Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Rifitto
Topic Author
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:46 am

The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:10 am

I have a crazy scenario circling around in my head
what if ( and that's a BIG IF) UA picks up the DL 77Ls and use them in the announced route EWR-JNB ?
(could be useed in SFO-SIN as well and enjoy full passengers load plus some cargo )
The 789 is a fantastic plane performance wise ,but i still don't think it gonna fit perfectly its role in such a very challenging route

at first thought , it sounds silly ,but if we look closely ,we could see the idea doable given multiple factors :

Unlike DL which is phasing out it's small 777s fleet ,UA has bigger one and plans to exploit the 777 family for long time to come

UA already has the infrastructures needed to deal with the new newcomers ,pilots ,MRO ,parts ...
assimilating the 77L will be easy task with very little cost since it share a lot of commonality with the 77W especially the engines

the other factor is the acquisition cost ,even pre-covid ,the 77L wasn't an attractive plane ,it's second hand market is inexistant ,
At the current crisis time ,UA could get them at a price near scrap value.

If the 20+ year old 77Es are getting new interiors and staying in service, i think that the younger and better performer 77L could find a place in the fleet
 
cityshuttle
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:56 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:16 am

Didn’t we have such suggestion a while ago, where someone mentioned that AA could swap A330 with DL B777 since both wanna get rid of the subfleet ?

So DL would receive additional Airbus and AA would gain extra Boeing and they could harmonize their fleets ...
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2717
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:59 am

Rifitto wrote:

at first thought , it sounds silly ,but if we look closely ,we could see the idea doable given multiple factors :


For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.


Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
flyer56
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:46 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 8:14 am

It is an interesting idea but UA seems confident with the software changes they are already planning they can efficiently use their existing fleet on these ULHs. UA would have to wring a super deal from Boeing to avoid negatively affecting their cash flow which I guess may be possible, but will they really any more capacity? It seems one of the factors in launching these new routes is United already has the planes, so they need to figure out where they are best deployed.
 
DaCubbyBearBar
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 9:19 am

Is it possible, yes. Is it likely, no. I think it is more likely, if they ever fly again, is that end up with someone like OMNI. If the owners of the a/c are lucky they will be picked up by a European or Asian carrier. My honest thought is that some of these have flown their final flights.....
I am me and no one else...so my opinions are mine
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8533
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 11:06 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs?


Not that I want to argue that the OP's scenario is likely, but does UA have different rates for the -200ERs and the 77Ws? Or for the 788s vs. 789s?
 
jfk777
Posts: 7390
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 11:19 am

What use are some old 777LR to United ? They have 787-9 and 77W which can perform flights to Johannesburg and Sydney very well. Why would United even entertain such an idea ? United operates so many international flights to so many destinations they have a fleet capable.
 
Okcflyer
Posts: 690
Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 11:10 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 11:22 am

The engines are the most valuable components on DL’s retired 77L. The frames make most sense to scrap and sell the usable parts.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15316
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 11:42 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.


Cash is the problem every airline is currently facing.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
texl1649
Posts: 1498
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 11:52 am

Conversion to 77F would make the most sense for the actual frames (they’re only about 10 years old), if cargo demand is continuing to ramp up ahead of pax. But with only 4 units, not sure IAI would want to mess with some sort of modified TC vs. their 77W program.

It’s quite a buyer’s market for parked 777’s right now though, and I think it depends where in their maintenance schedule they are as to whether they will be taken up by anyone. They were parked in March and though DL takes great care of their planes, I find it unlikely they’ll be taken up by an airline unless it fits in somehow with one of the hajj operators early next year who don’t care to even change the cabin.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2717
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:08 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs?


Not that I want to argue that the OP's scenario is likely, but does UA have different rates for the -200ERs and the 77Ws? Or for the 788s vs. 789s?


I do not know, but they almost certainly do as there are different MTOW & PAX counts for both the 77W & 77Es, and again for the 788 v 789 v 78J. Some operators differ their rates based on PAX count & some do based on MTOW. If the latter, there will be a required change as there is nothing in the UA fleet that has the MTOW of a 77L. As well, it is also possible that the PAX count would be different to the 77Es, owing to configuration. It is typical that operators will put families together under the same rates and work rules. But even then, they still have to work out what the deal would have to be for the 77L. And that is not an automatic process. So, yes, I would count on there being some amount of required revision.

zeke wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.


