Reply 19):
mmmmm...what route by a US carrier is/was longer?

Easy: DL's former ATL-BOM
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
United1
Posts: 3836
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 3:39 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 21):

Easy: DL's former ATL-BOM

Ahhh....thanks forgot about that one.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
caleb1
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:51 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:22 am

What I would like to know is if UA is still charging passengers for the midflight BOB snacks on this flight as well. I still can't believe they charge passengers for snacks on their long haul international flights.
 
DTWLAX
Posts: 910
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 4:19 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:26 am

Quoting Eirules (Reply 13):
Anywhere else in Japan? Cambodia? India?

Star Alliance partner AI flies DEL-SFO
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8488
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:45 am

Quoting trent1000 (Reply 16):
This is where passengers and crew should really be able to notice the marketed innovations of the 787, such as less irritation to eyes, nose and throat from increased humidity in the cabin. Also the claim that the 77 induces less jetlag.

Sorry you can have slightly improved humidity in the cabin but that does not nearly make up for the fact that the seats on the 787 are too damn narrow, the aircraft was never designed to accommodate nine seats abreast and while I have flown on a few 787s (Norwegian LGW-OSL, Air-India ICN-HKG, LO WAW-PEK, BA LHR-EWR, KL AMS-AMS), I don't like to be in constant physical contact with a stranger and that is the reality -- and I'm not even fat (83kg / 182lbs, 6ft / 182cm). Will be great when SQ restart US nonstops with the A350, that is an aeroplane designed for true nine abreast. You can see from my short list that most of my 787 flights have been shorthaul, I was lucky on LOT to have an empty seat next to me flying to Beijing, and BA to Newark was in business. It's fine on a two or three hour hop from Seoul to HK but sixteen or seventeen hours? You must be joking. And business class is out of my price range, at least on a high yield trip like San Fran to Singapore.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
irelayer
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:54 am

Quoting caleb1 (Reply 23):
What I would like to know is if UA is still charging passengers for the midflight BOB snacks on this flight as well. I still can't believe they charge passengers for snacks on their long haul international flights.

Snacks? What about booze! I can't believe beer is free on transpac, but liquor is 8 dollars! 8 dollars! I can do without snacks, but I want my booze so that I don't have to go to the bathroom 10 times during the flight.

Anyway...L class coach fares are sub $1k right now 5 weeks out, which when combined with the fantastic timing (arrive in the early morning from SFO and arrive back in SFO in mid morning) is a great option over the next best flight which is 19.5 hours through HKG with a rather tight connection.

I hope this does well.

-IR
 
AngMoh
Posts: 972
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:19 am

Quoting irelayer (Reply 26):
Anyway...L class coach fares are sub $1k right now 5 weeks out, which when combined with the fantastic timing (arrive in the early morning from SFO and arrive back in SFO in mid morning) is a great option over the next best flight which is 19.5 hours through HKG with a rather tight connection.

The SFO-SIN leg has terrible timing. Arrive at 6:15 AM? You will be too dead to do any meaningful work. Can not check into a hotel until 6 hours later. It is one full day completely wasted.

They should have planned for a 11PM to midnight arrival so you can sleep in a hotel. That still allows for connections from all over the US. I have done this type of flight many times (SIN-US) in all classes with or without stopover and you are not capable to be productive even flying in J when you arrive early morning. And for Y or Y+: you stumble like a zombie out of the plane just due to the sheer duration and time difference. And the time and jet leg are not any different in a better class.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 742 743 744 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
B737900ER
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:24 am

Quoting caleb1 (Reply 23):
What I would like to know is if UA is still charging passengers for the midflight BOB snacks on this flight as well.

Snacks and mid flight meal are complementary now. No more long haul BOB
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12322
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:27 am

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 25):
the aircraft was never designed to accommodate nine seats abreast

The majority of the fleet having exact that, seems to suggest otherwise.


Quoting cedarjet (Reply 25):
but sixteen or seventeen hours? You must be joking

The fact that the aircraft is about to takeoff for that, suggests that they aren't.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Max Q
Posts: 7549
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:36 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 29):
The majority of the fleet having exact that, seems to suggest otherwise.

Not really, it suggests the Airlines will just pack as many people in as possible.



Just because it's possible doesn't make it smart, let alone comfortable.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


Guns and the love of them by a loud minority are a malignant and deadly cancer inflicted on American society
 
United1
Posts: 3836
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:57 am

UA1 pushed back on schedule and is taxing to the runway. Showing getting into SIN 20 minutes early currently...
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 8620
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:05 am

Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2270
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:08 am

No one took photos?
...
...
oh boy, here we go!!!
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3306
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:18 am

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 27):
The SFO-SIN leg has terrible timing. Arrive at 6:15 AM? You will be too dead to do any meaningful work. Can not check into a hotel until 6 hours later. It is one full day completely wasted.

It's not ideal for all, but it's better for aircraft utilization.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 8620
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:20 am

UA1 is now in the air
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12322
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 7:48 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 30):
Not really, it suggests the Airlines will just pack as many people in as possible.

