Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
744
Topic Author
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 9:21 am

United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:03 pm

Just wondering how United is doing on SFO to DEL route? AI ended up axing the night flight from SFO to DEL and is in the surge of bankruptcy. Hopefully it's beneficial to United. Heard all United flights have been going completely full. Also heard rumors that United is planning to start SJC to BOM nonstop. It would be beneficial to tech savvy industry in Bay Area.
 
LH658
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 7:35 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:07 pm

Why SJC to BOM? When UA has a hub at SFO.
 
CAL
Posts: 458
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:33 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:12 pm

I agree. Seems weird to do SJC when SFO is so close. United doesn't usually do these types of things.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 6164
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:12 pm

744 wrote:
Just wondering how United is doing on SFO to DEL route? AI ended up axing the night flight from SFO to DEL and is in the surge of bankruptcy. Hopefully it's beneficial to United. Heard all United flights have been going completely full. Also heard rumors that United is planning to start SJC to BOM nonstop. It would be beneficial to tech savvy industry in Bay Area.


They wont fly SJC to BOM at all.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
 
User avatar
OA412
Moderator
Posts: 4784
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2000 6:22 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:19 pm

If UA decides to fly BOM from the West Coast, it will be SFO-BOM. SJC-BOM is not in the cards.
Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
 
Nicknuzzii
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:57 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:32 pm

LH658 wrote:
Why SJC to BOM? When UA has a hub at SFO.


It seems he meant SFO, not SJC.
 
Ishrion
Posts: 2819
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:17 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:32 pm

744 wrote:
Also heard rumors that United is planning to start SJC to BOM nonstop. It would be beneficial to tech savvy industry in Bay Area.


And... where did you hear that?
 
744
Topic Author
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 9:21 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:33 pm

How are UA loads from SFO to DEL? Are they making profits?
 
x1234
Posts: 875
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:41 pm

I asked in the UA thread and jayunited told me that for India flights due to Indias proximity to hostile or dangerous regimes (Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq) the pilots like extra contingency fuel in case the flight needs to divert. So it makes even the B789 not enough range to do SFO-BOM but SFO-DEL is within the limits. This is only the case east-bound from SFO->DEL. Returning its a Pacific route transiting India, Bangaldesh and Chinese/Japanese airspace to take advantage of the tailwinds so its not a problem. The difference between this flight and SFO-SIN is SIN is near countries that are friendly to the US (All of SE, East Asia) so it doesn't carry that much contingency fuel.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:43 pm

744 wrote:
AI ended up axing the night flight from SFO to DEL


What? I didn't hear that AI cancelled service from SFO to DEL.
 
User avatar
SFOA380
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:35 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:44 pm

AI ended up axing the night flight from SFO to DEL

No they didn't.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 9:32 pm

x1234 wrote:
I asked in the UA thread and jayunited told me that for India flights due to Indias proximity to hostile or dangerous regimes (Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq) the pilots like extra contingency fuel in case the flight needs to divert. So it makes even the B789 not enough range to do SFO-BOM but SFO-DEL is within the limits. This is only the case east-bound from SFO->DEL. Returning its a Pacific route transiting India, Bangaldesh and Chinese/Japanese airspace to take advantage of the tailwinds so its not a problem. The difference between this flight and SFO-SIN is SIN is near countries that are friendly to the US (All of SE, East Asia) so it doesn't carry that much contingency fuel.

This is not true. The pilots don’t carry extra contingency fuel for this route more than any other...
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4975
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:31 pm

744 wrote:
Just wondering how United is doing on SFO to DEL route? AI ended up axing the night flight from SFO to DEL and is in the surge of bankruptcy. Hopefully it's beneficial to United. Heard all United flights have been going completely full. Also heard rumors that United is planning to start SJC to BOM nonstop. It would be beneficial to tech savvy industry in Bay Area.

though UA could go Non-stop SJC-DEL with a 787? were there to be problems on the airplane? there are no hangars at SJC to service the airplane NOR? To store parts and equipment, Surprisingly enough? SJC is about 30 miles from SFO? It takes over an hour to get down there in regular traffic and by that time? The Crew would be timed out to even fly the flight. It Can be done,, but the real question is? Should it? And does it make sense TO do it?. I would say no to that since SFO is right up US-101 and there is transportation nearby..
 
jayunited
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:47 pm

Scarebus34 wrote:
This is not true. The pilots don’t carry extra contingency fuel for this route more than any other...


