Aug 17, 2013, 10:44 am
Last edit by: Bitterroot
Updates to Wiki as of 20 January 2014
Planned changes in aircraft by date and route:
SFO -- SYD: first 772 departs SFO 27 March; turns to 840 at SYD on 29 March
LAX -- SYD: first 772 departs LAX 29 March; turn off 840-29th.
NRT -- ORD: First 744 departs NRT 27 March (aircraft turn at ORD to PVG and FRA in succession the day following arrival from NRT)
ORD -- NRT: First 744 departs ORD 31 March
ORD -- PVG: First 744 departs ORD 28 March
PVG -- ORD: First 744 departs PVG 29 March
ORD -- FRA: First 744 departs ORD 29 March
FRA -- ORD: First 744 departs FRA 30 March
NRT -- SFO: 852 to operate with 772 27 March through 31 March inclusive (772 coming out of rotation)
Or, you can just go look at the good work here (note that info posted above differs from AIRLINEROUTE info dated 4 January 2014 and before):
http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/17/ua-s14update1/
Or, straight to the source if you want to do your own research:
http://www.oag.com/Global
Planned changes in aircraft by date and route:
SFO -- SYD: first 772 departs SFO 27 March; turns to 840 at SYD on 29 March
LAX -- SYD: first 772 departs LAX 29 March; turn off 840-29th.
NRT -- ORD: First 744 departs NRT 27 March (aircraft turn at ORD to PVG and FRA in succession the day following arrival from NRT)
ORD -- NRT: First 744 departs ORD 31 March
ORD -- PVG: First 744 departs ORD 28 March
PVG -- ORD: First 744 departs PVG 29 March
ORD -- FRA: First 744 departs ORD 29 March
FRA -- ORD: First 744 departs FRA 30 March
NRT -- SFO: 852 to operate with 772 27 March through 31 March inclusive (772 coming out of rotation)
Or, you can just go look at the good work here (note that info posted above differs from AIRLINEROUTE info dated 4 January 2014 and before):
http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/17/ua-s14update1/
Or, straight to the source if you want to do your own research:
http://www.oag.com/Global
[Confirmed] SYD going UA 3 Cabin 777 in 2014 [and other 747 route changes]
Aug 18, 2013, 9:38 pm
#376
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Syd
Programs: UA 1k 1MM, VA G
Posts: 886
Due to the length of the flight, you will either lose two F seats if the bunks are not installed in the aircraft flying the route, or two business class seats if they are.
At least that's how it used to be. I do not believe UA has installed overhead crew rest areas on its 777s.
At least that's how it used to be. I do not believe UA has installed overhead crew rest areas on its 777s.
the details from boeing make the little cabin look pretty nice
http://www.boeing.net/commercial/news/feature/osu.html
one could almost wish they could book it for themselves
Aug 18, 2013, 10:42 pm
#377
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
AC flies the 77L, also know as the 777-200LR which adds significant range.
And why is it ironic that NH offers more Y space in their 788s?
Personally I'm hoping for UA to either bring a nonstop to MEL, or at least keep providing an affordable option to get to ORD from MEL
And why is it ironic that NH offers more Y space in their 788s?
Personally I'm hoping for UA to either bring a nonstop to MEL, or at least keep providing an affordable option to get to ORD from MEL
AC also has crap business class coffin seats.
Aug 18, 2013, 11:25 pm
#378
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: MEL
Programs: OZ Diamond, QF, VA
Posts: 235
My post was a reply to someone who said that AC were flying 777-200 from YVR-SYD so obviously UA could make it with a 777. My point being that the 772, 77E, and 77L all have a different Max Range.
Aug 18, 2013, 11:35 pm
#379
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693
But is CX flying the 773, or 77W? Big difference there. I don't believe a 777-300 could make YYZ-HKG at anywhere near MTOW.
My post was a reply to someone who said that AC were flying 777-200 from YVR-SYD so obviously UA could make it with a 777. My point being that the 772, 77E, and 77L all have a different Max Range.
My post was a reply to someone who said that AC were flying 777-200 from YVR-SYD so obviously UA could make it with a 777. My point being that the 772, 77E, and 77L all have a different Max Range.
Aug 19, 2013, 1:44 am
#382
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Programs: Virgin Aus Platinum; UA 1K; Sofitel Platinum (A-Club); Marriott Platinum; Hilton Gold / Premium Club
Posts: 490
Air Canada fly the 777-200LR
Range 17,446 kilometers (10,840 miles)
Cruise Altitude 10,668 m (35,000')
Cargo Capacity 15,300 kgs (33,730 lbs)
Fuel Capacity 202,287 L (53,454
This is a huge difference compared to the UA variant.