Cash is the problem every airline is currently facing.


Quite very. So adding any new type to any airline's fleet would have to have an exceptional motive. I do not see that here.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
Lootess
Posts: 524
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 6:15 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:10 pm

Kirby doesn't have cash to just throw around, that's your answer.
 
ordbosewr
Posts: 621
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:30 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:25 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Rifitto wrote:

at first thought , it sounds silly ,but if we look closely ,we could see the idea doable given multiple factors :


For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.

Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.


Kirby has stated publicly that UA is burning about $25M per day.

I see no scenario that UA will do this, unless DL wants to give the frames to UA and even then I am not sure UA will want them for active service.

UA has deliveries happening of 787's that have been fully financed, so do they need any widebody frames? a big nope. UA has the most widebodies of any US airline, they do not need more at this time.

Yes, the 777L has unique features that MAY seen beneficial for specific routes to UA, but I am betting that UA would not take the added cost.
I mean if UA wanted the 777L they could have bought them when they bought the small 777W fleet a few years ago.
 
jayunited
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:29 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs?


Not that I want to argue that the OP's scenario is likely, but does UA have different rates for the -200ERs and the 77Ws? Or for the 788s vs. 789s?


I do not know, but they almost certainly do as there are different MTOW & PAX counts for both the 77W & 77Es, and again for the 788 v 789 v 78J. Some operators differ their rates based on PAX count & some do based on MTOW. If the latter, there will be a required change as there is nothing in the UA fleet that has the MTOW of a 77L. As well, it is also possible that the PAX count would be different to the 77Es, owing to configuration. It is typical that operators will put families together under the same rates and work rules. But even then, they still have to work out what the deal would have to be for the 77L. And that is not an automatic process. So, yes, I would count on there being some amount of required revision.

zeke wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.


Cash is the problem every airline is currently facing.


Quite very. So adding any new type to any airline's fleet would have to have an exceptional motive. I do not see that here.


The rates for the 77A/E/W and 787-8/9/10 are all the same here at UA. The 77L would not require a different rate.

Secondly DL has a cash on hand problem just like UA and both airlines have gone deep into debt in order to improve their liquidity.

Lastly UA does not need DL's 77Ls, UA announced just this week that they are investing in the 789 fleet and will increase the engines thrust and improve the fuel management system. The engines on UA's 78Xs produce more thrust than the engines on the 789s. It is now being reported that with this upgrade the engines on the 789 would produce more thrust than the engines on the 78X. The increased thrust is how UA will be able to operate JNB-EWR, the increase fuel efficiency is what will make SFO-BLR-SFO possible.
 
rnav2dlrey
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 1:10 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:33 pm

the PIP’d 789s will be able to fly the routes just fine. there’s zero need for the 77L.
 
codc10
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:47 pm

No chance. The only reason these routes are launching is the improved 789 is expected to have sufficient performance to operate nonstop in both directions with economical loads year-round. Adding a LOT more airplane, burning a LOT more fuel just to ensure some marginal additional range, or carry a bit of cargo, could very well swing a flight into the red. United has flown thousands of ULH flights with the 789 and has a wealth of operating data under all sorts of conditions. WIth today's sophisticated flight planning software, United can predict with accuracy exactly how much more performance it needs to squeeze out of the 789 to enable this flying, and obviously Boeing/GE believe they can deliver it. The 789 is incredibly capable, and so there is no need to introduce a bigger, heavier, costlier platform when there's already a more economical alternative that can make the grade.

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.


Nitpicking, but cash burn is currently around $25m/day. Still unsustainable, but you grossly overstate the likelihood of a "fundamental" restructuring (Chapter 11) or liquidation (i.e., Chapter 7) in the next 9-12 months for UAL. Maybe with another global shutdown the likes of March-May 2020, but even still, 9-12 months for some form of bankruptcy is not realistic given the cash the company has raised. Conventional wisdom says your premise is valid, but the timeframes are aggressive.
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 207
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:55 pm

texl1649 wrote:
Conversion to 77F would make the most sense for the actual frames (they’re only about 10 years old), if cargo demand is continuing to ramp up ahead of pax. But with only 4 units, not sure IAI would want to mess with some sort of modified TC vs. their 77W program.

