EWR764

This is nothing new for CX, though, as they already have a 77W configuration that omits first class, operating flights to ORD, YYZ, EWR, etc. Presumably the A35J would be its replacement.

eponymous_coward

It's probably replacing their (also no-F) A343 as well... I would suspect before the 77W given that a) the 343 is still using "coffin" J and b) replacing a four-banger with modern two-banger is likely to save a bit of fuel.

But anyways, everyone's pulling F out of their fleets to some extent save the ME3. UA's just a bit more extreme.

bocastephen

No, not everyone is pulling F out of their fleets. This is far from the truth - in fact many airlines are investing in new F products, take the Swiss example from this week.

CX is also investing in a new F product to be rolled out with the next-gen 777 which may or may not show up in the 350 later on.

What UA is doing is acknowledging their F product simply cannot compete with the products offered by superior competitors and decided to toss in their chips...ops, I mean "normalize to the industry" ("the industry" as defined by Spirit Airlines).

transportbiz

Already brought up in this thread. Cathy isn't dropping first class.

Bonehead

Handful? I think not.

eponymous_coward

It also happens to be far from what I said. Please don't selectively quote me without the "to some extent".

Or did you not notice LH pulling F from some 744s? Airlines reducing their F seats from 16 to 8 or 4?

transportbiz

I have not noticed LH pulling F from 747s. There are 747s that never had First, routed for specific vacation destinations where First would most likely never sell. Air France goes even further I think, they have planes that have no business class, dedicated to some Caribbean routes.

GeP

1. Transcons or even IAH to SEA and the like are really long; way longer than you'd find within Europe usually (where most carriers do not feature distinct F or C cabins).

2. Right now when going intercontinental I often go from ZRH, MUC, or FRA to a UA hub and then on with a regional UA connection, trying to upgrade on that second leg. If that is not an option any more, why bother flying UA? LH, LX, AF, KL and many others have lots of directs into major US cities.

BearX220

It's pure semantics, though, not reality. With a long taxi at EWR before a westbound transcon with a headwind you can easily spend 7 or 8 hours in your seat. Fly the other direction and with that duration you'd be in Paris.

swm61230

What are you talking about?

What announcements have been made that they are ending F service to London?

While AA INTL F product is nothing like the Gulf or Asia carriers it is certainly better then UA's product and it is still the only US airline that I have ever paid for INTL First. Even flying united for over 15 years I never paid for a first class ticket.

From the comments that I have heard come from AA is that they are doing extremely well with their F,C product on the routes they have it on. And while they are not going to put it on every route they have they know what markets are paying for it.

EWR764

Per the ever-reliable airlineroute.net, AA is going to a two-cabin 772 on 2 of its 3 own-metal JFK-LHR frequencies.

http://airlineroute.net/2015/07/05/aa-jfklhr-dec15/

Remains to be seen if this is a winter-seasonal cut. AA still has plenty of F capacity on the route through its JV partner in BA, but with this UA will move into the 2nd-most daily F seats in the NYC-LHR market with 3x 763ER (3-cabin) along with 2x 2-cabin 772s.

fly18725

AA's inflight F product is certainly not better than UA's. Just like UA it's a better seat with a few minor enhancement to C meals. Oh, and pajamas.

bldr1k

I fly several times a week and know very senior executives at many large companies. The number of people who buy first on a 3-cabin airplane is very small. Sure, in Saudi, Dubai and Qatar there are very wealthy people who buy whatever they want, and there are certainly CEOs of late companies who buy first, but the question is how many airlines can make a profit off of such a small number of fliers.

A lot of the Asian airlines invested in First and are now struggling because of the focus on fraud in China.

2-4-2 is a complete joke though - I have no idea who designed this. I would never pay business class on a 2-4-2 airplane (although it is still a lot better then coach).

airzim

The Swiss First Class product is virtually identical to their current offering. I would hardly call it an investment in a new product.

In the aggregate US corporate traffic drives the market. The corporate market does will not support paying for First Class travel when Business Class with flat beds is "good enough." This has been happening progressively for many years and is without debate happening worldwide as every major carrier (with a few isolated exceptions) is either reducing their First Class offering by number of seats on board seats, eliminating for certain fleets, or truncating it completely.

This has almost nothing to do with what type of luxury product is offered. If US corporate traffic won't pay for it, it's gone. The market has spoken.

Incorrect. LH was until recently one of the few carriers to still offer First on all long haul planes. They never had a fleet of non First equipped planes until recently.

Air France does not fly any long haul planes without Business Class.

luckypierre

The same folks/mentality that brought you 10 abreast seating on the 777, slimline seats, 2 additional rows on an A320, slimmer or missing lavs, etc.

It is interesting in Smisek's disdainful remark about the fate of first he focused on the real estate consumed by the cabin, not the soft side of the offering.

Pack 'em in.