Okay why don't you pull up the releases since October 2019 for flights UA82 and UA48, and also the release since December for UA104 and compare the release to the post arrival event reports, then compare those reports to UA's other international flights. There is one glaring difference and it is UA82, and UA48 barring any type of diversion or major deviation always land with at least 34,000 pounds of fuel remaining in the tanks and UA104 again baring any type of diversion or major deviation always lands with 25,000 remaining in the tanks. This block arrival fuel is also shown in the release. No other UA international flight lands with this much fuel remaining on board, no other UA international flight is released planning to have this much fuel remaining on board.

Yesterday's UA82-27 EWR-DEL gate fuel: 253,200 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 250,700, minus burn 212,500 LBS equals remaining fuel on board 38,200 LBS. The dispatch release called for a slightly lower burn and projected a remaining fuel of 39,600.
Yesterdays UA48-27 EWR-BOM gate fuel 314,400 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals 311,900 LBS, minus burn: 269,900 LBS, equals remaining fuel on board of 42,000 LBS. This dispatch release for this flight called for an higher fuel burn projecting an FOB of 39,400 LBS upon arrival into BOM.
Yesterdays UA104-27 SFO-DEL gate fuel 201,800 LBS, minus taxi: 1,300 LBS, equals 200,500 LBS, minus burn 179,000 LBS, remaining fuel 21,500. This flight had a significant over burn, the released projected an FOB of 27,600 but an additional 6,100 pounds of fuel was burned.

All of this information is available in Unimatic, and SABRE you can also look at the history if you have access to go back to October (posting all this information from October 2019 till January 27th 2020 would make for an extremely long post which I will not do). However you can do some research (if you work for UA) first before you want to call some one a liar or accuse someone of intentionally posting something that is not true.
 
Scarebus34
Posts: 525
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:03 am

jayunited wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
This is not true. The pilots don’t carry extra contingency fuel for this route more than any other...


Okay why don't you pull up the releases since October 2019 for flights UA82 and UA48, and also the release since December for UA104 and compare the release to the post arrival event reports, then compare those reports to UA's other international flights. There is one glaring difference and it is UA82, and UA48 barring any type of diversion or major deviation always land with at least 34,000 pounds of fuel remaining in the tanks and UA104 again baring any type of diversion or major deviation always lands with 25,000 remaining in the tanks. This block arrival fuel is also shown in the release. No other UA international flight lands with this much fuel remaining on board, no other UA international flight is released planning to have this much fuel remaining on board.

Yesterday's UA82-27 EWR-DEL gate fuel: 253,200 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 250,700, minus burn 212,500 LBS equals remaining fuel on board 38,200 LBS. The dispatch release called for a slightly lower burn and projected a remaining fuel of 39,600.
Yesterdays UA48-27 EWR-BOM gate fuel 314,400 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals 311,900 LBS, minus burn: 269,900 LBS, equals remaining fuel on board of 42,000 LBS. This dispatch release for this flight called for an higher fuel burn projecting an FOB of 39,400 LBS upon arrival into BOM.
Yesterdays UA104-27 SFO-DEL gate fuel 201,800 LBS, minus taxi: 1,300 LBS, equals 200,500 LBS, minus burn 179,000 LBS, remaining fuel 21,500. This flight had a significant over burn, the released projected an FOB of 27,600 but an additional 6,100 pounds of fuel was burned.

All of this information is available in Unimatic, and SABRE you can also look at the history if you have access to go back to October (posting all this information from October 2019 till January 27th 2020 would make for an extremely long post which I will not do). However you can do some research (if you work for UA) first before you want to call some one a liar or accuse someone of intentionally posting something that is not true.