It’s quite a buyer’s market for parked 777’s right now though, and I think it depends where in their maintenance schedule they are as to whether they will be taken up by anyone. They were parked in March and though DL takes great care of their planes, I find it unlikely they’ll be taken up by an airline unless it fits in somehow with one of the hajj operators early next year who don’t care to even change the cabin.


Exactly. If this decision was made Pre-Covid, I could see Lufthansa jumping all over them to convert these units into 777F’s to accelerate the departure of their oldest MD-11F. Lufthansa Technik has plenty of knowledge and experience to make it happen.
 
United1
Posts: 4196
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:56 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs?


Not that I want to argue that the OP's scenario is likely, but does UA have different rates for the -200ERs and the 77Ws? Or for the 788s vs. 789s?


No there is only a 777 and a 787 pilot pay scale, the individual models don't matter, and none of the other work groups are paid differently depending on the type they work. Actually to even simplify things a bit more at UA the 777/787 pay rates are exactly the same. UA probably would have to do a side letter with the pilot group as it is a sub-type but that would be more of a formality than a real impediment....a 777 is a 777.

The odds that UA picks up DLs former 77L's is slim to none. I don't believe it has anything to do with cash, UA is still taking delivery of new and used jets, or with CBAs or really anything other than UA doesn't need them. The 789 with the thrust bump and 77W are more than capable of handling anything the rest of UAs wide body fleet can't quite do.
Last edited by United1 on Wed Sep 16, 2020 1:04 pm, edited 3 times in total.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
JFKalumni
Posts: 207
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:45 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 1:01 pm

ordbosewr wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Rifitto wrote:

at first thought , it sounds silly ,but if we look closely ,we could see the idea doable given multiple factors :


For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.

Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.


Kirby has stated publicly that UA is burning about $25M per day.

I see no scenario that UA will do this, unless DL wants to give the frames to UA and even then I am not sure UA will want them for active service.

UA has deliveries happening of 787's that have been fully financed, so do they need any widebody frames? a big nope. UA has the most widebodies of any US airline, they do not need more at this time.

Yes, the 777L has unique features that MAY seen beneficial for specific routes to UA, but I am betting that UA would not take the added cost.
I mean if UA wanted the 777L they could have bought them when they bought the small 777W fleet a few years ago.


With the recent top up order for 787-9’s and 10’s, UA has no need for these frames. What UA need is a MTOW increase on the 78X. A HGW 78X with additional range would be the perfect replacement for all of the remaining 777-200A/ER’s in the fleet.
 
UA748i
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 11:53 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 1:16 pm

In addition that, arent the DL 77Es Rolls Royce Trent 700 powered?

I highly doubt UA would have an oddball fleet of 8x 77Es with a totally different powerplant.

Oddly enough, I do think the 77Ls could fit in nicely with their operations, in my opinion.
 
mjdemain
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:52 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 1:47 pm

FWIW if I recall correctly, the 77L is GE only. DL’s 77E fleet was indeed RR powered.
 
FlyingMSY
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 10:06 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:13 pm

I think it's more likely UA will pick up DL's 73Gs than the 77Ls, which in itself is a pipe dream.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2168
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:25 pm

FlyingMSY wrote:
I think it's more likely UA will pick up DL's 73Gs than the 77Ls, which in itself is a pipe dream.


Agreed. If anything, UA will likely start phasing out the oldest of the 772 fleet as a way to trim capacity further.
 
incitatus
Posts: 3382
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:49 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:31 pm

In the scenario that UA is interested, I think it would be outbid by a cargo carrier looking to convert them.
I do not consume Murdoch products including the Wall Street Journal
 
raylee67
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:37 pm

Everyone has a lot of spare capacity now. UA is not going to expand capacity by acquiring additional 77Ls. So unless UA is going to fly a new route that its current fleet of 789 and 77W cannot handle, UA is not going to look at the 77L.

The 789 is very capable. It can even fly LAX-SIN non-stop. The only possible route for UA that will require the ULR capability of the 77L is EWR-SIN. However, demand on the route is next to 0 now. SQ is flying the route with more efficient A359, UA is not going to make it work with old 77L, not until demand for such travel resumes to 2019 level.