Which, they couldn't *DO* if the aircraft wasn't designed and certified to sufficiently handle it. Come on dude, THINK.


Quoting Max Q (Reply 30):
Just because it's possible doesn't make it smart

Because it's profitable, does though.


Quoting Max Q (Reply 30):
let alone comfortable.

Since when do airlines care about Y passengers' comfort?


Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 33):
No one took photos?

it was almost midnight, so probably not.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
B747forever
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 7:51 am

Quoting United1 (Reply 31):
UA1 pushed back on schedule and is taxing to the runway. Showing getting into SIN 20 minutes early currently...

Looks like the flight time will be about 15.5hours today to SIN. Will be interesting to see this flight operate during winter with stronger winds enroute.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12322
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:00 am

Quoting B747forever (Reply 37):
Looks like the flight time will be about 15.5hours today to SIN. Will be interesting to see this flight operate during winter with stronger winds enroute.

It's slightly longer than EK's DXB-LAX, which would at times block up to 50seats back when the 77W was opping it.

I wonder if the proportion would be similar for a 789, or perhaps even worse.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
jayunited
Posts: 2153
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:00 am

Quoting FriscoHeavy (Reply 12):
Given the flight is so long, is this a flight in which the SFO-SIN leg would go out with fuel tanks maxed out?

Each day the max capacity would change depending on fuel density however for the launch flight (which is now in the air) it did not go out at max fuel. The aircraft's fuel tanks could have carried an additional 20,800 pounds.

Quoting okcflyer (Reply 14):
By the sound of it, the 789 is configured fairly optimally for the route with its high J ratio. Does anyone know how many if any Y seats are being blocked, especially westbound?

The flight departed with 21 open seats and there was over 21,000 pounds remaining ZFW and TOG there was also some freight and mail on the flight. So to answer you question there were no seats blocked if you used standard passenger weights the flight could have gone out with a full passenger load which would have cause an increase in our fuel but we still would have had weight remaining on the aircraft even with a full passenger load.

The capabilities of this aircraft really amazes me, nothing in UA's fleet comes close to the capability and fuel efficiency of the 787.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12322
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:08 am

Quoting jayunited (Reply 39):
The capabilities of this aircraft really amazes me, nothing in UA's fleet comes close to the capability and fuel efficiency of the 787.

And just think, it's early on.
Imagine how much more Boeing's going to be able to wring out of this thing, especially after they get the -10 up to speed.  Wow!
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
zippy
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 9:46 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:11 am

Quoting trent1000 (Reply 16):
This is where passengers and crew should really be able to notice the marketed innovations of the 787, such as less irritation to eyes, nose and throat from increased humidity in the cabin. Also the claim that the 77 induces less jetlag.
I have flown quite a few times and I do feel more comfortable with the cabin air - also other passengers not coughing/sneezing much.

So I just got back from getting up close and personal with the 787 (SFO-SYD-SIN-SYD-HND-NRT-SFO). I flew Scoot to/from Singapore, ANA to Haneda, and United for the rest. Y+ except for the ANA flight. United has a terrible international product (Scoot was the best of the lot). But I suppose you shouldn't really expect all that much from the RyanAir of the Americas.

While the 747 is noisier, more arid, has a tighter seat pitch, and is pretty dingy and run down inside -- it was infinitely more comfortable than the United 789. The sliding seat on the 789 never seemed to keep its position and was (as we all know) quite a bit harder (although not as bad as the cardboard box you sit on on ANA's 787 product) and less comfortable than the well-padded seats in the 747. The IFE didn't work for most people, so the purser rebooted it 6 or 7 times during the flight, eventually giving up (worked for me until the third or so reboot). This meant no: WiFi, IFE, or credit card processing. The fun part is, of course, on the United 787 the IFE also controls the lights and FA call buttons, neither of which work while the system is rebooting. Humidity? I guess the United 787 was a bit more humid than usual, but it was quite cold. I suspect that it's all up to the crew, as the Scoot flights felt pretty hot and dry by comparison. Granted, NRT-SFO is a bit shorter than SFO-SYD, but I was significantly less sore (and not nearly as thoroughly chilled) coming back home than I was flying into Sydney. If I had to pick between muscle aches and a bit of extra humidity, I'd take the comfy seat every time.

When the FA announced SFO-SIN I just laughed. I'm sure some people will love the idea of a nonstop flight, but me? I can't imagine spending that much time on a United 787, especially if SQ is going to maintain their service. Even the food was, predictably, absolutely vile on United (moldy, stale process cheese and crackers? WTF?).

In all fairness, there was no WiFi on the 747 either (because United).
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 557
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:20 am

Quoting jayunited (Reply 39):
The flight departed with 21 open seats and there was over 21,000 pounds remaining ZFW and TOG there was also some freight and mail on the flight. So to answer you question there were no seats blocked if you used standard passenger weights the flight could have gone out with a full passenger load which would have cause an increase in our fuel but we still would have had weight remaining on the aircraft even with a full passenger load.