That fuel you are speaking of is not contingency fuel - it is required fuel. They aren't taking anymore "extra" fuel than any other flight would due to the region... the comment was specific to the SFO-DEL flight as someone was saying UA can't fly SFO-BOM due to all the contingency fuel the flights were carrying due to the region.
 
hohd
Posts: 921
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 1:03 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:08 am

There is no evidence that AI has axed its night flight (which is 3/4 times weekly). Although I wont be surprised it they do, but they will still fly the daily flight. There is enough traffic for both flights to exist, especially for AI which has good connecting traffic in DEL. And if they hook with up Alaska, may be that can get some connection traffic at SFO also.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:30 am

x1234 wrote:
I asked in the UA thread and jayunited told me that for India flights due to Indias proximity to hostile or dangerous regimes (Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq) the pilots like extra contingency fuel in case the flight needs to divert. So it makes even the B789 not enough range to do SFO-BOM but SFO-DEL is within the limits. This is only the case east-bound from SFO->DEL. Returning its a Pacific route transiting India, Bangaldesh and Chinese/Japanese airspace to take advantage of the tailwinds so its not a problem. The difference between this flight and SFO-SIN is SIN is near countries that are friendly to the US (All of SE, East Asia) so it doesn't carry that much contingency fuel.


This is not true for any number of reasons.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8338
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:45 am

744 wrote:
How are UA loads from SFO to DEL? Are they making profits?



I doubt any ULH route prints money. Vanity routes for state owned carriers or cross-subsidized by private carriers. That is just me.

What happens if there is a FAA NOTAM for entire gulf region and Russia bans US carriers?
All posts are just opinions.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2399
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:49 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
744 wrote:
How are UA loads from SFO to DEL? Are they making profits?



I doubt any ULH route prints money. Vanity routes for state owned carriers or cross-subsidized by private carriers. That is just me.

What happens if there is a FAA NOTAM for entire gulf region and Russia bans US carriers?


DFW-SYD. PER-LHR. DFW-HKG. Not state run carriers, make a lot of money.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
babastud
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 1:38 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:59 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
744 wrote:
How are UA loads from SFO to DEL? Are they making profits?



I doubt any ULH route prints money. Vanity routes for state owned carriers or cross-subsidized by private carriers. That is just me.

What happens if there is a FAA NOTAM for entire gulf region and Russia bans US carriers?



'This is not a "vanity" route. This connects SF Bay area to India non-stop...
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 1991
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:09 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
744 wrote:
How are UA loads from SFO to DEL? Are they making profits?



I doubt any ULH route prints money. Vanity routes for state owned carriers or cross-subsidized by private carriers. That is just me.

What happens if there is a FAA NOTAM for entire gulf region and Russia bans US carriers?


What an idiotic comment. These aren't "vanity" routes. The technology is there in the 787 and A350 to make long and thin flights like this work and the demand is there, or the route would not exist. SQ needed the right aircraft to restart EWR-SIN nonstop and found it in the A350.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8338
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:20 am

OAG every year publishes total revenue and hours for top earning routes.

You calculate hourly revenue, take hourly cost for equipment type calculate airport fees at both ends and tell me which routes are printing money.

US3 can make lot more money just operating TATL and leave the rest to TATL-JV partners or third world code-share partner..
All posts are just opinions.
 
edealinfo
Posts: 2705
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2019 7:11 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:06 am

jayunited wrote:

Yesterday's UA82-27 EWR-DEL gate fuel: 253,200 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 250,700, minus burn 212,500 LBS equals remaining fuel on board 38,200 LBS. The dispatch release called for a slightly lower burn and projected a remaining fuel of 39,600.
Yesterdays UA48-27 EWR-BOM gate fuel 314,400 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals 311,900 LBS, minus burn: 269,900 LBS, equals remaining fuel on board of 42,000 LBS. This dispatch release for this flight called for an higher fuel burn projecting an FOB of 39,400 LBS upon arrival into BOM.



What? 2,500 gallons just to taxi? Why cam't they use a tug to take the aircraft all the way to the final takeoff? Multiply this with the number of flights a day and gazillions of gallons are saved.
 
jayunited
Posts: 2854
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:09 am

Scarebus34 wrote:

That fuel you are speaking of is not contingency fuel - it is required fuel. They aren't taking anymore "extra" fuel than any other flight would due to the region... the comment was specific to the SFO-DEL flight as someone was saying UA can't fly SFO-BOM due to all the contingency fuel the flights were carrying due to the region.