So no, I don't think UA, or anyone actually, will be interested in getting old 77Ls.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI LX
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
Lootess
Posts: 524
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 6:15 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:37 pm

The topic itself is a non-starter, the main reason DL is retiring the 77L is the fleet is already too small, and with more deliveries of the 280 tonne A359 being taken, it can do all the ops that currently are ran by Delta's 77L. Albeit the CPT stop-over, but the A359 can do JFK-JNB non-stop.

Second 77L is GE only.

Delta was smart to convert the 77E order to 77L when they took more deliveries from the initial order, it allowed footprint expansion and full cargo advantages over AA/UA on routes like ATL-DXB, ATL-PVG, LAX-SYD, and of course the printing money route, ATL-JNB.
 
User avatar
Boeing757100
Posts: 325
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 10:09 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 2:58 pm

What niche routes would the LRs fly that UA doesn't put 789s, and 777-300/200ERs on?
The 757-MAX is happening tomorrow.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2717
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:05 pm

codc10 wrote:
Nitpicking, but cash burn is currently around $25m/day.


A huge one, yes, since your number is

A. Projected for Q3, and not the Q2 referred to previously —which would be the one relevant to making fleet CapEx/finance procurement decisions.
B. Contingent on future bailouts being re-upped as well as leveraging things like MilagePlus, slots, gates, and routes collateral in order to meet the collateral needs for the rest of the money to made available. This is all in the article I referenced —from UAL's own The Hub— if you would like to read up on it.


codc10 wrote:
Still unsustainable, but you grossly overstate the likelihood of a "fundamental" restructuring (Chapter 11) or liquidation (i.e., Chapter 7) in the next 9-12 months for UAL. Maybe with another global shutdown the likes of March-May 2020, but even still, 9-12 months for some form of bankruptcy is not realistic given the cash the company has raised. Conventional wisdom says your premise is valid, but the timeframes are aggressive.



And I would say you are being grossly optimistic. A $25mio daily loss —which, again requires a lot of creative interpretation to arrive at— is, as you imply, not something to celebrate. Any of us would be righteously fired with prejudice for attempting to present that to the Board as anything less than a crisis. With no reason to suspect the market will grow significantly in the next 12 - 18 months, exactly how do you propose the company not restructure to avoid liquidation or merger? I will not tell you I have an answer for that, but I know no one else here does either. Revenue is not improving, something will have to give sooner or later. It is what it is.

I will not get too bogged down on this, even though I do believe it relates —very obliquely— to the thread premise. In any case, it more or less prohibits adding another fleet type absent some exceptional or outstanding need or absence.

United1 wrote:

No there is only a 777 and a 787 pilot pay scale, the individual models don't matter, and none of the other work groups are paid differently depending on the type they work. Actually to even simplify things a bit more at UA the 777/787 pay rates are exactly the same. UA probably would have to do a side letter with the pilot group as it is a sub-type but that would be more of a formality than a real impediment....a 777 is a 777.


Ok, thanks for that. Speaking strictly in theory, is that something you believe they could do in a timely manner?


United1 wrote:
The odds that UA picks up DLs former 77L's is slim to none. I don't believe it has anything to do with cash, UA is still taking delivery of new and used jets, or with CBAs or really anything other than UA doesn't need them.


I agree except that taking delivery may very well have to do with a cash position. It is worth noting that cancellations are not free and with deliveries this far aft of the C19 onset, they would not likely qualify for a Force Mejure exemption. It would not be hard to imagine that easily being more than the cost of a few 77Ls, and all to get an older plane? No, that seems very unlikely indeed.

United1 wrote:
The 789 with the thrust bump and 77W are more than capable of handling anything the rest of UAs wide body fleet can't quite do.


That and being far more interchangeable with the growing majority of UA's twin-aisle fleet as well, AIPT the 789. Do the 789s all have the same onboard product/configuration as well? That would be just one more nine inch nail against adding another fleet type...
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8533
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:10 pm

jfk777 wrote:
What use are some old 777LR to United ? They have 787-9 and 77W which can perform flights to Johannesburg and Sydney very well.


77Ws don't have the range of 77Ls - ask AA why it didn't try JNB-MIA with a 77W.

