entropy

RJ economics aren't comparable on a seat-mile to seat-mile basis. RJ's are one area where there is great sensitivity to comparing the stage length with comparable mainline flights. A 200 miler vs 1,000 miler, with taxi time on both sides, a climbout on both sides, landing fees, etc. will look a lot different.

enviroian

I was on a 1900 this week and loved it!

wto605

At least the 1900D's are under 15 years old (expect one apparently). Skywest is still flying 44 of these (28 in UA paint, 18 in Skywest paint for use with DL and UA) all 15~21 years old:



I don't mind it when I fly them (SMF-SFO, never seen it longer than 31 minutes), but I can't imagine doing RDM-SFO etc. on that. Saw at 1h56 minute flight gate-to-gate the other day.

P.S. unlike the 1900D, which was a massive refresh (including fuselage height increase, power and control surface upgrades, all new avionics, and comfort features) for commercial service in the early 1990's, the EMB-120 was designed for passenger service from day one, in the late 70's early 80's. The definition of quiet back then was not the same.

KenInEscazu

I wish that I could remember who wrote the post so that I could give them appropriate credit, but I do remember reading the post of a Milepoint member that UA simply doesn't have enough mainline aircraft to service their domestic network.

On the surface, that makes sense. They have retired, and continue to retire a bunch of old 757s and 737s. The new 737s are needed on more heavily traveled/profitable routes both domestically and internationally. Only new 737s and 787s are currently being delivered on the mainline side, if I'm not mistaken.

The E175s could be a great short term solution, and they are certainly better than the status quo, but... No WiFi, no warm meals, no power, no IFE and those miserably uncomfortable new slimline seats. My excitement about this aircraft being added ended when I learned about those seats. That's a big deal to me.

Some on these boards complain that the E175s aren't replacing E135/145s, but that is just a case of misunderstanding their application. Some of the first E175s are being used to free up mainlines currently being used on routes where the E175 can meet the demand, thus allowing the mainlines currently in use on those routes to be moved to routes where capacity is needed.

In my observation of what UA has done with Terminals A & B at IAH, it appears to me that they have no intention of actually resolving this problem of RJ-mania domestically. It is said by some in these forums that Smisek is focused on International routes only, and that he really doesn't care about the domestic market. IAH certainly supports that claim. While one could say that Terminal B had to be improved (and who could argue against that?), it sure looks like they have made a long term investment to support RJ service in big numbers.

This topic really caught my eye, as it is one of the primary reasons that I will be flying as an AA EXP in 2015. That was a hard decision, but combine this with the countless other problems I have experienced on UA this year, and it became much easier.

exerda

What really annoys me is that UA once led the industry in making RJs a better flying experience. PMUA brought us ExPlus, with F and E+ and food (albeit boxed food). They even stated they were bringing IFE to the RJ fleet.

Today, the OALs have not only caught up but surpassed UA, offering Wifi and hot food on RJs. UA is stuck with way too many CRJ200s and E-145s without even E+, much less F.

frankmu

Unfortunately, Skywest is retiring their EMB-120. I take it the cost of running the CR-200 is resulting in loss of service to communities like KMT, MOD, and reduction of service for us in OTH to 3 times a week for the winter. I don't think there is a replacement for this class of aircraft.

wto605

There's no obvious choice, but there are options more efficient than the Brasilia (mostly due to upgraded engines rather than a new fuselages):

While out of production there's definitely appears to be a used market for the Q200.

It seems to be more or less dead to the US after Roselawn, but the ATR-42 has had it's problems fixed (even used by SAS) and is still being refreshed (first delivery of the -600 was in 2012).

Russia/China are still making an old Antonov design .

channa

CLE generated healthy yields.

CLE was closed because of the pilot shortage -- they don't have enough pilots to fly the small planes at current wages.

DL saw this coming and shrewdly sourced smaller mainline planes (717s) so as not to reduce their network. UA had no such solution, so they must shed routes and close a hub, which is why CLE was a victim.

danville 1K

It wasn't that long ago that UA passengers were b!tching about TED. Be careful what you wish for. TED went away and was replaced by the regional jets everyone likes to complain about.

goodeats21

This is exactly what happened at my home airport. Now the frequencies are being cut. Can't get to NY prior to Noon. How business friendly is that? Contract workers that provide poor (or no) service. Reliability is crap.

AA and DL flying mainline. Makes it tough to stay with UA at this point.


Agreed. The only reason I stayed with United in 2014 was their service to Bangkok. For 2015, no such reason to stay with them.

Their RJ operation is out of control.

Kmxu

In another thread, it was mentioned that UA has retired 21 ERJ135/145 this year. It will take another 25 years to retire all of them at this speed. It is wishful that UA will do that. One just has to choose the "poisoning pills" (I mean, RJs) carefully if one has to stick with UA. Even when you have to fly on Q200 or CR2, which is a norm at my local station (ORF), you just have to choose an aisle seat.

entropy

As of April, they were showing a plan to remove 9 135's and 34 145's from service in '14. They will be likely be accelerating the 145 retirements faster than the fleet plan indicates. 43 ERJ's is ~15% of that fleet, so that's ~6 years at that rate.

I don't think anyone expects them to get rid of their entire regional fleet. However, a massive downsizing (~50-60% of the 145/CR2 fleet) would make a lot of people, myself included, happier about their position.

The Dash 8 fleet and the 120's serve quite a niche, and has a much lower fuel operating cost than jets. That and they actually serve a regional purpose, I think they make sense.

The CR7 and E-jets offer the potential to have a decent onboard experience for a 90 minute flight (though the slimline rocks in the CR7 are quite awful). UA could choose to improve the onboard service on those if they chose to be competitive, but I see no indication of that.

CO_Nonrev_elite

I think for me to be happy with it, I would need to see their use being curtailed on the longer routes. If they remove 60 of them, but then just drop service to a lot of cities and still have the 145 on nearly 4hr legs, then nothing really has changed.

Baze

The flights to DEN based solely on timing. At least it was a CR-700 and got 3B. The mainline times just didn't work. The IAH flight was not my first choice. Finished work 4 days early and this was all I could get. Was supposed to go through ORD and already upgraded on DTW-ORD and ORD-SFO. But those flights packed and no room. Only flight I could get changing 12 hours before leaving was DTW-IAH-SFO.

goodeats21

Well, the degradation continues. I couldn't believe it when I saw it on a third party search site, but United.com confirms it.

DAY-IAD service is now featuring prop planes for some flights. Q200 and Q300...not even something with a First Class. Some days are down to 2 flights daily on this route.

I just can't believe how far down UA service out of DAY has fallen.