That person was me.
SFO-BOM would be at least an 16 hour perhaps a 16.5 hour flight which on a 789 would required a gate fuel of 213,000 pounds (estimating using other UA 16 hour flights on 789s as a point of reference).
So lets use SFO-SIN as an example: UA29-27 SFO-SIN, gate fuel 213,000 LBS, minus taxi 1,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 211,500 LBS, minus burn 194,700 LBS, equals 16,300 LBS remaining on arrival.
Depending on fuel density the max tank capacity that I could find for our 789s ranges from 222,000 - 227,800. Again as I stated UA on flights to this region plan them with extra, required, contingency (whatever the correct terminology is) fuel. This means that a potential SFO-BOM flight would need to have a gate fuel of 223,000 pounds just to exceed UA's minimum required 25,000 LBS for 789 aircraft flying over to this region.

Yesterday's SFO-SIN flight ZFW was only 324,334 the flight had 99 open seats, far below the MZFW and as you well know the higher the ZFW the more fuel an aircraft burns. A full UA 789 with just passengers and bags would have a estimated ZFW of 339,290. Going through history looking at UA29 when we see a full passenger cabin on UA29 our gate fuel increases from 213,000 LBS, to between 217,000 - 220,000 LBS with the flight arriving (or planning to arrive) with 16, 000 LBS remaining in the tanks.

Knowing what the extra or required fuel requirements are for flights to this region the only way UA can make SFO-BOM work is by blocking rows. A fully loaded UA 789 with just passengers (252) and bags (estimating 310) could not do this route because of UA's fuel requirements which require at least 25,000 LBS to show on the flight release as extra or contingency fuel.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:12 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
OAG every year publishes total revenue and hours for top earning routes.

You calculate hourly revenue, take hourly cost for equipment type calculate airport fees at both ends and tell me which routes are printing money.

US3 can make lot more money just operating TATL and leave the rest to TATL-JV partners or third world code-share partner..


The US3 in their current form have extreme capital discipline and are shifting routes and aircraft where they maximize the return on assets/capital all the time. There’s literally zero reason they’d fly a route for vanity.
 
Pontius
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:19 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:59 am

edealinfo wrote:
jayunited wrote:

Yesterday's UA82-27 EWR-DEL gate fuel: 253,200 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 250,700, minus burn 212,500 LBS equals remaining fuel on board 38,200 LBS. The dispatch release called for a slightly lower burn and projected a remaining fuel of 39,600.
Yesterdays UA48-27 EWR-BOM gate fuel 314,400 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals 311,900 LBS, minus burn: 269,900 LBS, equals remaining fuel on board of 42,000 LBS. This dispatch release for this flight called for an higher fuel burn projecting an FOB of 39,400 LBS upon arrival into BOM.



What? 2,500 gallons just to taxi? Why cam't they use a tug to take the aircraft all the way to the final takeoff? Multiply this with the number of flights a day and gazillions of gallons are saved.


2,500 pounds! 1/6.75 of a gallon. 370 gallons. Still better mileage per pax than your Civic.
 
User avatar
Acey559
Posts: 1390
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:30 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:19 am

edealinfo wrote:
jayunited wrote:

Yesterday's UA82-27 EWR-DEL gate fuel: 253,200 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 250,700, minus burn 212,500 LBS equals remaining fuel on board 38,200 LBS. The dispatch release called for a slightly lower burn and projected a remaining fuel of 39,600.
Yesterdays UA48-27 EWR-BOM gate fuel 314,400 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals 311,900 LBS, minus burn: 269,900 LBS, equals remaining fuel on board of 42,000 LBS. This dispatch release for this flight called for an higher fuel burn projecting an FOB of 39,400 LBS upon arrival into BOM.



What? 2,500 gallons just to taxi? Why cam't they use a tug to take the aircraft all the way to the final takeoff? Multiply this with the number of flights a day and gazillions of gallons are saved.


Just because 2,500lb is included in the fuel ladder doesn’t mean that’s actually how much fuel is burned. Dispatchers will often give us extra fuel in various ways, like including an alternate when not legally required or added taxi fuel when not all is needed.

As for getting towed to the runway, this would be a nightmare. Airports are already congested enough and if you added in a tug for every aircraft many airports would gridlock.
In Dixie Land I'll take my stand to live and die in Dixie.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4975
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:41 am

jayunited wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
This is not true. The pilots don’t carry extra contingency fuel for this route more than any other...