What is the range of a PIP'd UA 789 from the elevation of JNB? JNB-ATL is ~450 sm farther than JNB-EWR, and DL's 77Ls have been doing it fine.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8533
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:20 pm

jayunited wrote:
The rates for the 77A/E/W and 787-8/9/10 are all the same here at UA. The 77L would not require a different rate.



Thank you. I knew that answer. Adding 77Ls would not be a big deal, however unlikely.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15316
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:33 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
Thank you. I knew that answer. Adding 77Ls would not be a big deal, however unlikely.


Except the small matter that they don’t have any, so they would have to come up with cash to change all those backend systems, training, spares, documentation, approvals, and interiors.

When they don’t have cash due to the bigger global issues.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5100
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:34 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Rifitto wrote:

at first thought , it sounds silly ,but if we look closely ,we could see the idea doable given multiple factors :


For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.


Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.

keep in mind A*net is not a business site, It's a site for enthusiasts. They neither Know nor do they Care about the Business aspect of the Airline. That's why there are Magazines like Airline Business , Aviation Week, and Air Transport World. They speak in Business language. This is a what if?, A how about this? and a whataya think of this? kind of site for armchair CEO's because on this site? Everybody is an expert! And it's no harm no foul. I know a lot of Airline Guys to visit this site on midnights when the work is slow and you'd better stay awake. And? It provided conversation and Disagreement enough to keep our blood flowing until the morning operation started. between 0230-0400. and for that? I will always be a big fan of A*Net.
 
Moosefire
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 12:47 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:38 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
Rifitto wrote:

at first thought , it sounds silly ,but if we look closely ,we could see the idea doable given multiple factors :


For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.


Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.

keep in mind A*net is not a business site, It's a site for enthusiasts. They neither Know nor do they Care about the Business aspect of the Airline. That's why there are Magazines like Airline Business , Aviation Week, and Air Transport World. They speak in Business language. This is a what if?, A how about this? and a whataya think of this? kind of site for armchair CEO's because on this site? Everybody is an expert! And it's no harm no foul. I know a lot of Airline Guys to visit this site on midnights when the work is slow and you'd better stay awake. And? It provided conversation and Disagreement enough to keep our blood flowing until the morning operation started. between 0230-0400. and for that? I will always be a big fan of A*Net.


They could use their new LR’s to feed their desperately needed Tampa hub!
MD-11F/C-17A Pilot
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5100
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 3:46 pm

Moosefire wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:

For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.


Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.

keep in mind A*net is not a business site, It's a site for enthusiasts. They neither Know nor do they Care about the Business aspect of the Airline. That's why there are Magazines like Airline Business , Aviation Week, and Air Transport World. They speak in Business language. This is a what if?, A how about this? and a whataya think of this? kind of site for armchair CEO's because on this site? Everybody is an expert! And it's no harm no foul. I know a lot of Airline Guys to visit this site on midnights when the work is slow and you'd better stay awake. And? It provided conversation and Disagreement enough to keep our blood flowing until the morning operation started. between 0230-0400. and for that? I will always be a big fan of A*Net.


They could use their new LR’s to feed their desperately needed Tampa hub!

and to where would you suggest they use them?
 
PhilMcCrackin
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2019 11:54 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 4:41 pm

Lootess wrote:
Kirby doesn't have cash to just throw around, that's your answer.


Not only that, but why would UA be interested in adding widebody capacity during this time where everyone is trying to slash their international fleets?

This idea makes zero sense.
 
flyfresno
Posts: 1087
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 4:44 pm

How about a swap of UA's 767-400s for DL's 77Ls? While we are throwing out moderately far fetched ideas...
 
N965UW
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 11:31 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:08 pm

cityshuttle wrote:
Didn’t we have such suggestion a while ago, where someone mentioned that AA could swap A330 with DL B777 since both wanna get rid of the subfleet ?

So DL would receive additional Airbus and AA would gain extra Boeing and they could harmonize their fleets ...


DL could've taken the 333s with PW engines quite easily. But AA's 332s are RR powered, while DL has none of those in its fleet. Delta Tech Ops has an agreement with RR to service the Trent family, including 700s. But they would still be an oddball in the DL fleet.

texl1649 wrote:
Conversion to 77F would make the most sense for the actual frames (they’re only about 10 years old), if cargo demand is continuing to ramp up ahead of pax. But with only 4 units, not sure IAI would want to mess with some sort of modified TC vs. their 77W program.