The capabilities of this aircraft really amazes me, nothing in UA's fleet comes close to the capability and fuel efficiency of the 787.

Wow!! Very impressive. Thank you for sharing.
 
olympic472
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:37 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:57 am

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 27):
The SFO-SIN leg has terrible timing. Arrive at 6:15 AM? You will be too dead to do any meaningful work. Can not check into a hotel until 6 hours later. It is one full day completely wasted.

They should have planned for a 11PM to midnight arrival so you can sleep in a hotel. That still allows for connections from all over the US. I have done this type of flight many times (SIN-US) in all classes with or without stopover and you are not capable to be productive even flying in J when you arrive early morning. And for Y or Y+: you stumble like a zombie out of the plane just due to the sheer duration and time difference. And the time and jet leg are not any different in a better class.

From my experience, the ideal arrival time is mid-day. Check-in, stroll around, dinner, retire early for business the next morning.

An early morning arrival is best if time is short (4 days business trip). As on a red-eye, you arrive at your destination and freshen-up for your mid-morning meeting.

Mid-night arrival is a waste. You pay for an additional room night for maybe 5 hours of sleep (if you are not wide-eyed and jet-lagged). It is better to spend it on business class and sleep on the plane.

This is from a Business class perspective.

For United, the early morning arrival means the plane does not have to sit overnight (note HKG and NRT flights). A three hours turnaround.
Civil Aviation has a "Need for Speed"!
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 17412
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:32 pm

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 27):
The SFO-SIN leg has terrible timing. Arrive at 6:15 AM? You will be too dead to do any meaningful work

Say what? SQ has probably a dozen arrivals by 6a, mostly longhaul

Quoting olympic472 (Reply 43):
Mid-night arrival is a waste. You pay for an additional room night for maybe 5 hours of sleep (if you are not wide-eyed and jet-lagged). It is better to spend it on business class and sleep on the plane.

   the last thing most business travelers want to pay for, in time or money, is an extra hotel night
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
a380787
Posts: 4573
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:38 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 1:38 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 44):
Quoting AngMoh (Reply 27):
The SFO-SIN leg has terrible timing. Arrive at 6:15 AM? You will be too dead to do any meaningful work

Say what? SQ has probably a dozen arrivals by 6a, mostly longhaul

I'll add that a good chunk (if not outright majority) of East Asia - Europe flights are westbound redeyes that land between 5-8am. So this is nothing particularly out of pattern, and certainly not one that is frowned on by customers globally.

There are still tons of 1-stop choices that allow SFO-XXX-SIN to land in early evening, for those who prefer those hours.
 
User avatar
ams747757
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:14 am

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:26 pm

Quoting Pbb152 (Reply 8):

I'll be on UA1 on June 23rd in business class. Looking forward to the trip.

Any chance for a TR? Curious to see how UA does on such a long flight.
 
flyenthu
Posts: 577
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:37 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:38 pm

Took a southerly route from the get go.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL1/history/20160602/0555Z/KSFO/WSSS

8hr 20min in and another 7hr1min to go per flightaware. Looks awesome!!

F/E

[Edited 2016-06-02 07:40:14]
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1552
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:54 pm

Quoting jayunited (Reply 39):
Each day the max capacity would change depending on fuel density however for the launch flight (which is now in the air) it did not go out at max fuel. The aircraft's fuel tanks could have carried an additional 20,800 pounds.
Quoting jayunited (Reply 39):
The flight departed with 21 open seats and there was over 21,000 pounds remaining ZFW and TOG there was also some freight and mail on the flight. So to answer you question there were no seats blocked if you used standard passenger weights the flight could have gone out with a full passenger load which would have cause an increase in our fuel but we still would have had weight remaining on the aircraft even with a full passenger load.

The capabilities of this aircraft really amazes me, nothing in UA's fleet comes close to the capability and fuel efficiency of the 787.

That is simply incredible. Thanks so much for sharing. I bet the flight will do just fine in the winter and be able to go with nearly full passenger load based on that information.

Follow up Question: If the plane had the same load factor (21 open seats), but the plane did carry the extra 20,800 lbs of fuel it could have held, how much additional flying time would that allow?
Whatever
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 23635
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: SFO-SIN Starts Today 6-1-16

Thu Jun 02, 2016 3:00 pm

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 27):
The SFO-SIN leg has terrible timing. Arrive at 6:15 AM? You will be too dead to do any meaningful work. Can not check into a hotel until 6 hours later. It is one full day completely wasted.

They should have planned for a 11PM to midnight arrival so you can sleep in a hotel. That still allows for connections from all over the US. I have done this type of flight many times (SIN-US) in all classes with or without stopover and you are not capable to be productive even flying in J when you arrive early morning. And for Y or Y+: you stumble like a zombie out of the plane just due to the sheer duration and time difference. And the time and jet leg are not any different in a better class.

When United announced the flight, during internal Q&A they specifically stated the redeye timing of the flight was driven based on input from corporate accounts, and their desire to maximize business day.

Its well proven that redeyes are preferred for longhauls.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California

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