Okay why don't you pull up the releases since October 2019 for flights UA82 and UA48, and also the release since December for UA104 and compare the release to the post arrival event reports, then compare those reports to UA's other international flights. There is one glaring difference and it is UA82, and UA48 barring any type of diversion or major deviation always land with at least 34,000 pounds of fuel remaining in the tanks and UA104 again baring any type of diversion or major deviation always lands with 25,000 remaining in the tanks. This block arrival fuel is also shown in the release. No other UA international flight lands with this much fuel remaining on board, no other UA international flight is released planning to have this much fuel remaining on board.

Yesterday's UA82-27 EWR-DEL gate fuel: 253,200 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 250,700, minus burn 212,500 LBS equals remaining fuel on board 38,200 LBS. The dispatch release called for a slightly lower burn and projected a remaining fuel of 39,600.
Yesterdays UA48-27 EWR-BOM gate fuel 314,400 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals 311,900 LBS, minus burn: 269,900 LBS, equals remaining fuel on board of 42,000 LBS. This dispatch release for this flight called for an higher fuel burn projecting an FOB of 39,400 LBS upon arrival into BOM.
Yesterdays UA104-27 SFO-DEL gate fuel 201,800 LBS, minus taxi: 1,300 LBS, equals 200,500 LBS, minus burn 179,000 LBS, remaining fuel 21,500. This flight had a significant over burn, the released projected an FOB of 27,600 but an additional 6,100 pounds of fuel was burned.

All of this information is available in Unimatic, and SABRE you can also look at the history if you have access to go back to October (posting all this information from October 2019 till January 27th 2020 would make for an extremely long post which I will not do). However you can do some research (if you work for UA) first before you want to call some one a liar or accuse someone of intentionally posting something that is not true.

Few if any of these guys have access to Unimatic OR Sabre. they can't look it up! So? they'll have to take your word on it..
 
Max Q
Posts: 8415
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: United Airlines SFO to DEL

Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:51 am

strfyr51 wrote:
jayunited wrote:
Scarebus34 wrote:
This is not true. The pilots don’t carry extra contingency fuel for this route more than any other...


Okay why don't you pull up the releases since October 2019 for flights UA82 and UA48, and also the release since December for UA104 and compare the release to the post arrival event reports, then compare those reports to UA's other international flights. There is one glaring difference and it is UA82, and UA48 barring any type of diversion or major deviation always land with at least 34,000 pounds of fuel remaining in the tanks and UA104 again baring any type of diversion or major deviation always lands with 25,000 remaining in the tanks. This block arrival fuel is also shown in the release. No other UA international flight lands with this much fuel remaining on board, no other UA international flight is released planning to have this much fuel remaining on board.

Yesterday's UA82-27 EWR-DEL gate fuel: 253,200 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals cleared fuel 250,700, minus burn 212,500 LBS equals remaining fuel on board 38,200 LBS. The dispatch release called for a slightly lower burn and projected a remaining fuel of 39,600.
Yesterdays UA48-27 EWR-BOM gate fuel 314,400 LBS, minus taxi: 2,500 LBS, equals 311,900 LBS, minus burn: 269,900 LBS, equals remaining fuel on board of 42,000 LBS. This dispatch release for this flight called for an higher fuel burn projecting an FOB of 39,400 LBS upon arrival into BOM.
Yesterdays UA104-27 SFO-DEL gate fuel 201,800 LBS, minus taxi: 1,300 LBS, equals 200,500 LBS, minus burn 179,000 LBS, remaining fuel 21,500. This flight had a significant over burn, the released projected an FOB of 27,600 but an additional 6,100 pounds of fuel was burned.

All of this information is available in Unimatic, and SABRE you can also look at the history if you have access to go back to October (posting all this information from October 2019 till January 27th 2020 would make for an extremely long post which I will not do). However you can do some research (if you work for UA) first before you want to call some one a liar or accuse someone of intentionally posting something that is not true.

Few if any of these guys have access to Unimatic OR Sabre. they can't look it up! So? they'll have to take your word on it..



It is an interesting assumption !
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests

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