As nearly identical as they are, the 77L still has composite floor beams and can't be converted to a true 77F. If IAI has the 77W figured out, they could probably do the 77L for lower-density cargo with relative ease. But there are not enough frames for the development and certification costs to make sense.
You can always go around
 
United857
Posts: 116
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:37 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:15 pm

PhilMcCrackin wrote:
Lootess wrote:
Kirby doesn't have cash to just throw around, that's your answer.


Not only that, but why would UA be interested in adding widebody capacity during this time where everyone is trying to slash their international fleets?

This idea makes zero sense.

The 77L could be quite useful for UA's new ULR routes SFO-BLR and EWR-JNB, especially the return from JNB.
A319 A320 A321 A333 A343 A346 A388 B712 B733 B737 B738 B739 B744 B748 B752 B764 B772 B77L B77W B788 B789 CRJ2 E145 E75S E75L E190 MD88 MD90
AA AC B6 CA CX CZ DL EK FM HU JL KA LH LX MU NH NK TK UA US
 
catiii
Posts: 3644
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:29 pm

Moosefire wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:

For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.


Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.

keep in mind A*net is not a business site, It's a site for enthusiasts. They neither Know nor do they Care about the Business aspect of the Airline. That's why there are Magazines like Airline Business , Aviation Week, and Air Transport World. They speak in Business language. This is a what if?, A how about this? and a whataya think of this? kind of site for armchair CEO's because on this site? Everybody is an expert! And it's no harm no foul. I know a lot of Airline Guys to visit this site on midnights when the work is slow and you'd better stay awake. And? It provided conversation and Disagreement enough to keep our blood flowing until the morning operation started. between 0230-0400. and for that? I will always be a big fan of A*Net.


They could use their new LR’s to feed their desperately needed Tampa hub!


This is outstanding.
 
catiii
Posts: 3644
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:30 pm

United857 wrote:
PhilMcCrackin wrote:
Lootess wrote:
Kirby doesn't have cash to just throw around, that's your answer.


Not only that, but why would UA be interested in adding widebody capacity during this time where everyone is trying to slash their international fleets?

This idea makes zero sense.

The 77L could be quite useful for UA's new ULR routes SFO-BLR and EWR-JNB, especially the return from JNB.


What do they need to buy airplanes to fly those routes for when they already have airplanes that can fly them?
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:32 pm

Zero chance. UA has no need for more widebodies.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 418
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:58 pm

JFKalumni wrote:
ordbosewr wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:

For a start, cash. More specifically, UA's position WRT being able to come up with the money to integrate a new fleet while being a position of having to both lay people off and beg the gov't for money.

In this moment, UA have 4.5 Billion in cash on hand & are burning approx $40 Million/day. The credit they will receive, in addition to this will allow them to live approximately 112 days, starting from now. This is factoring also in the cuts listed here, from UA itself. As you can see, those numbers are sobering as hell.

A.net has a very myopic focus, given the enthusiast nature of the site. You could likely debate the merits of taking on cheap 77Ls for specific city pairs all day, but one thing I have noticed is that we almost never look at the realities of the actual airline as a business when we do. While in some very local metrics, a used 77L might make more sense than say, a new 789, how would you justify renegotiating the CBAs for all the unions involved where taking on new fleet types occurs? Or the the time/money cost of getting a 77L added to the company's OpSpec?

Those may be more trivial things in normal times, and not noticeable in profitable ones. But I will repeat what I have said above. They are losing $40 Million a day. They will be sending literal thousands of people to the breadlines soon. And it is beyond very likely that the company will be fundamentally restructured —or just die outright— sometime in the next 9 - 12 months.

And CFO that approved such a thing at this time would be very rightly drug out to Tyburn to stand on a Three Legged Mare.

Your idea is not bad or silly in the most raw principle. It just is not feasible at this time.


Kirby has stated publicly that UA is burning about $25M per day.

I see no scenario that UA will do this, unless DL wants to give the frames to UA and even then I am not sure UA will want them for active service.

UA has deliveries happening of 787's that have been fully financed, so do they need any widebody frames? a big nope. UA has the most widebodies of any US airline, they do not need more at this time.