Range 17,446 kilometers (10,840 miles)
Cruise Altitude 10,668 m (35,000')
Cargo Capacity 15,300 kgs (33,730 lbs)
Fuel Capacity 202,287 L (53,454
This is a huge difference compared to the UA variant.
Aug 19, 2013, 6:54 am
#384
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: MEL
Programs: OZ Diamond, QF, VA
Posts: 235
Aug 19, 2013, 7:26 am
#385
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Programs: Virgin Aus Platinum; UA 1K; Sofitel Platinum (A-Club); Marriott Platinum; Hilton Gold / Premium Club
Posts: 490
So what is strange about this situation is not 777... It's that the only folks doing it are flying 777-200lr or 777-300er models. Boeing classes these both as "longer range." UA wants to fly this with a 777-200ER - which no one attempts today. For example Boeing shows 9395nm range on the 7-200lr vs 7725nm range on the -200er. I feel we might be visiting the islands more frequently in the future. Also don't love the idea of syd becoming a proving ground for maxing out aircraft capabilities. Risk avoidance is my policy over the pacific...and no doubt storms/turbulence/route adjustments are way more common these days.
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/commerc...lrproduct.page
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/commerc...lrproduct.page
Aug 19, 2013, 7:43 am
#386
Join Date: Jul 2013
Programs: AA EXP; UA 1k; MR Platinum; SPG Gold
Posts: 167
I apologize if this was raised before - I didn't come across it when I skimmed through the thread...
The West Coast - Australia route has received a lot of new capacity over recent years with the addition of Virgin Australia and Delta. My understanding is that this used to be a highly profitable route, thanks to the incredibly high numbers carriers would get for premium cabins, and now is still very profitable, but not as great as it once was.
Now that there is more competition, why is it that the product offered in premium cabins is not better?
As someone who travels long haul all year round for work, when I look at what is available on UA/QF/AC/DL/Virgin it is all nice, but inferior to what many of the other high yield high traffic markets have to offer.
AC/DL have similar products. I actually like those seats, esp the old CX version of it (now phased out except for the 744s and some a330s), but I know many hate them.
UA - in my mind the pmCO > pmUA seat on a biz to biz seat comparison, not first (although I think many people disagree with this view on FT - for me out of the 8 across on 777 or main deck 747 there are only 4 seats in each row that I see as being competitive product / 2x window+aisle)
Virgin - the seat is 'meh'
QF - full flat is ok-ish and the non-full flat aren't competitive with the other options on the route
The West Coast - Australia route has received a lot of new capacity over recent years with the addition of Virgin Australia and Delta. My understanding is that this used to be a highly profitable route, thanks to the incredibly high numbers carriers would get for premium cabins, and now is still very profitable, but not as great as it once was.
Now that there is more competition, why is it that the product offered in premium cabins is not better?
As someone who travels long haul all year round for work, when I look at what is available on UA/QF/AC/DL/Virgin it is all nice, but inferior to what many of the other high yield high traffic markets have to offer.
AC/DL have similar products. I actually like those seats, esp the old CX version of it (now phased out except for the 744s and some a330s), but I know many hate them.
UA - in my mind the pmCO > pmUA seat on a biz to biz seat comparison, not first (although I think many people disagree with this view on FT - for me out of the 8 across on 777 or main deck 747 there are only 4 seats in each row that I see as being competitive product / 2x window+aisle)
Virgin - the seat is 'meh'
QF - full flat is ok-ish and the non-full flat aren't competitive with the other options on the route
Aug 19, 2013, 7:46 am
#387
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: MEL
Programs: OZ Diamond, QF, VA
Posts: 235
With LAX-SYD & SFO-SYD at 6507 & 6445nm respectively, we may see these routes weight restricted during the northern winter like QF8 is. At the same time (as stated numerous times previously in this thread) ORD-HKG is even longer at 6772nm, but I was under the impression that it was weight restricted very often once it was downguaged to thee 77E.
Aug 19, 2013, 7:52 am
#388
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,592
With LAX-SYD & SFO-SYD at 6507 & 6445nm respectively, we may see these routes weight restricted during the northern winter like QF8 is. At the same time (as stated numerous times previously in this thread) ORD-HKG is even longer at 6772nm, but I was under the impression that it was weight restricted very often once it was downguaged to thee 77E.
Aug 19, 2013, 8:04 am
#389
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: MEL
Programs: OZ Diamond, QF, VA
Posts: 235