Yes, the 777L has unique features that MAY seen beneficial for specific routes to UA, but I am betting that UA would not take the added cost.
I mean if UA wanted the 777L they could have bought them when they bought the small 777W fleet a few years ago.


With the recent top up order for 787-9’s and 10’s, UA has no need for these frames. What UA need is a MTOW increase on the 78X. A HGW 78X with additional range would be the perfect replacement for all of the remaining 777-200A/ER’s in the fleet.

Please provide the link for the HGW 78X.
 
Pinto
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:30 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 6:58 pm

zeke wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
Thank you. I knew that answer. Adding 77Ls would not be a big deal, however unlikely.


Except the small matter that they don’t have any, so they would have to come up with cash to change all those backend systems, training, spares, documentation, approvals, and interiors.

When they don’t have cash due to the bigger global issues.


Besides the few spares they would need and reconfiguration I don't think there would be many expenses. The 77L and 77W use the same engine IIRC and they shouldn't have to train pilots as it is the same type rating
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 418
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:01 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
What use are some old 777LR to United ? They have 787-9 and 77W which can perform flights to Johannesburg and Sydney very well.


77Ws don't have the range of 77Ls - ask AA why it didn't try JNB-MIA with a 77W.

What is the range of a PIP'd UA 789 from the elevation of JNB? JNB-ATL is ~450 sm farther than JNB-EWR, and DL's 77Ls have been doing it fine.

Fine is an understatement there were plenty of fuel stops plenty of times were passengers and cargo were offloaded due to a slight change in wind. I would be willing to argue it is the most challenging ultra long-haul route in the world. That extra hour makes a huge difference on a flight like this.
 
codc10
Posts: 2912
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:18 pm

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
A huge one, yes, since your number is

A. Projected for Q3, and not the Q2 referred to previously —which would be the one relevant to making fleet CapEx/finance procurement decisions.
B. Contingent on future bailouts being re-upped as well as leveraging things like MilagePlus, slots, gates, and routes collateral in order to meet the collateral needs for the rest of the money to made available. This is all in the article I referenced —from UAL's own The Hub— if you would like to read up on it.


We'll see for sure in about a month, but Kirby was on CBS' "Face the Nation" this past Sunday and stated that the company was "still burning $25m/day". Certainly, a CEO of a publicly-traded corporation could run afoul of SEC regulations by making a public statement which materially misrepresents a key metric (cash burn). Considering how carefully the company is working to manage this figure, I assume a numbers-oriented CEO like Kirby would reflexively know the company's up-to-the-minute status in this regard. It's also within guidance.

Anyway, the only reason I reference that is because your comment was made about the present situation ("losing $40 million a day", in italics for emphasis) as well as forward-looking (suggesting it is "beyond very likely") toward a bankruptcy filing in 9-12 months. I'm not being overly optimistic... things are bad... but people I deal with in airline finance simply are not predicting Chapter 11 filings for the majors - to say nothing of your Chapter 7 suggestion - in the next 9-12 months unless there is a sustained industrywide shutdown. You'll find a great deal of support for that proposition and it's hardly invalid. If anything, predictions of Q2/Q3 2021 bankruptcies of the likes of AA, UA, etc. is an outlier position.

Beyond that timeframe is, of course, anyone's guess, and if we stay in a 30% demand environment through YE 2021 then there are going to be some serious, existential discussions in airline boardrooms.

And I would say you are being grossly optimistic. A $25mio daily loss —which, again requires a lot of creative interpretation to arrive at— is, as you imply, not something to celebrate. Any of us would be righteously fired with prejudice for attempting to present that to the Board as anything less than a crisis. With no reason to suspect the market will grow significantly in the next 12 - 18 months, exactly how do you propose the company not restructure to avoid liquidation or merger? I will not tell you I have an answer for that, but I know no one else here does either. Revenue is not improving, something will have to give sooner or later. It is what it is.

I will not get too bogged down on this, even though I do believe it relates —very obliquely— to the thread premise. In any case, it more or less prohibits adding another fleet type absent some exceptional or outstanding need or absence.


Again, it really doesn't require any sort of interpretation, given that the CEO of a publicly-traded company is making public statements precisely to this end. But take it however you like... I'm not celebrating anything.

The points you make about the cost of adding the 77L to the OpSpecs, training, manual updates, adding a simulator, reconfiguration of aircraft, etc. are all reasonable and valid. I have to believe the entire fleet, sold to one operator in a package deal, might approach the critical mass for a company like IAI to develop a 77L P2F STC.

Because a PIP'ed 789 will likely be able to do 97% of what the 77L can at ~20% lower cost, I would say it's a non-starter for United in this environment
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:29 pm

UA would be better off accelerating it's A350 deliveries if it has this sort of requirement.
 
jagraham
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:38 pm

jfk777 wrote:
What use are some old 777LR to United ? They have 787-9 and 77W which can perform flights to Johannesburg and Sydney very well. Why would United even entertain such an idea ? United operates so many international flights to so many destinations they have a fleet capable.


The 789 and 77W can fly TO JNB just fine. The limitation is flying OUT of JNB. DL 77Ls have special tires for higher ground speeds. Presumably this could be done on UA 77Ws since the MTOW is similar, but the 77W has rotation limitations that the 77L does not. And a higher OEW. The 789 also has less payload. It should be noted that DL plans a similar change on their JNB service, with the A359s stopping in CPT on the way back, a stop that the 77L did not require. That change shows that payload range is not the only factor; if it was, DL would presumably kept the 77L fleet.

Of course this is all subordinate to whether or not UA can find a full plane worth of people to fly to and from JNB at more than giveaway rates. And what COVID limitations are in place.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2754
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:46 pm

DylanHarvey wrote:
JFKalumni wrote:
ordbosewr wrote:

Kirby has stated publicly that UA is burning about $25M per day.

I see no scenario that UA will do this, unless DL wants to give the frames to UA and even then I am not sure UA will want them for active service.

UA has deliveries happening of 787's that have been fully financed, so do they need any widebody frames? a big nope. UA has the most widebodies of any US airline, they do not need more at this time.

Yes, the 777L has unique features that MAY seen beneficial for specific routes to UA, but I am betting that UA would not take the added cost.
I mean if UA wanted the 777L they could have bought them when they bought the small 777W fleet a few years ago.


With the recent top up order for 787-9’s and 10’s, UA has no need for these frames. What UA need is a MTOW increase on the 78X. A HGW 78X with additional range would be the perfect replacement for all of the remaining 777-200A/ER’s in the fleet.

Please provide the link for the HGW 78X.


What link? JFK didn't say UA is getting HGW 78Js, just that it would be ideal for them if and when it ever occurs.
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
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 418
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:47 pm

Antarius wrote:
DylanHarvey wrote:
JFKalumni wrote:

With the recent top up order for 787-9’s and 10’s, UA has no need for these frames. What UA need is a MTOW increase on the 78X. A HGW 78X with additional range would be the perfect replacement for all of the remaining 777-200A/ER’s in the fleet.

Please provide the link for the HGW 78X.


What link? JFK didn't say UA is getting HGW 78Js, just that it would be ideal for them if and when it ever occurs.

It’s just been an ongoing thing starting from some 359 threads, everyone was talking about HGW 78X’s. Yet Boeing didn’t say anything. If you want a bigger 789, a 359 is perfect.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 418
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: The odds that UA pick up the 77Ls from DL

Wed Sep 16, 2020 7:49 pm

jagraham wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
What use are some old 777LR to United ? They have 787-9 and 77W which can perform flights to Johannesburg and Sydney very well. Why would United even entertain such an idea ? United operates so many international flights to so many destinations they have a fleet capable.


The 789 and 77W can fly TO JNB just fine. The limitation is flying OUT of JNB. DL 77Ls have special tires for higher ground speeds. Presumably this could be done on UA 77Ws since the MTOW is similar, but the 77W has rotation limitations that the 77L does not. And a higher OEW. The 789 also has less payload. It should be noted that DL plans a similar change on their JNB service, with the A359s stopping in CPT on the way back, a stop that the 77L did not require. That change shows that payload range is not the only factor; if it was, DL would presumably kept the 77L fleet.

Of course this is all subordinate to whether or not UA can find a full plane worth of people to fly to and from JNB at more than giveaway rates. And what COVID limitations are in place.

The 77W is horrible from Johannesburg because it has pretty much the highest wing loading out of any plane flying right now. Atlanta is about an hour farther. The 359 can actually do it as zeke has pointed out.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 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